Proposed R.O.A.R. rules change
05-27-2011, 07:40 PM
#661
The kicker was the $350 speed control was in my Xray T3R which goes for $275 on stormer hobbies.
I qualified 4th behind a GTB and a Citrix and a Havok but I beat the Tekin.
yes the main was not the highlight of the weekend. fast lap in 12th scale was!
05-27-2011, 09:46 PM
#662
Personally I am all for a reasonable entry level class. However, pushing new rule sets annually is not the solution. Back when stock was "stock" we had locked timing, spec winds, and limits on interpretations of the rules for motor builders(IIRC). Banning blinking / timing esc's isn't really the most viable option. That forces the people that already have equipment to buy more stuff just to be legal. This stock crap has changed way to many times. First it was 13.5, then it was 17.5 with a little timing(LRP sphere tc), then it was 17.5 open timing/boost(tekin etc open), then it's 17.5 blinky no timing(tekin spec software upgrade), then its 17.5 buy a spec speed control cause tekin etc isn't legal. Come on, how about a spec formula and better written rules. Rather than deciding that someones interpretation of the rules isn't legal.
Sounds like Roar needs to sit down with racers, manufacturers and figure out a reasonable solution rather than just mandating how things will be. Allow current blinky no timing esc's, have a 2012-2014 frozen spec stock motor like DTM has. Where motors are revised a max of every 2 years and the spec the company wants to sell for a 2 year period gets submitted to roar and frozen. Exceptions for quality control / reducing catastrophic failures. That way racers don't have to wait out rules changes and buy new motors and esc's when they don't have to. And naturally look to manufacturers to have a cost effective decent price point brushless motor / esc combos for the new racers. Because for the MFG to switch tooling and develop new hardware all the time eats at their bottom line, increasing shelf prices OR decreasing profits. Personally I think that with the brushless motors we should be taking advantage of the longer service life and less maintenance, buying a new esc/ motor every year or two to match the rules is annoying when the gear I had last year worked fine with the revised no timing software.
Sounds like Roar needs to sit down with racers, manufacturers and figure out a reasonable solution rather than just mandating how things will be. Allow current blinky no timing esc's, have a 2012-2014 frozen spec stock motor like DTM has. Where motors are revised a max of every 2 years and the spec the company wants to sell for a 2 year period gets submitted to roar and frozen. Exceptions for quality control / reducing catastrophic failures. That way racers don't have to wait out rules changes and buy new motors and esc's when they don't have to. And naturally look to manufacturers to have a cost effective decent price point brushless motor / esc combos for the new racers. Because for the MFG to switch tooling and develop new hardware all the time eats at their bottom line, increasing shelf prices OR decreasing profits. Personally I think that with the brushless motors we should be taking advantage of the longer service life and less maintenance, buying a new esc/ motor every year or two to match the rules is annoying when the gear I had last year worked fine with the revised no timing software.
05-27-2011, 10:01 PM
#663
The combination of first lipo batteries, then brushless timing advance technology happened on a time line that made it appropriate to make repeated changes. There has never been a time in electric racing when available power has changed so much. With every change stock got faster by a greater margin than was possible before. It seems like the rules are jumping around a lot and they are but it's because historically unique circumstances.
I agree that if a speed control has a verifyable means to disable the timing features then it should be allowed to be used but on the other side, guys who own Tekins and other top end speed controls don't have any problem with spending money on new gear, just being told that they have to slow down. To them I say the same thing I've said since the late 80's, "step up and race modified".
The removal of timing advance has me buying stock motors and racing stock for the first time since then.
I agree that if a speed control has a verifyable means to disable the timing features then it should be allowed to be used but on the other side, guys who own Tekins and other top end speed controls don't have any problem with spending money on new gear, just being told that they have to slow down. To them I say the same thing I've said since the late 80's, "step up and race modified".
The removal of timing advance has me buying stock motors and racing stock for the first time since then.
05-27-2011, 10:07 PM
#664
STOCK WAS NEVER "STOCK"
05-27-2011, 11:33 PM
#666
AH YOUNG PADIWAN, you do not remember a long time ago at a track far far away where everyone ran Silver can motors and Sanyo Ni-Cad 1200 mah batteries. One of Roar's first motor rules was locking the End bell and later the com so timing could not be tweaked in stock class. All of that went away with brushless.
05-28-2011, 04:43 AM
#667
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
That is an interesting and very good point. Stock class (27t) had locked timing thru can design and armature design the last few years before brushless. 19t started that way then adjustable timing and handwound arms were allowed then poof the class got out of control. Having seen the 19t story I think it is one thing ROAR is trying to avoid.
The locked 17.5 and 13.5 motors are a return to what we had before.
As stated many times here, the highly programmable speedos are taking us to uncharted territory. ROAR is proposing a rule that will place a limit on them. But this thread is about the boost and not the motors, that just kind of evolved here.
The locked 17.5 and 13.5 motors are a return to what we had before.
As stated many times here, the highly programmable speedos are taking us to uncharted territory. ROAR is proposing a rule that will place a limit on them. But this thread is about the boost and not the motors, that just kind of evolved here.
05-28-2011, 06:16 AM
#668
How many entry level classes do we need? Wasn't that the reason the VTA, Mini, WGT, RCGT, 17.5 non-boosted, classes were created? 
Boosted speedos have allowed us to run fast cars and maintain safe motor temps (when not trying to get stupid). Are boosted speedos (or the perceived software nightmare) the real issue or is this a way to control the speedo monopoly? There were lots of us that didn't want to run 19t because it was harder on cars, too fast for small tracks, whatever. Now we're running 17.5 boosted cars that are way faster than 19t ever was. We have had lots of new faces over the past couple of years. Some of them jumped straight into boosted, some went for non-boosted and others decided to play in VTA. We already have too many entry level classes. I keep hearing that we need a class like the slash. We already have those. We haven't dumbed down 4wd buggy or 2wd buggy to create entry level classes. They stay the same and you drive what you can control. Nitro has a novice class with the same motors that the big guys are running. Electric is getting out of control trying to solve a problem. The irony is that the solutions that are offered just add to the problem. Too many motor classes, too many racing style classes and too many rule changes. All we need is 17.5 boosted, mod, and (insert one of the many niche classes that we've created to bring in new blood). Let's race. 
Boosted speedos have allowed us to run fast cars and maintain safe motor temps (when not trying to get stupid). Are boosted speedos (or the perceived software nightmare) the real issue or is this a way to control the speedo monopoly? There were lots of us that didn't want to run 19t because it was harder on cars, too fast for small tracks, whatever. Now we're running 17.5 boosted cars that are way faster than 19t ever was. We have had lots of new faces over the past couple of years. Some of them jumped straight into boosted, some went for non-boosted and others decided to play in VTA. We already have too many entry level classes. I keep hearing that we need a class like the slash. We already have those. We haven't dumbed down 4wd buggy or 2wd buggy to create entry level classes. They stay the same and you drive what you can control. Nitro has a novice class with the same motors that the big guys are running. Electric is getting out of control trying to solve a problem. The irony is that the solutions that are offered just add to the problem. Too many motor classes, too many racing style classes and too many rule changes. All we need is 17.5 boosted, mod, and (insert one of the many niche classes that we've created to bring in new blood). Let's race.
05-28-2011, 06:27 AM
#669
How many entry level classes do we need? Wasn't that the reason the VTA, Mini, WGT, RCGT, 17.5 non-boosted, classes were created? Boosted speedos have allowed us to run fast cars and maintain safe motor temps (when not trying to get stupid). Are boosted speedos (or the perceived software nightmare) the real issue or is this a way to control the speedo monopoly? There were lots of us that didn't want to run 19t because it was harder on cars, too fast for small tracks, whatever. Now we're running 17.5 boosted cars that are way faster than 19t ever was. We have had lots of new faces over the past couple of years. Some of them jumped straight into boosted, some went for non-boosted and others decided to play in VTA. We already have too many entry level classes. I keep hearing that we need a class like the slash. We already have those. We haven't dumbed down 4wd buggy or 2wd buggy to create entry level classes. They stay the same and you drive what you can control. Nitro has a novice class with the same motors that the big guys are running. Electric is getting out of control trying to solve a problem. The irony is that the solutions that are offered just add to the problem. Too many motor classes, too many racing style classes and too many rule changes. All we need is 17.5 boosted, mod, and (insert one of the many niche classes that we've created to bring in new blood). Let's race.
Boosted speedos have allowed us to run fast cars and maintain safe motor temps (when not trying to get stupid). Are boosted speedos (or the perceived software nightmare) the real issue or is this a way to control the speedo monopoly? There were lots of us that didn't want to run 19t because it was harder on cars, too fast for small tracks, whatever. Now we're running 17.5 boosted cars that are way faster than 19t ever was. We have had lots of new faces over the past couple of years. Some of them jumped straight into boosted, some went for non-boosted and others decided to play in VTA. We already have too many entry level classes. I keep hearing that we need a class like the slash. We already have those. We haven't dumbed down 4wd buggy or 2wd buggy to create entry level classes. They stay the same and you drive what you can control. Nitro has a novice class with the same motors that the big guys are running. Electric is getting out of control trying to solve a problem. The irony is that the solutions that are offered just add to the problem. Too many motor classes, too many racing style classes and too many rule changes. All we need is 17.5 boosted, mod, and (insert one of the many niche classes that we've created to bring in new blood). Let's race. Maybe making things simple and consistent for a number of years is the key. Investing in a TC, regardless of the class and rules, is tough to do if the rules keep changing.
I do like how Nitro is doing it, but aren't on road nitro numbers worse than electric?
With that being said, the only reason I don't own an on road nitro car is pure cost. When I purchase a car, I don't like to be out equipped. So I always buy what I feels is the best gear. Whether it makes me faster or not, doesn't matter. It's piece of mind knowing it's me and not the car. Some of the costs of nitro engines is just intense. Add to the fact that they only last so many gallons is even worse.
05-28-2011, 05:21 PM
#671
Stop sending Roar a membership fee and they will go away.........
05-28-2011, 05:49 PM
#672
I agree with the ROAR proposal.
It's not about fast drivers being fast, or wasting money to buy new equipment.
It's about rules, that if adopted moving forward, would attract new blood to on-road.
It's about new people, who are going to buy equipment for the very first time. It's about speeds that will not totally wreck a person's car in a crash and destroy $200 worth of equipment.
And it's still the local track owners choice to adopt the rule or not. At least the option is there.
Just my opinion.
It's not about fast drivers being fast, or wasting money to buy new equipment.
It's about rules, that if adopted moving forward, would attract new blood to on-road.
It's about new people, who are going to buy equipment for the very first time. It's about speeds that will not totally wreck a person's car in a crash and destroy $200 worth of equipment.
And it's still the local track owners choice to adopt the rule or not. At least the option is there.
Just my opinion.
05-29-2011, 04:18 AM
#674
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
I guess the people that had motor problems need to remember how to gear their cars. Just like we had to learn how to not cook a motor when running boost.
In other words, just another learning curve.
05-29-2011, 06:09 AM
#675
Interesting: When we ran no boost in WGT our temps dropped 20-30 degrees. if we geared higher the cars didn't get faster just hotter.
I guess the people that had motor problems need to remember how to gear their cars. Just like we had to learn how to not cook a motor when running boost.
In other words, just another learning curve.
I guess the people that had motor problems need to remember how to gear their cars. Just like we had to learn how to not cook a motor when running boost.
In other words, just another learning curve.