Sport 40 strut mounting

[HOTWATER]

Why change......lets all just go back to starting boats with shoestrings, Crystal radios (no more 2.4) and no more third channel needle valves....anything else is an advantage...right?

 

[Grimracer]

Yes, change is needed in my opinion and its been way overdue. The fact that many IMPBA members have been requesting this change for the past 15 years and with it being made a trial rule by our IMPBA Exec this year shows that a change is in the wind. We already have a dozen racers in IMPBA District 1 who have rear mounted struts and I can say there is NO DIFFERENCE in performance. If you don't want to have a rear mounted strut then so be it however, why push to not allow what others want? If people want a change it will show after the vote. [/size]

The simple fact is people are looking for AN ADVANTAGE.. even though SOME say there is no advantage to having it on the back, perception says LONGER IS BETTER. [/size]

I like racing within "limits".. others look to take ADVANTAGE of limits. It is just that simple.. no more and no less.[/size]

Lets vote! I accept all outcomes![/size]

Grim[/size]

Sorry Grim your statement is false when it comes to IMPBA District 1 in Eastern Canada. The racers In Quebec build their Sport 40's as exact replicas of the full size Grand Prix hydroplanes. All the full size GP boats run a rear strut. The modelers also run straight turn fins (no hooks) just as the full size boats do. These rc racers are NOT looking for an advantage and the only ''limits'' they are looking to acheive is to produce exact replicas.

Sport 40 is NOT a scale class... so easy to understand...

Grim

 

[SayMikey]

Yes, change is needed in my opinion and its been way overdue. The fact that many IMPBA members have been requesting this change for the past 15 years and with it being made a trial rule by our IMPBA Exec this year shows that a change is in the wind. We already have a dozen racers in IMPBA District 1 who have rear mounted struts and I can say there is NO DIFFERENCE in performance. If you don't want to have a rear mounted strut then so be it however, why push to not allow what others want? If people want a change it will show after the vote.

The simple fact is people are looking for AN ADVANTAGE.. even though SOME say there is no advantage to having it on the back, perception says LONGER IS BETTER.

I like racing within "limits".. others look to take ADVANTAGE of limits. It is just that simple.. no more and no less.

Lets vote! I accept all outcomes!

Grim

Sorry Grim your statement is false when it comes to IMPBA District 1 in Eastern Canada. The racers In Quebec build their Sport 40's as exact replicas of the full size Grand Prix hydroplanes. All the full size GP boats run a rear strut. The modelers also run straight turn fins (no hooks) just as the full size boats do. These rc racers are NOT looking for an advantage and the only ''limits'' they are looking to acheive is to produce exact replicas.

So next you want straight fins!

 

[Don Ferrette]

Yes, change is needed in my opinion and its been way overdue. The fact that many IMPBA members have been requesting this change for the past 15 years and with it being made a trial rule by our IMPBA Exec this year shows that a change is in the wind. We already have a dozen racers in IMPBA District 1 who have rear mounted struts and I can say there is NO DIFFERENCE in performance. If you don't want to have a rear mounted strut then so be it however, why push to not allow what others want? If people want a change it will show after the vote. [/size]

The simple fact is people are looking for AN ADVANTAGE.. even though SOME say there is no advantage to having it on the back, perception says LONGER IS BETTER. [/size]

I like racing within "limits".. others look to take ADVANTAGE of limits. It is just that simple.. no more and no less.[/size]

Lets vote! I accept all outcomes![/size]

Grim[/size]

Sorry Grim your statement is false when it comes to IMPBA District 1 in Eastern Canada. The racers In Quebec build their Sport 40's as exact replicas of the full size Grand Prix hydroplanes. All the full size GP boats run a rear strut. The modelers also run straight turn fins (no hooks) just as the full size boats do. These rc racers are NOT looking for an advantage and the only ''limits'' they are looking to acheive is to produce exact replicas.

Sport 40 is NOT a scale class... so easy to understand...

Grim

Z your are correct, sport 40 is NOT a scale class. However as per our own rulebook-

Boat Specifications

1. Boat must be inboard powered.

2. Hull must be a three (3)-point hydroplane configuration and resemble a limited or

unlimited hydroplane design of past or present, except outrigger, modified outrigger,

tunnel, or canard hulls are NOT permitted.

The vast majority of real limited hydros now run transom mounted struts so why not allow a boater to build a boat the RESEMBLES a limited hydro?? And I'll say it AGAIN - not a one of you not in favor of allowing this rules change has offered a single shred of a legitimate reason as to why we should not allow something that will bring CONSISTENCY across ALL our sport hydro rules AND make it easier on a boater who may want to build one. Sorry fellas the "that's the way it's been" answer don't float..........

 

[Tom Kelly]

Yes, change is needed in my opinion and its been way overdue. The fact that many IMPBA members have been requesting this change for the past 15 years and with it being made a trial rule by our IMPBA Exec this year shows that a change is in the wind. We already have a dozen racers in IMPBA District 1 who have rear mounted struts and I can say there is NO DIFFERENCE in performance. If you don't want to have a rear mounted strut then so be it however, why push to not allow what others want? If people want a change it will show after the vote.

The simple fact is people are looking for AN ADVANTAGE.. even though SOME say there is no advantage to having it on the back, perception says LONGER IS BETTER.

I like racing within "limits".. others look to take ADVANTAGE of limits. It is just that simple.. no more and no less.

Lets vote! I accept all outcomes!

Grim

Sorry Grim your statement is false when it comes to IMPBA District 1 in Eastern Canada. The racers In Quebec build their Sport 40's as exact replicas of the full size Grand Prix hydroplanes. All the full size GP boats run a rear strut. The modelers also run straight turn fins (no hooks) just as the full size boats do. These rc racers are NOT looking for an advantage and the only ''limits'' they are looking to acheive is to produce exact replicas.

Randy

The Sport 40 rules have been around for years. It was the original "Sport Class". The sport classes that came afterwards never followed the precedence in regards to the strut placement. This is where the problems began.

If the racers in District 1 built their boats to the rules at the time, the strut should of been under the boat.

 

[ZZ RACING]

Guys that have tried it both ways say no advantage or disadvantage. We all talk about growing the hobby and for a new guy trying to get into the Sport40 class, putting a hole in the bottom of his new boat is frightening. It doesn't say you HAVE to mount your strut on the transom.

 

[Randy Rapedius]

Yes, change is needed in my opinion and its been way overdue. The fact that many IMPBA members have been requesting this change for the past 15 years and with it being made a trial rule by our IMPBA Exec this year shows that a change is in the wind. We already have a dozen racers in IMPBA District 1 who have rear mounted struts and I can say there is NO DIFFERENCE in performance. If you don't want to have a rear mounted strut then so be it however, why push to not allow what others want? If people want a change it will show after the vote.

The simple fact is people are looking for AN ADVANTAGE.. even though SOME say there is no advantage to having it on the back, perception says LONGER IS BETTER.

I like racing within "limits".. others look to take ADVANTAGE of limits. It is just that simple.. no more and no less.

Lets vote! I accept all outcomes!

Grim

Sorry Grim your statement is false when it comes to IMPBA District 1 in Eastern Canada. The racers In Quebec build their Sport 40's as exact replicas of the full size Grand Prix hydroplanes. All the full size GP boats run a rear strut. The modelers also run straight turn fins (no hooks) just as the full size boats do. These rc racers are NOT looking for an advantage and the only ''limits'' they are looking to acheive is to produce exact replicas.

Randy

The Sport 40 rules have been around for years. It was the original "Sport Class". The sport classes that came afterwards never followed the precedence in regards to the strut placement. This is where the problems began.

If the racers in District 1 built their boats to the rules at the time, the strut should of been under the boat.

So ... because an outdated rule has been around for years means it can't be changed??? If that were the case, we should all be playing with tether boats.

The majority vote will settle this issue and then we can all go back to playing with our toy boats.

If no advantage why change ? Save paper.

Save paper?!?! IMPBA rules are now posted on this new thing called the internet.

 

[Grimracer]

Yes, change is needed in my opinion and its been way overdue. The fact that many IMPBA members have been requesting this change for the past 15 years and with it being made a trial rule by our IMPBA Exec this year shows that a change is in the wind. We already have a dozen racers in IMPBA District 1 who have rear mounted struts and I can say there is NO DIFFERENCE in performance. If you don't want to have a rear mounted strut then so be it however, why push to not allow what others want? If people want a change it will show after the vote.

The simple fact is people are looking for AN ADVANTAGE.. even though SOME say there is no advantage to having it on the back, perception says LONGER IS BETTER.

I like racing within "limits".. others look to take ADVANTAGE of limits. It is just that simple.. no more and no less.

Lets vote! I accept all outcomes!

Grim

Sorry Grim your statement is false when it comes to IMPBA District 1 in Eastern Canada. The racers In Quebec build their Sport 40's as exact replicas of the full size Grand Prix hydroplanes. All the full size GP boats run a rear strut. The modelers also run straight turn fins (no hooks) just as the full size boats do. These rc racers are NOT looking for an advantage and the only ''limits'' they are looking to acheive is to produce exact replicas.

Randy

The Sport 40 rules have been around for years. It was the original "Sport Class". The sport classes that came afterwards never followed the precedence in regards to the strut placement. This is where the problems began.

If the racers in District 1 built their boats to the rules at the time, the strut should of been under the boat.

So ... because an outdated rule has been around for years means it can't be changed??? If that were the case, we should all be playing with tether boats.

The majority vote will settle this issue and then we can all go back to playing with our toy boats.

If no advantage why change ? Save paper.

Save paper?!?! IMPBA rules are now posted on this new thing called the internet.

edit

 

[Tom Kelly]

SHEILDS UP

 

[Randy Rapedius]

SHEILDS UP

LOL .... good one Tom.

I have some Kryptonite in my tool box just in case of an attack.

No more post from me on this issue. The voters will decide.

 

[P THOMAS]

Much fuss about this rule.

Really wont make much difference in the class only gives a choice. Main reason i see is,, to include the more true to scale sport 40 builders in dist 1 to be able to go to national races and be legal.

So everyone vote for it and do as you want with your struts.

 

[Tim Kish]

I've not read a single valid point as to why this rule should not pass.

This argument over where to place the strut on a toy boat has been going on for how long now, ten fifteen maybe twenty years ?

I know why don't we just create another class, we can call it sport40/2.

Hell knows we need more classes in IMPBA.

 

[Blackout]

Guys, they are not toys. Let's be honest about that.

 

[Tim Kish]

Guys, they are not toys. Let's be honest about that.

Tell my wife that .lol

 

[Grimracer]

To me.. it seems like the confusion is from the intent wording of the class. The idea that these were to mimic full scale hydroplanes is true but to mimic to scale is not. Lets face it nobody could see into the future of either RC boating or full scale for that matter.

In saying this.. bottom line.. somebody is looking for a winning edge. I (we all know full well) this has VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH SCALE.. and more do to with winning. How many sport boat racers RIGHT NOW would all dive in if we said.. all sport 40 hydroplanes need to be "SCALE hydroplanes". It would END THE CLASS.

The argument to change them is weak. The racing would be no better, the boat really no easer to build and setup. (its just not leaps and bounds people!)

I would totally back away from this if I had not been racing sport 40 for the last 10 years. I feel its sooooo strong now that one has to ask himself.. what the REAL reason for change.

Somebody got beat.. somebody wants more………

I am not looking for 110%.. Im looking to work with what works, is working, and what we have NOW!

Lets vote..

Grim

 

[Tim Kish]

To me.. it seems like the confusion is from the intent wording of the class. The idea that these were to mimic full scale hydroplanes is true but to mimic to scale is not. Lets face it nobody could see into the future of either RC boating or full scale for that matter.

In saying this.. bottom line.. somebody is looking for a winning edge. I (we all know full well) this has VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH SCALE.. and more do to with winning. How many sport boat racers RIGHT NOW would all dive in if we said.. all sport 40 hydroplanes need to be "SCALE hydroplanes". It would END THE CLASS.

The argument to change them is weak. The racing would be no better, the boat really no easer to build and setup. (its just not leaps and bounds people!)

I would totally back away from this if I had not been racing sport 40 for the last 10 years. I feel its sooooo strong now that one has to ask himself.. what the REAL reason for change.

Somebody got beat.. somebody wants more………

I am not looking for 110%.. Im looking to work with what works, is working, and what we have NOW!

Lets vote..

How is parody with NAMBA a bad thing ?

Are you saying IMPBA sport40's could not compete because of the strut placement ?

I have raced against sport40's with the strut on the transom and held my own just fine.

Has anyone that wants to vote ever raced against a sport40 with a transom mounted strut ?

Grim

 

[Grimracer]

Tim, Good question i just don’t feel parody between orgs IS or should be the driving force behind this, that’s all. Truth is, its not what’s driving it. We know what’s driving it. Somebody got beat..



Having said this is the ONLY one that makes any sense to me at all,, Again just not strong enough to pull be to vote for it.



Grim

 

[Don Ferrette]

"I would totally back away from this if I had not been racing sport 40 for the last 10 years. I feel its sooooo strong now that one has to ask himself.. what the REAL reason for change.

Somebody got beat.. somebody wants more………"

That is so far off base Z, It has NOTHING to do with anyone "getting beat". I tested transom mounted struts on sport 40s before you were even racing them (15 years ago) there was no advantage then just like there is no advantage now. For the life of me I cannot understand how some of you cannot comprehend that all this does is bring consistency to ALL our sport hydro classes, allows modeling a boat after a real limited hydro JUST LIKE THE ORIGINAL SPORT 40 RULE SUGGESTS, and most importantly makes life a little easier for someone who may want to build one. Anyone who says putting a strut through the bottom of a hull is as easy as off the transom is lying their arse off. I'm done with this thread and only hope that enough IMPBA members have common sense to understand what this REALLY is all about and to not listen to the Chicken Littles who think the sky will fall if this passes....................

 

[Grimracer]

Don,

Just looking for a GOOD REASON FOR CHANGE.. no BS... no more no less. I just for the life of me can not see it.. We talk about the pros and cons and maybe I have my head up my *** to far.. but the idea of changing this just does not have allot of meat on the bone.

Sport 40 is SO FAR FROM DEAD as nitro boats go what is Truly the NEED for change.. thats the part i dont get. If we say well.. we really dont "need" it its more of a update then is it worth the change?

Thats if from me.. lets vote!

Grim

 

[P THOMAS]

This was my reason for vote yes,,, Grim

Really wont make much difference in the class only gives a choice.

Main reason i see is,, to include the more true to scale sport 40 builders in dist 1 to be able to go to national races and be legal.