Francis M.

iTrader: (2)

If you want to make it really easy for a newbie to get into the sport of racing

Chasis price limit with silver can and only stick packs allowed.

This class will fix a lot of things
1) Initial cost to race.
2) Silver Can has less speed no motor sponsors
3) Stick packs will make it simpler to charge and discharge.

Nova F1 Racer

iTrader: (3)

Or you take the RTR from Team Assoc, Trinity and Tamiya and thats your class. No hop ups allowed...

Ed237

iTrader: (11)

I hate to even introduce this thought into the thread but if everyone is serious about decreasing costs and slowing down ROAR has already proposed an aswer.

5 Cells.

I'm not even sure I like the idea myself. But its worth discussing. Since stock racing is so battery intensive racers could save almost as much money if their packs cost 17% less than they do now.

ckearns

One other way to make less attractive to look, well, less attractive, is to make something else look a whole lot cooler. I think it would be interesting to have factories/teams run in a shootout. Each factory would provide 2-4 drivers and an off the shelf, shrink wrapped kit for each. Run a spec tire, a handout motor, and pair of $60 off the shelf batteries. Rules are simple: Build the car with what's in the kit, use up to $50-$100 in MSRP priced option parts, add electronics, and go race.

You would get 20+ of the worlds best drivers running in a factory stock class (and out of stock) with a complete kit anyone can get off the shelf of their LHS. Factories would get their glitz/glam magazine moments and the race on Sunday sell on Monday principle of marketing is still met. Run a points system to see who the top manufacturers and drivers are.

Us mere mortals would be able to see what the cars are capable of without dropping a fortune on option parts or getting into motor and battery wars. Stock racers would get some room to move around in the stock class. Stock racers wouldn't be competing with custom machining and prototype parts that are only available to the factory drivers. And it would be some sweet racing.

Chris

GreaseMonkey

iTrader: (4)

My club has an entry level class that is 4 cell,/stock motor/rubber tyres.

Having been through it myself, I think it is a great learning class for driving and set-up w/o having to worry about motors and batteries as much. Motors go a lot longer between cuts, there's no need to worry about adjusting the car as the foams wear down and most of the people running it are just buying last seasons batteries from the 6 cell racers. At that level, the batteries and chassis do not matter as much because the driver who wins is the driver who keeps the car off the wall.

It's also quite slow so you rarely get anybody who stays down in the class for more than a couple of seasons before stepping up to our 6 cell/stock/ rubber class and they are better driver's for it. It certainly cuts down on the guys who come out once, run 6 cell stock, break everything on their car and then you never hear from them again.

Schuie Driver

iTrader: (8)

Car chassis are much more expensive than they used to be. (I don’t remember paying $400 for my HPIRS4 Pro back in the day.) Between the increase in chassis cost, stronger motors, better batteries and the fact that tourers are not as crash resistant as they used to be, new people getting into this segment of the hobby better have deep pockets or be pretty skilled at keeping the cars off the barriers. Otherwise, they are spending a lot of money on spare parts or spending a lot of time in the pits rebuilding from their latest run in with the wall.

You want to grow stock touring again? Make it a little easier for the new guy to get started and to stay with it. When we were all running RS4 Pro’s (or insert your favorite chassis of the day here), we were many times running on less than perfect surfaces with barriers that were not too rough on the cars. (Corner dots and garden hoses come to mind.) We didn’t have 15 bazillion rubber tire/inserts to choose from, we were not running foams, we didn’t have a gazillion tools to tweak cars all day long for that extra 10th of a second gain in lap times. There generally were not guys with sponsorships everywhere you turned either thus making it a little easier for guys to stay competitive.

I have to think if this class ends up dying out the manufacturers are just as much to blame as the racers for giving out sponsorships to everyone and their brother instead of just a select few that drive in the fastest class (modified) at the biggest events.

Francis M.

iTrader: (2)

+1

Unregistered

I agree McSmooth.

Also, on the subject of reducing the number of cells it would slow the class down but it is also harder on the batteries. This has been documented by both the Japanese (4 cell) and Europeans (5 cell). Both of these also rule out LiPo and that's a bad idea IMO.

robk

iTrader: (22)

To be honest we are now at a crossroads which will give us an unparalleled opportunity. Brushless is now coming onto the scene. Since it looks like everyone will eventually run these motors in spec classes, we need to slow the cars down now, while change is here. Stock is too fast anyway, so something slower than the current motors should be mandated, whether that is a 17.5 or 21.5 or 19.5 or whatever. The main thing is a change should be made while we have the chance, before everything gets set in stone.

If you're worried about lipo and brushed, then stock should be 35 turn with full stacks, like a 19t arm, and maybe go to the 23t motor for 19t, since it is available anyway.

jiml

iTrader: (3)

Here's the problem:

One less cell means slower.

Slower means corner speed is more valuable.

More corner speed means stiffer chassis.

Stiffer chassis means more money.

So what you save on a battery pack goes right into the chassis.

Also, a car that costs $100 less is better than a battery pack that costs $10 less.

Greg Sharpe

iTrader: (15)

Ok, say we decide to approach ROAR and request Stock TC class rules be changed to require 27T full stack, 17.5/19.5BL, , (insert your motor choice here), etc. How do we go about officially requesting that? (Hi Jim!)

Secondly, what is ROAR's internal process for making such a change? What hurdles are they going to encounter? Which of those hurdles can we lower to make the chance of success greater?

Lastly, since ROAR is a racing organization, do they have any precedent of making rules for the so called NOVICE class that may or may not be raced at their State, Regional, or National events? In other words, can ROAR write rules for a class they MAY never see run at their events? Not that the class couldn't, shouldn't, or wouldn't be run at the big races ..... it just seems unlikely at this juncture.

Ed237

iTrader: (11)

What about gearing. ROAR could reduce speeds in Stock and 19T by specifying conservative gear ratios. It would be an easy change to make.

Greg Sharpe

iTrader: (15)

That won't work for foam tire racing, as the tire size is constantly changing along with the final drive ratio. Furthermore, with regards to the manufacturing variances in brushed motors, spec gear ratios (and even spec FDR) would make the higher RPM specimens more desirable, further increasing the number of "worthless, but brand new" armatures.

I like the simplicity of your concept! It's broad enough to encompass everything, but still accomplishes the goal, and is inherently simple as well. Maybe there's another idea that can come from that mentality?????

robk

iTrader: (22)

Just like Junior, Masters, and the brushless/lipo class they ran at offroad nats, ROAR does allow for some non standard classes. Basically, you have to ask the class committee to propose your idea to the executive committee. I don't know what you can do to increase success w/ the executive committee, since they seem to have their own ideas.

jiml

iTrader: (3)

Ban foam?

Think about it the only place where TC is run on foam tires is the US. It's to the point where manufacturers (X-Ray, Corally) are making 2 cars, one regular car for rubber tire applications, and one super stiff car for US foam tire racing.