Outboard rules and class ideas needed

[Don Ferrette]

Thanks Mike, love the picture. :lol:

I'm still trying to figure how according to some, the 2 IMPBA districts with the largest P limited participation and no issues with which part is the "fuse" aren't doing it right and needs to change. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[DPeterson]

Don Ferrete

"I'm still trying to figure out how according to some, the 2 IMPBA districts with the largest P Limited participation and no issues with which part is the "fuse" aren't doing it right and needs to change."

Just curious - Who and what data suggest that theses two IMPBA districts are running the largest numbers of P Limited classes. Who did the analysis and what was used for input data?

I participate in both IMPBA and NAMBA venues and to date I am finding much more P Limited racing in NAMBA Versus IMPBA.

To Mr Smock - Do you have anything to offer to this valuable discussion besides the smiley face?

Doug

 

[Doug Smock]

To Mr Smock - Do you have anything to offer to this valuable discussion besides the smiley face?

Doug

Hey Mr. Peterson, No sir. It's the same old song and dance and we both know there isn't any support to make the Limited classes official in the IMPBA. When I see these discussions now I just .I will have more to say if / when somebody puts a proposal before the IMPBA BOD. But I'll say it to the BOD.

As far as limiting power in the P and Q? Tunnel classes.

If that's what the guys want to do at a local level fine, but I won't personally support that at the National level.

D.

 

[Don Ferrette]

Mr. Peterson, I suggest you re-read my post a little slower as I never made any comparison between NAMBA and IMPBA. As for your "data" one only has to look at races entry numbers and how after almost 4 seasons of running the P-limited classes nobody has burned down anything in either D12 or D13 in the P limited classes. And if you are going to post my name at least spell it right. :wacko:

And for the record I also will not support power limitations or any more classes FE or otherwise that require spec'ing the power that drives them beyond measuring bore/stoke or voltage. I guess some still haven't learned their lesson with teching (or should I say lack of) "stock" engines in the gas classes while others ***** about cheaters behind the scenes. <_<

And since we are talking about these new classes, to quote the movie line- "show me the money". In other words let's see the boats first before we start creating any more national level classes. You guys are even talking about writing rules for boats nobody is even building yet. I held off writing the gas scale unlimited rules for over a year until I saw enough of them under construction or already running around the IMPBA to warrant it (I hope to have mine finished this fall). Sporadic appearances at the local pond or at one big specialized race does not justify penning a batch of new classes that impact an entire organization. Show me the numbers with some consistency around the IMPBA and I'll be glad to support it.

 

[SayMikey]

And since we are talking about these new classes, to quote the movie line- "show me the money". In other words let's see the boats first before we start creating any more national level classes. You guys are even talking about writing rules for boats nobody is even building yet. I held off writing the gas scale unlimited rules for over a year until I saw enough of them under construction or already running around the IMPBA to warrant it (I hope to have mine finished this fall). Sporadic appearances at the local pond or at one big specialized race does not justify penning a batch of new classes that impact an entire organization. Show me the numbers with some consistency around the IMPBA and I'll be glad to support it.

Amen take a look at the big picture. New classes should be built around numbers of existing boats.Making a class then building boats for it dont work.

 

[lohring]

Neu limiters cost $50. My list was just various ideas. I have no final solution. The motor limits seem to be working in P spec classes. The RCU limits still don't allow electrics to compete equally with nitro boats. I doubt that there is any formula that can accomplish that.

My efforts were to explore what economical electric power plants could be used with existing nitro hulls. So far I've tested Q spec power in a 7.5 tunnel and a sport 40. I've tested the RCU limits in an 1/8 scale hull that now holds the NAMBA electric 1/8 scale two lap record. It also won 1/8 scale and T sport hydro at the nationals. Once again my favorite quote from a noted racer is, "Just decide on the rules so I can figure out how I'm going to kick your a**,"

Lohring Miller

 

[DPeterson]

Sorry Don - too many e's r's and t's for my eyes. The referrence to District 12 and 13 being the largest P-Limited racing group is hard for me to digest. I have traveled around the US to race and have been to venues that have large turnouts of P-Limited racers. Arizona, Michigan, and London ON to name a few. Have yet to travel to Florida or Washington but I know they have large groups of P Limited racers.

Also to suggest no one has burned anything down in 4 years is even harder to digest. In fact I have heard and read information that suggests differently. Then I guess if you prop down to run with the nitro I could see the equipment lasting a lot longer. Not sure I would consider that racing.

Thanks to the OP for taking the lead and starting these discussions. Nothing wrong with good communications. In fact more often than not someone is always throwing out the phrase "If you want something fixed or changed - get involved". Then of course there are those posters that try to stiffle the discussions. Just need to look beyond this.

I have learned a lot so far from this thread. The unfortunate part is that on the electric side there is alot to discuss yet beyond hull design and set up. Kind of a wild animal on its own. For the record I would have a very difficult time supporting any spec racing above and beyond the existing P-Limited classes on an National basis. Doug and Doug agree.

Doug

 

[Chilli]

Lohring, We always appreciate you sharing your knowledge and offering technical solutions to problems that may arise from some of these ideas. I think those that want to keep the rules "as is" want avoid the need for having to implement such measures.

Doug, I invite you to attend a few D12 and D13 races. In four years, all of the rare (once a year) Limited equipment failures were due either to the Aquacraft bullets failing on a new boat or a new FE boater throwing a boat in the water with a prop (against my recommendations) that someone on the internet recommended. In the later case the motor and ESC usually blow within two laps. That's it. My son and I have won our fair share of races in the Limited classes running up to four classes at an event and we haven't blown or replaced a motor in three years. We do indeed run with the nitro boats and have a speed parity rule. However this has only been a factor in the B/P-Mono class. No one has ever been asked to prop down in any of the B/P-Limited classes.

No one is trying to trying stifle any discussions. It's been done numerous times on the electric boards. A long thread on the subject usually rear's it's ugly head about every three years..... and we're about due. LOL There has been no shortage of opinions on the P-Limited subject, but no proposals have been submitted. Why hash over the same arguments time after time? So why don't I submit a proposal? I just don't feel the need. I have D13 to the south that runs the same P-Limited rules as we do (except for their crazy mill..Sorry Smock LOL). and I have a NAMBA district to the north whose only P-Limited classes are Sport Hydro and Offshore. Neither of which we run in my district. And truthfully, the FE boats in the IMPBA are having a hard time getting into any National event. The Limited classes have nothing to do with it. Usually we're allowed to enter in an Open class or on occasion we will get thrown a few nuggets a month or two out if entries are light.

For now, my recommendation to everyone is race what you want in your area and have fun. If you want to travel, don't let a rules conflict keep you from making new friends and enjoying new venues. Adapt to their rules or skip the class. It's just not worth the aggravation or the hard feelings that develop between the good people who enjoy our hobby.

 

[James E Beasley]

Well guys, if we don't get control of this situation this is what we could see signed up to race in the next Tunnel Champs!! Check out the quad OB setup. :- o

 

[dion smith]

That's cool James

 

[HTV Boats]

Well guys, if we don't get control of this situation this is what we could see signed up to race in the next Tunnel Champs!! Check out the quad OB setup. :- o

If Otto looked like the girl in the pictures you guys would welcome the 4 motor carboat thingamabob.

 

[Mark Poole ModVP]

Ok back on track......

Mod-VP has done well at the venues where the rules have been made clear which are mainly Brandon and Charleston. Racers from different parts of the country have expressed interest but it always come back to "where are the rules?" Between OMC, HTV, Vision, Longboards and some modified monos that are around, there are quite a number of them and not just in Ga. Fl. and S.C.

Next, a name change is in order. I agree with what Mike Z. said a long time ago that "Mod-VP" is a confusing name for the class. Most people in RC racing don't know what that stands for which is "Modified Engine-Vee Hull Production. The life size class allowed Vee hulls, Modified Vee hulls and Tunnel Vee hulls as long as the boat retained a center keel as a ride surface. Basically what this creates is an outboard class that excludes any 3 or 4 point hydro hulls as well as true cat hulls. In life size OPC racing you had Mod and Sport classes which were all tunnel hulls and then you had the Family classes which was anything that rode on a "keel". The class was a real delight that was filled with many different brands of boats and designs. Very much like the old days of stock car racing.

So, let's move forward here with a simpler hull rules criteria than the one I wrote years ago which was rather lengthy and technical.

Class Name: VT-OPC (VT stands for Vee Tunnel)

Any outboard powered mono, modified mono or tunnel vee design.

Mono hull......Any normally legal mono hull.

Modified mono....A mono that has been enhanced with added appendege to the hull such as a pad keel or sponsons that aid the stability and cornering ability of the of the hull. Center keel must remain as deep or deeper than any other part of the hull for at least 15 inches going forward. Ride surfaces other than the keel shall not exceed more than 1 inch past the bottom at the rear of the hull. This is to prevent having a hull which could potentially ride on two "points".

Tunnel Vee....Can be designed from the ground up or convert an existing tunnel hull. Can be a picklefork bow or a closed (full) bow design. The center ride surface on a Tunnel Vee must be a MINIMUM of 1 inch wide at the point where its depth is even with the outer sponsons. It can be of any design....flat, round, vee, etc. The center ride surface must begin within 1 inch (max) of the back of the hull and remain as deep or deeper as any other part of the hull for at least 15 inches going forward. This prevents a hull that could potentially ride on two "points"

Turn fins are allowed

Wings, spoilers are allowed

Closed cockpit cowl or open is ok

Any design may be scratch built and made out of wood or composite.

For future reference, any large scale VT-OPC hull will meet the following minimum specs.....

Any Tunnel Vee hull 33 inches and larger, the center ride surface mnimum is 1.5 inches wide and goes forward minimum 17 inches.

This class mixes monos and non monos just like offshore mixes monos and cats. Provides a class where outboard monos can race. Lots of hulls available or built your own.

Anyone who is skeptical of the potential has never been to Brandon or the Tunnel Champs.

 

[Don Ferrette]

"Anyone who is skeptical of the potential has never been to Brandon or the Tunnel Champs."

Again, two isolated races do not make up participation throughout the organization. Let's see the actual boats counts besides one IMPBA specialized event.

 

[Andy Greene]

never mind.

 

[Mark Poole ModVP]

Quite a number of my hulls are in Canada, and several of the north mid west states. I know some Longboards went to Canada and Northeast U.S. A conservative total number would be 50.

Now without ill feelings, how many twin gas hydros existed when the rules for the class were proposed?

 

[Don Ferrette]

Quite a number of my hulls are in Canada, and several of the north mid west states. I know some Longboards went to Canada and Northeast U.S. A conservative total number would be 50.

Now without ill feelings, how many twin gas hydros existed when the rules for the class were proposed?

Don't take this personally but since you are the manufacturer of these hulls one could easily say you have quite an interest in writing the rules and pushing for this class regardless if it benefits the whole of the IMPBA or not. I'm simply playing devil's advocate here now before it comes up during board discussions and it will if it gets that far, we've been down that road before. As for the twin gas class I'm not going to waste much on that other than to say we found ourselves behind the eight ball when we scrambled to get the rules written. I've been to a lot of races all over the IMPBA and can't recall seeing a Mod VP in person. So one more time, let's see them at some IMPBA races besides one specialized race and go from there. If there are "conservatively" that many out there this should be a non issue right?

 

[Ron Saxvik]

Don.......saw these run a few years ago at the WTC and people who haven't witnessed them in person don't know

what they're missing. I came back home and immediately got ahold of Mark to put one on order. Because of

circumstances beyond my control, I haven't had a chance to finish or run mine but hopefully will get something

together for next summer. These things really bring the fun back to racing !

 

[Bob Kensill]

Don

You were one of the proponents of the twin nitro hydro class. I don't see a lot of these boats at races, or better yet, twin gas hydro. Don't be so negative towards forward thinking racers. I started this post to get ideas and opinions. I don't plan to rewrite the rule book, just want to give it some much needed attention. I am planning to attend the board at the Nitro Nats, and would like to present some ideas.

[Quote name=Don Ferrette'

timestamp='1375237262' post='548913]

"Anyone who is skeptical of the potential has never been to Brandon or the Tunnel Champs."

Again, two isolated races do not make up participation throughout the organization. Let's see the actual boats counts besides one IMPBA specialized event.

 

[Don Ferrette]

Don.......saw these run a few years ago at the WTC and people who haven't witnessed them in person don't know

what they're missing. I came back home and immediately got ahold of Mark to put one on order. Because of

circumstances beyond my control, I haven't had a chance to finish or run mine but hopefully will get something

together for next summer. These things really bring the fun back to racing !

Then let's get 'em out there racing and drum up even more support. To be clear I have no problem what so ever if the boats are there in supporting a new class. Keep in mind that the other side of this is we are hearing lots of complaints in recent times that we have too many classes and it's hurting us more than helping.

 

[Andy Greene]

Quite a number of my hulls are in Canada, and several of the north mid west states. I know some Longboards went to Canada and Northeast U.S. A conservative total number would be 50.

Now without ill feelings, how many twin gas hydros existed when the rules for the class were proposed?

Don't take this personally but since you are the manufacturer of these hulls one could easily say you have quite an interest in writing the rules and pushing for this class regardless if it benefits the whole of the IMPBA or not. I'm simply playing devil's advocate here now before it comes up during board discussions and it will if it gets that far, we've been down that road before.

Then you would be asking someone without a clear knowledge of the boats and the spirit of the class to write the rules because everyone that makes one- races one . I would think that the board would/should show some latitude if all the current racers agreed to what has been presented. As far as this being a small potatoes class - that IMHO you seem to liken to RTR - (how did that go anyway ??) you are correct, its still not to Gas Mono numbers - because at this point the collective effort to grow the class between people like Mark,Mic, Charleston club and myself (by offering the class at our specialty races) is still young. It will be a staple at my October race and as that race grows does the exposure. Its an exciting class to watch as well as drive and offers a new and experience racer alike a relatively cost effective way to have a ton of fun. What is the issue for a set of rules that gives those just getting started direction to help grow the class, instead of shoving it off to the side as unbenificial to IMPBA.