scirocco14

iTrader: (5)

Myron, I agree with you! The folks who don't want to play because of the motor rule are missing out on one of the best on-road classes for the weekend warrior. Their loss. The USVTA class was THE reason I decided to try on-road RC car racing.

My nitro planes and helis are wondering WTH happened.

Keep up the good work!

Mark C.
USVTA #115

Cain

iTrader: (294)

I'd be fine with say:

- 1500g weight, basically inbetween ROAR and USVTA
- Real 5000mah battery, confirmed prior to sale. Sorry but the concept of 5000mah because the label says so the more I think about it doesn't sit well with me when someone can just drop a bigger mah cell inside the case and label it that way. "Certified VTA legal", be fine with that regardless of mah.

I think the way you need to look at it is if the concept that a single source is logical, then the logic behind having esc choice is illogical, why not just spec on one ESC from novak and the motor too?

And maybe the question is this, would the numbers for turn out you are reporting have been greater if the motor rule was open?

Or, another way, would have turn out been greater if the ESC rule was closed to one particular model from Novak or whoever?

I think personally to me, by default if you found that giving choice in one area was good, then the potential for choice may be good elsewhere too.

Heck, seems choice if I am understanding the rules correctly exists on the electronics except the motors within reason for manufacturer selection like battery and esc, assuming it meets a "spec".

Maybe a motor can meet the spec too.

Regardless, I think the big thing I find odd is that for the benefit Novak gets for being exclusive, seems prices went up versus staying even or getting better for USVTA drivers, and the consistency if the whole label issue is as such should be better too for the official spec motor.

And lastly, things do change. USVTA from what I am understanding has changed from when it first started to what it is now. I am sure their are those who felt that the stuff used at that time was perfect and didn't want to change, but ultimately, things did change to the benefit of the class.

Maybe the motor limit is the next step ... maybe not. But with anything, change seems consistent.

Totally DIALED

iTrader: (4)

You are missing the chance to spend a lot of money! In the classes without a specific motor rule, a majority of the racers will end up with the same motor in their cars. Hell, the oval guys just ran the D3.5 17.5 for 2 years straight... Cause as we all know if you didn't have a D3.5 in your car you didn't stand a chance...At Oval Masters... EVERY truck this year had an R1 17.5 it, yet its an OPEN Motor class.!! So what is the difference? No different than running VTA with a Boss motor...sure some are better and some are weaker... But a crap motor can still push a good chassis.
Personally I have 1 VTA motor. Its better to learn that motor and work on my chassis then to throw a "fast" motor in a crap car.
For years Legend cars were the answer to the "economical spec racing" class of racing. It was box stock. In off road the ox stock Slash helped off road to grow..Both classes required that only the motor which it came with could be run. To me, that was the idea behind VTA...and for the most part..that "box stock" formula has helped RC to grow in the different forms of racing...When you get too far away from the "grass roots" rules of the class, in my opinion is where you may not see the decline in the class, but that's where the decline starts....Keep it simple...that's the appeal to a lot of people..
All the changes is how we end up with 6+ classes at a club race and 3 guys in each class. We tweak the rules to fit our needs instead of tweaking our cars to fit the class needs.

My .02

Cain

iTrader: (294)

ultimately the problem I saw with stock slash and talking to guys who run legends was people who new how to tune a motor than others. seeing guys with a "box stock" getting walked on by others with a supposely "box stock" motor was quite eye opening.

I agree the spirit of the class has merit.

However if the spirit is limited box stock racing, when you open up parts of the stuff like ESCs, battery choice etc, you already have gotten away from that anyway.

And to have a truly spec, the electronics need to be consistent as possible.

And who knows, maybe that is where USVTA needs to look ultimately, that if you are the official spec motor for the class, then it needs to be something consistent in quality that you don't need to make a custom rule for to account for inconsistencies in the labeling of the timing settings of a motor, or any other issues similar to this.

And if you are the manufacturer are unwilling to address this while increasing prices on class drivers, ,then maybe put the motor selection up for bid with specifics on what you are looking for.

DARKSIDE

iTrader: (2)

2007-2008....4 cell 27t....2010 5000 25.5 Novak....hummm

the class has made changes over the years. but what hasnt changed?...esc hasnt never really been an issue until "boost/turbo" can into play, then the whole Tekin Vegas mess..oh and the Black Dimond...do you see where Im going with this...we changed different things surrounding the esc..and its had to be changed several times...we have stuck to ONE motor since 2010 and all is happy...thats 4 plus years of not spending any dollars cause something new came out....

and before anybody says well the boss and vented endbells...my original Novak 21.5 converted to 25.5 with one of the original 3 stators still runs great and in my ride till this day...

this is a dead situation imo...the Novak 25.5 has made this class grow period. and if you dont think so...next time you have a ROAR Reg or Nats event in your area...go support and run a ROAR VTA car, if its even offered...and be happy that you made the A, cause thats all it will be.....then come to the Southern, Scale, or Summit Nationals and be amazed to be in the room with more USVTA cars than anywhere in the World..

any questions?

John Wallace2

Right now the only difference between USVTA and our EOS rules here in Texas is the motor. EOS allows any 25.5 and guess what the guy who dominated the EOS VTA class (like he has NEVER been between by a legal 25.5 motor in the last two years) runs a Novak motor at 45 degrees timing. As I posted earlier, only the very high end hand build certified motors look as good as the Novaks on the dyno. Although I've made a lot of noise about the Novaks in the past, once I got mine running at the correct timing (thanks to the Motorlyser) it runs great. (Just be sure to swap out the senor unit as the new ones come with slightly shorter screws - at least they were shorter than the ones that came with my BOSS).

So I'm indifferent to what the motor rule is: Novak only or any 25.5 motor. EOS runs them together and the Novaks fair very well if not out perform most others. We are still looking for a way to slow Tommy R down - perhaps making him run something other than a Novak would work - I doubt it!

DARKSIDE

iTrader: (2)

1550 is a must due to older cars like my TC4 being at 1600 without any extra weight added. Its easier to add weight than to start hacking on the older chassis to loose weight.

5000 lipos is a perfect price and power for the 25.5 Novak motors that help with the speed issue. Some lipo companies can and will not be truthful on the correct size of the lipo. weight and of course you can cycle it and see. simple

tires/rims so glad we are past that issue. prove to stand the test of time and HPI best selling along with the HPI 68 Camaro.

Bodies are as written and if a company want s to add, just make sure it was raced in this era...contacting the USVTA before hand would be easy as well...save some time...

chassis are open to 4wd touring...any make any model...nothing?....hummm

servos are a choice of you driving and chassis...knock yourself out...

Novak GTB2 with Xdrive still the best esc for this class imo...wont be changing that

oh and before I forget...if somebody ever pm me about "this guy is using a $500 radio to run VTA, should this be allowed?"...really?...well if I had a honest bone in my body and really spoke my mind.....Myron would say I dont care, but Battman would tell EA to go run 17.5 and mod...lol

ps have a safe trip EA

.crispy

Sorry, I disagree with you on the weight. Keeping obsolete rules around to keep ancient cars competitive is counterproductive.

As others have mentioned, USVTA rules HAVE changed with the times. At some point that rule needs to change too. How long are we going to protect the TC4?

hairless_ape

iTrader: (3)

You have to plug your esc into your phone? That's so quaint. Toro and SpeedPassion both have bluetooth adapters, that allow me to set my ESC's up wirelessly. It's great for making adjustments during practice, you don't even have to get off the stand. [sarcasm]That's such a low end feature, I wish they'd make them more driver friendly.[/sarcasm]

I agree, a box stock SP V3 motor is not very affective for 17.5 blinky. The MMM motors are a better choice for blinky out of the box. However, those timing inserts are only $20, which only only brings the motor cost up to $50. That's still half the cost of most ROAR motors.

Trackstar ROAR motors don't need a timing insert to get "full" adjustment, so you can keep right at 1/3 the cost instead of 1/2.

DARKSIDE

iTrader: (2)

its not protection....are you saying guys with older chassis that work great for a class that has slower speeds should retire that chassis and drop $300 on a new chassis to do the same job?...

if you think dropping the weight is going to help anybody with newer chassis..you are correct...but most guys like what they have and have learned their chassis and able to run with the guys using the high end chassis.

what chassis are you running?

scirocco14

iTrader: (5)

I don't know, I think the rule is great. It's amusing to watch my friends try to figure out where to bolt all that lead in their expensive Xray T4's and TC6.2's, while I'm replacing the screws with aluminum ones to get down to weight (I race a TC4...along with a whole bunch of other guys I race with).


Mark

John Wallace2

One of the fastest guys here drives a TC3, why put him at a disadvantage because he likes to drive a TC3? If someone wants to spend $1,000 for the latest state of the art TC chassis, what's another $25 for lead to bring it up to 1550 grams?

Totally DIALED

iTrader: (4)

.....

Cain

iTrader: (294)

By that logic those who were fine with the motors prior to the 25.5 shouldn't have had to retire the motor to drop $89 - $99 on a new one that basically does the same job, move the car around the track.

But ultimately it was changed as a benefit to the class.

If there is a benefit to the class as a whole, then yes, by all means, change the rules, which as can be seen, its been done before for different aspects of the rule set.

I will admit though, it is funny to try and place all that weight, though seeing some of the hack jobs to fit the baby spurs on a TC3 is pretty funny too.

exactly!

correct, as time went on the rules were evolved for what best fit the class, hence why now we are allowed to run ESCs in a blinky mode when before it had to be something approved by USVTA which at the time, was believed to be best for the class.

Stuff has changed over time and was good for the class, even though a variety of people at the time may have thought everything is perfect, why change?

I fully believe that your converted motor runs great, however the motor itself as what can be purchased new has changed, with a $10 up charge as well for what is available and apparently issues with some of the various ballistic series motors timing label to warrant a rule change in and of itself.

Personally at a minimum, I would think for a motor that is the official spec motor for the class you shouldn't have to adjust your rules for what appears to be issues with the motor itself. Maybe they should fix the motor instead, especially with the exclusive rights to the class they have because of it.

I agree the change to a slower motor than what was originally used help grow the class, however, the fact that other changes were implemented over time shouldn't be glossed over regardless of what is run or supported where, including allowing modifications to the original 25.5 motor that allow benefits over the original design with the current BOSS setup.

If that wasn't the case that changes offered benefits to the class, then no change to the original rules for ESCs would have been necessary at all or even more, a single esc would have been spec'd on just like a single motor since the logic leads that way that a single item spec'd on is better.

But, as was seen, the esc's were opened up to more options, hence bringing in people who wanted to run there specific brand in that area. I seem to recall the discussion concerning esc selection being a common theme at one point, till changes were put in place.

And personally, I am hopeful that maybe the next area to be looked at is the batteries to have a spec of what constitutes a USVTA legal battery in a testable manner as if what I have heard can be done is true, what is inside your pack isn't necessarily "5000mah".

Ultimately my point being is this, USVTA has and continues to modify their rule set from the beginning to provide basically a better experience for those running the class. I personally think its great they are willing to do this to the benefit of those who run the class.

Could it be a benefit to go to form of a "USVTA" spec rule for the motors other than just novak's offering to help with consistency of motors by competition within the spec, maybe, maybe not.

But ultimately examples of "this had / has big turnout so that means all is perfect" isn't necessarily true if rules keep evolving with the intent to provide a better experience for those in the class.

Some classes raced that were the hot thing in RC at one point would still be around if that was the case.

So in short, do I feel USVTA needs to change because I and others say we want "A", no. I don't.

Do I feel however that discussions concerning things that people feel could improve the class can be had without resorting to name calling, "go race this then" arguments, etc., yeah I do.

nf_ekt

iTrader: (115)

Open dialogue? A decent concept I say.