GT 1/8 Scale Rules and Setup Sharing
#331
reference. Sometimes I alone am my scariest friend.
Love ya.........coming saturday ?????
#332
#333
Cole.............I just checked..............there's no one here but me.....
and my shadow. I'm not sure who it is that you reference that is 'sponsored' and
whispering in my ear.
I have balanced 'setup' tips because it boils down to the driver anyway.......
not everything everyone else found works for them does so for me. I found no
problem staying with Kyosho..........even with their currently lack of presence
on the GT8 scene (on-track). Maybe you'll get your setup info..............I'm even curious as to where it's going to come from. (watch out for the little voices)
and my shadow. I'm not sure who it is that you reference that is 'sponsored' and
whispering in my ear.
I have balanced 'setup' tips because it boils down to the driver anyway.......
not everything everyone else found works for them does so for me. I found no
problem staying with Kyosho..........even with their currently lack of presence
on the GT8 scene (on-track). Maybe you'll get your setup info..............I'm even curious as to where it's going to come from. (watch out for the little voices)
#334
Regarding the issue of "adjustable" clutches, I have some questions and comments...
Exactly what does "adjustable" mean?
It has been stated that one can change springs, shoes, and even modify the weight of the shoes (shaving), etc. but that "mechanical" adjustments are not allowed.
From this we can draw the conclusion...
The ability to "tune" the clutch engagement to a drivers individual car and track conditions is clearly desirable (as opposed to an exact "Spec" clutch setup with exactly prescribed springs, shoes, flywheel, bell etc. that cannot be modified in any way).
So then what exactly does "adjustable" mean? After all, from the moment that you allow any "change" from a "spec" clutch you are really allowing "adjustment" regardless of what you call the "modification" or "change" and, as we have concluded, the ability to "alter" the characteristics of the clutch is clearly desirable.
It has been suggested that the meaning of "adjustable" is a "mechanical" adjustment. From this clarification and the acceptability of alterations and modifications to clutch components (i.e. shaving shoes) can it be concluded that a more clear rule would be:
***Changes that alter the "characteristics" of a clutch can be made without limitation as long as the change comes from a physical modification or the addition, removal or replacement of a component in the clutch but NOT a solely mechanical change.***
This seems to be the current state of explanation thus far...
We can then conclude the following....
The M2C adjustable flywheel, which can be "tuned", "adjusted", or whatever you want to call it, by adding or removing set screws from the flywheel, is LEGAL. Specifically it is legal because you are adding, removing or replacing a component to effect a "change".
The Fioroni "Vario" clutches are all ILLEGAL. This is because they posses a "mechanical" adjustment which allows you to change the "characteristics" (specifically the spring tension) without adding, removing, modifying or replacing a component.
The Buku clutch is ILLEGAL for the same reason.
However, if the Buku design were changed so that instead of turning an "adjustment" screw to effect the "change" you instead removed and replaced a "spring seat" to effect a change, then this version would be LEGAL.
So, a driver would have a box of tiny different (perhaps color coded) "spring seats" (sounds a lot like a box of different springs, gold, red, black, 30 degrees, 35 degrees, etc, doesn't it...) that they could swap out to "tune" their clutch to different track conditions. And of course because modification of components is allowed then a savvy driver would have these seats hand ground to length to give him exactly the levels of tension he was looking for in advance...
And this is better why?
And who is going to tech a rule like this? Someone running around trying to determine if a person is running a Vario clutch, or what version of Buku, the Original "Speed Tune" or the new "Quick Change GT Legal" version.
The simple reality is, the ability to make "Adjustments" or "tuning" or "alterations" or whatever you want to call it, to improve your performance on the track is a GOOD thing. If it wasn't clearly desirable then everyone would be demanding a "no modifications spec clutch".
Why then is the term "adjustable' being used at all? It reality, it has nothing to do with "adjustments", "adjust-ability, or "tuning"....
It has EVERYTHING to do with Centax or more specifically "Axial" style clutches. Obviously no one is interested in these "on-road" clutches being allowed. It's clear that they are the SOLE source of this issue in the first place. Unfortunately the term "adjustable' was initially used synonymously with "Centax" in the beginning of this discussion well before the range of currently used off-road clutches were considered.
Now later, after the term "adjustable" has been added to a proposed rule (for no real reason other then trying to clearly prohibit Centax or Axial clutches), it must be interpreted to be able to consistently and repeatably make a ruling on clutch legality in a practical manner by a wide range of potential techs and tracks. So we must stumble, case by case, through the VERY wide range of "completely legal for off-road racing" clutches that exist in the world.
Of course, we see all of the above issues arising, which seems to be the exact opposite of what everyone is looking for ... Simplicity and Clarity.
I would suggest that there is a very clear delineation that should be applied instead...
The simple prohibition on Axial (or Centax) style clutches, and/or the mandate that all clutches be Radial (to use a more accurate term). This completely clear and simple delineation could be easily identified and inspected, and is completely clear to understand. (Yes, I know the first question is going to be what about the Werks Power clutch?. The Werks clutch is clearly a "radial" clutch. The spring tension is on the axis but is irrelevant. The TORQUE DELIVERY comes from the shoes traveling out on the radius (hence "radial") and engaging the clutch bell just like every other "Off-Road" clutch.)
I submit this for consideration and, more importantly for the purposes of starting out with a rule that in the future can Practically be included in a Sanctioning Bodies rules, which a prohibition on "adjust-ability" could never be for now obvious reasons...
and, propose the simple rule.
Clutches: Axial (Centax) style clutches are prohibited.
(and if you wish to add: "Only Off-Road, Radial style clutches are allowed.")
Short of a rule like this one, the prohibition on "adjustable' clutches is in for a long, detailed and argument filled journey, which of course makes it that much more likely no one will pay attention to it anyway and I doubt that this is the goal of these discussion...
Exactly what does "adjustable" mean?
It has been stated that one can change springs, shoes, and even modify the weight of the shoes (shaving), etc. but that "mechanical" adjustments are not allowed.
From this we can draw the conclusion...
The ability to "tune" the clutch engagement to a drivers individual car and track conditions is clearly desirable (as opposed to an exact "Spec" clutch setup with exactly prescribed springs, shoes, flywheel, bell etc. that cannot be modified in any way).
So then what exactly does "adjustable" mean? After all, from the moment that you allow any "change" from a "spec" clutch you are really allowing "adjustment" regardless of what you call the "modification" or "change" and, as we have concluded, the ability to "alter" the characteristics of the clutch is clearly desirable.
It has been suggested that the meaning of "adjustable" is a "mechanical" adjustment. From this clarification and the acceptability of alterations and modifications to clutch components (i.e. shaving shoes) can it be concluded that a more clear rule would be:
***Changes that alter the "characteristics" of a clutch can be made without limitation as long as the change comes from a physical modification or the addition, removal or replacement of a component in the clutch but NOT a solely mechanical change.***
This seems to be the current state of explanation thus far...
We can then conclude the following....
The M2C adjustable flywheel, which can be "tuned", "adjusted", or whatever you want to call it, by adding or removing set screws from the flywheel, is LEGAL. Specifically it is legal because you are adding, removing or replacing a component to effect a "change".
The Fioroni "Vario" clutches are all ILLEGAL. This is because they posses a "mechanical" adjustment which allows you to change the "characteristics" (specifically the spring tension) without adding, removing, modifying or replacing a component.
The Buku clutch is ILLEGAL for the same reason.
However, if the Buku design were changed so that instead of turning an "adjustment" screw to effect the "change" you instead removed and replaced a "spring seat" to effect a change, then this version would be LEGAL.
So, a driver would have a box of tiny different (perhaps color coded) "spring seats" (sounds a lot like a box of different springs, gold, red, black, 30 degrees, 35 degrees, etc, doesn't it...) that they could swap out to "tune" their clutch to different track conditions. And of course because modification of components is allowed then a savvy driver would have these seats hand ground to length to give him exactly the levels of tension he was looking for in advance...
And this is better why?
And who is going to tech a rule like this? Someone running around trying to determine if a person is running a Vario clutch, or what version of Buku, the Original "Speed Tune" or the new "Quick Change GT Legal" version.
The simple reality is, the ability to make "Adjustments" or "tuning" or "alterations" or whatever you want to call it, to improve your performance on the track is a GOOD thing. If it wasn't clearly desirable then everyone would be demanding a "no modifications spec clutch".
Why then is the term "adjustable' being used at all? It reality, it has nothing to do with "adjustments", "adjust-ability, or "tuning"....
It has EVERYTHING to do with Centax or more specifically "Axial" style clutches. Obviously no one is interested in these "on-road" clutches being allowed. It's clear that they are the SOLE source of this issue in the first place. Unfortunately the term "adjustable' was initially used synonymously with "Centax" in the beginning of this discussion well before the range of currently used off-road clutches were considered.
Now later, after the term "adjustable" has been added to a proposed rule (for no real reason other then trying to clearly prohibit Centax or Axial clutches), it must be interpreted to be able to consistently and repeatably make a ruling on clutch legality in a practical manner by a wide range of potential techs and tracks. So we must stumble, case by case, through the VERY wide range of "completely legal for off-road racing" clutches that exist in the world.
Of course, we see all of the above issues arising, which seems to be the exact opposite of what everyone is looking for ... Simplicity and Clarity.
I would suggest that there is a very clear delineation that should be applied instead...
The simple prohibition on Axial (or Centax) style clutches, and/or the mandate that all clutches be Radial (to use a more accurate term). This completely clear and simple delineation could be easily identified and inspected, and is completely clear to understand. (Yes, I know the first question is going to be what about the Werks Power clutch?. The Werks clutch is clearly a "radial" clutch. The spring tension is on the axis but is irrelevant. The TORQUE DELIVERY comes from the shoes traveling out on the radius (hence "radial") and engaging the clutch bell just like every other "Off-Road" clutch.)
I submit this for consideration and, more importantly for the purposes of starting out with a rule that in the future can Practically be included in a Sanctioning Bodies rules, which a prohibition on "adjust-ability" could never be for now obvious reasons...
and, propose the simple rule.
Clutches: Axial (Centax) style clutches are prohibited.
(and if you wish to add: "Only Off-Road, Radial style clutches are allowed.")
Short of a rule like this one, the prohibition on "adjustable' clutches is in for a long, detailed and argument filled journey, which of course makes it that much more likely no one will pay attention to it anyway and I doubt that this is the goal of these discussion...
And thanks for voicing your concerns! it's important to us..
#335
Cole.............I just checked..............there's no one here but me.....
and my shadow. I'm not sure who it is that you reference that is 'sponsored' and
whispering in my ear.
I have balanced 'setup' tips because it boils down to the driver anyway.......
not everything everyone else found works for them does so for me. I found no
problem staying with Kyosho..........even with their currently lack of presence
on the GT8 scene (on-track). Maybe you'll get your setup info..............I'm even curious as to where it's going to come from. (watch out for the little voices)
and my shadow. I'm not sure who it is that you reference that is 'sponsored' and
whispering in my ear.
I have balanced 'setup' tips because it boils down to the driver anyway.......
not everything everyone else found works for them does so for me. I found no
problem staying with Kyosho..........even with their currently lack of presence
on the GT8 scene (on-track). Maybe you'll get your setup info..............I'm even curious as to where it's going to come from. (watch out for the little voices)
Thats why I have no problem sharing my setups....
#336
Tech Elite
iTrader: (2)
Keep in mind.... If I hand my car to either of you.. you might hate it... everyone likes a different feeling car..I like a twitchy car.... lots of steering.. some hate that... waht works fo me..... may not work for you..
Thats why I have no problem sharing my setups....
Thats why I have no problem sharing my setups....
#337
#341
I picked up a If28 brake set for the gt2. Am i suppose to glue the pads to the black plastic plate?
Thanks
Thanks
#342
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Was in Toledo, OH now Battle Ground, WA
Posts: 833
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
i also use the propeller style clutch. The bell I use is the same one that came with the new 2 speed tranny upgrade for the GT2. Your right , the shoes do stick out a bit with the fioroni clutch. If you happen to find another bell that fits flush, please post and let us know.
#343
#344
I had some questions locally about cut outs for the bodies. We have run a 2" diameter on the front , 4" on the rear , and driver window can be cut out for fueling. We as yet have not allowed the fuel guns, since it requires you to cut a substantial hole in the top of the car.
#345
I had some questions locally about cut outs for the bodies. We have run a 2" diameter on the front , 4" on the rear , and driver window can be cut out for fueling. We as yet have not allowed the fuel guns, since it requires you to cut a substantial hole in the top of the car.
I have a 3 inch hole in mine/ front... and a 2 in the back... .....No holes in the windows.... but i cut the front whole pretty high... like 1/2 inch past the windows edge...FYI...i basicly took the idea/ Rule from the sedan...look at the roar book.... personally the bigger the hole the worse it will handle.. correct? losts of air in the car... less going over the top...