Displacement Size

[Buckshot]

I’m wanting to know how to go about getting the displacement size changed in X hydro from 1.8 to 2.0 to allow the LEGAL running of two 1.0 motors.

I know that when the limit was wrote / made a .90 size engine was all that was available and now there are 1.0 motors.

What is the proper way of trying to get this done?

-Buck-

 

[Don Ferrette]

I’m wanting to know how to go about getting the displacement size changed in X hydro from 1.8 to 2.0 to allow the LEGAL running of two 1.0 motors.
I know that when the limit was wrote / made a .90 size engine was all that was available and now there are 1.0 motors.

What is the proper way of trying to get this done?

-Buck-

105212[/snapback]

​

This came up a couple years ago in IMPBA & was shot down. I agreed with that decision then & still do now.

 

[Roy Munoz]

You have to wright up a proposel on what you trying to do and why..And submittid to your Dist clubs to be voted on at there Nat meetting..Same thing for it to go National...Good Luck..

 

[HendricX]

For CMB ... you could run 2 .80's.

For MAC ... you could run 2 .84's

 

[Buckshot]

For CMB ... you could run 2 .80's.For MAC ... you could run 2 .84's

105231[/snapback]

​

I've got a twin .84

I want a twin 1.0

Don, why do you say / feel that way? :blink:

This a hobby and I don't see why someone should be denied the right to run what they please if it is readily available to everyone. Right?

Wanting the biggest ,

-Buck-

 

[AndyBrown]

What to do when .105's come out????? h34r:

The 30 cc IMPBA "F" class limit was writen long before a production 15 cc (.90 )

engine was ever availible.

Not too many years ago the NAMBA limit was 22 cc's (two .67's)

Where would it stop? That is why IMPBA also has a 25 pound max. weight limit.

I mean we are now discussing someone who got hurt with an r/c boat.

Many of of you don't know about the IMPBA member that got hit square in the head by a 16 pound .67 powered Scale at full bore about nine years ago.

I hate to think about the potential damage that could result from a 16 pound twin 90 or 100.

 

[Don Ferrette]

What to do when .105's come out?????  h34r:

105289[/snapback]

​

Exactly. Know when to say when.

 

[John Knight]

For CMB ... you could run 2 .80's.For MAC ... you could run 2 .84's

105231[/snapback]

​

You can also run 2 CMB 90's and be legal.

 

[piper_chuck]

What to do when .105's come out?????  h34r:

105289[/snapback]

​

That and what are all the people with .90's supposed to do, buy 2 new engines?

 

[Tim_Duggan]

I'm with Andy and Don.

Oh yeah - two A100's would still be illegal as they are bigger than 1 cube. The rule change would only really suit twin CMB's.

I'm still waiting to see someone build a biiiiig Single or serious multiple cylinder nitro engine! That would be a very interesting spin on the capacity rule.

Tim.

 

[Buckshot]

That is why IMPBA also has a 25 pound max. weight limit.

I mean we are now discussing someone who got hurt with an r/c boat.

Many of of you don't know about the IMPBA member that got hit square in the head by a 16 pound .67 powered Scale at full bore about nine years ago. 

I hate to think about the potential damage that could result from a 16 pound twin 90 or 100. 

105289[/snapback]

​

So what ya’ll are saying is that a twin 1.0 would be too dangerous?

I always thought that X-class should be unlimited but keep the weight limit.

25 lbs.?!?!?!?! Ya'll are thinking "Damm that is heavy". But how much dose a gass sport hydro weigh when it is full of water after it flips in the back straight for example? Damm near a ton. :lol:

Seriously though, lets start a list of reasons why the membership wouldn’t go for the displacement change.

1)Too dangerous

2)Too Heavy

3)Benefit 1 Manufacturer

4)Current X-hydro owners at the 1.80 limit would have to upgrade

5)

Regards,

William Shackelford

 

[Preston_Hall]

To me weight would be the biggest concern but you have to take into acount the speed as well. Afterall, it is the impact that is the concern.

So in reality, to me, the speeds of boats would have to have a set maximum relative to their weight in order to provide a margin of safety. But in the same reality, all boats would have to be slowed to where they would be no fun.

You have to draw a line somewhere.

Look at the RC jets. With the introduction of turbines the top speed was set at 200mph. This could happen with boats as well.

 

[Heartbeat]

Why Couldn't you have better safty rules for this class

Like you MUST have 2 receivers

Mike

 

[Preston_Hall]

Why make it class dependent?

Sure, given a choice you would rather have a 20 mono hit you head as compared to a twin.

 

[Buckshot]

Mr. Hall has a point but where do you draw the line?

Think about a A-hydro going let's say 70mph straight for the pit or an X-hydro going 95mph straight for the pits? There really is no differance because they will both kill someone or at the very least seriously hurt someone.

Now think about the question I have asked. Why is the displacment size being met with hesitation? I'm thinking most are afraid of the speed factor. But with more and more people running well into the 100mph range who is to say who can drive a boat that fast and who shouldn't? Are we to do like the FIA and make driver qualify for a licence to run a certain speed or class?

If I ever hear of the National Orginizations wanting to limit the speeds I think I would have to hang it up or just become an outlaw boater.

William Shackelford

 

[Preston_Hall]

Where would you suggest making the cutoff? There must be a limit. Right?

Besides, you could most likely build a single to beat the twins. If you think of it that that way then the limit is fine and you must only pick your poison. "F" isn't a "twin" class but a possible mutiple engine class.

If 1.0's are allowed to run just because they are manufactured then we would also have to allow twin gas engines into the mix as well. That would seem only fair to me.

But again, it isn't a "twin" thing. You cannot rule out triples or quadruples just because you don't see them.

As far as speed...................I think I would support a 100mph cap during racing with no problem.

I'm not pooping on twin 1.0's, just trying to rationalize the rule. If I where to poop something then it would be twins in general. :lol: Maybe outboards too. :lol: I'm in trouble now.

 

[piper_chuck]

Now think about the question I have asked. Why is the displacment size being met with hesitation?

I would vigorously fight any attemts to raise the engine size limit in any class I raced. To me it's not a speed issue, it's to proctect the investment people have made in engines that fit within the rules for the class. If there is truely a need for larger engines, establish a new class for them.

 

[Don Ferrette]

If I where to poop something then it would be twins in general.  :lol: Maybe outboards too.  :lol: I'm in trouble now.

105399[/snapback]

​

Im gonna let this one go................

 

[Buckshot]

Besides, you could most likely build a single to beat the twins. If you think of it that that way then the limit is fine and you must only pick your poison. "F" isn't a "twin" class but a possible mutiple engine class.

If 1.0's are allowed to run just because they are manufactured then we would also have to allow twin gas engines into the mix as well. That would seem only fair to me.

As far as speed...................I think I would support a 100mph cap during racing with no problem.

105399[/snapback]

​

My current single dose beat most twins it is matched up with, but that is not the point. I want to be able to build a twin 1.0 if I wanted.

I don't care what the gas guys do. They can change their own section of the rule book.

100mph cap is asinine! :angry:

You probably wouldn't have said that if you where heat racing at 101 mph right? Now I'm not saying that I race at 101 mph but isn't that one of the common goals of model boating? To see just how fast you can make it go.

-Buck-

 

[Buckshot]

Now think about the question I have asked. Why is the displacment size being met with hesitation?

I would vigorously fight any attemts to raise the engine size limit in any class I raced. To me it's not a speed issue, it's to proctect the investment people have made in engines that fit within the rules for the class. If there is truely a need for larger engines, establish a new class for them.

105413[/snapback]

​

Not talking about any other class but X / F.

And even if changed those running now will still fit in the class, It will just open the door for bigger opportunities.

William Shackelford