|
Post by Dave Chamberlain on Oct 10, 2011 6:35:51 GMT
Hi folks,
with just under two months to go before the 2011 AGM we thought it was about time to refresh the AGM proposal thread..
So if anyone has a proposal please post it here (one thread per proposal) and if it gets seconded we will put it up for vote at the AGM on the 14th..
|
|
|
Post by Reuben on Oct 10, 2011 15:21:52 GMT
I propose for Outdoor classes:
Open TC - stays the same 17.5 - stays the same Pro-Eco - stays the same Eco - stays the same (assuming the price on RTR kits has not increased).
Are there any representatives for Pro-Eco about motors for next year? Is is still the Ansmann / Maverick that are easy to get hold of / last? maybe a list of Pro-Eco/Eco sealed can motors needed? or just a race directors discretion?
|
|
|
Post by darrenoakley on Oct 10, 2011 18:17:41 GMT
I propose we drop the race fee price for non member to only a £1.00 more than members.
|
|
|
Post by jamietraylor on Oct 10, 2011 20:53:34 GMT
I'll 2nd Darren on the race fee cost for non member's.
|
|
ianlloyd
Lapping the Back Markers
Posts: 932
|
Post by ianlloyd on Oct 11, 2011 8:44:22 GMT
I agree that Pro Eco should stay the same. I guess the rest of the classes appear to work as well so if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Chamberlain on Oct 11, 2011 11:40:20 GMT
All really good stuff guys, keep them coming!!
|
|
|
Post by yellowshark on Oct 11, 2011 17:17:14 GMT
I propose that Sunday and Wednesday prices go up £1 and member discounts go up £1. Additionally that an individual's 1st race at the track should be at members' price.
Objective is to encourage people to become members.
An alternative would be that the person's 1st 3 runs are at members' price to tie in with another rule we have/had about the 1st 3 races - was it BRCA membership?
|
|
|
Post by yellowshark on Oct 11, 2011 18:12:29 GMT
I suspect this one may engender some debate so I have added a few comments to explain my thinking. I propose that the Stock class (17.5) is changed to non-timing speedos.
The primary reason is the BRCA Clubmans series which for 2012 is being rebranded and made more accessible (Southern and Northern championships). The proposal is that the 17.5 class is non timing speedos. With the demise of the SLCC this is the only 17.5 class championship and bringing our stock class into line seems sensible as it would provide an easier route for our less experienced drivers who want to make the move into a "bigger" series.
The proposal has been put forwarded by Bob Burr and John Robson, both known "faces" within the sport and as I understand it, it was requested by the BRCA following the faltering start of the current Clubmans championship. I say that as personally with this sponsorship I think it will get the nod at the BRCA AGM.
At our club it makes the transition from the Eco classes easier in driver terms. I accept though that it then makes the jump to Open class bigger!
|
|
|
Post by yellowshark on Oct 11, 2011 18:15:58 GMT
I propose that monitoring of non timing speedos in the Stock class is done on trust. The Race Director of course has the option to investigate any scenario which seems unfair/against the spirit of competition and the BRCA have now published a list of non timing and blinky speedos with the necssary settings. www.brca.org/sites/default/files/library_files/markstiles/BRCA%20Blinky%20ESC's%202011.pdf
|
|
|
Post by darrenoakley on Oct 11, 2011 19:02:19 GMT
I agree with you on the 17.5 non timing speedos Pete. I have run admittedly in 12th scale, blinky/ so far this winter and I like it. It has a great feel to it and also without the option of timing changes between racers the whole pack will be a lot closer. I imagine it will be like Pro eco racing but with the reliability of brushless. With pro eco being as popular as it is I dont think many will take it up though sadly.
Have to say though the flashing red LED is really annoying,Constantlly makes you think there is a problem with it. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Dave Chamberlain on Oct 12, 2011 6:29:31 GMT
Again guy this is fab stuff, good to see some debate and ideas comming out of the woodwork!!
Interestingly (not wanting to Hijack the thread!) We were discussing the current 21T motor availability issue in Eco / Pro Eco.. One idea was to run 17.5 sensorless..
|
|
ianlloyd
Lapping the Back Markers
Posts: 932
|
Post by ianlloyd on Oct 12, 2011 9:11:56 GMT
Ok my thoughts on this for what it's worth.
17.5 Class.
Running this class with a non timing speedo is a good idea (my opinion) this will be good class I suspect and will make it much more competitive and would maybe encourage more people into it. I think this could be like Pro Eco but a bit quicker so would appeal to lots of people and if approved by the BRCA then even better. It will also lower the running costs I suspect as the power of a non timing speedo will not take so much out of the drive train or tyres.
Eco/Pro Eco.
The object of these classes from what I remember was to have a starter class (Eco) that would encourage people to come racing for a minimum cost. To do this they had to purchase (mostly) a Ready To Run car, the Ansmann or the Maverick which all come with certain motors fitted. I hope that this will remain as it is the best way to get people to start racing in a competitive way without them having to spend loads of cash initially or having to start changing motors etc. Ready to Run means Ready to Race.
Pro Eco in my view has been a huge success and this is also based on a fair and cost effective formula by limiting the choice of motor to a "cheap" option that you can do nothing with. OIt also allows the ECO racer to "upgrade" if he wants by getting a better race chassis, in the main people are using something like the Schumacher MI one as it is a good chassis at a decent price but there are others who are using full on spec race chassis mainly (like me) as they want to use what they already have.
I am most certainly AGAINST any changes to this, the introduction of brushless motors in this class would be a mistake as far as I can see. There is a choice of motors and that should stay and be set in the rules clearly. The Ansmann 21t, the Maverick 22t or if you want the Saturn 20t or even the 27t. They all have very similar performace and are all a similar price. You then have a choice of 3 or 4 motors to choose from to suit yourself without compromising what the class is all about and to my mind that is about driving skill, set up skill and most imprtantly close, FUN racing!
Ok so you know what I think, apologies if this does not suit everyone but it is my opinion.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by Reuben on Oct 12, 2011 9:49:26 GMT
If we do have a proposal for Blinky 17.5 class (ohhh this brings back haunting memories), then I think a fixed FDR is needed also (or a max FDR of say 3.6 outdoors and whatever the equivalent is indoors 4.8 maybe?). The reason for this would be, No timing = pushing the motor and HEAT. without a max FDR I would just gear it at 3.2 and get away with it by smoothing out the throttle... some newby might then try to copy this FDR and blow a £60 motor - thats 8 or so Pro-eco motors? so a SAFE fdr would need to be followed. and as much as I would like to see blinky 17.5, maybe its just another class we do not need? The only reason I say this, is that Sundays it appears that all the regular core brushless runners are happy to run either 13.5 or 17.5 with timing and Pro-eco/eco guys are happy with what they have. There is a void between the two classes... but who will race it? But as a initial Non-Believer in the Pro-Eco class - I and pleasently surprised how well attended this year and think it should not be changed / expanded at all .
|
|
ianlloyd
Lapping the Back Markers
Posts: 932
|
Post by ianlloyd on Oct 12, 2011 10:24:59 GMT
You could well be right there Reuben and a fixed FDR is something else to worry about with scrutineering etc. I do also agree to the question of who exactly is going to race the class at club level. Forget National racing, all we need to concern ourselves about is what is run at SHMCC. People will have to either come down from a higher class or go up from Pro Eco. We do not need to dilute the classes we have anymore than necessary.
I still think the class is a good one (17.5) but may not be suitable for the club with the amount of members we have at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Reality Racer on Oct 12, 2011 11:18:58 GMT
I am most certainly AGAINST any changes to this, the introduction of brushless motors in this class would be a mistake as far as I can see. There is a choice of motors and that should stay and be set in the rules clearly. The Ansmann 21t, the Maverick 22t or if you want the Saturn 20t or even the 27t. They all have very similar performace and are all a similar price. You then have a choice of 3 or 4 motors to choose from to suit yourself without compromising what the class is all about and to my mind that is about driving skill, set up skill and most imprtantly close, FUN racing! Ian I agree totally with you for Eco & Pro Eco Ian.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Chamberlain on Oct 12, 2011 11:41:35 GMT
One idea was to run 17.5 sensorless.. Wow the forum is ALIVE!! of course I did just make the last bit up
|
|
|
Post by darrenoakley on Oct 12, 2011 13:08:33 GMT
I also agree that we have enough classes all ready so probably wouldn't take off as an official class. I may still try it sometime for a change.
|
|
|
Post by darrenoakley on Oct 12, 2011 13:11:00 GMT
I propose that Sunday and Wednesday prices go up £1 and member discounts go up £1. Additionally that an individual's 1st race at the track should be at members' price. Objective is to encourage people to become members. An alternative would be that the person's 1st 3 runs are at members' price to tie in with another rule we have/had about the 1st 3 races - was it BRCA membership? Don't fully understand this one Pete. A pound more to pay and a pound more discount must surly cancel themselves out ? Or am I missing something
|
|
ianlloyd
Lapping the Back Markers
Posts: 932
|
Post by ianlloyd on Oct 12, 2011 14:23:59 GMT
I think what Pete means is that we should put members race fees up by £1 and then for those of us that are members we will get an extra discount of £1 against non members fees which were always higher but Pete is suggesting they should be the same as the before discounted members fees so making them cheaper than they are now but more expensive than actual members otherwise there is no point in being a member. Except of course when a non member wants to race for the first time in which case the proposal is that they pay the discounted members price before the increase of £1. I assume this is to encourage new members or should I say non-members to come and race with us. Sounds simple to me……
??
|
|
|
Post by Reality Racer on Oct 12, 2011 15:55:16 GMT
Oh now I understand.
Thanks Ian.
|
|
|
Post by yellowshark on Oct 13, 2011 19:39:24 GMT
I think what Pete means is that we should put members race fees up by £1 and then for those of us that are members we will get an extra discount of £1 against non members fees which were always higher but Pete is suggesting they should be the same as the before discounted members fees so making them cheaper than they are now but more expensive than actual members otherwise there is no point in being a member. Except of course when a non member wants to race for the first time in which case the proposal is that they pay the discounted members price before the increase of £1. I assume this is to encourage new members or should I say non-members to come and race with us. Sounds simple to me…… ?? Sorry guys, I have spent the last 36 hours figuring out how to stream Itunes to my new DLNA Sony blue ray player without a bit of Apple kit in sight, almost there but I thought I had better check the forums before trashing my PC ;D The objective was simply to make non membership less attractive and as a result hopefully get some more members - on the basis that if you pay for membership you will probably attend more races than just a couple of visits as a non member. So the proposal does not change the current pricing for members but puts the pricing for non members up £1. I have not done a intensive study but I do believe our differentiation between member and non memer prices is at the lower end.
|
|
|
Post by yellowshark on Oct 13, 2011 19:51:55 GMT
Re my proposal on the 17.5 class
To be clear I was not proposing another class but a change to the 17.5 class.
I don't really have an agenda on this one apart from I have always been on the side of the club aligning with the BRCA rules and direction; which admittedly has been a bit lacking at club level in recent years with them ditching Stock from the Nats.
But with their proposal which in essence is rebranding the Clubman's series as a National level series one might hope it is changing.
|
|
|
Post by yellowshark on Oct 13, 2011 19:58:36 GMT
... re 17.5 proposal and FDRs. I can see where you are coming from Reuben but i am not sure if it is workable. There is an argument that you should set the limit at a level which will not penalise motors that can take a high gearing. Taking your beginners logic then, you could say that others will then think 3.2 is OK and blow their motors up.
And the subject of heat is further complicated by the motor timing set and the program selected on the non timing ESC
|
|
|
Post by yellowshark on Oct 13, 2011 20:12:35 GMT
I have thought long and hard about this one, I am concerned about opening up a can of worms, and I do not want to be devisive, but...
I propose that Sunday races, including the Reality Racing Cup, have an hour between heats, with no additional allowance for lunch.
Reasoning: In recent years the Club has done well in making the sport accessible to beginners – 17.5 before timing speedos and then Eco classes. However, I believe that senior drivers, ie experienced drivers who have moved up the ladder, are being forgotten.
TC driving is not just about putting an RTR on the grid and off you go.
It is as much about car setup. My view, and I know of some others, is that there is now just not enough time to consider and make setup changes without being under intense pressure. Add to that a significant crash which may have tweaked the car as well as breaking something then there is no way to get onto the grid in time for the next race with a sorted car, let alone tyres prepped properly.
I remember when we all breathed a sigh of relief that the coming of Lipos and brushless would give us more time to to check the cars, get the setup right and be in good shape for the next race without the risk of a heart attack
Part of the fun of TC racing is getting your car setup optimally for the race and as required try something that might improve things.
There seems to be a desire now to get Sunday’s over and done with as quickly as possible (which I could understand if there was something decent to watch on the TV) ;D.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Chamberlain on Oct 15, 2011 10:29:30 GMT
All good debate gents, but can I please ask that we keep this thread for AGM proposals and seconded posts only.. Thanks Les / Pete I've moved the last post to a new thread for the debate to continue. bashley.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2726Les if you want to post a "seconded" motion for Pete's 1 hour gap, please feel free to do so.
|
|
|
Post by justchris on Oct 15, 2011 11:45:33 GMT
Hi all i would like to second Pete's proposal for a 1hr gap. My proposal using above times i propose to add 1 more qual or final ,(should be done by 4 if we start sharp)
|
|
|
Post by yellowshark on Oct 15, 2011 18:56:07 GMT
I propose that Sunday Club Championship and Reality Racing Cup championship meetings have an hour between races with no additonal time for lunch and that Sunday non-championship meetings have a minimumof 50 mins between races with no additonal time for lunch.
(NB this is a second proposal to my original, not a replacement, taking into account some of the comments. As I read it if both get voted "in" then my original proposal would take precedence as I have deliberately said a minimum of 50 mins in this one and therefore they are not contradictory. Happy to take an amendment to 48 mins Reuben )
|
|
|
Post by jamietraylor on Oct 18, 2011 20:39:41 GMT
I propose control tyres for pro eco.
|
|
ianlloyd
Lapping the Back Markers
Posts: 932
|
Post by ianlloyd on Oct 19, 2011 7:23:17 GMT
I propose control tyres for pro eco. OK I will second that Jamie. However from what I have seen and raced this last year it is pretty much a done deal anyway. Sorex 28's I reckon.
|
|
|
Post by Reuben on Oct 22, 2011 12:23:10 GMT
Proposal: Membership for 2012 - prices to stay the same however there is a sliding scale towards the end of the year.
So Adult Membership purchased in Jan = £20, Purchased in July= £10, Purchased in October = £5 Child in Jan = £10, Purchased in July = £6, October = £4 Family, January = £25, July = £15, October = £8
Race Day fees to stay as they are
|
|