Benzaah

iTrader: (24)

So how many of you guys have stock of these motors? Is there going to be a push by any of the clubs to have arcmarc approve these for the rest of the year? Let the discussion begin.

I was on the fence and don't have any as yet but this was a planned purchase for the nationals. Fortunately/unfortunately there's no onroad racing happening here in SA currently otherwise I'd definitely have these motors. I think it logical to have them approved for the rest of the year.

PDR

iTrader: (31)

Me

However, apart from the grace period, the motor should only be allowed if it conforms to the required specification. This is harsh, perhaps, but fairer than a situation where an out of spec motor is not available to other racers in the back half of the year.

Phil.

evochick

iTrader: (5)

I have no broblem with the 17.5 being banned. I do have an issue with the 13.5 being banned as there was no mention of it in the original press releases to say it would be banned as well..

scott_g

iTrader: (9)

Perhaps the thing to do is wait for some more official confirmation from ROAR as to the status of the 13.5. If it's off the list because it doesn't meet specs, then we shouldn't (in my view) be making a special case for it here beyond a short grace period.

My personal view would be that if (IF) ROAR announce it as not meeting specs, then a three month window beyond which it's no longer acceptable in sanctioned AARCMCC (and ORRCA Q) events would be appropriate. Club use of course could continue beyond that.

There are a lot of ifs to be resolved before we would need to encourage a decision from AARCMCC (and ORRCA for the Queenslanders).

ta04evah

iTrader: (2)

+1

While I do not have a D3.5 13.5 motor I do also have a problem with the way ROAR has decided to deem the motor illegal.

The following is my take on the events of last year so some things may not be exactly accurate.

In 2013 ROAR announces that due to new "testing processes" the Trinity 17.5 turn D3.5 failed to meet the required specifications and was promptly banned from competition at ROAR events.
The announcement was made public before Trinity was informed of the decision, naturally Trinity was peeved with this as the motor passed testing earlier in the year, and the 17.5 is their "bread & butter" motor in the US market.

After some arguing and threats being thrown around Trinity decides to take ROAR to court on the matter to have the 17.5 re instated on the motor approval list.
With both parties realising that a legal battle could, and would be a long drawn out & costly path to take for both parties involved so an out of court agreement took place.
The agreement involved stated that the 17.5 motor was the only motor of the D3.5 spec range that failed testing, and would be given a grace period to be phased out to give racers time to continue to use their motor, and time to acquire a approved motor when the grace period elapsed.

At no point in time before now did ROAR or Trinity state that the 13.5 would also be taken off the approved list at the end of the grace period, as it was one of the spec motors (10.5 13.5 & 21.5) that passed the tests for spec motors.

Is ROAR acting in a passive aggressive manner hoping no one would notice it being taken off the appoval list, or have they not learned a lesson and just gone ahead with decision thinking that they can just go and do what they want because they can?
Or it could just be a typo with someone accidentally deleting the 13.5 off the list without relising their mistake? (I don't think this happened)

Cheers
Rob.

xrayracer1

iTrader: (1)

Just curious, is Trinity going to release a new motor to replace the D3.5 series? I've read on some other threads that there is a possible replacement.
(I may be wrong about this.)

froggie22

iTrader: (4)

From what I remember reading, the ban stated that it would remain on the list until the 31st of March OR until trinity released the D4, whichever came first. So I'm guessing there is a motor in the works but it didn't make it before the 31st of March deadline.

lookieaefanboi

iTrader: (39)

Just goes to prove how bullshit the list is here is a link to a motor approved by them in the middle of 2013 that doesnt appear on the list.
http://roarracing.org/4rmb/showthrea...llshot-R-1601R

There are several other motors that have been tested after the d3.5 issues and were subsequently approved but never added to the list

PDR

iTrader: (31)

Just to point out that all new approvals are published here:
http://roarracing.org/4rmb/forumdisp...otor-Approvals

The Killshot R is there...

lookieaefanboi

iTrader: (39)

and if you look at the current list non trinity motors approved in march 2014 are listed but the trinity motors approved in june 2013 they forgot to add to the list?

The problem is events go off the list and not the forums. I know this as I use the revtech and had prove they were on there for aoc as they used the roar lists.

mick355

iTrader: (14)

This is bs. Roar need to make up their mind.
I have two if these, one for on road and one for offroad. All the hype about how fast they are is rubbish.
There are new motors out there on the roar list that are quicker.

jimkoimanis

Lat I heard was that arcmarc was not going to take it off the list so u guys r safe if u want to no pm Romsey and he will tell u whats happening

xrayracer1

iTrader: (1)

Totally agree.

ta04evah

iTrader: (2)

I believe that I have found the reason as to why the 13.5 was pulled from the ROAR motor approved list.

Link to quote is here

So, where do we go from here in regards to the now "banned" D3.5 13.5 motor?
Will it be allowed to be used in any sanctioned event in Aus, or will it be instantly barred from such events, and will it earn any "grace period" to be used?

Cheers
Rob.

nexxus

iTrader: (315)

Once a motor is approved, that should be it, new motors come out all the time, even if the wire guage is out by a micron, the next new motor will probably trump it anyway. Roar needs to improve transparency including any actual or percieved conflict of interest (ie a motor manufacturer as one of the determining parties if a motor is legal or not)

I wonder, if there is another court case from Trinity against Roar, what the judge would be thinking? Probably never want to see a toy motor again!