PDA

View Full Version : HFAY Discussion about new Chassis Available


briankstan
2017.01.03, 05:02 PM
I'd like to open up discussion for allowing the use of some of the new chassis that are available for use in HFAY. Along with this discussion I would like your opinions on what you thing should and shouldn't be allowed with respect to some of the chassis that are powered by different types of ESC's and Servos along with being mostly brushless and lipo powered. What's fair or reasonably equal in terms of speed with our current requirements?

These are being considered not for season 23 that is starting now, but we will be considering making legal for Season 24 starting in July 2017.

some of the options of these newer chassis that need to be considered:

Belt AWD
Shaft AWD
Full carbon platform chassis that is similar to 1/10th scale Touring Cars
Lipo Batteries
Brushless (sensored and sensorless)
Separate Receivers and Speed controllers (limits on Amps etc.)

any other items pertaining to theses chassis' AMZ, BZ, GLA, and others of similar type.

Also the issues of the currently allowed HFAY brusless motor. do we need to look at and revise what's legal for use?

Let me know what you think on this issue. Thanks.

byebye
2017.01.03, 05:57 PM
I'd like to see the aftermarket chassis allowed without restriction other than motor. All of the current chassis available are brushless(AMZ/AMR@5000kv) but run on 7.4volts. The aftermarket chassis' are not designed to take a AAA pack. While I do think they are fast I don't think they offer any advantages over a top racers chassis.

I think the current motors for HFAY are fine. There are many options up to 5500kv. Some people don't need more than a stock motor as they are hazards on the track...

The question then arises as to if an aftermarket chassis can run 7.4v lipo can I design and 3d print a chassis that uses all mini-z parts but uses a 7.4v battery? Or could I just find the right sized 7.4v lipo and use that or maybe the LiFe?

Kris

DMALMAD
2017.01.03, 06:38 PM
You should really keep awd and 2wd separate. In a competitive environment the 4wd beats out the 2wd almost every time. It isn't always faster hot lap wise but the consistency is waaaay better. When I was running with the awd vs 2wd chassis (BZ v.s. MRX w/ A-arm) I knew it was an advantage and it was not even close how much easier to drive the 4wd was.

That said, not all chasiss are equal. X-power 4wd (either version) is just plain garbage. I haven't tried the GLA but it certainly seems fast and consistent to me from the little I have seen of it being run.

I also think that in a 4wd class there doesn't need to be a motor limit. Unlike 2wd, you can get away with running a hotter motor even if you don't have the skills since the car is just naturally easier to drive. So just let what everyone can handle run and the best driver will win. It is pretty simple.

Lastly there is the issue of tires. On 4wd you can get away with some creative tire setups to find more speed because the chassis is more forgiving and you have toe and camber to play with on the rear along with a lot less weight. So I would never recommend spec tire... Buuuuut I would say try and keep the tires to like one manufacture or one specific version (ie PN KS only or Marka V1 or V5 or V6 or whatever only). I think trying to run 4wd on only kyosho tires would be really interesting. Not the fastest combo but certainly the easiest to get going without worrying about glue and flipping.

DMALMAD
2017.01.03, 06:45 PM
Another thing that would be interesting is having like a kysoho stock class for 4wd. Basically, you can buy any 4wd rtr or bnd chassis and only thing you can change is the camber, springs, and tires. Speaking from experience, the 4wd (like any rc chassis) requires a lot of support tools, upgrades, and adjustment parts. Asking someone new to jump into that while also having to pay for that is a lot, more so than trying to get them into 2wd since the car is a lot easier to just get driving. So maybe have one class where it is only kyosho shaft 4wd and amz bnd chassis and one class where it is anything goes 4wd since the GLA and BZ really should be run together.

arch2b
2017.01.03, 08:06 PM
would the new AWD chassis's make a significant improvement over the kyosho models? if you look through HFAY's years of rankings, there are very few AWD in the ranking which is telling.

just checked this past season, only two out of 28 drivers ran AWD. thats not a ringing endorsement for AWD superiority. going back at least a year, the best was 6 of 30.

byebye
2017.01.03, 09:30 PM
Another thing that would be interesting is having like a kysoho stock class for 4wd. Basically, you can buy any 4wd rtr or bnd chassis and only thing you can change is the camber, springs, and tires. Speaking from experience, the 4wd (like any rc chassis) requires a lot of support tools, upgrades, and adjustment parts. Asking someone new to jump into that while also having to pay for that is a lot, more so than trying to get them into 2wd since the car is a lot easier to just get driving. So maybe have one class where it is only kyosho shaft 4wd and amz bnd chassis and one class where it is anything goes 4wd since the GLA and BZ really should be run together.

You won't find anyone running any awd in our group let alone competitively. 2wd grip and acceleration is superior to awd on hfay tracks. The awd has it's advantages but they are a bit more work and the 2wd upgrades found today are worthy upgrades and not just bling.

I don't believe any awd aftermarket chassis will be consistent enough to be competitive in hfay. That's why I say just allow any chassis with the single rule of the 70t or 5500kv motor. Just do it and see what happens. I'm willing to bet it will be years before anyone can even come close to finishing top 3 with one.

Mike Keely
2017.01.03, 10:52 PM
Out of everything talked about here I think my only concern is the 7.4 battery. I think that they make enough advantage that it may end up making a lot of people need to change cars after a short learning curve.

ukyo
2017.01.04, 12:19 AM
our two fastest guys run AWD as that is their preference so our club mostly runs AWD... my skill level is just not there to go any faster with a 2WD

betty.k
2017.01.04, 01:46 AM
I'd say limit brushed to stock motor and nimh only, separate motor limit for nimh brushless and lipo brushless.

Otherwise anything else goes, if people wanna get serious about winning then a clear superior chassis will emerge and they can all buy one of them.

briankstan
2017.01.04, 04:51 PM
Thanks for the great info everyone, keep it coming.

I'm not at all trying to limit development of the scale but without making it a necessity to upgrade to be competitive I wouldn't mind including but we want to do it in a fair way.

I've run by my brushed and brushless car in the same season (20) and finished 1st (brushed) and 4th (brushless) and that was just throwing in a brushless esc and motor with my standard setup and no really development on my VE car. I just drove it.

the brushless car was far more consistent on the smaller HFAY tracks and the 5500kv cars was good but a little overpowered for the small track.

this is where the 4wd cars would I believe handle the track size better and if they are run with both higher voltage and a faster motor that may just swing it to an unfair advantage? thought?

EMU
2017.01.04, 05:11 PM
My opinion is to have a restricted 4.8v nimh class, and an open class with 7.4v. Include 4.8v results in the open class, but not the other around.

Those that wish to keep it simple, can still race against one another, and see where they stand against the open boys.

Lipo has a clear advantage, especially with the same motors available. A 70t Lipo car will be as quick as a 39t AAA without the drop off that is associated with AAA. There is also an additional weight penalty to AAA.

With racing, you can never have too much power... Only too little. Even on a small track, if you can hook it up and keep it off the walls... You will be faster. You can always dial back the power, but if you don't have enough, you cannot add any.

I suggest open chassis regulations, since the majority of aftermarket chassis are going Lipo already. This puts the inexpensive pn chassis on the same playing field as the mr03, and permits any AAA 1/28 aftermarket chassis on the same category. None have really showed that they are better in the long run over the tried and true Kyosho base. I do feel that the mini touring car awd brushless/Lipo cars do have the potential to outpace any AAA cars, but won't do so out of the box.

byebye
2017.01.04, 06:00 PM
This is why I recommend just allowing them in the season now. You don't have any real data to say otherwise and I can tell you that the days I did run my AMR(lap counted but as a filler in D-Main) I ran a few laps and gave up. It was just too inconsistent. I've seen a lot of fast aftermarket chassis on carpet and RCP and really big tracks. HFAY caters to those that don't have the space so the tracks are small and handling is way more important to focus on than speed.

One thing that has made this race series easy for all of us to enter is there is only one class and that class is set by motor and by AAA. This also makes it very very easy to manage since there is very little to tech inspect and only one class for you to manage Brian. I vote NOT/NOT to create different classes and to allow all other chassis and voltages with only one restriction, the motor be 70t or ≤5500kv. Let the numbers speak for themselves. Let those who cannot easily purchase or afford the Mini-z finally be allowed to enter and compete(speaking about those overseas).

On the days that we run our local series we run a 3WL layout and we have three classes, stock, mod, 90mm. I would guess almost half the time we run more laps in stock class than we do mod. For mod I run my HFAY 5000kv turned up a bit so it's "faster" but I end up running 5-10 less laps than my stock car so all that power, even on a larger track, doesn't equate to more laps.

Last point that's a bit off topic- I wasn't aware I could enter more than once...I don't think this is really fair since you've essentially given yourself two chances to win when the rules state you only get one opportunity to submit times...this bumps a lot of people down the list that would have otherwise finished better...I know it's your race series and you'll do what you want but I know I'm not the only that has brought this up.

Thanks for the great info everyone, keep it coming.

I'm not at all trying to limit development of the scale but without making it a necessity to upgrade to be competitive I wouldn't mind including but we want to do it in a fair way.

I've run by my brushed and brushless car in the same season (20) and finished 1st (brushed) and 4th (brushless) and that was just throwing in a brushless esc and motor with my standard setup and no really development on my VE car. I just drove it.

the brushless car was far more consistent on the smaller HFAY tracks and the 5500kv cars was good but a little overpowered for the small track.

this is where the 4wd cars would I believe handle the track size better and if they are run with both higher voltage and a faster motor that may just swing it to an unfair advantage? thought?

mleemor60
2017.01.04, 06:21 PM
We hosted an event some time back, when the MRX was still the new flavor of the month. In an attempt to find a suitable motor we did some testing with a motor master for RPM comparisons at different voltages. We found that the lowly 80T motor from PN would crank out a healthy 18,954 RPM's at 4.8V. When we cranked it up to 7.4V the peak RPM jumped up to almost 42,000RPM with no other changes. Needless to say we ran the 80T instead of the Brushless with a smaller pinion than you might have thought necessary and very nearly won the event except for the interference from a back marker. it still finished a very close second.

Personally I don't feel that the PN chassis should be allowed in anything but Modified competition either. After all, it isn't a Mini-Z. All of these aftermarket creations should be welcomed with open arms BUT with a modified classification. Though some like to lump them in with and as Mini-Z's, they in fact are not and serve only to ramp up the already steep learning curve as well as create confusion for the less capable competitors that are being told "you have to have" in order to win when the first thing on their minds should be learning to complete a single lap without hitting anything or anybody.

EMU
2017.01.04, 06:25 PM
This is why I recommend just allowing them in the season now. You don't have any real data to say otherwise and I can tell you that the days I did run my AMR(lap counted but as a filler in D-Main) I ran a few laps and gave up. It was just too inconsistent. I've seen a lot of fast aftermarket chassis on carpet and RCP and really big tracks. HFAY caters to those that don't have the space so the tracks are small and handling is way more important

The issue with most aftermarket chassis, is steering response. On large layouts, it isn't a concern... But on small layouts, it really is. When developing the GSR chassis, that was the biggest issue that I faced. I went through 4 servos, and still didn't have the response that I was looking for. This is where Kyosho hit the nail on the head with the mini-z.

My experience with the AMZ was very similar to yours. The steering was slow and inaccurate. Also had issues centering. On a large track it was fine until i got to the tight sections, then I was hindered. This is what I assume was the issue with your AMR.

If you find a good steering setup, you could match the Kyosho chassis... Then the additional grip, lower weight, and increase of power would give an edge. This was why I stated that out of the box, it wouldn't be as competitive. But with good development, it could be and then some.

Mike, I completely understand your view. And I feel that the pn chassis so close to the Kyosho chassis in price and design (relative to the carbon aftermarket chassis), that it really reflects the stock scale of the class. Much like the mr02 vs the mr03... We already change 90% of the car, that all that is left to call it mini-z is the electronics, servo and the main chassis.

ideally, I believe that it should be scale based, with open regulations on chassis design with a given power source and motor.

Really, what has to be decided is If this is mini-z, or 1/28 scale

byebye
2017.01.04, 06:41 PM
Same issues. I agree with all your points. I was willing to invest the time but in order for me to be competitive I had to do what the fast guys are doing. I still think there is hope for it.

The issue with most aftermarket chassis, is steering response. On large layouts, it isn't a concern... But on small layouts, it really is. When developing the GSR chassis, that was the biggest issue that I faced. I went through 4 servos, and still didn't have the response that I was looking for. This is where Kyosho hit the nail on the head with the mini-z.

My experience with the AMZ was very similar to yours. The steering was slow and inaccurate. Also had issues centering. On a large track it was fine until i got to the tight sections, then I was hindered. This is what I assume was the issue with your AMR.

If you find a good steering setup, you could match the Kyosho chassis... Then the additional grip, lower weight, and increase of power would give an edge. This was why I stated that out of the box, it wouldn't be as competitive. But with good development, it could be and then some.

briankstan
2017.01.04, 09:50 PM
Chris, in regard to running the two cars. That was to test where the brushless compared with the 70t and In essence is what lead to the brushless being included in HFAY and what motors were legal. if you would like we could use you as a comparison running your other car. To keep it consistent I would prefer you run both cars in the series in spereate heats as long as you club is ok with you doing so.

My Brushless was faster but the speed does change the handling especially on the smaller track. On the HFAY sized tracks I can run a faster lap bit it's less consist and in turn I don't remember ever surpassing my brushed car with the brushless in overall lap count.

byebye
2017.01.04, 10:38 PM
Brian you're a stand up guy :) I was really expecting a bit of backlash...back to the topic...

I'm 100% sure arch2b and a few others will let me run an aftermarket chassis. In fact I should be receiving my BZ I won in a contest next week. I'll use that and my AMZ. We can capture and share the data and setups so we can establish a baseline.

Kris

Chris, in regard to running the two cars. That was to test where the brushless compared with the 70t and In essence is what lead to the brushless being included in HFAY and what motors were legal. if you would like we could use you as a comparison running your other car. To keep it consistent I would prefer you run both cars in the series in spereate heats as long as you club is ok with you doing so.

My Brushless was faster but the speed does change the handling especially on the smaller track. On the HFAY sized tracks I can run a faster lap bit it's less consist and in turn I don't remember ever surpassing my brushed car with the brushless in overall lap count.

DMALMAD
2017.01.05, 12:24 AM
You should really keep awd and 2wd separate. In a competitive environment the 4wd beats out the 2wd almost every time. It isn't always faster hot lap wise but the consistency is waaaay better. When I was running with the awd vs 2wd chassis (BZ v.s. MRX w/ A-arm) I knew it was an advantage and it was not even close how much easier to drive the 4wd was.

That said, not all chasiss are equal. X-power 4wd (either version) is just plain garbage. I haven't tried the GLA but it certainly seems fast and consistent to me from the little I have seen of it being run.

I also think that in a 4wd class there doesn't need to be a motor limit. Unlike 2wd, you can get away with running a hotter motor even if you don't have the skills since the car is just naturally easier to drive. So just let what everyone can handle run and the best driver will win. It is pretty simple.

Lastly there is the issue of tires. On 4wd you can get away with some creative tire setups to find more speed because the chassis is more forgiving and you have toe and camber to play with on the rear along with a lot less weight. So I would never recommend spec tire... Buuuuut I would say try and keep the tires to like one manufacture or one specific version (ie PN KS only or Marka V1 or V5 or V6 or whatever only). I think trying to run 4wd on only kyosho tires would be really interesting. Not the fastest combo but certainly the easiest to get going without worrying about glue and flipping.

I just want to clarify and point out that there is a lot of theorizing and presumptions being made about AWD...

It is the most difficult chassis to setup. The BZ is leaps and bounds better than the standard Ma-whatever, the amz, the x-power, and the jury is still out about the GLA but I would say that the GLA and BZ are fairly equal.

The steering response is the same as the fully optioned X-power that everyone seems to hate. You can crank it like crazy and not worry about flipping if you get the setup right... IF. RH, preload, camber, toe, tires, WEIGHT DIST, and a lot of other factors are all playing into the handling and each impacts the car differently and just more than the 2wd. So clear advantage goes to the AWD even on tight layouts because I got my 4wd to turn like a 2wd while pulling out of the corners like a 4wd should. Takes a lot of time and most people won't get their cars even to be able to stay on all fours let alone be dialed so just let them run what they want in a lipo open class... but keep 4wd and 2wd Separate since there is a CLEAR advantage.

edit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSOGtUC7Ia0&t=342s

Just an example (one of my better drives dark green car is BZ and I put I think 3+ laps on 2nd place. All the rest were MRX lipo mod and it was a mixture of tight and twisty with some speedy sections).

Also I just want to say this was just my experience with 4wd. Car is easy to drive and handles better but as with everything it takes a driver and a setup to get things right. Obviously I can't speak for HFAY tracks but an advantage is an advantage and I would suggest for structured competition to keep a level playing field. I know there are other factors so this is just my opinion and experience I am not trying to negate anything anyone else has experienced or points they have made.

arch2b
2017.01.05, 08:10 AM
I personally can appreciate the enthusiasm for AWD but your making references and inferences based vastly different programs, Maj is not HFAY by a long shot (not disparaging Maj's program at all, just pointing out they are entirely different programs). HFAY's long history and a large database of results show AWD is indeed slower in HFAY and FAR less popular (for whatever reasons those may be). It demonstrates in my personal opinion, that AWD is clearly not the fastest platform for HFAY. If it were, after 22 seasons you would see an increase in their use, not a decrease. Thus, no need to separate AWD from 2WD as the demonstrated performance gap is irrelevant at HFAY scale. This is backed by 22 seasons of results. The entirety of the topic is oriented to HFAY, not various racing programs such as the incredibly fast and competitive program at Maj's, PN worlds, etc. where the logic and data do not necessarily translate due to program differences. The track size in this case levels the playing field or is the equalizer.
Nice video btw ;) Having a announcer makes such a big difference in the feel and enjoyment of an event or just racing in general.

DMALMAD
2017.01.05, 08:59 AM
I personally can appreciate the enthusiasm for AWD but your making references and inferences based vastly different programs, Maj is not HFAY by a long shot (not disparaging Maj's program at all, just pointing out they are entirely different programs). HFAY's long history and a large database of results show AWD is indeed slower in HFAY and FAR less popular (for whatever reasons those may be). It demonstrates in my personal opinion, that AWD is clearly not the fastest platform for HFAY. If it were, after 22 seasons you would see an increase in their use, not a decrease. Thus, no need to separate AWD from 2WD as the demonstrated performance gap is irrelevant at HFAY scale. This is backed by 22 seasons of results. The entirety of the topic is oriented to HFAY, not various racing programs such as the incredibly fast and competitive program at Maj's, PN worlds, etc. where the logic and data do not necessarily translate due to program differences. The track size in this case levels the playing field or is the equalizer.
Nice video btw ;) Having a announcer makes such a big difference in the feel and enjoyment of an event or just racing in general.

You are right they are two completely different settings (Maj's and HFAY) and therefore different platforms work better than others. I just wanted to point out to people that the 4wd platform deserves a full chance since, in particular, the BZ is just so easy to drive. I don't think any 4wd mini-z before the BZ was even worth the effort to drive on a weekly basis but now I think it is worth it. Sorry if I came off as a little zealous, I tend to do that sometimes when it really isn't necessary :o

arch2b
2017.01.05, 12:40 PM
Brian you're a stand up guy :) I was really expecting a bit of backlash...back to the topic...

I'm 100% sure arch2b and a few others will let me run an aftermarket chassis. In fact I should be receiving my BZ I won in a contest next week. I'll use that and my AMZ. We can capture and share the data and setups so we can establish a baseline.

Kris

If i recall, we ran a couple drivers with brushed/brushless in that season for bench marking/validating as well ;) it may not have been clear with all that the results were being entered for recording. I don't recall this happening in subsequent seasons.

i'm happy to allow whatever is needed for further testing, etc. Just need to know how to format the results so it's clear what is what.

briankstan
2017.01.05, 01:30 PM
I can enter the option of Atomic BZ under the chassis configuration, that way it will be easy to see. I'd also like to know what the motor is so I can make that available as well if it's different than what we currently allow. then times can just be submitted as normal and it'll be easy to see.

DMALMAD
2017.01.05, 06:38 PM
I can enter the option of Atomic BZ under the chassis configuration, that way it will be easy to see. I'd also like to know what the motor is so I can make that available as well if it's different than what we currently allow. then times can just be submitted as normal and it'll be easy to see.

BZ uses all the standard mini-z brushless motors except kyosho ones. Generally people run a 5000kv on a big to medium size track and I usually run 7500kv tuned down with the speedo (otherwise it is way to fast to handle). I think someone tried it with the pn 3500kv but I don't know how that worked out because just getting the gearing right on the BZ was a pain in the you know what :p

byebye
2017.01.05, 08:36 PM
I can enter the option of Atomic BZ under the chassis configuration, that way it will be easy to see. I'd also like to know what the motor is so I can make that available as well if it's different than what we currently allow. then times can just be submitted as normal and it'll be easy to see.
So far every Atomic car has come standard with a 5000kv motor which is also what I use in my HFAY MR-03

byebye
2017.01.05, 08:37 PM
Are there any others that are interested in running for data?

arch2b
2017.01.06, 08:06 AM
i'm happy to drive a car for data logging, if provided. I just don't have any of them myself.

tommy_greeneyes
2017.01.06, 10:15 AM
You know some people like to keep classes basic. And new technologies coming. And you may consider to change the rules for some classes. Only for modify. Stock classes are little bit different.

briankstan
2017.01.06, 10:27 AM
So far every Atomic car has come standard with a 5000kv motor which is also what I use in my HFAY MR-03

I ha e that motor already in there. So it just needs to be labeled as "Atomic 5000KV"

Also when you get the BZ, can you weigh it complete with battery and body, might need to add weight to meet the minimum weight.

I'll see if Ben wants to run his BZ as well in this upcoming season as a benchmark as well.

briankstan
2017.01.06, 10:38 AM
Also, are you going to test with a an ASC Body or with a lexan body.

arch2b
2017.01.06, 12:23 PM
You know some people like to keep classes basic. And new technologies coming. And you may consider to change the rules for some classes. Only for modify. Stock classes are little bit different.

HFAY has one class only, far from what is generally considered a stock class. For BTE it adds in MOD class, which may need to be altered to incorporate 3rd party/3d printed kits.

DMALMAD
2017.01.06, 12:57 PM
I ha e that motor already in there. So it just needs to be labeled as "Atomic 5000KV"

Also when you get the BZ, can you weigh it complete with battery and body, might need to add weight to meet the minimum weight.


With Lexan body my BZ is under 150g and that was with the 560mah battery, with the 360s I am running that come with it as standard I would assume it would prob be close to 145g. I think the AL chassis adds 5g and plastic body probably another 5-10 depending on make. So it definitely needs weight to make it legal.

RussF
2017.01.06, 06:07 PM
I'd like to open up discussion for allowing the use of some of the new chassis that are available for use in HFAY. Along with this discussion I would like your opinions on what you thing should and shouldn't be allowed with respect to some of the chassis that are powered by different types of ESC's and Servos along with being mostly brushless and lipo powered. What's fair or reasonably equal in terms of speed with our current requirements?

First thing to keep in mind is this is all for fun. With that said:

My opinion is that HFAY needs to be 2 classes for sure. 2WD Racer and 4WD Open.

The Racer class for HFAY needs to be 2wd, NiMh batteries with hard plastic autoscale body, PN 70t or 5500kv or less brushless motor, 170 grams minimum weight limit (I did not see a weight limit in the season 20 rules, did I miss it?). And only one entry per contestant. Some considerations for rules are: Radio, PCB, chassis, aftermarket parts, body modification, as well as other things. But adding a bunch of specifics would get hard to do and limit the fun.

For a 4wd class, this could be open to whatever you want to run for now to gather data.

Id also like to see specialty classes added like F1, Nascar, 90mm, and others for the clubs that run them. The biggest problem is time to complete the races for too many classes.

For general rules I'd like to see the race time shortened to 5 minutes per race. But thats me because I'm old and grumpy! ;)



Last point that's a bit off topic- I wasn't aware I could enter more than once...I don't think this is really fair since you've essentially given yourself two chances to win when the rules state you only get one opportunity to submit times...this bumps a lot of people down the list that would have otherwise finished better...I know it's your race series and you'll do what you want but I know I'm not the only that has brought this up.

I hadnt considered this but he's right. In the Racer Season 20 Brian bumped Bill C. down to 5th instead of getting 4th, and Chad bumped Raymond C. to 10th instead of getting 8th. I think only one entry should be allowed per class. Running these brushless cars in the Racer class would be fine if it was the only car the person ran in the class.

arch2b
2017.01.06, 07:29 PM
i actually prefer the longer mains myself. more time to recover, with a tight class, small track, a couple mistakes makes an enormous difference in a short race. nothing less fun than being out if it before you get into it.

time is indeed the biggest hurdle. we run both directions on the same day and it takes all of 4-5 hours. i would be willing to drop counterclockwise direction and replace with picking up another class. BTE already adds MOD class to the options and rules set.

F1 is already in there;) just not very popular or garners sufficient participation. Nascar failed as a mini-z line and i don't see that ever coming back, especially with autoscale prices where they are now.

why bother with adding 'AWD' to an unlimited class title? at that point, darwin's principal will weed out the chaff as others have mentioned. likewise, no real point in labeling racer class '2WD' AWD still participate in small numbers and have weeded themselves out of the 70T small track bracket. it's adding a layer of divisiveness to something when isn't really necessary. we all have members in our club that run 'X' just because it's what they like and prefer, regardless of the results. why exclude that participation? especially if emphasis is on having fun.

byebye
2017.01.06, 10:26 PM
Also, are you going to test with a an ASC Body or with a lexan body.

I only planned to use an asc. I think that is one absolute rule that should never change.

i'm happy to drive a car for data logging, if provided. I just don't have any of them myself.

I will have my BZ before our next race day so I'll have both the amz and bz available. I can swap the amz motor for you. It's already covered with an R8 :cool:

I ha e that motor already in there. So it just needs to be labeled as "Atomic 5000KV"

Also when you get the BZ, can you weigh it complete with battery and body, might need to add weight to meet the minimum weight.

I'll see if Ben wants to run his BZ as well in this upcoming season as a benchmark as well.

I suppose this is one very big factor because the lipo adds a significant weight loss. In my experience with the AMR(2wd) it almost didn't have the weight underneath to keep it planted. I think Dmalmads posted weight claim is true. Again though I think we should gather some data before you make any rule changes.

i actually prefer the longer mains myself. more time to recover, with a tight class, small track, a couple mistakes makes an enormous difference in a short race. nothing less fun than being out if it before you get into it.

time is indeed the biggest hurdle. we run both directions on the same day and it takes all of 4-5 hours. i would be willing to drop counterclockwise direction and replace with picking up another class. BTE already adds MOD class to the options and rules set.

F1 is already in there;) just not very popular or garners sufficient participation. Nascar failed as a mini-z line and i don't see that ever coming back, especially with autoscale prices where they are now.

why bother with adding 'AWD' to an unlimited class title? at that point, darwin's principal will weed out the chaff as others have mentioned. likewise, no real point in labeling racer class '2WD' AWD still participate in small numbers and have weeded themselves out of the 70T small track bracket. it's adding a layer of divisiveness to something when isn't really necessary. we all have members in our club that run 'X' just because it's what they like and prefer, regardless of the results. why exclude that participation? especially if emphasis is on having fun.

I agree. I love this hobby so much I'd be willing to run 15min. mains. On our local days we run 10min. mains and we finish in the triple digits of laps. Please don't take my wheel time :-)

And arch2b nails it; inclusive not exclusive...