Clete Landefeld

So here is question I have... Say Gus buys a force .28... And he doesnt touch the internals... but the carb. is a POS... and uses another.. is that a acceptable modification.....keep in mind this motor is super cheap and he could put a new carb on it and stay under the limited price rule....
I have my own opinon but we would like to hear yours..

Solara

iTrader: (17)

I personally don't think that is a bad idea. But again, you are altering the rule. If you want a better carb, get a better engine and paid a little more. Altering the engine (even a screw) = alteration, modifcation. If you are in G-main no one will care, but if you win the national or world, that will be the $30 mistake that cost you the title.

Is that worth it...? I think buying a better engine with better carb (if the better carb is that important to you) is the better choice.

C-Trickle

iTrader: (2)

In my opinion, I don't feel that is a fair modification. I know guys like to get the Force .28's and put better carbs and ceramic bearings in them. I personally don't feel that is fair. But that's just my feeling on the matter.

Clete Landefeld

Trickle....
Yeah that is a issue... but I am saying just a carb change... no internals.

Also, I think that if a guy was super fast and eating the rest of us up on HP.... that person would be under the microscope... and maybe even a tear down on bigger races..

C-Trickle

iTrader: (2)

Ok. Just carb change. I still feel that it's no modifications to the engine. But it's definitely a grey area. I'm with Solara on this one, if you want the nicer carb, buy a nicer engine. For not much more cash than the Force .28 you can get much nicer engines.

Clete Landefeld

Agreed and noted!

spooky 1

iTrader: (1)

Clete, thanks for the engine input. I've been thinking B5, but my Nova Rossi treated me very well at the Nats. You're right , I don't want to run the Force. So, it's 3 port then? I still think that is a bummer, but it's your show and I'll comply. We have gone to open class period out here and let times and laps dictate whether you are sportsman or open. Nobody is going crazy on engine costs. We don't do a weight limit, but found that the cars actually handle better between 3400 and 3600 grams.

Solara

iTrader: (17)

The rule has to draw.......and has to be stand. Changing 1 part is modification. To keep this class grow you need to draw a simple rule and stand on it.

I really think it is a very easy to work on the engine rule, if there is a $280 USD price rule, there are only a few of the VERY GOOD one around. These engine are usually ran by others and proven they are the best....simply pull out the paypal and buy that engine and have fun.

Also...about the opening up the engine rule. I think that is only going to happen by request. If Paolo beat me on the A by lapping me 6 times over 1 hour main, that is NOT because his engine is fast, it is because Paolo is fast.

I think to spot a cheating engine is very easy....you don't see a $150 engine outrun a $280 Nova Rossi everyday.

C-Trickle

iTrader: (2)

If Clete's saying the B5, then they're allowing 5 ports?


What are you guys running out at the Timezone Track for diff fluids? I'm trying to get this Team C figured out and it's been some serious trial and error.

Clete Landefeld

Spook....
Hmmm let me check with everyone here on the 3 port... Troy ran a B5 last year.... I dont know that that rule was solidified.... I dont want to lead you n the wrong direction.. so hang tight.. for a day or so...

I like the $280 motor rule.. the main reason is this!
" I want to do this, this is super cool...what does it cost to get into...."

From there I can give the new guy a realistic price that he can take to his wife... do some begging and get a new toy!

T-Hawk

iTrader: (2)

Trust me, if and when we change the motor rule I will be upgrading. But if you are only running our race with it, go cheap and save some money for the expensive battle ground hookers.

BIGCAT TX

iTrader: (1)

I love that everyone is supporting the GT class, but I have some overall concerns about dividing the class in the way we are (open/spec).

Dividing the class by a monetary value seems unusual to say the least when it comes to different RC classes. I just want to give my 2cents and see if anyone thinks it makes sense.

At large off road events the classes are subdivided let's say by two categories of drivers... Open or Expert and Sportsman. And in off road the drivers seem to easily be able to determine whether they should be running in open or sportsman. And it is based on ability to drive the car. Meaning the fastest guys will have to run in the open, but the slower guys can still compete and win in the sportsman before they are forced to run open. Has nothing to do with how much the car costs or motor or anything else. The rules are the same for everyone.

With that in mind.....
With the current class structure at some tracks as mentioned above here is what could play out. A bunch of guys that don't have to spend the money on the car can still race in the spec class. But a lot of those guys will be rookies and maybe some that just don't want to spend that much money. But Paolo or any other sponsored driver could buy let's say the ofna 28 stock motor, and that motor would be as fast or faster than his motor in the open class. So to me encouraging guys to come out and race is one thing, but creating a class based on somewhat of a skill level is another. If those rookies could actually be in a class that they have a chance to win in, it would encourage more drivers to come out and race or encourage more to stay.

In other words any other spec class for other class of cars would do so to encourage lesser skilled racers/drivers to come out and win and compete, then when they are good enough, bump up to the open and compete. Having the same car/driver running in two different classes with a different motor only is not really creating another class for lesser skilled drivers. There is no limitation (really) on motor size, just motor value. This also encourages people to think you need a high end on road motor to compete. Which again, I think most of us know that you can be just as fast with a lesser priced motor. The mind frame of money being the factor in order to win is somewhat ridiculous. Paolo could win with any priced motor based on his driving skills and set up skills. Motor is not winning it.

Here in Texas we have one class for GT racing. If we can gain more support and drivers I believe we should create a spec class based on skill like every other class out there. Not money. Once you win in the spec class move up to open.

This could be based on lap times at the track or a certain pace off the top qualifier at any race. Or it could be as simple as if your a sponsored driver you have to run in the open class, and if not your in the sportsman class.

This would give more guys the chance to race more competitively and still win. If all the spec guys are running 27 laps they will all have a better race than if the open guy comes to the spec race and runs 30 laps on them every time. Those other guys are not going to come out and lose every race over and over.

I like the other part of the rules, just not that everyone can drive if they by a cheaper motor. Divide the class by skill of drivers because in this particular case some of the lesser priced .28's can smoke the open .21's and the motor value is really irrelevant. It might not last very long either, but that is not the point. To grow the class we need more racers, and those racers need to have fun, get help from the fast guys (not beat by them) and still be able to win with a goal in mind of getting good enough to run in the open class.

spooky 1

iTrader: (1)

There you go. Well put. That is what we have done here and it is the way the nitro classes have all been.

chaderick

+1 agree 100%. We have to give the new drivers a chance to grow in spec. This will also allow them to tune their skills without the pressure or attitudes from more experienced drivers that they will tend to hit during a race. Last year we lost 2 or 3 GT drivers I believe largely by attitudes some of the faster guys gave them during and after the race. I have been racing for many years. I don't get too upset if someone hits me in a race unless it happens often. When I'm racing guys that I know are new or less skilled it doesn't bother me. We need to work with them to understand that slower is faster. We have used the format that BigCat recommended in off-road and our local off-road group went from the smallest in the state to one of the largest traveling groups of guy in the state of Texas. Unfortunately the land the off-road track was on was sold to a local school district that didn't want the liability and closed it down.
On another note: I think we need to try and keep this class a lower cost class. I truely think the reason on-road is suffering is the cost to run these cars compared to off-road. I think a great rule that they use for the Byron's Challenge is no on-road engines for the GT class. I can see the GT class as a great source to attract new racers that may work there way into 10th scale and 1/8 open classes down the road.
My hope is that the GT class will continue to grow and gain more popularity because I'm having more fun racing than I have had in years.

Clete Landefeld

Agreed... at this point the our region needs to get a little deeper in numbers to create this...format

Should we as a national "group" .... argee on a BASE LINE set of rules.. for the Novice and small "Getting Started" Club/Region.. Kinda ..."here is how to grow a class" set of rules ... and then the bigger clubs like Utah... run both...
And when a big event is scheduled .. the organizer can decided on what class/classes work best for the event???

All good information and thoughts guys...
Keep in mind that we are not trying to throw a wrench in any scheduled race or event.. these ideas are for all of us to ponder and maybe etch in stone next year...if ROAR does not get involved...

i like everything i hear.... well get it down to a round table vote and be set for next year