Will 21.5 Brushless be the new stock?
#321
Tech Addict
iTrader: (5)
I agree with Howard 100%. While there may be subtle differences between the motors, with the resistance specs on the motor (along with other specs carefully chosen), the 25.5 motors seem to be equal.
At upcoming races, I'll be measuring USVTA motors resistances in tech to see if any of the manufacturers are playing loose with the specs. If I find anything, it'll be reported to the authorities!!! lol.
Mark
At upcoming races, I'll be measuring USVTA motors resistances in tech to see if any of the manufacturers are playing loose with the specs. If I find anything, it'll be reported to the authorities!!! lol.
Mark
#322
Sounds like the same measures put against 25.5 need to apply to the other spec winds: 21.5, 17.5, and 13.5.
#324
Tech Elite
iTrader: (37)
There seems to be an oft-used excuse for the motor wars in any class: "advancing technology". In reality, there isn't any new technology in any of this. The performance increases come only from changing dimensions that aren't called out in the motor rules. The motor wars are caused by inadequate rules. They don't have to happen.
#325
Tech Master
iTrader: (6)
That would be great!
There seems to be an oft-used excuse for the motor wars in any class: "advancing technology". In reality, there isn't any new technology in any of this. The performance increases come only from changing dimensions that aren't called out in the motor rules. The motor wars are caused by inadequate rules. They don't have to happen.
There seems to be an oft-used excuse for the motor wars in any class: "advancing technology". In reality, there isn't any new technology in any of this. The performance increases come only from changing dimensions that aren't called out in the motor rules. The motor wars are caused by inadequate rules. They don't have to happen.
#326
Tech Lord
iTrader: (3)
I read those posts. Is it time we came up with a minimum resistance spec for 21.5 motors? Don't ask ROAR for it, let's come up with it and recommend it to ROAR.
So would it be acceptable to say that touring car should be 3 classes; VTA, GT, and 17.5? And open mod would only be run at the big races?
#327
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
Defeating the Purpose???????? what purpose is that. Its just another class the some feel the need to gain an edge. there is no other purpose. 25.5 in VTA you could say suffered or prospered the same thing last year when Novak was given the boot and other motors were allowed in the class.
#328
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
Howard, I hope so.
I read those posts. Is it time we came up with a minimum resistance spec for 21.5 motors? Don't ask ROAR for it, let's come up with it and recommend it to ROAR.
So would it be acceptable to say that touring car should be 3 classes; VTA, GT, and 17.5? And open mod would only be run at the big races?
I read those posts. Is it time we came up with a minimum resistance spec for 21.5 motors? Don't ask ROAR for it, let's come up with it and recommend it to ROAR.
So would it be acceptable to say that touring car should be 3 classes; VTA, GT, and 17.5? And open mod would only be run at the big races?
#329
Tech Elite
iTrader: (37)
I submitted minimum resistance rules when I was the ROAR technical director, more than three years ago. No one else on the executive committee voted yea or nay; I don't even think they believed it was important. If they had acted, we would have avoided both the "short stack" motor war, and the current "skinny stack" motor war. That's a whole bunch of racer's money that could have been saved.