P-spec tunnel

[Tim leyde]

How about a ESC up to a certain size and a motor up to a certain size. The simpler the rules the more people will be interested.

Tim

 

[SeanKewley]

How about a ESC up to a certain size and a motor up to a certain size. The simpler the rules the more people will be interested.

Tim

I agree Tim.

How much thought has been put into this rule proposal and by whom?

What motors are being allowed and why?

What ESCs are being allowed and why those?

How does this rule committee plan on “spec’ing” this equipment to ensure that it has not been tampered with? What tools are being used to conduct this spec’ing process on the motor and ESC?

What batteries are being allowed and why? Perhaps those on the rule “committee” should consider limiting the fuel source size and brand too. I mean if you only have 3300 mAh of fuel you can only use so many watts in a given amount of time.

What props are being allowed? If the goal is to even the playing field, spec’ing the props should also be considered along with motor and ESC.

I think that these are all valid questions Tim, and I’m sure that the rules committee has worked out every detail. Perhaps they can post some of these details for us.

 

[Mark Leyde]

True Sean,

I think that the fallowing should be allowed in the P spec classes. We should NOT be promoting salls for one company over another.

Any ESC up to stated amp

Any motor up to stated KV

Any battery up to stated mah and C rating

Leave the props out of it.

With that said all stickers and markings must remain on the spec controlled products. Or they are not legal.

 

[Tim leyde]

Agree, no rules say what props we can and can't use in Nitro.

 

[lohring]

The solution in a spec class is to not have the motors listed in the rule book. The electric director (that's you, Dave) then appoints a group to compile the current motor list along with specifications that can be checked. In the really old days that's what was done with K&B outboards so the stock classes had specifications the officials could measure engines to. In every Nationals the stock engines of the trophy winners are ALWAYS torn down and inspected. There have been several instances where the winner was disqualified. Any system with less checking is asking for cheating.

Lohring Miller

 

[raptor347]

How about a ESC up to a certain size and a motor up to a certain size. The simpler the rules the more people will be interested.

Tim

Tim,

The problem is you end up with the motor/esc of the week war. The search for the most efficient motor and ESC. For exmaple the motors currently being used are ~75-80% efficient (rough estimate). If I had a choice of any motor under a given weight and kV, I'd go directly over to the NeuMotors site and find one that fits within the limits. That buys me another ~10% efficiency in the motor (less energy turned into heat, more power at the prop). Another advantage is a much higher quality motor. The drawback is the motor price went from ~$60 to ~$180.

A little history. When we came up with this spec class (it originated in the PNW, quickly followed by the FL guys), the idea was to run power systems out of mass produced RTR boats designed for 4S LiPo or 12 NiMH batteries. Originally, we wanted to run the stock esc's. The majority wanted to run existing esc's that they already owned. So that's the way it evolved in NAMBA. It looks like IMPBA is going a different direction.

Quite honestly, it will be fine one way or the other. Generally the best tuner/driver wins under any rule set.

Here's my one gripe, all this concern about specing esc's doesn't make a bit of difference until technical specs have been established for the motors. "as delivered from the manufacturer" is all well and good as long as you've established what the manufacturer delivers. The way the rules are run now, there's nothing a tech inspector can use to identify a modified motor from a stock motor. And yes, you can modify the motors.

 

[Dick Loeb]

If you want to stop the cheating just make the SPEC or LIMITED classes a claimer class.

 

[raptor347]

If you want to stop the cheating just make the SPEC or LIMITED classes a claimer class.

I've mentioned that to a few people. I think it's a great idea.

 

[DPeterson]

Hi Guy's

Whats a claimer class?

Doug

 

[raptor347]

Doug,

For a set price you can buy anyones motor. If you feel someone has a better motor than you do, you pony up the money and buy it from them at the end of the race. If it really is that much better, you can expect someone to buy it from you at the next race. It really limits the time and effort people will put into a stock motor that may not be theirs at the end of the evening. If someone doesn't want to give up a motor, they are DQ'd.

 

[Doug Smock]

Reluctantly posting on this thread again. :blink:

I don't have any experience with the claimer rule, perhaps it is worth a look.

Just throwing this out there.

A 60 amp esc limit with a max kv of say 2100 would IMO go a long way to keeping motor tweakers in check. It would certainly make racers think twice about the higher kv look alikes.

We (D3 & D13) members checked approx 20 UL 1 motors at our Nov.GP race. The average kv of these motors was 1946. None of them measured 2030,and btw there was no noticible difference between the old and new motors. So we do have some #s to go by.

So what you end up with is approx.900 watts and 2100 kv to play with.

I'd take this over a open esc rule on race day hands down.

However this pans out, I'll be at the pond. B)

D.

 

[lohring]

The problem with any rated current ESC is that at the same rating, the overload capacity will be different. Our spec riggers pull at least 100 amps with bursts as high as 150 amps. The tunnels are similar. The Turnigy Aquastar, rated at 120 amps won't take this but the Turnigy Marine 120 amp ESC will. The difference is the burst rating. One is rated at 150 amps burst, the other is rated at 240 amps burst. Ideally, the class should have been setup to run motor and speed control sets as they came in the RTR boats. We all started that way and found that we got faster with better connectors, low resistance, adjustable timing speed controls, and lower resistance batteries. Since the idea of spec classes is cost containment, this can all get out of hand.

At present, the motor is the weak link. However, motor failure often takes the speed control with it. The class is still a lot less expensive than the open P class. Methods to limit the current fairly are the only solution. The ones I can think of are electronic current limiting, available in some speed controls, and propeller specs. Hoping racers will control the current draws to a manufacturer's specs is silly. If I raced with Brian (I do), I would let someone else claim his motor when he wins. He knows how to push the current limit so the motor will live a few races before the insulation break down kills it. Claiming his motor just finances his racing. LOL

Lohring Miller

 

[Mike Luszcz]

OK, I'm sorry, but if you are pulling that many amps with a UL-1 motor, then you know the simple answer, PROP DOWN. See, this is the issue right here. Guys with money are willing to fry motors to be the fastest out there. This leaves the newcomers, or budget racer not a chance in the world to compete. Jeez, it was enough to have to read this kind of justification on OSE this week, but to see it here just blows my mind. Good luck to you all, I want no part of it. Mike

 

[raptor347]

The funny part of all this is I've only had one motor failure in competition, and it wasn't a burnt winding (rotor failure). I've failed a few in testing, but I also know the limits of my equipment.

The real problem is what works on one hull doesn't always work on another, finding the limit for a given boat can be a challenge. For example, Eric Bourlet and I did a bunch of testing last season to find the limits of what the motors would take. The prop that ran perfect on my Raptor would kill the motor in his JAE. The best prop on his boat didn't perform on mine.

Stock/spec classes have always been the most tuning/setup critical. People often make the mistake of equating stock/spec with novice/entry level racing. In many cases stock/spec class is the most challenging.

My spec boats run 85 amps average with spikes to 130. Those numbers apply to hydro, tunnel and sport hydro. I have the data logs for all these setups. It's the safe limit of the motor. Once you get there, it's time to work on efficiency and driving.

If you have to run a stock esc, you put an oversized esc and a data logger in the boat for testing. Then tune it to the survivable current level of the required equipment. No failures required, but you do need a little extra equipment and testing time.

 

[Grimracer]

I have to ask.. how did this all start.. this "Spec" Class craze..

What do WE REALY want from this and what was the intent from the very beginning. Do MOST of you offering up your opinions and facts to the solution really know.. Do you really know and care about better RC boat racing.. of just want to win em all.. Really ask your self’s..

I bet..

Darin Jordan knows

Brian Buaas knows

I bet the bickfords know....a few others as well. I bet they have a clear idea of the intent and what it WAS.. how it came to be….

Munching on some popcorn here........

SOME HOW.... yea kid.. you can go buy this at your local hobby shop and race it with is was JUST TOSSED OUT THE WINDOW!..

Lets face it.. Its due to the greed of winning…

Winning is really a large chuck of this deal but racing done wrong leads to.. hey.. were is everybody.. or that was a crappy race.. turn out was low..

Keep it in focus,

Rock and Roll

Grim

 

[D. Newland]

Grim-I need some clarification. Are you saying that the greed of winning is why P-Ltd looks the way it does today, and that the new racer with the RTR has no chance and should throw his box boat in the trash?

If I'm interpreting that correctly....I don't buy it.

I don't know if it was truly planned or not, but what we have now resonates with many, many racers. New racers, old racers and "National" racers.

It wasn't greed. It was many, many other things. Good things. It was getting a level of relatively cheap performance with equipment (hulls/hardware/ESC's) that many already had. It was the close competition (no matter your ESC choice). It felt good. Fun, too.

You were at the NAMBA FE Nat's. Can you explain how 4 of the 6 most popular classes were P-Ltd classes? How much fun did we have (to answer your question below...that's what I want...and I want as many people as possible doing it)? How much drama was there?

Was "racing done wrong" at that race?

Is "racing done wrong" going to happen in 16 hours here in Az? Heck, All but 2 classes are P-Ltd classes, and we've got more people coming this year than ever before.

Rules wise, many of us did our best to bottle what happened during the '09 and '10 NAMBA FE racing season. It's not perfect, but it's good. Yes-I'm partial, but it encompasses the rules that have been driving P-Ltd attendance at national events, and it has a proven track record.

IMO, Production/RTR gets fostered at the club level. If there is a National event that feels the need to come up with a Production/RTR class specifically for this group, they can do so.

When these new racers are ready to spread their wings, P-Ltd is waiting for them and it's chuck-full of some of the best racers in the country. Racers that probably aren't all that interested to drop down to a Production/RTR boat...and probably shouldn't, either.

 

[SeanKewley]

I believe that some of the misconception that is taking place in regards to the P-limited classes is that they are beginner classes. That is not the case. Rather, they are the next logical step for people that are new to FE boat racing. The first and most cost efficient step for those wanting to get their feet wet should be a RTR/Production class. It should be local club policy that any new FE boat racer start with this class as it has the shortest list of items to choose from, and is the best solution for keeping cost and confusion to a minimum.

Proboat and Aquacraft have done a great job of providing models to accomplish this. In fact, I would like to implement a RTR/production class here in District 4 very soon to accomplish just that.

Once someone has become familiar with the components and concepts involved with the FE RTR/Production class, the next logical step for them would be the P-limited class. They can run the same boat that they were running in the RTR/Production class if they choose, or they could take some of the components out and put them into a different hull for the more advanced P-limited classes that only limit the motor selection.

 

[Grimracer]

David.. yep.. that is what Im saying… are you then saying P Limited is “Strong”?

That I disagree with.. can it be.. does it have the potential to be.. Yea we all agree with that.. Maybe the strongest numbers of all types of RC boat racing..

Truth is I don’t really care to much what happens at the Nats.. typically a “Raw” class just does not show up at the Nats.

As for popularity at the nats..Yep.. I have seen the future like you of “high end” classes and they had been dieing a slow death anyway.. Money i suspect... looking at the current economic situation. Would you have expected anything less from he Limited classes at last years nats.. na.. not me..

BTY dude.. in my opinion.. YOU SAVED THE FE NATS last year.. the local club also worked there tails off but really.. It would have been a SO SO race if you would have not busted your azz on that one.. Thanks again.

GRIM OUT!

 

[Grimracer]

Ya know.. in my haste and passion to help others I lost focus..

One the topic of this tread.. and the other my personal goals for FE racing..

All in all Im sure you will all will get it worked out..

ROCKET AND ROLL..see ya at the pond!

Grim

 

[Mike Culhane]

Wow! This is not sounding like fun anymore. Maybe just put this junk on the shelf and let it rot.