Vector03cobra

iTrader: (11)

lol your fast the motonica clutch i saw was shoe

that body looks nuts

you just need to race more your driving is fine

5italkart

iTrader: (2)

too be honest the centax was run cause the flywheel on the motonica clutch was shot. not sure it was better since it was old from a serpent 950. the class seems more driver than techy stuff, lets just work on that and our building.

aarcobra

iTrader: (12)

Jeff this isn't the "Toledo Tamiya F1 Class Thread! lol

What rules?!?!!?

Taylorm

....that class morphed to no rules also.....i bought a fixed timing motor thinking thats what we would all run...now im prolly the only one w/o an adjustable timing motor...we racers never leave anything alone...thats why i hate "stock" classes...they arent even stock......

hitcharide1

iTrader: (1)

Just to set your mind at ease:

9.2.2 All vehicles must be equipped with a working de-clutching device capable of allowing the vehicle to stand stationary with the engine running.

Outside of that, there's not a single rule I can find in the book pertaining to 1/8 2wd clutch...nothing whatsoever. Since it's a Midwest thing and we're more "consensus" based, I suspect unless it gives you some unfair advantage (not bloody likely with 2wd) then it's all good. Sort of like the adjustable rocker/suspension/give/tweak/@#%$% on the new Motonica front end, it's all good unless someone is dominating the class utilizing an item others don't have. That, and I doubt anyone would seriously object when taken into consideration it's a car of your own build (and right now you're in the lead, progress wise, much as it pains me to admit that.) Schmuck.

(Note: on reflection, the Centex could actually hurt you. You'll have to get it adjusted perfectly so as to not deliver too much oomph, otherwise you'll break traction every turn you try to power out of. That means setting it to engage sooner, probably, which keeps it on a par with three shoe style. And, if memory serves, the three shoe style on the Motonica is adjustable as well and I've heard no one bringing that up as an issue. AND that doesn't matter anyhow since "back in the day" we used to trim our shoes to get them to bite later and keep the r's up...so you can adjust it with a dremel, a set screw, or a nut, and it all works out even in the end. Blah.)

Vector03cobra

iTrader: (11)

you can thank all the MI guys for that.

Fixed timing and no short battery.
next thing you know half the guys have them.

anyways you can get a timing motor or the same motor me and lon use for 38$ or so

and ted I think has the deals on different size small batterys all less then the cost of the $$$$ shorty packs anyways

Ned this is the pan car thread dunno why your talking about F1

Vector03cobra

iTrader: (11)

I remember asking lon why they didnt run the centex style clutch he said something to the effect not allowed, sorta like its not allowed in the GT class to.

well maybe its allowed but thats a good thing the shoe clutch is always slipping it seems

I am pretty sure i could get a centex style clutch to make a decent pan car a fair amount faster and be more durable seemed Lon and LonII with little lons car had problems from time to time with them just falling apart for no reason.

this thread is always a fun read though I hardly post here i almost always read it when i stop by

hitcharide1

iTrader: (1)

Meh. I get that there is no centex in GT because it's a Midwest thing already agreed to with some basic posted rules. We do have the ROAR rule book, it IS still in effect (unless majority decides different on a local level but it'd still apply at a ROAR sanctioned event.) But I don't see where it'd make a difference in pan...if anything, I think it may not work so well, but I sure don't see the harm in trying. My two cents worth, if you want to build a pan car and it has centex clutch, then I say go for it. We don't have enough people yet to get picky over anything unless it gives one person a drastic advantage. I think so long as your build (or kit) falls within the ROAR rules as to weight, length, fuel cap, etc. and blah blah, then it's all good. That and pan is supposed to be more non-competitive anyhow, more about the drivers having fun than winning, and I'd hate to see anything promulgated that had a detrimental effect on participation....

Das 1/8th Mopar

I think I said anything that I don't have, is not aloud! It was right there with "if you beat me, you must be cheating!" Who knows what I'll say this year, but the fun is already mounting. Joe was leading the way with his ideas and it looks as if a bunch of you are jumping in and building something with your ideas. A Mod Pan Car just sounds so fun. This is an area that the pan guys can really get into, not so much 4wd.

LETS GET THOSE CARS TOGETHER, SO WE CAN KICK EACH OTHERS ASS!!

Taylorm

.........i also think a pan with a centax would be quicker.........i want to do it for durability......i seemed to KILL shoes FAST on my RC300......whereas the centax seems durable (if tuned ok) even in a 4WD......just want to go the less hassle route......so i can have more time sabotaging Patricks car when he's not looking......

aarcobra

iTrader: (12)

Just to see if I could get you to respond!

My point is that there really are no rules, no tech, etc. If some one buys weird batteries, that's the rule. (even though they do not appear to be ROAR Approved.)

Same with Pan. Many rules were discussed, but none ever approved or checked.

Like Lon says: "go race......................"

Taylorm

.thats how i look at it......trying to keep these affordable.........using crap i already have laying around.......If i win first time out go ahead and blame the centax........cause the driver sure didnt do it......

hitcharide1

iTrader: (1)

I'm having enough trouble building a pan car...I imagine that were I to attempt to build a 4wd, it'd weigh 20 pounds and be about as agile as a cow patty.

hitcharide1

iTrader: (1)

My understanding, about this time last year, was that we'd use the ROAR rules for 2wd pan that have been around about as long as you have. HOWEVER...if a majority wanted to go another route, that'd be fair game too, but the existing rules are our benchmark. True, we have no tech....and I'm not sure pan needs one at this point. Almost all the cars are Motonica, and I reckon Lon can catch something amiss at a glace by now. I ran Delta and EVERYONE knows that car...Associated, MRP, whatever the mark, there's only so many ways you could cheat if you wanted to....and who would want to? I think last year turned out extremely well and this year promises to be better.

aarcobra

iTrader: (12)

Please show me the rules for 2WD Pan in ROAR. This all I can find, it is off the current website, so it "should" be up to date.


9.4.9 1/8 Scale On-Road Fuel (IFMAR Class):
4WD class 2525 g Minimum
Weight 2WD class 2400 g
Pan Class 2270g
9.4.9.2 Tire type: Foam only
9.4.9.3 Engine size: .21 ci only
9.4.9.4 Transmission: Single, two or three-speed.
9.4.9.5 Rear suspension and drive:
· Independent suspension allowed
· 2WD or 4WD
9.4.9.6 Body style: Can-Am, Sports/GT, or WSC.
9.4.9.7 Wheel arch cut-outs: Maximum 13 mm over tire diameter
9.4.9.8 Upper body widths will be checked by placing a caliper or similar tool, legs
down, across the top of the body at any point.


THIS IS FROM 9.4.5 1/10 Scale .15 Fuel On-Road 2WD:
9.4.5.5 Rear suspension and drive:
· Single, one-piece drive axle only in Pan class
· Independent suspension allowed in Suspension class
· Rear Wheel drive only


Unfortunately, "understanding" and not having written rules is the reason tor the discussion on clutches, "blocked suspensions", engine size, etc. Nobody will care about the vintage pan cars until someone wins with one, then the questions will come up.