charlie_b

iTrader: (1)

I really find this interesting. In 2007 when i announced i will be adapting the stock 17.5 rule to all my stock classes in 2008, i got a ton of heat from my racers. Quite a few actually stopped racing with me because i renamed the 13.5 class "Pro Stock" while the rest i kept the same. "Rookie, Intermediate, Sportsman Stock". The argument was "i can't keep up with the Pro stock guys". The funny thing was when i allowed the 13.5 and the 17.5 cars to mix prior to 2007, the 13.5 guys were clearly faster regardless of "skill". The big issue to me was that there just wasn't enough 13.5 Sportsman Drivers to make their own class.

Three years later, the racers adapted pretty well. Consistently having full Rookie, Intermediate, and Sportsman Stock 17.5 drivers, it became the norm for my races. With the introduction of RCGT, 17.5 gained a Pro or Expert Class and shortly after, a expert 17.5 class.

My point is, 17.5 is fast, but not so fast that it will scare beginners away. Nor do i think it is the home for "Sand-Baggers". Obviously, when turn outs are low, the expert driver will have to run with the sportsman drivers and vice versa. It is no different from 10-15 years ago when the brushed rebuildable 24* stock motors were the standard and there was Sportsman and Expert Stock.

The problem isn't with the technology. It is how race programs control it. Of coarse, some things are out of the race program's control, like low turnouts=everyone mixed together. Nothing can be done about that. But if there is a a chance to separate the expert/pro drivers from the mere mortals, im sure it would be done. Welcome technology. Don't hold it back. It really isn't about who spends the $$ at a club level race 100% of the time. Believe it or not, driving still is the biggest advantage over the technology. It has been proven time and time again at my track. One 14 year old racer who i just bumped up to Sportsman Stock is running a Cyclone S, V1.0 Speed Passion esc and a V1.0 17.5 with 3200 Yeah racing Lipos. He has beaten drivers with the new Orion 45C's and Tekin esc's. All driving.

We get new racers all the time, not quite as often as before due to the economy. But if we focus less on "who has the best equipment" and emphasize on Driving and Set Up, i don't think people would find as many excuses why they are slow on the track.

What ever motor, whether it is 17.5, 21.5 or 10.5, there clearly should be a separation of skill levels, not dooming a motor type or making a NEW MOTOR CLASS. If i was told to get rid of my 17.5's, i probably wouldn't race as much. Know who the fast guys are and put them in a class of their own if the entries permit. Like my race program, be conistant and it will flourish.

InspGadgt

Pardon me for the disjointedness of my post but I'm kinda on the fence on this issue and can't figure out where to be. I'll try and organize my thoughts in sections to make it easier.

Separation of classes: When I first started racing there was only stock 1/10th pan car being raced locally on-road. Then as now I wanted to run with the fast guys because I got faster doing so. But it seems today there are 2 types of potential new drivers. Type 1: Those that are intimidated by the faster drivers. And Type 2: Those that just want to go fast even if they can't really handle the speed. Type 1 are the drivers that want a separate class because of skill level. Type 2 either think they can buy their way to a win, or they want a separate class because of equipment. Either way it seems the desire is for a separate class for novice drivers. Now when I used to run a scale F1 race we started out with 1 class and for about 8 to 10 years that worked well. Then about the time the F201 started coming out the new crop of new drivers were intimidated by the veterans and the modified chassis we ran so they wanted a separate class and we gave them one. Our race had strong restrictions on motor and battery that made chassis upgrades pretty much moot but still people perceived this to be an advantage, even though it wasn't, and were intimidated by it. 2 things came about due to the split, 1 good and 1 not so good. First the drivers in the novice class were having more fun, which was a good thing. But they didn't improve at near the same rate they did when the classes were combined. It should be noted though that adding the novice class did not bring in any new drivers. It only split up the drivers we had.

ESC Restrictions: In the past I've been against restrictions on electronic timing/boost and such not because I don't think it will help but because I don't think it is feasible from a rules enforcement perspective. At a local club race it is impractical to know and have all the equipment necessary to check each brand of ESC to make sure their electronic timing is turned off. At a big race level there are too many ways to cheat electronically and have it disable by holding brake at the end of a run so it passes tech inspection or something to that effect. Now I'm not saying any of our current ESC manufacturers would ever cheat, but you never know about new manufacturers coming in. The same problem did cause huge problems in paintball when electronic triggers were introduced. Eventually they had to make a lot of thing legal that were previously illegal because they could not tech for it. We do need to make a change and I do believe that if timing restrictions could be enforced that it would be a good idea. Now I am thinking we should for the betterment of the hobby and IF cheating occurs deal with it then. The reason I am now thinking this will work is I have rethought the comparison with paintball. You see in paintball the trigger circuits are fairly simple and anyone who understands enough about electronics can easily make their own circuit at home and this is where the cheater boards started. Eventually even the big manufacturers needed to make cheater boards to take advantage of the market demand. However the same does not hold true for an ESC, especially a BL ESC. These are much more sophisticated and can not be easily made or modified at home. So as long as manufacturers agree to stick to a certain set of rules for novice class whether it be a spec profile or a spec ESC I now believe it will work. I would suggest that new ESCs coming out have a separate LED away from the normal LEDs that is illuminated when the spec profile is being used. This will make it easier for officials to tech. This way we could have both budget ESCs with spec parameters and higher end ESCs running with a spec profile in the same race and it would be fair.

Cost of racing: Well up to BL and LiPo the cost of racing really hadn't gone up yet participation was still going down. BL and Lip didn't really up the cost of racing for those who were already running higher end equipment but it did for the budget racer as there really are no sport pack LiPo batteries, no inexpensive stock motors, and budget BL ESCs are only now starting to come out. For a novice or sportsman class to work and draw in new drivers it needs to be low cost. A budget ESC with spec parameters is needed. Additionally higher end ESCs need to have the spec profile for those willing to buy the better ESC now so they don't have to later. A low cost sport pack LiPo battery needs to be the sportsman battery. With 40c and 50c batteries now out I don't think it would be too much of a stretch to have a low cost 20c sport pack. Lastly motors need to come down majorly in price...whether it be through a low cost stock motor with non-adjustable timing or some other method. When I look back over the years at what I've spent on RC to me the costs if anything have come down...but that is only when comparing RC to RC. I think Stitchy nailed it though...even though the costs of RC haven't changed muched and have even come down for some of us, we aren't competing against RC of the past for people's attention. We are competing against things like console games where people not only don't have to get out of their chairs to race, but setups are only a click of the up and down arrow keys, not to mention all the other different types of games out there which provide a rush that aren't even racing related.

I guess after putting all my thoughts down I've figured out which side of the fence I'm on now

or8ital

iTrader: (38)

I disagree. Everyone pushed things to the limit before all the timing boosts and more dynamic timing days, especially on larger tracks. With the more dynamic timing you can help the motor run more efficiently while running optimally and keep the temps down. Back before the timing tricks the first thing everyone did when coming off the track was temp their motor.

I don't think static timing is necessarily the answer. I think you can slow things down, keep things spec but also keep equipment failures to a minimum. It just takes a little thought.

redbones

+1

except the gearing with the BL motors. different BL motors have different sweet spots that will prevent over heating. This includes undergearing. So what is the solution? Sealed endbell brushed motors with a dyno check at the end of the race. Love how we have to regress.

gashuffer

iTrader: (48)

Where is this thread going??

gashuffer

iTrader: (48)

No. Expert drivers should not run and clinic the sportsman than. J/K can you imagine?

Kent Beal

iTrader: (72)

gashuffer- COMPLETELY NOWHERE. This was about the fact that Roar now says no sponsered drivers of any kind in sportsman stock. Now it's about motors, esc's, and classes.

My thing is, if Ernie P. is such a big believer in this why didn't he start making his team do this years ago. He should've already known that his drivers belong in superstock and mod all along. Oh wait, that's right he wanted to make money. how do sell your products? win races.

I think Roar is trying to do the right thing. But in that quote it says

"Sportsman Stock classes at any ROAR nationals is off limits to any driver with any amount of compensation whether it be product, travel, lodging, and/or incentive bonus payments of any kind.
-Entry fee may not be paid by any business entity, regardless of hobby affiliation."

So does this mean that if some kid wants to go to the Nats but his family can't afford it and so he goes to locals businesses and get some sponser money from them (like little league) so he can go, but he now has to run something other that sportsman stock?

Now that's not fair either.

or8ital

iTrader: (38)

I think its about one way of bringing new people into the hobby which lead to other ways of bringing new people in which lead to motors, ETCs and classes.

I wonder:

- Does this rule get sponsored drivers out of stock and into Super Stock?

or

- Does this rule get sponsorships remove from people in stock? (The same racers stay in the class?)

I have a feeling a rule that was put into place for a dozen or so racers (people in the first question) will end up effecting many many above average racers that are in the second question. But maybe that is not necessarily a bad thing. For people to get discounts means the rest of the racers are picking up the tab. Maybe it will help bring the prices down a bit for everyone.

gashuffer

iTrader: (48)

The whole bringing new people story is kinda old already. There will always be people buying in. Stock racing in any form should not have sponsored drivers i.e 21.5, 17.5, 13.5. What gets me is nowadays the fast guys want to go fast in a slower class???

Andy63

Why have ,for example, the Super Stock class at all? They are about half a second slower then Modified and that tells us that it is way to fast!

So why not have 2 classes only in touring, Modified and Stock.

the Stock should run 17,5 brushless motors with nimh(dont know what turns it is with LiPo maybe its 21,5? :S)

and modified as you like.

Dont need to be so complicated.

Here in sweden we had 3 classes before, T27, T19 and modified. and we couldnt really fill the spots. but now we only have stock(the slower one) and modified left.

stiltskin

iTrader: (103)

Is the point of this debate to bring in new racers or to eliminate sponsorships? I didn't get faster when I started getting a discount. Qualifying already separates the better drivers, so why separate them even more. If we are trying to encourage new blood, then why are we pissing off the old blood to do it? Add a 21.5 NOVICE class if you want but don't force people to race in a faster class. I've been running 13.5 outside and I'll be running it inside tomorrow, but 17.5 is still the most fun and most competitive class at our track. I don't believe that anyone is being discouraged from racing just because they can't win an A-main at their first race. We have a local driver with a deal from a car company. I don't think he's made the A-main in more than 2 of the last 6 indoor races. Now he has to race 13.5 at a bigger event? We have another racer that deals mainly with offroad and has several offroad sponsors. He does very well in the Amain each week. How does this affect him? He doesn't receive any help in TC, so he's allowed to run Amatuer (or whatever we're calling it)??? Too many scenarios to play out, but I still don't see how this changes the direction the hobby is going, nor do I see any benefit to new drivers.

gashuffer

iTrader: (48)

Andy-Manufacturers decided to flood the market with so many different motors.

So what wins sells ans at the end of the day money is the goal. People do get faster when they have the best gear because that plays a big role in performance along with practice. So to answer your question that you didn't get faster with discounts is yes you did. Cheaper parts mean you can afford to change them out more often without worry keeping you car in perfect tune every time. Tires, batteries, bodies, parts and so fourth. When I use to race 1/8 on-road I was changing clutch shoes every hour of run time. 80 bucks a race was killing me on top of the 200 in tires just for club racing. It was that competitive.

ckaspar

iTrader: (1)

I have an idea.

Open motor, open to all drivers, Qualifying is not separated out by class or motor, just times. The faster X percent are in the Pro Class, the next X percent are in Expert, the next X percent are in Sportsman the remainder go in novice.

It seems to me that would stop the sandbagging/moaning/whining/etc.

In short, I could be in a Qual race with Barry Baker, I know he is going to whomp me! He quals for Pro and me for "Get the heck off the track you don't even belong here".

Or for smaller club races base it off of practice times throughout the day or something.

The "Class" seems subjective to me. Am I a Novice or am I Sportsman? Who knows? The only real determination is the amount of times I can get around the track in 5 minutes, how clean I run, etc. That is the real determination in my mind.

Hatebreed

@stiltskin: well, he is still sponsored.. you know the answer!

stiltskin

iTrader: (103)

NO I didn't. (said it last, got my fingers crossed) If I save $10 on a motor, the discount didn't make me faster. I was going to buy the motor anyway. If I bought 9 motors and you could only afford 8 with the same money, did I really get an advantage over you on the track? The same motor, car, speedo, etc... is available to everyone else in the market. My point is that if I drop my sponsors, I'm still the same driver, with the same talent. Now I just pay more for my stuff.

Answer to this problem is: create a new NOVICE / AMATEUR class but still allow sponsored drivers to race 17.5. Choose whatever motor you want for novice, but why force other drivers into a faster class when they are happy with the one they're in?