View Poll Results: What's your input on 1/10th tc minimum weight?
1420 grams
80
51.95%
1500 grams ( Current ROAR)
18
11.69%
1450 grams ( same as IFMAR)
56
36.36%
Voters: 154. You may not vote on this poll
What's your input on 1/10 Electric Touring Min weight?
#31
consider also, that as long as there is an electric sedan that is light, containing low rotating mass, and unspring weight, many racers will buy it for the advantages it presents (whether perceived or real). the racers that can run a clean race will not be bothered by the fragile design, and the racers that can't will follow suit anyway. in short, the market has to drive this design change. short of a rule written to qualify/approve rolling chassis types based on gross weight or some series of complicated durability tests, this vision seems idealistic.
but yes, if you can keep people from buying fragile cars that win, it could work. referencing the rdx sales on carpet in the two years after it was released, i'd say you have your work cut out for you.
again, there are racers and hobbiests. while we all need to get along, we needn't be writing racing rules around guys that don't like racing enough to spend the money to do it regularly, nationally, or competitively. i'm convinced, it isn't the money that keeps them away, it is their other priorities.
#32
Our track follows ROAR rules, as do most clubs it seems. They are the defacto standard for rules in the US, which is a great thing. Otherwise you couldn't easily travel to other tracks. Locally we have a lot of people who do race in ROAR events so they try to keep them in line to help those folks out. Would be ashame to practice one way and then race at a national event another. Wish I could have gone to the Nats this year. Still may if I can get a scheduling conflict resolved.
i guess i keep wondering when i'm going to race with the guys telling us what the rules should be.
#33
Tech Champion
iTrader: (38)
i understand the philosophy. what i didn't realize was your role as a spokesperson for these racers. as important as it is to be able to easily travel to other tracks, we never saw you at The Gate, nor the carpet nats, and not even at your home track the weekend chicky and i were down there supporting one of your trophy races.
i guess i keep wondering when i'm going to race with the guys telling us what the rules should be.
i guess i keep wondering when i'm going to race with the guys telling us what the rules should be.
I'm not sure why the people that keep the hobby going shouldn't have a say in the rules? Because I've only been in the hobby a few years and don't want to get it handed to me at a National event then I shouldn't get a say of my opinion? If you want to exclude some chassis designs because of a weight rule then that is your opinion and its just as valid as mine IMO. I'm not saying mine is the right answer. I'm just saying the reasons why I don't like the change in the rules. My goal is to race in these events and be competitive so I don't see the problem with expressing my opinion.
Id love to see some regional ROAR races but I never hear of them. Do they exist still?
#34
Tech Lord
iTrader: (32)
consider also, that as long as there is an electric sedan that is light, containing low rotating mass, and unspring weight, many racers will buy it for the advantages it presents (whether perceived or real). the racers that can run a clean race will not be bothered by the fragile design, and the racers that can't will follow suit anyway. in short, the market has to drive this design change. short of a rule written to qualify/approve rolling chassis types based on gross weight or some series of complicated durability tests, this vision seems idealistic.
but yes, if you can keep people from buying fragile cars that win, it could work. referencing the rdx sales on carpet in the two years after it was released, i'd say you have your work cut out for you.
but yes, if you can keep people from buying fragile cars that win, it could work. referencing the rdx sales on carpet in the two years after it was released, i'd say you have your work cut out for you.
#35
The speed difference between a car at 1500 and 1420 will be significant. Noticeable by most drivers not just the top ones. It makes a bigger difference then you think. People who think cars will break less at 1420 are forgetting that the car will be going a lot faster. They will break just the same.
And about speed and crash, well, I think you're wrong again. Energy increases with speed squared whereas it only increases with mass linearly. So a 1% increase in speed translates in a much higher impact energy than a 1% increase in mass. And it's impact energy that does the damage not g forces, etc, etc.
Last edited by niznai; 08-12-2009 at 10:11 AM.
#36
Tech Champion
iTrader: (38)
The speed difference depends on more than just motor power. Sure, all else being equal (disregard track layout) theory says the ligther car should go faster. But then considering the oversimplification about track layout you will see that only large open tracks will translate in significant differences in speed between lighter and heavier cars. But with a difference of say 100grams I don't think you'll a higher top speed or acceleration. Not high enough to beat somebody else's better speedo/motor/car design etc.
And about speed and crash, well, I think you're wrong again. Energy increases with speed squuared whereas it only increases with mass linearly. So a 1% increase in speed translates in a much higher impact energy than a 1% increase in mass. And it's impact energy that does the damage not g forces, etc, etc.
And about speed and crash, well, I think you're wrong again. Energy increases with speed squuared whereas it only increases with mass linearly. So a 1% increase in speed translates in a much higher impact energy than a 1% increase in mass. And it's impact energy that does the damage not g forces, etc, etc.
The speed increase will likely result in more crashes. As seaball pointed out its not like folks are crashing right at the force that breaks a part. They are crashing at a lot more then the force necessary to break a part.
#37
I encourage you to try it out on the track. I think you will find your lap times increase.
The speed increase will likely result in more crashes. As seaball pointed out its not like folks are crashing right at the force that breaks a part. They are crashing at a lot more then the force necessary to break a part.
The speed increase will likely result in more crashes. As seaball pointed out its not like folks are crashing right at the force that breaks a part. They are crashing at a lot more then the force necessary to break a part.
And yes, I have tried it. Doesn't make a difference. I used to race an old car which just couldn't come below 1700grams with Nimh/nicd and won regularly in my class against modern hardware. But I put that down to our track layout where speed isn't that different between the fastest and the slowest class to begin with. That's why I said the track will make a big difference. Much bigger than 100 grams of weight (or in my case 200).
Last edited by niznai; 08-12-2009 at 10:51 AM.
#38
we always want to argue about rules using examples that are rarely exhibited at the track. someone is always going to have to be slighted by the change in rules. if it's one guy in a hundred, i can live with that. if it's ten, i can probably live with that. in the real picture, the guy that runs the 5 year old chassis is rarely doing many of the 'free' things correctly enough to be competitive to begin with. (i didn't say never) if tires or compound has changed in that time, what setup does he use? does it still work right with a lipo sitting in the car? if the car is 5 years old, how old is the horsepower? to make rules around this unique racer seems a bit unreasonable. especially when we have classes specifically developed for this person (novice, spec, vta). inspect the habits of this racer, and 9/10 you will find that nothing about their program is competitive, right down to their excuses.
there's an angle for everything. but i think if you start to look at the mentality/philosophy of the various groups of racers, you'll start to realize that there elements of the hobby that separate it from the xbox/ps3, etc. i also think that these elements will disappear if we constantly serve the laziest, cheapest, and least motivated of groups. at which point, the next challenge will be finding a way to do this for less money than one of those consoles.
unfortunately, things always have to hit bottom before most of us succumb to compromise and get on board with a cohesive program.
#40
Tech Champion
iTrader: (1)
For those that don't know... Less weight equals higher average speed. When the brushless systems 1st became competative all the failures resulted in the 5cell rule. This rule supposedly allowed you to run one less cell with a lower weight limit to offset the reduction in power. Well that wasn't the case. On almost every track 5cell cars with less powe were up to 1/2 a sec a lap faster due to the higher cornering speed.
If you think less weight will reduce anything like wear or breakages then rethink that when you consider you will be going faster and turning more laps in the same race time.
If you think less weight will reduce anything like wear or breakages then rethink that when you consider you will be going faster and turning more laps in the same race time.
#42
Tech Elite
iTrader: (88)
until electronics move closer to the center line and get significantly lighter...it will always be a challenge to get the car in balance too. This is a problem that faces all cars.
A lighter car is actually harder to drive in my opinion, because the power to weight ratio is a lot larger. A lighter car can go faster in the hands of the right person (like others have said).
I personally think we here in the US need heavier stronger cars and slower motors or batteries. Many people that I see racing are struggling with even the power of 13.5.
Going faster with lighter cars will certainly kill an already struggling touring car market.
A lighter car is actually harder to drive in my opinion, because the power to weight ratio is a lot larger. A lighter car can go faster in the hands of the right person (like others have said).
I personally think we here in the US need heavier stronger cars and slower motors or batteries. Many people that I see racing are struggling with even the power of 13.5.
Going faster with lighter cars will certainly kill an already struggling touring car market.
#43
I personally feel that 5-cell was faster than 6 simply due to the progression of the cars and electronics, not the weight.
#44
Maybe I'm missing the point, but the rule states that this is a minimum weight right? So how does a lower minimum weight lead to the exclusion of older chassis that are heavier? Is there a max weight as well? I can see that yes a lighter car can go faster, but as some folks have pointed out the track itself is the great equalizer, not all track layouts will allow cars to hit a higher top speed. I just don't understand what all the fuss is about. Make your car as light as you can with in the limits and try to maintain a balance. I doubt most folks will ever win or lose a race because their car was 3 grams heavier then the guy in front of them.