trackdesigner71

iTrader: (6)

This is good discussion guys I do think that the focus ought to be on growing the LM1 numbers so that it can be a viable class on its own and then branch off that to a more open class with F1 or WGT chassis or whatever will be the best fit

burgboyz

iTrader: (70)

Please clarify what people are proposing for battery/motor rules..

Is it 1s -or- 2s with 21.5???
...and for 17.5???

possibly 13.5 outdoors??? Hmmm..

Oh and....keep the foams!!!
Really helps build the groove on dirty or green tracks for club racing.
Pan cars on rubber tires??? Preposterous!!

Greg Sharpe

iTrader: (15)

Dear Santa,

Please give me an entry to a 24hr endurance race with these cars.

Sincerely,
Not the race promoter

trackdesigner71

iTrader: (6)

I think the consensus on the other thread discussing the LM1 was to run 2S.

Id be perfectly fine with 21.5 being the motor of choice for the LM1/LMPC spec class. I reckon that once we get the numbers for the LM1 class up across the country, you could see a second more open class with a 2S/17.5 powerplant combo follow. (Id give the LMPC class about a year before going that route personally)

trackdesigner71

iTrader: (6)

Id go with a 2.4 hour first. Have a weekend event with 45 minute "sprint enduros" for WGT, LMPC/LM1, USGT, VTA and F1 and maybe one for 12th scale too and then have a 2.4 hour enduro in the LeMans style with an LMP1 class, LM1/LMPC, WGT and USGT running together.

mrod

iTrader: (4)

Hey guys, I was talking with Brad Palmer aka bp shadow, and we were discussing how this class could maybe be run. We were talking about having diffierent motor and battery configurations and giving everyone a choice on what they wanted to run, but they would all run in the same class or heats, whatever you prefer to call it. You could have guys running 21.5 to guys running 13.5, single cell or 2 cell has not been discussed yet. The one thing that came to question is chassis configurations. A lot of people have old WGT chassis which are pretty much the same as the new lm1 chassis with the exception of the wheel base. What we thought of was that if you are running a wgt car you would probably have to run the courage body from the 103 gt as the wheel base is the same, the speed passion lm1 body has a longer wheel base and will not fit properly on a wgt or 103 wheel base. The biggest thing in the rules would be that you would have to cut the bodies out on the pre scribed lines for the wheel base, this keeps the bodies looking correct and not hacked. What to people think about this?

howardcano

iTrader: (37)

It's really easy to make a pair of adapter plates from some 1/8" fiberglass to move the front suspension forward on most WGT chassis. You can make whatever wheelbase you want (within reason).

burgboyz

iTrader: (70)

Running multiple classes of cars would be a lot of fun on large carpet tracks or on asphalt tracks. But probably chaos on smaller tracks. Need the wider lanes for passing at speed. And the lanes would need to treated full width to make it work.

Think open practice at any multiple class nitro race....can get a 'lil crazy.

-Jon

mrod

iTrader: (4)

Thats true if you have the ability to do that, the main think is to keep the body trim line and wheel arches in the proper place for the scale realism.

Ed Delgado

iTrader: (3)

Since Speedpassion is the only one to produce an LMP car to date, they should be rewarded by having their car rubber stamped as the standard bearer or "spec" for all those who follow. That means 280mm wb and 200mm width as well as their wheel size and mounting style. If the class takes off in popularity, current WGT chassis producers can easily manufacture longer chassis plates, metric stub axles and hex style wheel hubs as used in F1 diffs. Body companies such as PF should be encouraged to produce bodies to fit Speedpassion's LM1 car and not shorter wheelbase WGT chassis.

howardcano

iTrader: (37)

So that sounds like a good product! There might be quite a few guys who would spend $10 to be able to use their existing chassis.

liljohn1064

iTrader: (17)

So far in testing with the LM-1 spec kit, 21.5 2S on medium to high grip carpet works well. 17.5 2S is a handful on the same type of track and detracts from good racing. On a long high grip track it would be a decision to run 17.5 2S. 13.5 2s would work on large outdoor venues, something we don't have locally. 13.5 1s WGT is still a rocket in comparison to the 21.5 2S in the same conditions, I'm guessing it's the 250+ gram difference.

*** If SP wanted to corner the market, they could put out the FRP lower chassis plate to accept other front ends: CRC, Associated, Tamiya F103GT, etc. At $20.00 for a replacement, they would essentially own the class.***

BP SHADOW

iTrader: (24)

I am looking at some of the posts, and I think there is some good dialogue going on. I would caution about allowing too many combinations or trying to adapt this chassis or that. It was posted earlier to honor the wheelbase of the body, and I think that is important. I would allow the TAMIYA 103 GT to run as long as it is fitted with the SpeedPassion wheels and tires. This should be the standard for the class, and there should be a wear limit on the tires. Also I don't think that LeMans should be split into separate classes. To me it makes no sense to have 3 different LeMans groups and only have 2 or 3 cars on track at a time.

Ed Delgado

iTrader: (3)

The biggest problem with the F103GT chassis with the Courage body is Tamiya itself: if that particular car has not yet been discontinued it probably will soon be as is the case with their GTP cars, as well as parts and spare bodies. It is a shame because the Courage body they modeled is basically the same car the former ALMS was using in the LMPC class-an ideal one-body spec class. The other issue with the F103GT is that it uses touring car wheels front and rear and is 190mm wide.

howardcano

iTrader: (37)

Then specify a minimum width. But don't say someone can't use a particular chassis. As long as the car uses whatever tires/rims are required, and meets the dimensions, it should be allowed. It doesn't take much to widen the car a few mm. USGT guys do it all the time.

I agree with the wheelbase requirement.

And while I don't mind the principle of spec tires/rims, I DO mind when those spec tires/rims cost $60 for a set. That's twice what a set of 1/8 scale nitro foams cost! In this case I think it is best to just specify the min/max diameter and width to encourage some competition in the market.

Yes, there should be a minimum OD for tires, to preserve scale looks.