ROAR Stock TC Guideline Suggestion
10-02-2007, 11:23 AM
#31
Tech Apprentice
*
Last edited by charley; 10-02-2007 at 11:32 AM. Reason: Double Post sorry!!!
10-02-2007, 11:41 AM
#32
Don't get me wrong. I am not blaming this on the stock racers as I still race stock myself, but I have never won or been on the podium at a National level. I just think ROAR needs to create a system that will benefit everyone. Right now there is not much motivation for a stock guy to move soley into 19 turn and have to race all of the factory modified guys. There is noone to blame, but I would really like to see some thought put into it.
Races could also be limited to one class per car, but that creates an issue of possible money loss for the hosting event. Most racers run multiple classes and this brings in money. Right now we do not have enough new people to make up the difference, but hopefully it will some day.
Races could also be limited to one class per car, but that creates an issue of possible money loss for the hosting event. Most racers run multiple classes and this brings in money. Right now we do not have enough new people to make up the difference, but hopefully it will some day.
10-02-2007, 11:51 AM
#33
I like the idea of one class of TC per race. As far as the lower money for the race promoters, up the entry fee. I hear guys complain about paying $20 for and entry fee yet spend $400 on a radio that they know how to use the trims on it. If you racing in a National event, you should expect to pay $50-$100 on entry fee. Rob is 100% correct. I'd much rather see 19T as the mainstream class.
10-02-2007, 11:55 AM
#34
I like this the best so far. This will allow RTR newbies to race their cars without having to shell out a thousand or so immediately. For me, this proposition will do more for the hobby by bringing in new blood, than it would by achieving any other goals.
On the topic of rules, something like, "Kit cost limit of $XXX, and only replacement parts may be used, no performance enhancing chassis." Keep in mind, this is sounding more and more like TCS with every post. However, the cars we're talking about here are very similar to the cars we race every weekend and would follow suit with current ROAR/Big Race guidelines with regards to motor selection, battery types, tires, etc.
On the topic of rules, something like, "Kit cost limit of $XXX, and only replacement parts may be used, no performance enhancing chassis." Keep in mind, this is sounding more and more like TCS with every post. However, the cars we're talking about here are very similar to the cars we race every weekend and would follow suit with current ROAR/Big Race guidelines with regards to motor selection, battery types, tires, etc.
I like this as well, but instead of doing away with the curent stock class, instead relabel it "prostock" with current open chassis/wallet rules and this new budget class would be normal "stock" which has whatever budget/chassis/whatever limitations to be imposed. This way the newbies get a chance to sort out driving skills against each other (which most would rather do than get lapped every 3rd lap).
10-02-2007, 12:00 PM
#35
I like this as well, but instead of doing away with the curent stock class, instead relabel it "prostock" with current open chassis/wallet rules and this new budget class would be normal "stock" which has whatever budget/chassis/whatever limitations to be imposed. This way the newbies get a chance to sort out driving skills against each other (which most would rather do than get lapped every 3rd lap).
As for this spec type of class. This is kind of being done at most club level tracks now. I do not think adding additional classes is the answer. How many racers is this going to bring to a National? I think most people that fit this category are club racers just looking to have a great time. I like the idea of a ladder system or a points type of system. Once you reach a certain level you are forced to move out of stock. We need ARCOR for onroad.
10-02-2007, 12:05 PM
#36
What gives you guys the impression that stock racing is supposed to a stepping stone to 19T or Mod? I've seen a lot of factory drivers in 19T - Why is that O.K.? (I dont really have a problem with it)
I've also noticed that its mostly the same 5-10 guys winning Mod events for the last 5 years. Should they step aside too? Maybe its time they switched to 1/8 Scale?
If stock is that bad dont race it - choose another class. If everybody eventually leaves, they will have to do something about the rules. But if turnout for stock events stays strong that means its not broken and doesnt need fixed.
I've also noticed that its mostly the same 5-10 guys winning Mod events for the last 5 years. Should they step aside too? Maybe its time they switched to 1/8 Scale?
If stock is that bad dont race it - choose another class. If everybody eventually leaves, they will have to do something about the rules. But if turnout for stock events stays strong that means its not broken and doesnt need fixed.
10-02-2007, 12:16 PM
#37
What gives you guys the impression that stock racing is supposed to a stepping stone to 19T or Mod? I've seen a lot of factory drivers in 19T - Why is that O.K.? (I dont really have a problem with it)
I've also noticed that its mostly the same 5-10 guys winning Mod events for the last 5 years. Should they step aside too? Maybe its time they switched to 1/8 Scale?
If stock is that bad dont race it - choose another class. If everybody eventually leaves, they will have to do something about the rules. But if turnout for stock events stays strong that means its not broken and doesnt need fixed.
I've also noticed that its mostly the same 5-10 guys winning Mod events for the last 5 years. Should they step aside too? Maybe its time they switched to 1/8 Scale?
If stock is that bad dont race it - choose another class. If everybody eventually leaves, they will have to do something about the rules. But if turnout for stock events stays strong that means its not broken and doesnt need fixed.
Some of the super fast stock guys will be in the mix in modified. Look at Ray Darroch, Jeff Dayger, and Bobby Flack. Three guys that have made the switch in the last couple of years and are serious competitors in modified.
I only see a stepping stone for stock. Once you move out if allows the next generation to move in. I have made the A main in stock at most of these National level races so I am looking at this from all angles. I am not someone that just wants to win and wants the fast stock guys out. I am only trying to think of ways to help as a whole. Maybe I am wrong, but many others seem to agree.
Oh well. I am out! Hopefully some changes come to light for 2008.
10-02-2007, 12:37 PM
#38
i don't necessarily think chassis kits need to be as expensive as they are these days... back when the mr4-tc, tc3, and xxx-s were the top cars, they were considerably cheaper than the current "super cars". but, the kits that preceeded them were all very expensive. i would love to see a few "cheaper" kits come out that kill the competition, like the mr4-tc did. that will drive all the companies to look at making more affordable, but competetive, kits.
i think a lot of it has to do with the turnaround in designs. kits don't go unchanged and on the market for years at a time anymore. the constant "updates" affect the price two-fold... cost is heavily dependant on quantity, the fewer items produced the more each costs. also, when only selling a kit for 6 months to a year it is cheaper, at lower quantities, to use the more expensive and exotic materials like carbon fiber and machined aluminum vs. molded composites. so by advancing the designs so rapidly, the costs are negatively impacted twice, materials choices driven by quantity and higher part costs driven by quantity. a carbon fiber chassis or an aluminum bulkhead are just a new program for the machines, a molded chassis is completely new tooling.
xxxs-gp was one of my favorite cars. the up-front costs of that chassis had to be significantly higher than a double deck chassis, but it was in production for so long and sold so many kits that cost was more than made up for.
i think a lot of it has to do with the turnaround in designs. kits don't go unchanged and on the market for years at a time anymore. the constant "updates" affect the price two-fold... cost is heavily dependant on quantity, the fewer items produced the more each costs. also, when only selling a kit for 6 months to a year it is cheaper, at lower quantities, to use the more expensive and exotic materials like carbon fiber and machined aluminum vs. molded composites. so by advancing the designs so rapidly, the costs are negatively impacted twice, materials choices driven by quantity and higher part costs driven by quantity. a carbon fiber chassis or an aluminum bulkhead are just a new program for the machines, a molded chassis is completely new tooling.
xxxs-gp was one of my favorite cars. the up-front costs of that chassis had to be significantly higher than a double deck chassis, but it was in production for so long and sold so many kits that cost was more than made up for.
10-02-2007, 01:47 PM
#39
What gives you guys the impression that stock racing is supposed to a stepping stone to 19T or Mod? I've seen a lot of factory drivers in 19T - Why is that O.K.? (I dont really have a problem with it)
I've also noticed that its mostly the same 5-10 guys winning Mod events for the last 5 years. Should they step aside too? Maybe its time they switched to 1/8 Scale?
If stock is that bad dont race it - choose another class. If everybody eventually leaves, they will have to do something about the rules. But if turnout for stock events stays strong that means its not broken and doesnt need fixed.
I've also noticed that its mostly the same 5-10 guys winning Mod events for the last 5 years. Should they step aside too? Maybe its time they switched to 1/8 Scale?
If stock is that bad dont race it - choose another class. If everybody eventually leaves, they will have to do something about the rules. But if turnout for stock events stays strong that means its not broken and doesnt need fixed.
, but since all the "fast guys" are preparing for national events, they want to run the class they will be racing. So they race stock and scare off all the new people. And if we had some new people, we would have enough guys to run stock AND 19t at the local tracks.
This part of racing is broken and something needs to be done to fix it.
10-02-2007, 02:45 PM
#40
Why do you expect guys who have devoted their careers to stock racing to just step aside and let someone else will win? Yes stock is a little bit slower than 19T, but its definately not slow and its not just for beginners. Neither is Tamiya TCS silver can racing for that matter.
Its racing, not turn taking. If you don't like who's winning the stock events, do something about it like trying to beat them at their own game.
Trying to change the rules so other people can win is just wrong.
Its racing, not turn taking. If you don't like who's winning the stock events, do something about it like trying to beat them at their own game.
Trying to change the rules so other people can win is just wrong.
10-02-2007, 04:20 PM
#41
Here in FL, if someone wins the state race in stock he/she can not compete in that class again for two seasons. Maybe we should incorporate that into the ROAR rules.
10-02-2007, 04:58 PM
#42
Why do you expect guys who have devoted their careers to stock racing to just step aside and let someone else will win? Yes stock is a little bit slower than 19T, but its definately not slow and its not just for beginners. Neither is Tamiya TCS silver can racing for that matter.
Its racing, not turn taking. If you don't like who's winning the stock events, do something about it like trying to beat them at their own game.
Trying to change the rules so other people can win is just wrong.
Its racing, not turn taking. If you don't like who's winning the stock events, do something about it like trying to beat them at their own game.
Trying to change the rules so other people can win is just wrong.
Most guys who are interested in racing don't stay real long because when the dude who wins THE SLOWEST CLASS is putting a lap on the field, and the field has 5 laps on the new guy, they lose interest. What is the point?
And as far as the intimation that anybody who complains about the current state of stock racing is a whiner, you could say all the guys who never move out of stock are all spineless because they don't want to race the guys who are better than them in mod.
"Why do you expect guys who have devoted their careers to stock racing to just step aside and let someone else will win?"
That sounds silly to me, devoting a career to stock racing. Path of easiest resistance I guess...
10-02-2007, 06:37 PM
#44
Wow, Day 1 and there's plenty of ideas in here.
I'll admit that my focus in starting this thread was to make it cheaper and more enticing for newbies to get involved. Judging by the sales figures, allowing RTR kits to run in our slowest class is our easiest route to accomplishing the goal of bolstering the number of people who enjoy this "sport" (Hey Ed!).
Enticing a newbie defintely means making the slowest class more affordable. Is there a better way to neuter the Stock TC class than by making the most important component inherently cheaper?
Set a maximum MSRP on kits (ie:rollers) and RTR packages.
ROAR would work with the manufacturers to meet the goal of this concept.
Only allow replacement parts from the original parts list.
In the event a car has a potentially disastrous component, allow alternate parts to remedy the issue. TCS does this and it works just fine. As an example, allow the use of updated suspension arms for a car with notoriously weak suspension arms.
I'll admit that my focus in starting this thread was to make it cheaper and more enticing for newbies to get involved. Judging by the sales figures, allowing RTR kits to run in our slowest class is our easiest route to accomplishing the goal of bolstering the number of people who enjoy this "sport" (Hey Ed!).
Enticing a newbie defintely means making the slowest class more affordable. Is there a better way to neuter the Stock TC class than by making the most important component inherently cheaper?
Set a maximum MSRP on kits (ie:rollers) and RTR packages.
ROAR would work with the manufacturers to meet the goal of this concept.
Only allow replacement parts from the original parts list.
In the event a car has a potentially disastrous component, allow alternate parts to remedy the issue. TCS does this and it works just fine. As an example, allow the use of updated suspension arms for a car with notoriously weak suspension arms.
10-02-2007, 06:45 PM
#45
best quote I heard at the IIC was during the stock foam TC "A" main as a european commented as he looked up at the tshirts on the drivers stand "that in europe all the stock "A" main drivers would be privateers." no sponsorship at all. which would pretty much move all the drivers in the c and d classes up to the "A" in the states if you took out all the chassis sponsored drivers. even the 50% guys. heck I run 19t in TC at national events because it's fun and I'm not even sponsored. the problem isn't the drivers that want to run more it's the chassis companies that say you wna this sponsorship you must run stock. it all comes back to win on sunday sell on monday. your not going to change this. I had a conversation with Drew Ellis a couple years ago at the novak race. he wants to run MOD. he actually ran it at the novak race in 2006. he was told that he couldn't run mod at the national level as they needed him to run stock and they had enough mod drivers and needed him to STAY IN STOCK. win sunday sell monday
on limiting it to only one class as most stock tc guys run 19t also. the setup is similar and vice versa with mod to 19t that is why drivers run both. it's track time for the main class stock or mod. and it's also not cost effected to only run one class at a big race where you would have 7+ hours between runs. also just look at the winners of the 19t class the last couple big races other then a few races it's mod guys cherry picking in 19t class. for example Dumas told someone last tuesday that he would TQ and win 19t foam. which he did in convincing fashion. he was the only "A" main mod guy to run 19t
what's the answer
I say drop the 27t totally and make stock a 35t or 17.5t motor and you will get rid of the intrenched stock drivers they will either cherry pick and run the slower class or step to 19t making 19t a prostock class. I figure more will run "prostock" then cherry pick. and then you can really make fun of the cherry pickers. but it will take a hugh rule change on roars part to do that. but then again japan has the 23t class as a prostock I hate to add another class as I run stock at our club races just to have enough people to run but I don't see any other way to get the fast stock guys out of the stock class other then making it slower.
on limiting it to only one class as most stock tc guys run 19t also. the setup is similar and vice versa with mod to 19t that is why drivers run both. it's track time for the main class stock or mod. and it's also not cost effected to only run one class at a big race where you would have 7+ hours between runs. also just look at the winners of the 19t class the last couple big races other then a few races it's mod guys cherry picking in 19t class. for example Dumas told someone last tuesday that he would TQ and win 19t foam. which he did in convincing fashion. he was the only "A" main mod guy to run 19t
what's the answer
I say drop the 27t totally and make stock a 35t or 17.5t motor and you will get rid of the intrenched stock drivers they will either cherry pick and run the slower class or step to 19t making 19t a prostock class. I figure more will run "prostock" then cherry pick. and then you can really make fun of the cherry pickers. but it will take a hugh rule change on roars part to do that. but then again japan has the 23t class as a prostock I hate to add another class as I run stock at our club races just to have enough people to run but I don't see any other way to get the fast stock guys out of the stock class other then making it slower.