R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Nitro On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-30-2012, 03:12 AM   #151
Tech Elite
 
Bishop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,223
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pattojnr View Post
at a time when people are struggling to race, Blocks want to up the costs. and where is it coming from ? the same area that is makign the world hold their breath every day, will it happen today, or do we put of the recession another week ?
It's not always that cheap to add weight either though, not a lot of room to stick lead on a five, so a few genuine Mugen bolt on brass weights (not that cheap locally), and hopefully some brass YBSlow engine mounts which will likely be $50+ plus post...

And with the lack of room on modern chassis, people now are using tungsten, so even more cost, at least if your heavy you have the option not to spend and run heavy, be light and you 'must' spend money to get the weight up...

Yeah it's a thin gripe, but hey I'm still pushing AARCMCC to lower their limits cause I'm too lazy to want to add weight...
__________________
QRCCRA
www.qrccra.org.au
www.facebook.com/englandparkraceway
www.myrcm.ch/main?pLa=en&hId[1]=org&dId[O]=4331
Bishop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 03:21 AM   #152
Tech Addict
 
Aza088's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 684
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomB View Post
the benefit with a lower weight limit is the cars move into a new era of racing.

considering that most cars run lipos or life batteries (minimum 30 grams lighter), lighter steering and throttle servos (maybe 60 grams lighter as a pair) and lighter front and rear diffs (20 to 30 grams for a pair) you have a minimum of 110 to 120 grams lighter for a car as the older designs of before.

a car these days can reach 1625 grams easily. that's not including micro reciever, titanium screws, or titanium pivot balls. maybe another 40 grams less right there.

if you add titanium turn buckles then you have less weight again and you are reaching 1550 grams.

If the serpent 733 has issues going under 1725, then there is serious problems with the design. AZA have you got low profile servos, micro reciever and lipo? what about titanium pivot balls, and screws?

Aza how much does each 733 diff weigh? reason i ask is the cap diffs weigh 26 grams whilst the mtx5 diff weigh 28 (both with oil). you could have 10 grams per diff more with the serpent and not know it. Is the two speed shaft and front shaft aloy or hollowed? (the mugen's front shaft is alloy and the rear is hollowed, easy 15 to 20 grams lighter than standard)
So to clear this up i have a 733 TE with the following lightweight parts
low profile savox servos for both
titanium screws through the whole car
capricorn life bat
Smallest 4pk RX
front layshaft and rear both have been drilled out
spool in the front

titanium turnbuckles and small things like that will save weight but not 150 to 200 more grams

I have milled a chassis and cut the shit out of it so ill see how much different this makes and how much different it handles i guess but anyway good luck to efra I really hope Serpent Brings out a car light enough to compete with the other brands.
__________________
Shepherd | Brilliant RC | Matrix | Maxima | Xceed | KoPropo
www.bluerc.net
www.hobbyexpress.com.au
www.hootrc.com.au
Aza088 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 03:22 AM   #153
Tech Regular
 
djiewie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 440
Default

Has anyone heard something about additive`s used on the preworlds. I believe its allowed now i think. Wich are the brands to use i wonder??

I saw Dirk with the additive`s device on the table.
I haven`t seen a Efra approved additive`s list though.

About the weight limit. It will get you a agile and more nimble car i think.
The NT1 will get 1600 grams easily for all without much investment.
First you have to change the rules before the manufacturers will follow.
Otherwise no progress is made whatsoever. Maybe a little step at the time is better for all.
djiewie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 03:52 AM   #154
Tech Champion
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: www.moorebankraceway.com
Posts: 5,119
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aza088 View Post
So to clear this up i have a 733 TE with the following lightweight parts
low profile savox servos for both
titanium screws through the whole car
capricorn life bat
Smallest 4pk RX
front layshaft and rear both have been drilled out
spool in the front

titanium turnbuckles and small things like that will save weight but not 150 to 200 more grams

I have milled a chassis and cut the shit out of it so ill see how much different this makes and how much different it handles i guess but anyway good luck to efra I really hope Serpent Brings out a car light enough to compete with the other brands.
hmm...weigh your body. Painted it should not be more than 110 grams.
just from looking at 733 TE pics:

-you might have some unneccessary weight on the front and rear knuckles, maybe other brand knuckles fit the 733?
-the rear end with the DLS looks heavy
-the diff could be lightened with the smaller gears in plastic and the shafts in lighter alloy
-the shocks may be 2 or 3 grams each heavier than other brands = 12 grams right there. i'd weigh the shocks against the cap or mugen shocks to double check. You could also run xray adjustable plastic body shocks. more prone to breaking but lighter than alloy shock bodies. (plastic body xray shocks are 2 grams per shock i think lighter than xray alloy body shocks).
-if the front bumper is high density foam you will have 20 grams more right there. the xray nt1 had astandard bumper which was 5 grams and a high density bumper which was 25 grams, so double check the weight of the bumper
-plastic support on front bumper might be heavy. is there an option to eliminate it? (less weight on front can equal less steering though)
-lighten the rear brake pulley by dremelling it out evenly on a lathe..might get rid of 2 grams there
-get rid of the reciever box and run a modified mtx4 cover. you will loose easy 10 grams with no reciever box

i recon with the small changes listed above you can shave off another 35 to 40 grams. especially with no reciever box and double checking the weight of the shocks against competitors.
TomB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 03:55 AM   #155
Tech Champion
 
Roelof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Holland
Posts: 6,275
Send a message via ICQ to Roelof
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
It's not always that cheap to add weight either though, not a lot of room to stick lead on a five, so a few genuine Mugen bolt on brass weights (not that cheap locally), and hopefully some brass YBSlow engine mounts which will likely be $50+ plus post...

And with the lack of room on modern chassis, people now are using tungsten, so even more cost, at least if your heavy you have the option not to spend and run heavy, be light and you 'must' spend money to get the weight up...

Yeah it's a thin gripe, but hey I'm still pushing AARCMCC to lower their limits cause I'm too lazy to want to add weight...
Spending money to get the weight up is a more important reason than spending more money to get the weight down? I can imagine it is not your probleem anymore to add weight but is it fair to give the higher rated bill to others by just a rule change?

Throw away the Lipo battery and use a NiMh, get normal rims, get steel diff gears, use a regulair body instead of a lightweight etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by djiewie View Post
Has anyone heard something about additive`s used on the preworlds. I believe its allowed now i think. Wich are the brands to use i wonder??

I saw Dirk with the additive`s device on the table.
I haven`t seen a Efra approved additive`s list though.

About the weight limit. It will get you a agile and more nimble car i think.
The NT1 will get 1600 grams easily for all without much investment.
First you have to change the rules before the manufacturers will follow.
Otherwise no progress is made whatsoever. Maybe a little step at the time is better for all.
This was just an unofficial race, no strict rules needed top be used, it is up to the drivers to test with legal equipment to gain data for the real WC.

Regarding the weight, is you opinion the right one? Most new cars with current lightweight wheels, body and batteries are easy to get on a lower weight but not to the extreme sugested 1550 gram. No, I do not share your opinion that a rulechange is needed to push manufacturers because there are already lighter cars.
You can also look it from another angle. Designing a car which is out of the box too light can also be a design fail under the current rule of 1700 gram.
__________________
The quality of an answer comes with the quality of the question.
Roelof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 05:09 AM   #156
Tech Regular
 
djiewie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roelof View Post
Most new cars with current lightweight wheels, body and batteries are easy to get on a lower weight but not to the extreme sugested 1550 gram. No, I do not share your opinion that a rulechange is needed to push manufacturers because there are already lighter cars.
You can also look it from another angle. Designing a car which is out of the box too light can also be a design fail under the current rule of 1700 gram.
What you are implying is, that the EFRA was noting the lightweight of the recent Cars and therefor came with this rule change as to suit the weight. It seems that only Serpent are a little on the heavy side and CAP are on the light side. To me the rule was a complete surprise. But with every rule change, every one follows regardless of opinion. I agree with you that 1600 grams are a better choice for everyone.

Its decided, so now to get the least weight for 2013.

And more important get the right tire additive??? Because thats will make more impact i think.

Last edited by djiewie; 01-30-2012 at 05:22 AM.
djiewie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 05:31 AM   #157
Tech Elite
 
Bishop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,223
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roelof View Post
Throw away the Lipo battery and use a NiMh, get normal rims, get steel diff gears, use a regulair body instead of a lightweight etc.
So throw away my preferred and superior battery chemistry choice (and spend more money on batteries), reduce the efficiency of my driveline by adding weight to it, and I'm already running a regular body, likewise nothing I bought was with the idea of keeping anything light, the Savox LPs are cheap, anyway you look at it I still have to spend and suffer to gain weight, where as if your heavy you can in the end just run that way and not spend a cent.

Actually, if I had to vote on it, so you say ok here are you choices, it either stays at 1700-1725 (it's 1725 here), or 1550, to be honest I'd pick the 1550, and I'd pick it even if I knew my car could not make that weight easily, cause stuck in a middle ground knowing you have to spend to go either way, your going to pick lighter, surely most people would rather spend $100 on titanium something than $50 on brass?.

But, with any luck it will all be mute, by the time 2013 rolls around I suspect we would see a lot more of a push for a 16XX weight, although it seems odd that we have to wait 'that' long to see any weight change, odds are AARCMCC may take another year after that, but which point cars will be coming in at 1400g...
__________________
QRCCRA
www.qrccra.org.au
www.facebook.com/englandparkraceway
www.myrcm.ch/main?pLa=en&hId[1]=org&dId[O]=4331
Bishop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 10:26 AM   #158
Tech Master
 
DS Motorsport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,440
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
I find it odd that so many have said it's hard enough just to get the 733 to the current weight limits, it seems rather strange Serpent would build a car so overweight to begin with?.

My MTX5 out of the box is under 1650g, with twin Savox LPs and a LiFe, and a regular body, so the Mugen is not going to struggle to make 1550-1600.


I did have thoughts about the 1550 limit recently, it's obvious someone wants to push the boundaries of 200mm IC, I'm guessing someone feels like the next level of development is stagnating, while it's possible that could be a little true, more realistic limits should have been voted in.

To be fair, both sides of coin stir an emotion from me, on the one side you take a beautiful bit of chassis and design, and someone says you now need to bolt 100g of ugly to it. On the other side, you still want to have a chance with something older, yet your already 100g overweight...
The car was already quite old before it was released, it was designed before Serpent got in trouble and had to reorganize.
I believe they use a softer type of aluminum (not 7075T6) for the bulkheads and such. This saves money but you will need more material to make all the parts strong enough. Also it shares it's 2 speed bulkheads with the 966 so they are over engineered for the 733.
It might be interesting to weigh the plastics, Capricorn uses an innovative composite for the suspension pieces which makes everything lighter. The 733 plastics have more nylon and less graphite which makes them heavier.

A lot of unnecessary weight is also in the radio tray. When the 1550 rules were announced I designed a new tray for the 733 which basically is a piece of carbon and two small supports for the steering servo. This eliminates all the unnecessary plastic stuff.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Roelof View Post
How reliable car do you want to have?
I have had titanium screws and and did not like how fast the hex fitting did turn arround. Also aluminium shafts and other aluminium parts are weak. Also the plastic gears in the diffs are a factor if you can make a finish or not. And with all of that I have seen many failures arround LiPo and LiFe batteries.

It is not only getting the weight, I do believe it can be made with many cars but for most drivers it is the question if the cost and efford but also the higher running costs is worth it.
Buy quality parts and you will have a different experience. The 3racing and such Ti hardware is a waste of money since it's as soft as aluminum hardware.
Get some quality, European made Ti hardware and it will last several seasons.

I use one set of composite gears for an entire season, the fact that other manufacturers can't get it right doesn't mean all the composite gears are unreliable.
Since I've been using Lipo's I've had zero battery failures, most drivers that I know are very pleased with their Lipo/Life batteries. With the Nimh packs the chance on a loose connection is a lot higher since there are five cells to connect instead of two. Plus the Lipo's are cheap, the ones I use don't even cost $10!.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pattojnr View Post
id not agree with the 1st mention, and not effecting reliability. some times you just need to ride a curb on the right angle at high speed, and your car has a huge vibration in it, or worse, cracks a rim. never mind a tangle with another car.
I rather break a rim then a suspension part. The white nylon lightweight rims are very vulnerable and I've seen drivers breaking them regularly. The carbon lightweight rims are just as strong as normal ones if you ask me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aza088 View Post
So to clear this up i have a 733 TE with the following lightweight parts
low profile savox servos for both
titanium screws through the whole car
capricorn life bat
Smallest 4pk RX
front layshaft and rear both have been drilled out
spool in the front

titanium turnbuckles and small things like that will save weight but not 150 to 200 more grams

I have milled a chassis and cut the shit out of it so ill see how much different this makes and how much different it handles i guess but anyway good luck to efra I really hope Serpent Brings out a car light enough to compete with the other brands.
-Smaller battery, most don't need more then 1000Mah capacity. (unless you are running 1 hour mains)
-The recently released aluminum uni balls.
-Lighten the radio tray as mentioned above.

But I would wait for the new prototype, maybe it will be released pretty soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by djiewie View Post
Has anyone heard something about additive`s used on the preworlds. I believe its allowed now i think. Wich are the brands to use i wonder??

I saw Dirk with the additive`s device on the table.
I haven`t seen a Efra approved additive`s list though.

About the weight limit. It will get you a agile and more nimble car i think.
The NT1 will get 1600 grams easily for all without much investment.
First you have to change the rules before the manufacturers will follow.
Otherwise no progress is made whatsoever. Maybe a little step at the time is better for all.
I believe most used Paragon since it gives a ridiculous amount of grip. However that type of additive won't be allowed during efra races since it has a very strong odor.
The efra approval list will be released around march I think, together with the updated exhaust and body list.


I think it would be wise to combine the lower weight with a reduction in engine power (preferably a max rpm or exhaust port) since it's important to reduce the amount of noise produced by the cars.
With a lighter car you can reduce the noise without slowing down the cars too much (I think we can assume no one wants a slower car). If we could set a maximum amount of rpm or exhaust port size you will reduce wear, reduce power and reduce noise.
Because in Europe the noise is a bigger threat to the hobby then the 1550 weight rule if you ask me, I can't drive at my home track anymore because it makes too much noise with efra approved parts.
__________________
P1-RC.com
DS Motorsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 12:22 PM   #159
Tech Apprentice
 
romain_f's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: France
Posts: 73
Default

If cars get lighter, wich component will ware out less?????

Take a gess!!

The Engine, probaly what cost the most in RC racing...

That's the idea of Efra
__________________
HB R8/Novarossi
romain_f is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 09:54 PM   #160
Tech Elite
 
Bishop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,223
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by romain_f View Post
If cars get lighter, wich component will ware out less?????

Take a gess!!

The Engine, probaly what cost the most in RC racing...

That's the idea of Efra
Does not work like that, like DS said above, unless your reducing the RPM's or port sizing or other restrictions, engines will wear just the same regardless of the weight of the car.
__________________
QRCCRA
www.qrccra.org.au
www.facebook.com/englandparkraceway
www.myrcm.ch/main?pLa=en&hId[1]=org&dId[O]=4331
Bishop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 12:56 AM   #161
Tech Elite
 
blis's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 3,434
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by romain_f View Post
If cars get lighter, wich component will ware out less?????

Take a gess!!

The Engine, probaly what cost the most in RC racing...

That's the idea of Efra
It's in the design like the back end of a capricorn C02.
Then it's cost, using lightweight high quality alloy that you can machine to be lighter.
Then it's in the build, you have to take more care when using smaller screws and lock tight them
Then it's driving them, you cant jump curbs and throw the car off track and expect it not to break.

The lighter the car, the less the load on the transmission as well. The cars will be faster to accelerate, less tyre wear, better power to weight performance, faster lap times. Yes, it will cost more, but how much more in comparison to travel, accomodation, tyres, engines etc etc...

The argument against comes from people who own cars that can not get down to that weight, and they shouldnt penalise the cars that are at that weight. They need to complain to the manufacturer to come up with a better design. I do agree we should wait for the manufacturers, but not allow too much time other wise they wont do anything.
__________________
RC Cars: E4/G4/TCX/LAB-C02/T4'15/MM Engines
WEB: Beachmums Racing - MYRCM Race Registration
Media: Amain - RCRacingTV - RedRC - LiveRC - blisx264
blis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 02:51 AM   #162
Tech Elite
 
Pattojnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 4,594
Trader Rating: 19 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blis View Post
It's in the design like the back end of a capricorn C02.
Then it's cost, using lightweight high quality alloy that you can machine to be lighter.
Then it's in the build, you have to take more care when using smaller screws and lock tight them
Then it's driving them, you cant jump curbs and throw the car off track and expect it not to break.

The lighter the car, the less the load on the transmission as well. The cars will be faster to accelerate, less tyre wear, better power to weight performance, faster lap times. Yes, it will cost more, but how much more in comparison to travel, accomodation, tyres, engines etc etc...

The argument against comes from people who own cars that can not get down to that weight, and they shouldnt penalise the cars that are at that weight. They need to complain to the manufacturer to come up with a better design. I do agree we should wait for the manufacturers, but not allow too much time other wise they wont do anything.
i really think you guys have the point all wrong. i am not complaining my car cant get down to weight, im not worried if it will or not, im not fussed that one of many manufacturers can, just about out of the box. WHat i dont agree with, is ...... How does this all attract new comers to the sport. really, HTF does it ?
light weight this, light weight that, first bingle a guy has, and it will probably cost him near on $100 to fix , instead of $20- $30 for arms and some shock mounts, then use the buckled rim (not smashed to peices) for Practice.
at a time when things are tight, and numbers are dropping in RC mainly due to costs, this rule comes out, and everyone now seems to defend it.

can some one please tell me where the New guy will see this as a Fun And entertaining way to spend his time and some money ? when every time he has a crash, hes most likely looking at 1/4 of the cost of a Clubby OS ? this is the problem i have.

i can not see how it will invite new comers when they reaslise how fragile the cars can become, and how much to maintain. i just dont see it.
__________________
Serpent - Walter RC
Serpent E Power ..... Serpent 747 Reds M3T
Serpent 966-TE Reds M7T .... S411ERYX Speedpassion 3.5T, T-Shox
Serpent 811-TE REDs R5T
Pattojnr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 03:41 AM   #163
Tech Elite
 
Bishop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,223
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

It's likely the cars are just generally being under built for the amount of power they can put down now...

Like in electric, you don't really want to have a big bingle in electric, but where the saving feature comes in there, is the bulk of people only strapping in a 21.5 or 17.5 turn, and lets be honest, your then just not going fast enough to 'really' wreck something.
Strap in mod like power though, and they just about break something standing still...

I think nitro is a little the same, or becoming simular, so much power and speed, less mass to the cars, and in nitro your always going fast, or faster than other things.
But it's likely why they are trying to slow down 8th scale, reduced wings I think, smaller carb restrictor, and there was something about reduced nitro in the fuel.

Someone else said it, but quite likely is they are looking to tame down 200mm next, I'm not sure at all if any of that is good, still not been in it long enough to judge that, but I will say, as someone who does 200mm now, if they do bring in the restrictors and reduce nitro in 8th, I'd be bloody tempted to jump to 8th scale, no kidding there.

As to fragile nature of lighter cars?, well so far I'm not seeing it, I have seen those Caps hit walls at speed and break nothing, and so far I think my MTX5 is as tough as the G4JS or CD3 I started with, even compared to the 4 I'm not sure it's 'that' much more fragile...

Old Jedi master Trev (can't see the cars at night so drives using the force...) seems to think the strength peaked at the 3 anyway, but in the hands of newbies the 4's seem to hold up quite well, but 'overall' I'm just not sure any car and it's breakages relate to things how we think they do, I think in the end people and newbies in general are more happier with just a better grade of car?.
__________________
QRCCRA
www.qrccra.org.au
www.facebook.com/englandparkraceway
www.myrcm.ch/main?pLa=en&hId[1]=org&dId[O]=4331
Bishop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 05:12 AM   #164
Tech Apprentice
 
romain_f's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: France
Posts: 73
Default

Good point Bishop, lighter cars don't break more often, the design is just better!

But let's say an engine running the same RPM on a 1550 g car and a 1700 g, don't you think the engine will last longer on a lighter car?

I don't remember who told me this, but I think it was a suggestion from Robert Pietsch himself
__________________
HB R8/Novarossi
romain_f is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 05:33 AM   #165
Tech Elite
 
blis's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 3,434
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pattojnr View Post
i really think you guys have the point all wrong. i am not complaining my car cant get down to weight, im not worried if it will or not, im not fussed that one of many manufacturers can, just about out of the box. WHat i dont agree with, is ...... How does this all attract new comers to the sport. really, HTF does it ?
light weight this, light weight that, first bingle a guy has, and it will probably cost him near on $100 to fix , instead of $20- $30 for arms and some shock mounts, then use the buckled rim (not smashed to peices) for Practice.
at a time when things are tight, and numbers are dropping in RC mainly due to costs, this rule comes out, and everyone now seems to defend it.

can some one please tell me where the New guy will see this as a Fun And entertaining way to spend his time and some money ? when every time he has a crash, hes most likely looking at 1/4 of the cost of a Clubby OS ? this is the problem i have.

i can not see how it will invite new comers when they reaslise how fragile the cars can become, and how much to maintain. i just dont see it.

Hey Patto,

I hear you regarding the new guy, I think it's a matter of numbers and motive. We had several years as newbies learning the craft and only now stepping up in performance. I think there's always a crowd that will come along and love it for what it is, accept there are many faster cars and drivers and will stay and enjoy.

There's also the newcomers who dream of the weekend beating patto and others who cant accept the reality that it takes time and give up before they
go through the motions.

More mass is a greater load on the clutches, the tranny, belts and such and the rules dont say you have to be that light and it's very much up the the club and the drivers to give the newcomers a good experience and not have to "blow their doors" off so to speak. It's an club etiquette issue more than a car specification and for those that get a good year of enjoyment in a good club, they'll step up and get their hands on a good chassis and go through the same motions we did.

Not arguing the point either, we so often assume that the cars and the specs are the problem with newbies. It's a much bigger picture, with so many variables as to why they stop. Anyone that gets into motor racing knows its expensive and for those that dont, then it's not going to make any difference what the top level guys do.

Ultimately we need more numbers to make it a much more rewarding experience for all drivers and that's what makes spending the $$$ worth it.
__________________
RC Cars: E4/G4/TCX/LAB-C02/T4'15/MM Engines
WEB: Beachmums Racing - MYRCM Race Registration
Media: Amain - RCRacingTV - RedRC - LiveRC - blisx264
blis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The New Werks B5 .21 Racing Engine Werks Offroad Nitro Engine Forum 9312 11-08-2017 11:45 AM
ROAR new body rules pdmustgt Nitro Off-Road 361 05-24-2011 03:25 PM
New Ener-G 4600 Ni-MH Cell Kropy Electric On-Road 507 09-15-2009 10:53 AM
New EFRA 7min Qualifying Rule Michael_T Nitro On-Road 36 03-01-2009 09:44 AM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 07:11 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net