Question about Twin rigger

[Mike Hughes]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

 

[Piston1]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

 

[Andy Brown]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

To the insurance company it's all about ENERGY. Bigger engine(s) = Higher Energy! 35 pounds with 10 horsepower (two gas engines) will not go too fast around our course. 35 pounds with twenty horsepower (two .101 nitro engines) will go faster around our course. This equals more kinetic energy which means more damage potential. Put a pair of 27 cc nitro engines(potentially 30 Horsepower) in a 35 pound boat and the risk goes up more.

Make technical sense? Sure we could do it if everyone opts to pay more $$$ for insurance.

 

[Piston1]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

To the insurance company it's all about ENERGY. Bigger engine(s) = Higher Energy! 35 pounds with 10 horsepower (two gas engines) will not go too fast around our course. 35 pounds with twenty horsepower (two .101 nitro engines) will go faster around our course. This equals more kinetic energy which means more damage potential. Put a pair of 27 cc nitro engines(potentially 30 Horsepower) in a 35 pound boat and the risk goes up more.

Make technical sense? Sure we could do it if everyone opts to pay more $$$ for insurance.

It makes perfect sense. Kinetic Energy is a function of speed and mass. Mass is controlled by both organizations but speed is not. Maybe to reduce damage potential we should control speeds. Does that make sense to you? By the way nobody is thinking about 27cc Nitro engines here on my side.

 

[Andy Brown]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

To the insurance company it's all about ENERGY. Bigger engine(s) = Higher Energy! 35 pounds with 10 horsepower (two gas engines) will not go too fast around our course. 35 pounds with twenty horsepower (two .101 nitro engines) will go faster around our course. This equals more kinetic energy which means more damage potential. Put a pair of 27 cc nitro engines(potentially 30 Horsepower) in a 35 pound boat and the risk goes up more.

Make technical sense? Sure we could do it if everyone opts to pay more $$$ for insurance.

It makes perfect sense. Kinetic Energy is a function of speed and mass. Mass is controlled by both organizations but speed is not. Maybe to reduce damage potential we should control speeds. Does that make sense to you?

Speed and therefore kinetic energy is basically controlled by power and the size of our course along with the weight which is mandated. If we had a much bigger course we could get a 35 pound boat going a little faster with our available horsepower. Meaning MORE potentially damaging KE. In a distance of 330 feet we are just not going to get 35 pounds to a very high speed. We can go faster on our 330' foot course if we make the boat lighter, but a lighter boat (less mass) being accelerated by the same power to a higher speed has the same kinetic energy as a heavier (higher mass), slower boat. So in the end mass, power and the size of our course controls the KE.

 

[Piston1]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

To the insurance company it's all about ENERGY. Bigger engine(s) = Higher Energy! 35 pounds with 10 horsepower (two gas engines) will not go too fast around our course. 35 pounds with twenty horsepower (two .101 nitro engines) will go faster around our course. This equals more kinetic energy which means more damage potential. Put a pair of 27 cc nitro engines(potentially 30 Horsepower) in a 35 pound boat and the risk goes up more.

Make technical sense? Sure we could do it if everyone opts to pay more $$$ for insurance.

It makes perfect sense. Kinetic Energy is a function of speed and mass. Mass is controlled by both organizations but speed is not. Maybe to reduce damage potential we should control speeds. Does that make sense to you?

Speed and therefore kinetic energy is basically controlled by power and the size of our course along with the weight which is mandated. If we had a much bigger course we could get a 35 pound boat going a little faster with our available horsepower. Meaning MORE potentially damaging KE. In a distance of 330 feet we are just not going to get 35 pounds to a very high speed. We can go faster on our 330' foot course if we make the boat lighter, but a lighter boat (less mass) being accelerated by the same power to a higher speed has the same kinetic energy as a heavier (higher mass), slower boat. So in the end mass, power and the size of our course controls the KE.

All of your points above are 100% accurate but the matter here is that we are just simply trying to allow running an increase in displacement from .9 to 1.01. This is an option supported by the same engine platform. After evaluating the engine parameters side by side along with the other physical control factors associated with the boats it is apparent to me that the potential safety margin effect is negligible. You are making this sound as if 35# boats were to be heat racing at 110mph. None of us old farts including you can handle that under all the other existing rules and race courses. Checks and balances should be evaluated and adjusted up or down as necessary by the sanction organization to ensure safety margin is not compromissed.

 

[Scott Schneider]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

To the insurance company it's all about ENERGY. Bigger engine(s) = Higher Energy! 35 pounds with 10 horsepower (two gas engines) will not go too fast around our course. 35 pounds with twenty horsepower (two .101 nitro engines) will go faster around our course. This equals more kinetic energy which means more damage potential. Put a pair of 27 cc nitro engines(potentially 30 Horsepower) in a 35 pound boat and the risk goes up more.

Make technical sense? Sure we could do it if everyone opts to pay more $$$ for insurance.

It makes perfect sense. Kinetic Energy is a function of speed and mass. Mass is controlled by both organizations but speed is not. Maybe to reduce damage potential we should control speeds. Does that make sense to you?

Speed and therefore kinetic energy is basically controlled by power and the size of our course along with the weight which is mandated. If we had a much bigger course we could get a 35 pound boat going a little faster with our available horsepower. Meaning MORE potentially damaging KE. In a distance of 330 feet we are just not going to get 35 pounds to a very high speed. We can go faster on our 330' foot course if we make the boat lighter, but a lighter boat (less mass) being accelerated by the same power to a higher speed has the same kinetic energy as a heavier (higher mass), slower boat. So in the end mass, power and the size of our course controls the KE.

All of your points above are 100% accurate but the matter here is that we are just simply trying to allow running an increase in displacement from .9 to 1.01. This is an option supported by the same engine platform. After evaluating the engine parameters side by side along with the other physical control factors associated with the boats it is apparent to me that the potential safety margin effect is negligible. You are making this sound as if 35# boats were to be heat racing at 110mph. None of us old farts including you can handle that under all the other existing rules and race courses. Checks and balances should be evaluated and adjusted up or down as necessary by the sanction organization to ensure safety margin is not compromised.

At the level we operate our current model boats, pushing the limits to satisfy the ego of those always pushing more is better will NEVER plateau .... It really boils down to the check and balance of " If you build it they will come " mentality.

The progression of more bigger faster never ends until those pushing get a wall that holds firm !! This is your limit, deal with it and push it's limits. <_<

 

[Andy Brown]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

To the insurance company it's all about ENERGY. Bigger engine(s) = Higher Energy! 35 pounds with 10 horsepower (two gas engines) will not go too fast around our course. 35 pounds with twenty horsepower (two .101 nitro engines) will go faster around our course. This equals more kinetic energy which means more damage potential. Put a pair of 27 cc nitro engines(potentially 30 Horsepower) in a 35 pound boat and the risk goes up more.

Make technical sense? Sure we could do it if everyone opts to pay more $$$ for insurance.

It makes perfect sense. Kinetic Energy is a function of speed and mass. Mass is controlled by both organizations but speed is not. Maybe to reduce damage potential we should control speeds. Does that make sense to you?

Speed and therefore kinetic energy is basically controlled by power and the size of our course along with the weight which is mandated. If we had a much bigger course we could get a 35 pound boat going a little faster with our available horsepower. Meaning MORE potentially damaging KE. In a distance of 330 feet we are just not going to get 35 pounds to a very high speed. We can go faster on our 330' foot course if we make the boat lighter, but a lighter boat (less mass) being accelerated by the same power to a higher speed has the same kinetic energy as a heavier (higher mass), slower boat. So in the end mass, power and the size of our course controls the KE.

All of your points above are 100% accurate but the matter here is that we are just simply trying to allow running an increase in displacement from .9 to 1.01. This is an option supported by the same engine platform. After evaluating the engine parameters side by side along with the other physical control factors associated with the boats it is apparent to me that the potential safety margin effect is negligible. You are making this sound as if 35# boats were to be heat racing at 110mph. None of us old farts including you can handle that under all the other existing rules and race courses. Checks and balances should be evaluated and adjusted up or down as necessary by the sanction organization to ensure safety margin is not compromissed.

I just gave a technical reason, and made no inference to a 35 pound boat going 110. I just used 35# because it is the upper limit and if we did put more power in it, it would carry more KE. It would be kinda of silly for me to express the idea of increased KE potential by talking about putting Twin 27 cc nitro engines in a 5 pound boat. On our course a 35# boat with 10 HP might go 40 mph. With 20 HP maybe 55 mph. With 30 or more HP it might run 70 and the KE is getting up there.

What organizations choose to do about the larger engines available is for them to decide. I just pointed out the reason for having the limits.

Me personally!...give me Twin 1.25's and 500 foot straights baby!

 

[Piston1]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

To the insurance company it's all about ENERGY. Bigger engine(s) = Higher Energy! 35 pounds with 10 horsepower (two gas engines) will not go too fast around our course. 35 pounds with twenty horsepower (two .101 nitro engines) will go faster around our course. This equals more kinetic energy which means more damage potential. Put a pair of 27 cc nitro engines(potentially 30 Horsepower) in a 35 pound boat and the risk goes up more.

Make technical sense? Sure we could do it if everyone opts to pay more $$$ for insurance.

It makes perfect sense. Kinetic Energy is a function of speed and mass. Mass is controlled by both organizations but speed is not. Maybe to reduce damage potential we should control speeds. Does that make sense to you?

Speed and therefore kinetic energy is basically controlled by power and the size of our course along with the weight which is mandated. If we had a much bigger course we could get a 35 pound boat going a little faster with our available horsepower. Meaning MORE potentially damaging KE. In a distance of 330 feet we are just not going to get 35 pounds to a very high speed. We can go faster on our 330' foot course if we make the boat lighter, but a lighter boat (less mass) being accelerated by the same power to a higher speed has the same kinetic energy as a heavier (higher mass), slower boat. So in the end mass, power and the size of our course controls the KE.

All of your points above are 100% accurate but the matter here is that we are just simply trying to allow running an increase in displacement from .9 to 1.01. This is an option supported by the same engine platform. After evaluating the engine parameters side by side along with the other physical control factors associated with the boats it is apparent to me that the potential safety margin effect is negligible. You are making this sound as if 35# boats were to be heat racing at 110mph. None of us old farts including you can handle that under all the other existing rules and race courses. Checks and balances should be evaluated and adjusted up or down as necessary by the sanction organization to ensure safety margin is not compromissed.

I just gave a technical reason, and made no inference to a 35 pound boat going 110. I just used 35# because it is the upper limit and if we did put more power in it, it would carry more KE. It would be kinda of silly for me to express the idea of increased KE potential by talking about putting Twin 27 cc nitro engines in a 5 pound boat. On our course a 35# boat with 10 HP might go 40 mph. With 20 HP maybe 55 mph. With 30 or more HP it might run 70 and the KE is getting up there.

What organizations choose to do about the larger engines available is for them to decide. I just pointed out the reason for having the limits.

Me personally!...give me Twin 1.25's and 500 foot straights baby!

And I fully understand your point. Let's go racing.

 

[Mike Hughes]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

I personally dont think its a problem. From the powers that be I get the inference that the limit is 30cc and if we raise it, then they will come out with something more. As stated above. I run twin 84' s and love my boat.

Mike

 

[Tom Foley]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

I personally dont think its a problem. From the powers that be I get the inference that the limit is 30cc and if we raise it, then they will come out with something more. As stated above. I run twin 84' s and love my boat.

Mike

Well the 101 motors are here and I feel that they need to be included in both sanctioning bodys rules as this would be a step forward . They are not for everyone for sure but they must be addressed . In my opinion not allowing the motors would be absolutely ludicrous and backward thinking . Boating must go forward to survive and if the rekindled interest in Twin riggers is partially fueled by the bigger motors than they must be allowed IMHO .

 

[Jeff Lutz]

Just to ask this question a different way. What is the maximum boat weight and length that NAMBA covers?

Are there any Nitro engine displacement limitations that prevent the 1.0, 101s, etc. from being covered under the NAMBA insurance at this time?

The 1cubes and 101s are covered under the 30cc limit as singles. The problem is everyone want to run them as twins.

Mike

Mike,

Why do you think it is a problem to want to race twin 101s as long as you meet weigth and length limitations. I ask this question at IMPBA several years back and nobody gave me a technical sensible answer. If everyone want to run as twins as you stated above why do you think it is a problem.

JOSE

I personally dont think its a problem. From the powers that be I get the inference that the limit is 30cc and if we raise it, then they will come out with something more. As stated above. I run twin 84' s and love my boat.

Mike

Mike, If people tried to raise it 3 times in 10 years I can understand.But the rule in namba has never changed,and its probably time. Impba has done it,2.5 will last a long time considering there are no engine manufacturers about to build anything close to a 1.25.Anytime soon....Jeff Lutz

 

[BigChuck]

Jeff.............I would never say never. When IMPBA put the pettion out for the displacement rule change I for One wanted it to be 2.10. Why, because it covers the largest displacement that can be use. And what would I do with twin 1.05's

 

[Mike Hughes]

Mike, If people tried to raise it 3 times in 10 years I can understand.But the rule in namba has never changed,and its probably time. Impba has done it,2.5 will last a long time considering there are no engine manufacturers about to build anything close to a 1.25.Anytime soon....Jeff Lutz

Well there is a way to get it done. You have to put a proposal together from your district. Getting your district director involved. It can then be put on the ballot for the next vote. You just need to move forward with it.

Mike

 

[Tom Foley]

Mike, If people tried to raise it 3 times in 10 years I can understand.But the rule in namba has never changed,and its probably time. Impba has done it,2.5 will last a long time considering there are no engine manufacturers about to build anything close to a 1.25.Anytime soon....Jeff Lutz

Well there is a way to get it done. You have to put a proposal together from your district. Getting your district director involved. It can then be put on the ballot for the next vote. You just need to move forward with it.

Mike

Yes Mike very true . I will personally contact ours to see if we can get it changed !

 

[Chris Wood]

maybe a dumb question but i got to ask

why don't namba and impba make the twin class a unlimited cube size? lets face it as time goes on motors will just get bigger and they will again over time change the limit?

chris

 

[Don Ferrette]

maybe a dumb question but i got to ask

why don't namba and impba make the twin class a unlimited cube size? lets face it as time goes on motors will just get bigger and they will again over time change the limit?

chris

One word - insurance.

Yes the underwriters of our policy do actually look at what we are doing. :huh:

 

[Scott Schneider]

maybe a dumb question but i got to ask

why don't namba and impba make the twin class a unlimited cube size? lets face it as time goes on motors will just get bigger and they will again over time change the limit?

chris

One word - insurance.

Yes the underwriters of our policy do actually look at what we are doing. :huh:

Exactly .... "Just because you can does not mean you should" is a quote that comes to mind here :blink:

 

[Joe Warren]

IMPBA is Good @ 2.50 max Limit. The Rules for TWIN class are in Place!! You boys Need to work with NAMBA to increase there TWIN Hydro class Max Limit. Many boaters crossover from IMPBA to NAMBA racing. Only makes sense that the engines classes comply to the same.

 

[Chris Wood]

don,

how do we get away with running a UNLIMITED class at races then?

chris