Outboard rules and class ideas needed

[Rhonda Pickard]

I agree Jeff keep this simple you have new people coming into the sort that want to run tunnels and people like myself that love to if it turns into a fighting match and there are so many rules takes the fun out of everything we are here to have fun and play yes rules need to be in place but how many is my point Robert

 

[Kris Flynn]

Tightening the rules will kill innovation. There is already a severe lack of people coming up with Kool new tricks these days as it is.

 

[RonShaw]

Why does it allways end up about the turn table ob they are legal , if you change the rule now thats fine as long as you grandfather me ,Otto Ryan and who ever else has them . It would be f... Up if you change now because certain people don't like them , next people will wan't bann certain boats cause they don't like the way they look (they don't look scale).

Like I said can of worms!

Shane,

Yes, its a can of worms. I think all existing boats including the ones you three own, would probably have to be grandfathered, including the Aeromarine outboard hulls as their inset exceeds the 10% of the boat length, transom inset proposal. Hopefully everyone understands why this needs to be done sooner than later, before more of these designs show up at the local races. This would keep NAMBA tunnels in line with the real OPC Tunnels as was designed, and can bring IMPBA's rules in line as well. This is all open discussion and would need to be put to a membership vote if the proposal makes it through the boards of both organizations.

 

[RonShaw]

Tightening the rules will kill innovation. There is already a severe lack of people coming up with Kool new tricks these days as it is.

Kris,

There are many new "kool tricks". New engines such as NR powerheads, many new outboard hull designs and classes, new hull designs on the horizon of introduction, new outboard pipes, and others. These innovations are where innovations should be, and do not challenge the definitions of the classes themselves and cause controversy.

 

[Jerry Dunlap]

Don't be afraid os stock engine rules. Yes, it will require inspection. NAMBA has been inspecting all the trophy winners at their nationals as long as I have been a member. Several well known national champions were disqualified over the years. The system works and isn't particularly difficult to implement. Even with displacement only rules, you need to check bore and stroke. This was true with the K&B 48 (.875 bore) sleeves in the past and gas cylinders and crankshafts today.

Lohring Miller

Hey, I resemble that statement. :wacko: At recent NAMBA Nats, I've discovered an easy way to pass the engine tear down rule. Screw up so badly you're not even remotely close to receiving a trophy.

JD

 

[SayMikey]

Good Luck ! Some times too many rules have a negative effect.

Remember when making or changing rules you need to take into account the whole country not just a local area.

 

[lohring]

Just for the record, NAMBA already has OPC rules for the following FE power classes:

P-Limited
(Up to 4S, Limited power systems... equivalent to 3.5)
P
(Up to 4S, Open power systems... equivalent to 7.5)
Open
(5S-10S, Open power systems)
I can't imagine needing more tunnel classes than that. It covers the available hull sizes, with the exception of really smaller tunnels (< 27"), and provides a "spec" level, an up to 4S "open" level, and an up to 10S "open" level.

We also updated the definitions of what an FE "outboard" is, which was essentially based on the NAMBA Nitro OPC rules. Should be in the current rules.

It's all pretty clear. I don't really see any need at all for NAMBA to update any OPC rules, at least regarding FE. They are already there. Just need people to start building them. Currently, it's rare to see anything other than P-Limited boats.

I hate to point out that 7.5 nitro outboards are not length limited and all the popular 7.5 size hulls, except for the Shaman, are longer than the P rules allow. Fortunately, limiting the power with the P limited rules allows a lot of usable hulls within the P length limits. A better 7.5 nitro tunnel replacement would be a Q spec motor class. It should be less expensive than an open P power plant. We've tested a possible combination on a Leecraft XT-460. It was faster than a 7.5 mod nitro powered version of the same boat. A bigger boat like the HTB 360 or a more restricted power plant is probably needed. The same power plant in a sport 40 is very close to 7.5 nitro performance.

Lohring Miller

 

[HTV Boats]

Lohring is correct on a "Q" or 5-6s class being a natural replacement for existing outboard hulls. IMPBA recognizes N (2s) P(3-4s) Q (5-6s) S(7-8s) & T(9-10S) OB tunnel classes already for records 1/4 1/3 & SAW. In reality above 6S is not being built any time soon for heat racing. NAMBA going from P to open may not encourage building Q tunnels. Adding Q and then letting anyone building larger just go to open would not be difficult. There are actually a few hulls that are legal for P. Hornet,, Warhead,. HTB340 and Vision will make a shorter hull. ML Boatworks has some good full P kits. The advantage of Q is not so much speed as the P's run fast. The ability for a larger heavier hull makes them more reliable. The next plus is you cut your amps by 1/3 to make the same watts. A P motor will push a 180-200 amp ESC where the same watt and less KV to match rpm draws 2/3rds the amps giving some headroom. After all this back to the P limited class NAMBA has one and IMPBA doesn't. FE is one area that similar rules for both organizations can be standardized. Mic

 

[RonShaw]

Just for the record, NAMBA already has OPC rules for the following FE power classes:

P-Limited
(Up to 4S, Limited power systems... equivalent to 3.5)
P
(Up to 4S, Open power systems... equivalent to 7.5)
Open
(5S-10S, Open power systems)
I can't imagine needing more tunnel classes than that. It covers the available hull sizes, with the exception of really smaller tunnels (< 27"), and provides a "spec" level, an up to 4S "open" level, and an up to 10S "open" level.

We also updated the definitions of what an FE "outboard" is, which was essentially based on the NAMBA Nitro OPC rules. Should be in the current rules.

It's all pretty clear. I don't really see any need at all for NAMBA to update any OPC rules, at least regarding FE. They are already there. Just need people to start building them. Currently, it's rare to see anything other than P-Limited boats.

I hate to point out that 7.5 nitro outboards are not length limited and all the popular 7.5 size hulls, except for the Shaman, are longer than the P rules allow. Fortunately, limiting the power with the P limited rules allows a lot of usable hulls within the P length limits. A better 7.5 nitro tunnel replacement would be a Q spec motor class. It should be less expensive than an open P power plant. We've tested a possible combination on a Leecraft XT-460. It was faster than a 7.5 mod nitro powered version of the same boat. A bigger boat like the HTB 360 or a more restricted power plant is probably needed. The same power plant in a sport 40 is very close to 7.5 nitro performance.

Lohring Miller

Lohring,

These are all great points. I agree the NAMBA FE Classes have much tighter rules and definitions. Hopefully IMPBA will continue to improve as well. My only change to FE would be covered by defining the term outboard as to what it is, how its mounted, where its mounted, etc, in line with the OPC Tunnel OB rules all OB Classes should mimic. This definition would cover FE, Nitro, and Gas.

 

[Grimracer]

Im not sure I understand the "need" or requirement for a virtical transom. I have seen Johns boat and this was what came to front of mind when it came up. Just as a for instance my Full size Fralick hyroplane has a tilted transom..

I also could care less in the open tunnel classes what lower is used,, Home made from pop bottle and popcille sticks is fine with me.. Or some CNC master crafted one off.

Im not sure any of this needs updating. Im just not seeing a "trend" or trends blasting the current rules.

Grim

 

[RonShaw]

I just saw this post from Fred at LAWLESS Drives in the manufacturer section. Here is a blurb:

"There seems to be some discussion going on about the shortage of outboard drives hurting the tunnel hull classes, or so it has been reported to me. I am STILL making all 3 sizes of Lawless Drives on a daily basis. Sometimes I get a little behind, but I have not quit by any means. "

 

[RonShaw]

Im not sure any of this needs updating. Im just not seeing a "trend" or trends blasting the current rules.

Grim

You need to come to the next WTC, which I consider a great benchmark as its the largest

Collection of RC Outboard racing in the World, and look around. Its definitely trending.....

 

[DPeterson]

SayMikey

"Remember when making or changing rules you need to take into account the whole country not just a local area."

Second that. A major fundamental flaw in both organizations and the root cause behind turmoil when rules are proposed. A true democratic process involves having issues pass through committees prior to going to approval or voting. It is currently possible for a group from one area of the country to propose rule changes and go directly to vote. Because of low voter turnout the proposal has a favorable chance of succeeding. This of course is what fuels dissention. A geographical rules committee would not be that difficult to create.

Curious as to what these controversal lower units and set ups look like. Can someone post a picture?

Carry on. Doug

 

[Bob Kensill]

Guys

I started this topic to see what changes/additions are needed or wanted. I agree that everyone should have some input. I de agree that the WTC in Charleston is the premier Outboard event in IMPBA. Don't complain about rules if you just sit by and watch someone else do all the work. Tell me your thoughts! The purpose is not to make "John Ottos 40 outboard" illegal, but help establish guidelines and limits as to what constitutes an outboard. I have been known to "think outside the box" on occasion myself. Wait till you see some of my new projects

 

[Bob Kensill]

I would also like to invite anyone to send me any rule ideas they may have. Lets make Outboard racing grow and have fun.

 

[RonShaw]

I would also like to invite anyone to send me any rule ideas they may have. Lets make Outboard racing grow and have fun.

Amen...

 

[Grimracer]

Im not sure any of this needs updating. Im just not seeing a "trend" or trends blasting the current rules.

Grim

You need to come to the next WTC, which I consider a great benchmark as its the largest

Collection of RC Outboard racing in the World, and look around. Its definitely trending.....

Ron.. Been there done that got the T-shirt.. I would like to come back some day but my eye sight limits my driving. I hope that too gets better someday. I spoke to Dunny about it and he too would like to come back.. so maybe in the coming year or two.



Point on.. Outboards themselves are trending.. Despite" the current rules.. I can see a somewhat better definition but truthfully I still don’t understand the transom deal. I also would spend more time on “one new class” then hashing out the old ones.



Again.. I just don’t see a “design advantage trend” overtaking tunnel boat racing in the IMPBA.



Let race! Tunnel are SOOOO cool…



Grim

 

[RonShaw]

Im not sure any of this needs updating. Im just not seeing a "trend" or trends blasting the current rules.

Grim

You need to come to the next WTC, which I consider a great benchmark as its the largest

Collection of RC Outboard racing in the World, and look around. Its definitely trending.....

Ron.. Been there done that got the T-shirt.. I would like to come back some day but my eye sight limits my driving. I hope that too gets better someday. I spoke to Dunny about it and he too would like to come back.. so maybe in the coming year or two.

Point on.. Outboards themselves are trending.. Despite" the current rules.. I can see a somewhat better definition but truthfully I still don’t understand the transom deal. I also would spend more time on “one new class” then hashing out the old ones.

Again.. I just don’t see a “design advantage trend” overtaking tunnel boat racing in the IMPBA.

Let race! Tunnel are SOOOO cool…

Grim

Grim,

Glad to hear you have been here before. Would love for you and Dunny to come back to the WTC. It would be a blast to see you guys. Lots of competition these days for sure. No doubt some of the best tunnel drivers in the country are now coming. Yes, tunnels are trending as I mentioned earlier, in the hull, engine, pipe departments, and several other areas, but there is no reason to "trend" on the rules. There is no doubt what the intent of the rules were when the terms "outboard" and "OPC" were used to help describe the class. Again, all of the other details were to be the "icing on the cake", not the determining factors behind the outboard class designation. Unfortunately, some are playing on the "other" instead of on the word "outboard", and for that reason, I feel it needs full definition and clarification in both organizations. Now with that being said, let's continue the thread Bob started and get this figured out and put to a vote by the membership of both IMPBA and NAMBA. Then we can have even more fun running tunnels!!!!......

 

[dion smith]

Some pics of these lowers that are on the nose would be great! Would help clear up the picture , the 90* transom will rule out some great hulls, eg synthar 1/4 scale tunnels

 

[lohring]

Don't be afraid os stock engine rules. Yes, it will require inspection. NAMBA has been inspecting all the trophy winners at their nationals as long as I have been a member. Several well known national champions were disqualified over the years. The system works and isn't particularly difficult to implement. Even with displacement only rules, you need to check bore and stroke. This was true with the K&B 48 (.875 bore) sleeves in the past and gas cylinders and crankshafts today.

Lohring Miller

Hey, I resemble that statement. :wacko: At recent NAMBA Nats, I've discovered an easy way to pass the engine tear down rule. Screw up so badly you're not even remotely close to receiving a trophy.

JD

You are far from the only one. I remember several cases of no K&B needle in the fuel line. Congratulations on Sport 20. You spent a lot of time designing boats for that class.

Lohring Miller