|
Post by miffed on Nov 30, 2011 18:20:42 GMT
Can I propose we don't have any more proposals as I am getting very confused! Anyway, if you can run 15 turn motor in Stock then I assume Pro-Eco (and Eco) will remain the same motor as now (21t Ansmann or 22t Maverick). Sounds OK to me but have no idea of the difference between the 17.5 brushless and the 15 turn Firebolt. Until someone tests this out it does seem difficult to make such a decision. Now a proposal that we should all run PROPER touring car shells is a much more exciting prospect. A grid full of Alfas, Volvos, Hondas etc would excite me much more than squabbling over motors......... anyone seen my ostrich? Ref the 15t/17.5 ...Ian the information I am trying to pass on to the club come from months of testing by VERY experienced drivers with years of "know how" from a well known club,Aldershots members have been testing various motor combinations over the past few months to keep speeds equal and as cheap as poss. Their Sportsmans class initially started with the 15t and open speedo but soon found other experienced racers wanted to join in the fun but didn't have a brushed ESC,most of theses racers had speedo's that could Run Blinky mode so the 17.5 was tested with the 15t and found to be pretty much a match with speeds. Check out their web site,you will see the popularity of this class has taken off big time,with many top names dropping down to "mix it" with the clubies (wonder how many other clubs faster racers would do this to help their club interest ...I DID !!) and importantly have some seriously close racing and fun!!........And yes Ian the current body shells are allowed but are "frowned upon" ...as they like you to run Scale shells or something completely different!....Ive seen Fiat 500's and 90's Group C shells run side by side on all sorts of chassis including FWD minis A clsss such as this could possibly be helpfull to SHMCC and could even persuade a few racers to return outdoors(as long as the heat/time schedule is sensible)....But it seems no one has even given this a thought to a point of ignoring the suggestions.....Or is it because I'm talking "Bollocks" from the side lines again Seen your Ostrich Ian? I think its on the far side of that small herd of Sheep ;D Ps Hi Dave... the norm is a class motor limit works in reverse. ie if the rule/suggested rule is 20t , a motor such as a 15t (faster) is not allowed but anything higher is,21t.27t etc etc.
|
|
|
Post by Reuben on Nov 30, 2011 19:45:39 GMT
Dave, no the intention in my post was to remove the labels from Eco, Pro-Eco and Stock and just have it all in 1 group called Stock.
after racing sunday all the regular sunday racers all stayed and we talked about ideas and classes to boost numbers, we are there pretty much every week outside and we all race OpenTC. Why has OpenTC sustained numbers and not Eco / ProEco and Stock? maybe because we always have someone to race and its the lack of racers in other classes - its no fun when you dont have anyone to race against. How can we suggest to a racer to go buy a Eco Car and then tell them that they will be the only Eco there each week? So the idea behind the proposal was to combine it all, so that people have people to race against - thats where the fun is.
When I first started racing, I had a plastic chassis, RTR type car, but I was in stock still, and I would prefer to be there rather than my own plastic tub chassis class - it encourages progression and that sense of acheivement when you beat better gear - which keeps people coming back. Theres nothing like the sensation of beating a better or more experienced driver and its what all the guys want to do. Then as the drivers stay in the club longer, they can then upgrade to brushless gear.
So the proposal was to have just 2 classes at the outside track.
OpenTC and Stock.
Stock would include Eco, Pro-Eco and current Stock - but NO boost or on-the-fly timing advance.
as to the motor limit for Stock 20t, 15t sealed cans - makes no odds to me..... just needs to be fairly matched
baaaaaaaaaaaaaa
|
|
|
Post by miffed on Nov 30, 2011 20:36:18 GMT
Quote: as for motor limit for stock 20t,15t sealed can-makes no odds to me....just need to be fairly matched. Unquote. Proposal time: Stock: 17.5 Blinky/no-timing, 27t Brushed and up to a 20t Sealed Can motor (any motor). So why propose this then? The Wolf
|
|
|
Post by Reuben on Nov 30, 2011 20:49:44 GMT
Because 20t limit seems to be around the current usage? A proposal is a suggestion, not a final end of fact, its a start to an idea / a plan for a future outcome? The 3 little pig in the brick house
|
|
|
Post by miffed on Nov 30, 2011 21:13:11 GMT
Because 20t limit seems to be around the current usage? A proposal is a suggestion, not a final end of fact, its a start to an idea / a plan for a future outcome? The 3 little pig in the brick house 17.5/20t for stock?....An ill thought out dangerous and poor suggestion/proposal.A class idea that could lead to "bad feelings" over speed issues if taken up by a "newby" committee or seconded by those with little or no motor testing/comparison experience. Wolf with C4 .....Its not 1843
|
|
|
Post by Reuben on Nov 30, 2011 22:05:34 GMT
C4?: I prefered the bulldozer . Ok, so in all seriousness for our club and drivers I think we need to combine our stock classes - some testing at our track is needed over the winter for the new year, but I would still like to propose a Single STOCK class that uses either Brushed, Brushless or Sealed can - all no timing and regardless of chassis.
|
|
|
Post by darrenoakley on Nov 30, 2011 22:33:32 GMT
This coming summer I am happy to run pro eco or blinky 17.5 and honestly dont give a s**t if they are together in the same class or not. I also dont care if someone beats me with a faster motor in the same class. What I am more bothered about is having a few racers on the track to make up a full heat. Why has every proposal on this thread becomes a childish argument ?This is going to damage numbers at our club more than petty arguments over motor turn limits. Until recently the forum was a useful place to visit but has now lost that benefit.
|
|
|
Post by darrenoakley on Nov 30, 2011 22:38:13 GMT
Oh also are we going to run a short meeting after the AGM
|
|
ianlloyd
Lapping the Back Markers
Posts: 932
|
Post by ianlloyd on Dec 1, 2011 8:35:55 GMT
Sorry Darren but I do not agree with your comments on this forum and this thread as being a bunch of childish arguments. I see this as a discussion forum and to me this is exactly what we have here. At the AGM we will no doubt have only a few minutes to discuss and decide these issues so this forum is exactly the place to prepare for it. The fact that everyone here has a right to their own opinion and added to that a certain amount of tongue in cheek humour should show to all that we are an open and up front club that is worth being a part of.
The discussion on motors and classes is an important one if we are going to keep and grow the numbers of people racing. We need to get it right. I am easy and will go with whatever everyone else feels is correct and best although on a personal note I would like to see the Eco/Pro Eco type starter classes in some way kept going as I do feel that they encourage new drivers to start racing. However I also see Reubens point that we all had to start in the stock class many years ago regardless of ability. Is there a point for stock and Eco/Pro Eco (combined class) to be run as one but seperated on the scoring/points system so new drivers or those who do not want to go very fast can have there own race series?
As for me, I am off to buy a Mk1 Lotus Cortina shell for next years challenge....
The only problem with sticking your head in the sand is that it gets everywhere....
|
|
|
Post by darrenoakley on Dec 1, 2011 9:33:55 GMT
Don't worry Ian that is my one and only post on the matter. Oh apart from this one.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Chamberlain on Dec 1, 2011 20:48:36 GMT
Ah! OK Reuben, all understood now and it was me who misread the proposal Obviously we all enjoy racing against other drivers, and when you think about it we always combine classes in a heat where possible to ensure we.. A. Can run a meeting B. Race against someone So I'm not convinced grouping it all together and calling it stock is all that different. Personally I'm happy to mix it with blinkys / 15T sealed 20T sealed, rebuild 27T whatever.. But we should always offer a basic Eco class, even if we have to combine the heats for them to race most of the time.. We should always be able to tell a parent of a prospective new young member that there is a RTR class for there child to run in.. As with all seconded proposals on this thread it will be voted on at the AGM and the member present will decide..
|
|
|
Post by Dave Chamberlain on Dec 1, 2011 20:49:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wessex88 on Dec 1, 2011 22:10:15 GMT
I think eco and pro-eco should be left alone.Do we really want to tell to tell a prospective new member that a rtr car can be purchased for around about £150 but if they want to race and be competative around the £1000 mark is what will be needed.As for numbers if You look at the club championship more pro-eco drivers have completed 3 or more rounds than open tc drivers.I think the fall off in numbers is due to the time of year.If stock class needs a revamp all well and good but leave the classes that work and are enjoyed alone.
How about a control tyre in open tc.I was thinking tamiya kit tyres.
|
|
|
Post by Reuben on Dec 2, 2011 15:24:42 GMT
I think eco and pro-eco should be left alone.Do we really want to tell to tell a prospective new member that a rtr car can be purchased for around about £150 but if they want to race and be competative around the £1000 mark is what will be needed.As for numbers if You look at the club championship more pro-eco drivers have completed 3 or more rounds than open tc drivers.I think the fall off in numbers is due to the time of year.If stock class needs a revamp all well and good but leave the classes that work and are enjoyed alone. How about a control tyre in open tc.I was thinking tamiya kit tyres. those numbers are a little extreme for anyone looking at OpenTC....Brushless isnt the same scary prices it use to be, and it all lasts an amazingly long time
|
|
|
Post by martinchallis on Dec 2, 2011 17:04:56 GMT
I think i could get a competitive car without spending £1000... any pro chassis from the last 3 years, I could pick up a cyclone for less than £100 Hobbywing extreme stock £63 Any brushless motor from £30 - £90
all this said for a beginner this would be the worst way to go... all you would get is an unreliable missile - and end up having a very tedious time.
just trying to highlight reubens point - being on the pace in tc dosent cost as much as it did at the start of speedo wars.
|
|
|
Post by wessex88 on Dec 2, 2011 20:54:03 GMT
Ok £1000 might be to high.But buying new with decent equipment it`s at least £700. Why not leave eco and pro-eco alone and run stock as blinky 17.5 and 15 turn sealed can. I believe there are people running pro eco as the speeds with the 17.5 are to high for them.
|
|
|
Post by yellowshark on Dec 5, 2011 1:18:08 GMT
C4?: I prefered the bulldozer . Ok, so in all seriousness for our club and drivers I think we need to combine our stock classes - some testing at our track is needed over the winter for the new year, but I would still like to propose a Single STOCK class that uses either Brushed, Brushless or Sealed can - all no timing and regardless of chassis. May I just point out that that is not C4. A C4 is made by Chevrolet, has a V8 and the ZR1 model did hold the Nurburgring production model record for a while. The C5, like wot I have is no faster but is more reliable and of course has won Le Mans GT more often than not during the Noughties The C3 like wot I also have is not fast, is a challenge around corners, with current fuel costs probably costs about £100 per mile but importanly looks like sex on wheels
|
|
|
Post by martinchallis on Dec 5, 2011 10:46:34 GMT
lol, i wasnt sure u were talking about corvettes untill you said the c3 looked like sex on wheels... the french "c" series looks like a group of washing machines. the american "c" cars look a little more likely to kill
|
|
|
Post by Dave Chamberlain on Dec 5, 2011 21:15:20 GMT
ALL,
Please note the AGM proposal thread will be locked this Friday 9th Dec to allow time to prepare the list of seconded proposals for publishing on Monday 12th before the AGM..
|
|