1/8 Scale rules question

[longballlumber]

The Plett from the list costs about $1000 to get one manufactured and shipped to you here. Not sure about a Lehner 2280 these days. Maybe $750 or so. A neu 1527 is $310 I think Mike said.

The Plett is very similar in size to a TP 5650 accept it's 8 pole vs 6 pole. The TP is however 25 grams heavier. Comparable? No idea. The TP is about $800 cheaper though so I guess you could buy 5 different ones and swap them around until you found a good option.

A Neu 2215 is larger than the plett and the TP but the 2215 weighs in nearly the same as the TP. Less poles at 4. Comparable? No idea. Expensive? Yep. $550 ish. Does it terrify those not running one? Yep. Is there anyplace to race it? Not that I'm aware of.

If I ever race my T Plus again I'll likely spring for the Plett.

I'm still in favor of no regulation but I've accepted that not everyone agrees with me. The notion that the boats can be "too fast" just doesn't register in my brain. We do this with every other class. Go as fast as we can and adjust the boats and their construction to handle what's possible. We know for instance that it would be tough to run 80mph with a P mono. Sooooo.... we dial it down to someplace sane for a 34" boat. Again, I recognize it's not what everyone thinks or wants. These require considerably more time and effort. Maybe that's the difference. Others are as or even more interested in the art (the essence maybe?) of this class than they are in the performance. It's more of a touchy feely thing that I can't quite quantify. I don't have to be right on this BTW.

There's no quick easy solution to the scale motor riddle. It will take some guys that want a solution to invest some time and resources.

[SIZE=10.5pt]Terry, I am not sure where you’re getting the dollar figures stated above.... I spoke directly with Kevin and the Plett cost him $691.00 to his door. That included shipping and PayPal fees. I also reached out to Todd about the Lehner cost of a 2280 (I think he's a Lehner dealer) and his response is "street value is around $540.00. While I don't think the cost of the motors is/was a consideration several years ago; I do think it's important to keep our discussions accurate for the sake of those reading.[/SIZE]

• [SIZE=10.5pt]I want to be clear about the goal of the 1/8 scale class. The goal is to control the available power for the class. 1/8 Scale ISN’T an OPEN class and should not be an OPEN class. Moving forward we ARE NOT trying to limit speeds; we are trying to limit available power.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=10.5pt]In the IMPBA you already have the option between 8s, 10S, and your choice of motor KV. Those options buy themselves give you a great deal of opportunity.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=10.5pt]The Plett motor is an outlier. I think it’s been determined its capable performance is head and shoulders above the motors currently on the list and many motors that are not on the list. So far it hasn’t been a huge issue because of it cost (my assumption). I am not sure what we can do about the Plett. It’s already in the rules and there are already boats out there using that motor. IMO we are stuck with it.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=10.5pt]There are several boats out there that are successfully racing with the NEU 1527 1Y motor. That tells me IT IS possible to push a 1/8 boat with a motor in that size range.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=10.5pt]The E-RCU group (out west) are running 1/8 scale boats with motors in the same size range of the NEU 1527 and the Lehner 2280. They are also limited to 8S! Again, this tells me it can be done.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=10.5pt]My gut tells me that motor weight isn’t going to be an effective solution for the 1/8 scale class. The Lehner 2280 comes in at 800grams and the Plett 3750/50/A1 comes in at 690 grams; which one you picking? Look at the P-Liimited information you have. Of the motors that fit inside of the length and diameter limits the TP Power motors are the heavy, but aren’t necessarily the best performers.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=10.5pt]We need more practical data to make an informed decision. I have already suggested the TP Power 4070 to be a good place to start. I would also suggest the HET Typhoon would be another option. Clubs can/should be doing what gets boats to the pond. That includes amending rules locally to boost participation.[/SIZE]

 

[T.S.Davis]

Went back and looked at my texts. Yep $691. It was the speedo they recommended for it that was $1025 with the programming card. I didn't dream the number. Just applied it to the wrong thing. Sorry for the confusion.

Todd gets his motors from MGM. Today right now, (just checked) a 2280 is 741.88us plus shipping from MGM. Less for team drivers but I can't get one for $540. Shipping runs about $125 every time I get anything from them. So 866....ish for the regular Joe?

The Plett is a better motor then the Lehner for scale despite the weight different. 8 poles vs 2. Some will remember having raced against Nayman's Miss US in D2. He was running the Plett against the nitro fellas. Went undefeated for an entire season with a Muck hull. It's probably not fair to say it was just the motor. Fast boat, experienced builder, with very respectable driving ability.

The trick to running well with the 1527/1.5y was/is weight in my opinion. The best runner I can remember was built pretty light. Purpose built might be necessary moving forward. Speculation on my part. Building light is counter intuitive for a boat we want to throw 10s at though.

I've run a Lehner 3060, a Neu 2217, and a Neu 2220 in scales. The 3060 was run on Nimh in a 23 pound boat. Learned nothing. Sold the motor and esc after the second run.

By limiting the power you are limiting the speed. Lower speeds being merely a byproduct. Same thing we're doing with spec racing. A better example is 10th scale. You've mentioned this before. I've made piece with it Mike. I trust ya.

Maybe after the NATS we can scratch at this some more. Kevin has both a 1527 and the big Plett. I still have the 22 series Neu motors. Todd has 2280's. Todd had an HET too but he baked it I think. Maybe throw a TP or 2 in the mix. You figure out what data will help and then we'll collect accordingly. Even if it's just test runs on the local puddle without actual racing. See if we can come up with something both sane and exciting.

......now that I think about it. The NATs might be a good opportunity to do some data mining too. At least get data off the legal stuff.

 

[LohringMiller]

If you limit the prop diameter, voltage, and real KV, the main differences in performance will come from prop efficiency. Changes in blade area and pitch also matter, but at a given rpm, the power absorbed is mostly due to the diameter. This really shows up in the P limited classes where performance has steadily improved even though the motors have mostly been identical (within manufacturing tolerances).

Lohring Miller

 

[T.S.Davis]

I wouldn't be in favor a prop diameter limit. Different boats like/need different props. My Stealth likes the H5. The JAE on the same motor likes something entirely different. The same will be true for scales. Old school shovel vs say a T6 or a twin wing bud. One might like pitch and the other diameter.

 

[Don Ferrette]

I've said it before and I'll say it again- 1/8th scale is NOT a spec class. You guys want to limit the prop diameter, voltage, and KV in NAMBA knock yourselves out but I think you will only hurt the class in the long run. The only thing I see worth considering in the current IMPBA 1/8th scale FE rules is expanding motor choices and personally I think limiting the can diameter and length is probably the best option (which I have been researching with more to do).

 

[LohringMiller]

I think it's a matter of do you want to encourage racers who are more interested in exact scale boats versus racers who are more interested in the racing aspect of the boats. I feel the sport hydro classes were designed for those who want to race scale like boats. The scale classes are for those who want to recreate a small version of full size unlimited racing. The 1/10 and 1/7 scale groups race clockwise for an even more exact recreation.

The sport hydro racers want to concentrate on the speed aspects of the boats. The scale racers want to concentrate on the scale aspects. Specifying the drive train helps scale racers do this. Nitro scale has been pretty much a spec motor class recently and never has had even close to the selection electrics have. The boat we set both the NAMBA sport hydro and 1/8 scale electric two lap record with ran an 8S power plant with around 4 3/4 hp. Recently a T hydro power plant developed over 20 hp with a Lehner 2260 motor and a custom speed control. How do you think you can equalize these examples without more restrictions than a battery voltage limit?

Lohring Miller

 

[T.S.Davis]

"The scale racers want to concentrate on the scale aspects. " Then don't race them.

I've had this debate a bunch of times.

Full scale unlimiteds are right out on the ragged edge. Nature of the beast. If you're not on the ragged edge with a real boat you're not really racing. With scale though it seems guys have a sort of image in their head of how fast is too fast. If this is okay, who gets to decide what's fast enough? The guy running the Miss Wahoo or the guy running a modern turbine. Clearly not me. hahaha I may well be mental but I don't have a mental speed limit where scale stops being scale.
Another thing I find puzzling about the "scale aspect"............ There are guys that want strict adherence to the scale aspect. The right paint, the right mirrors. That accuracy is important. Looking right on the water etc matters to them. I get it. Even understand it. That's fine. However......when has a T6 ever raced the Slow Motion? What's scale about that? One example. There's a reason the real boats evolved. More power. More engineering. They got faster. How do you equalize the design and engineering breakthroughs? A turbine from today may be able to run maybe 200mph in the straight. But with scales.............lets make them all equal. Close at least. A modern turbine boat could have maybe 3000hp full scale. It's going to be limited to the same power as a shovel that in it's day had maybe 1000hp. Scale? Is it?

We're trying to emulate the real thing. Accept not really.

I still don't have some easy answer BTW.

 

[Don Ferrette]

Well said Terry. And again you guys in NAMBA want to create spec scale racing so be it but please keep it in your back yard. Smart money says you do this and you will kill the class except for the 2 areas that currently run the restricted format as you will "outlaw" existing boats and the owners will need to spend a pile of money AND time to re-establish a competitive FE set up. Dialing in an 1/8th scale can take an entire season or more to extract it's full potential, it's not like dialing a rigger or mono. Between that and the costs of a new FE drivetrain you just might see a bunch of FE scale boats become shelf queens. It was suggested to me by a long time NAMBA member that this "proposal" was really so the guys can race their "restricted" FE scale boats elsewhere in NAMBA. Geeez, I sure hope that's not what's driving it!! I have raced nitro 1/8 scale for a long time (set records with them too as well as FE scale so enough of the whole setting records thing to justify the stance) and I'll flog the horse yet again- 1/8th scale is not and never was intended to be a spec class. Even with the dwindling selection of nitro motor options we can still modify the motors, change pipes, up the nitro % etc. to produce more power ( if it was a "spec class" you'd require stock 67 motors, same pipes, same nitro % etc.). The argument of too much power by using a record setting SAW T hydro example of available horsepower power is laughable. I've experimented in the past with what a nitro scale would do with a bigger motor and had a ultra competitive mega winning boat go to an unmanageable beast with nothing more than a higher displacement motor. Just because you can stuff in bigger power doesn't mean the boat can cope with it. I am one of those guys who wants scales to be properly done with correct colors, graphics and such so they look "realistic" on the water but I also build with the understanding that we RACE them, I look for any edge be it modding my motors, tricks to the running surfaces or whatever. Bottom line is these are still race boats, if someone really wants only to "concentrate on the scale aspects" then maybe they need to build scale tug boats or schooners..................

 

[Hydro Junkie]

Okay Don and Terry, let me throw this at you:

Back in the early days of unlimited racing, as long as a boat was over a certain length, it was an unlimited and anything went. That meant that any style hull and any engine was legal as long as it had a driver and mechanic on board.

In 1951, the mechanic requirement was eliminated, making the boats rear potentially narrower since it didn't need a second seat

By 1960, the engines of choice had come down to the 1710 Allison and 1650 Merlin

In 1974, the first turbine boat appeared, raced and sank. It was raised and reset with a piston engine, raced for another roughly 10 years

In the 80s, piston boats were made obsolete by the Atlas/Miller, Budweiser and Circus Circus camps

By the early 90s, the class was restricted to piston engines(namely the twin Turbo Allison) and the T55-L7B. Props were also limited to 16 inches, at any pitch or rake. The engine used in the Atlas/Miller, the L11C was banned as too powerful

By the end of the century, the boats were restricted to the two engines above and had to weigh 6700lbs, not to mention the ever present length restrictions

Now, based on the above and going by what I think both of your posts are saying, you are basically saying that the unlimited class is now a spec class since the length, weight, props and engines are limited by the rules. Am I correct on my interpretation? I know the APBA, Hydroprop and H1 all were/are working toward a more competitive class of boats and was looking for more deck-to-deck racing to bring up the excitement levels and bring back the crowds. How is the NAMBA proposed rules any different? The proposed drivetrain rules really do one thing, they prevent someone from dominating the class by leveling the playing field. It prevents someone from going out and buying the most powerful motors, ESCs and battery packs because they have the money to do so and dominate all the racing because no one else can afford to spend that kind of cash to compete with that one person. When you really look at it, that was how Budweiser dominated for so long, Bernie Little had an almost unlimited budget while Jerry Hopp had to run boats with what he or the owners could get with the money they was able to raise.

 

[Don Ferrette]

"Now, based on the above and going by what I think both of your posts are saying, you are basically saying that the unlimited class is now a spec class since the length, weight, props and engines are limited by the rules. Am I correct on my interpretation? I know the APBA, Hydroprop and H1 all were/are working toward a more competitive class of boats and was looking for more deck-to-deck racing to bring up the excitement levels and bring back the crowds."

Rather than waste a lot of keystokes on your entire post I'll keep it simple- I do find it amusing that in using the above statement in trying to justify the NAMBA proposal you are undermining your own argument- H1 is all but DEAD from choking on their own rules and restrictions. If they don't open things up they'll be history in the next 3-5 years tops, they struggle now to field 6 boats at a race. No cigar for you............

:lol:

:lol:

 

[Hydro Junkie]

I have to disagree with you Don. It's not the rules and regulations that's killing H1, or many other activities for that matter. It's the desire for instant gratification that's killing many things off.

I'll use the Seattle Seafair festival to illustrate my point:

1) The H1 race is the grand finale to the festival. By the time the race weekend gets here, people are burned out by parades, events and constant bombardment over all conventional media sources

2) When people show up to the race, they get bored while waiting for the 1.5-2 hours between the sets of heats, not by the number of boats

3) Many just come out to see the Navy's Blue Angels and then leave

4) The price of a general admission ticket basically gets the people inside the park, no NASCAR styled set seating or guaranteed anything. Everything else costs and, as far as food goes, it's seriously overpriced

5) Many just come to the race to say they did and to drink until drunk, something that's been heavily controlled over the past decade(much to deter the drunken party crowd) to make the event more family friendly

As far as what's killing the sport and how many boats are showing up, the rules have nothing to do with it. It comes down to one thing:

COST OF BUILDING AND OUTFITTING A BOAT AND TEAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When you figure it costs close to $1,000,000 to build and set up a boat, before you know if it's going to be able to compete, the additional costs of testing, reworking parts or hull, more testing and so on, unless you have seriously deep pockets, you'll never be able to afford to put a team together. For example, the last new boat Madison Indiana received was paid for by the Oberto Sausage Company. The city didn't pay for the boat, even though the city owns it. When you really look at it, the truck, shop and equipment were all paid for and maintained by sponsor money. Granted, the 8806 Madison was bought from Ron Jones by the city but, after that, it's all been sponsor's money. Hell, Bernie Little DONATED the turbine engines and crew help to the Madison team prior to the 1991 season or Madison would have been running Turbo-Allisons for much longer, just due to cost

 

[Buddy Benedict]

This thread is getting a little off topic. I was trying to understand why the electric 1/8 scale is limited to 3 motors. The other scale classes in IMPBA ( 1/8 Scale Nitro & Gas Scale) have a size limit on the motor but you can run any brand you want to. I feel this is the way 1/8 Scale Electric should be too. Now as far as the Maximum size limit goes from what I have been researching 40mm by 105mm would be a good place to start.

What do you think?

Buddy

 

[Don Ferrette]

Buddy is correct we got way off track so from here on this is about FE 1/8th scale motor options in the IMPBA, not NAMBA so let's drop any further the talk of the NAMBA proposal (I almost went back and deleted all the posts including my own on the NAMBA proposal and still might do that). So let's get back on track and talk about motor options............

 

[Don Ferrette]

This thread is getting a little off topic. I was trying to understand why the electric 1/8 scale is limited to 3 motors. The other scale classes in IMPBA ( 1/8 Scale Nitro & Gas Scale) have a size limit on the motor but you can run any brand you want to. I feel this is the way 1/8 Scale Electric should be too. Now as far as the Maximum size limit goes from what I have been researching 40mm by 105mm would be a good place to start.

What do you think?

Buddy

I would probably guess that when the rules were written then those were what was available. I have been on this for a bit and agree limiting motor can diameter and length might be the best option for the IMPBA in opening up motor choices. With FE the math is simple- volts x amps = watts = horsepower and you have 2 choices to get there- more volts and less amps or more amps and less volts. Higher amperage is more heat and heat is the killer of electronics, the 9 & 10S scales I've done run well below max temps that I'd want to see. With the ones I've built or helped build I found we need roughly between 2100-2500 watts to adequately power a heavier FE 1/8 scale reliably in the 55-65mph range. I think by limiting the can size we should be able to keep a decent lid on the wattage potential. Since the Lehner 22 series run 44mm diameter, are numerous and already legal we should probably consider a max diameter of 45mm. As for length a Lehner 2280 with optional fan is 120mm and currently legal so we need to be around that as well. As for Plettenberg I found a series called Dinator and at a 45mm diameter with smooth can looks viable but the Plett HP 370BM/50 A1 S which appears to be the motor Mike referenced is problematic with it's size. How many are actually out there currently in use? If it's just one or two then it might need to become a sacrificial lamb for the sake of growing the overall motor options. All of the current 40mm 15 series Neus will fit in this 120mm x 45mm range as will the Leopard, TP and SSS motors. That right there opens things up to more options and lower cost as well and if anyone knows of other brands that would fit within this range please feel free to chime in.

 

[Don Ferrette]

Just saw a new HET Typhoon motor for sale on OSE for $115 shipped, model number is HET 700-98-935Kv. Did some looking and they sell in the $150-$160 range on line. Can specs out at 39mm diameter and a 98mm length with 8mm shaft so that makes yet another option that fits the 45mm x 120mm range. This keeps looking better, anyone know of other motors that might fall within this sizing range?

 

[T.S.Davis]

"I would probably guess that when the rules were written then those were what was available."

Nope, it was based on the "great lakes gentleman's agreement". They didn't want someone to dominate with open motors. Reasonable. Respectable even but then they picked three that weren't really equal IMO.

Some history.

There were basically 5 guys that pushed the motor list into the original FE IMPBA scale proposal. They were from this great lakes area. Those motors were the ones that those 5 guys were racing. The only IMPBA heats that had ever been seen prior to submission were at the Northern NATS in London. There were other NAMBA heats but not IMPBA heats. Not that I was aware of at least. The registration requirement was added by somebody that had never owned or run an FE scales. Nobody can explain what the registration does for the class. I've asked repeatedly. The answer is always that it doesn't cost much so just do it!

So shorter answer..............yer limited to 3 motors because those are the motors that the early racers had in their boxes back 2006 or so.

I always wanted to build a light 8255 and run it on 6s6000's. Maybe a TP 5660/3y on cupped up x455. Weeeeee. Cheap too. 6s, low voltage ESC. Cheap motor.

Oh well. If we keep the cost up and make it as difficult as possible maybe we can keep people from running it. Sarcasm. Sorry. Lost my head....... again.

 

[T.S.Davis]

Hey! I just checked. 1/8 scale made the cut for the FE nats! Some heats!

 

[Don Ferrette]

Thanks for the history lesson Terry.

Moving forward I'm still looking real hard at the best way to expand into additional and even more so affordable motor options. I will say though personally I feel the big 56mm and larger motors really don't belong in the scale class. To me that's like dropping a .90 in a nitro scale and the 40-45mm diameter motors have already proven they more than get it done.

 

[T.S.Davis]

56mm makes sense if you want to do it on 6s. 6s isn't a choice though. 6 pole torque in a fat scale is of benefit with a 10s boat too. You can use a large rotor for torque too. The 30 series Lehners are beastly. The 2220 in my T Plus gets warm pushing it's fat butt around. I don't know if a 40mm can will get it done. I never felt like I was going faster than anyone else. The 2217 gets hot. Too hot but it's a higher kv so that makes sense.

At the moment, scale absolutely is a spec class. 10s is required. Three motor choices. You can pick different winds but at 10s there are 3 motors. That could be okay if the scales were all of the same era.

A full scale turbine today does not race against a full scale from 1960 with a 1710 Allison or a 1650 Merlin. All those various specifications Hydro mentioned from years passed applied to the boats that were running on that day on that lake together. The way we do it with our scales though is that we limit boats that are designed to go about 50% faster to the same motor as the older slower boats designed for much less power. Are we after the "scale".....ness of it or aren't we? We want a certain "look" out on the water. The look from 1960 or the look from last Thursday? It aint the same look.

The obvious problem with my blather is that we/us/FE/RC in general don't have the numbers to support a pair of specifications like they are two classes. I believe ERCU breaks up their 10th scales this way. They have an open motor 4s 10th scale class but they also have the numbers to support it.

Again, I don't have a simple solve either.

 

[Matt Schofield]

Seems like the most logical way going about opening the motor list up a little bit is to propose some motors to the IMPBA board to be added to the list. Cost, availability and performance I could see being factors for the motor being added to the list. To me the class is after scale looks not scale speed, that's just my opinion.

I have just started to dabble into the FE stuff but from my limited experience with racing 1/10 oval cars is spec classes are getting way more support than a non spec class. If you don't have a spec class it always seemed like you were chasing who ever has deep pockets. The local club here went to classes where everyone bought the same motor and you couldn't touch anything with it. I don't have the FE experience to say that would be effective in this case as there are so many other factors than just a motor.

I have a T6 on my build board and have thought about going FE with this one as I already have a nitro scale. Affordable options definitely help......