Mini-Z, Kyosho Mini-Z Racer, MR-03, MR-02, MA-010, Forums, News, Pictures, Parts, and Shop - Mini-ZRacer.com
Forums, Mini-Z, MiniZ, Kyosho Mini-Z, Kyosho MiniZ, Kyosho Mini-Z Racer
Mini-Z Hop-Ups, Mini-Z Parts, MiniZ Hop-Ups, MiniZ Parts, Kyosho Mini-Z Hop-Ups, Kyosho Mini-Z Parts, Kyosho MiniZ Hop-Ups, Kyosho MiniZ Parts, Kyosho Mini-Z Racer Hop-Ups, Racer Kyosho Mini-Z Parts
Old 2009.03.19, 10:40 PM   #16
rocketman
Thom Rocketman Belmont
 
rocketman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lake Sam Rayburn
Posts: 131
Great work on the rules. I like the gist of what you have done.

Some quick thoughts:

Do we need a min wire gauge for stock motors?
Do we need to allow for non-sealed stock motors where
brushes can be changed and inspected more readily?
rocketman is offline  
Old 2009.03.19, 10:52 PM   #17
Draconious
Moderator
 
Draconious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Goodrich MI
Posts: 6,160
Send a message via AIM to Draconious Send a message via Yahoo to Draconious
I think my "I will never actually make one MiX chassis" should qualify for these rules...

I also hope there is a Ultra-Mod class one day... to allow brushless, I want to see better and smaller brushless motor and esc for this scale developed in mass.
__________________
Draconious is offline  
Old 2009.03.19, 11:15 PM   #18
rocketman
Thom Rocketman Belmont
 
rocketman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lake Sam Rayburn
Posts: 131
Perhaps a 3 tier event with stock, modified and open. would be good to allow for research of products that push the envelop in the open classes and get manufacturers battling for bragging rights.
rocketman is offline  
Old 2009.03.19, 11:19 PM   #19
yasuji
PN RacingTEAM Driver
 
yasuji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: southern calfornia
Posts: 1,529
Send a message via AIM to yasuji Send a message via Yahoo to yasuji
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketman View Post
Great work on the rules. I like the gist of what you have done.

Some quick thoughts:

Do we need a min wire gauge for stock motors?
Do we need to allow for non-sealed stock motors where
brushes can be changed and inspected more readily?
i am not so in tune with motor winding so im not sure about gauge
currently the only 70 turn is made by pn racing.....so i urge atomic to make one as well
pn and atomic motor cans have quick change brushes
__________________

Grant "Yasuji" Matsushima

PN Racing Team Driver
www.pnracing.com
gm@pnracing.com

yasuji is offline  
Old 2009.03.19, 11:28 PM   #20
yasuji
PN RacingTEAM Driver
 
yasuji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: southern calfornia
Posts: 1,529
Send a message via AIM to yasuji Send a message via Yahoo to yasuji
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketman View Post
Perhaps a 3 tier event with stock, modified and open. would be good to allow for research of products that push the envelop in the open classes and get manufacturers battling for bragging rights.
i think as of rt now there will be no need for that ...the more options will allow for cherry picking and domination.....the less classes will make for better racing and more competition
__________________

Grant "Yasuji" Matsushima

PN Racing Team Driver
www.pnracing.com
gm@pnracing.com

yasuji is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 12:31 AM   #21
rocketman
Thom Rocketman Belmont
 
rocketman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lake Sam Rayburn
Posts: 131
I agree as too many classes waters things down and I think cost control, taking a look back at what ROAR did wrong in the mid 80's and learning from those lessons. Cost of operating is our biggest advantage over any other scale and whatever we can do to keep it from going crazy is good and attract more folks to try it and stay at it. Right behind the costs is the kick in the pants speed and handling these cars exhibit.
T
rocketman is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 02:16 AM   #22
Ancient Artist
Registered User
 
Ancient Artist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Midwest
Posts: 50
Thumbs up

GREAT WORK YUSJI, CT and everyone else invloved! I don't think there's much more to do, and keeping it simple and limited to the three classes is perfect. Theres certainly alays room for some niche classes locally like F1 etc. but I think as a standard to focus on those cover everything really well.

As you mentioned not only does it create a consistent set of rules for exisiting racing, it really helps to guide new groups starting out as well.
I've been involved in r/c racing at every level since I was a kid and the biggest crowd killer through the years in any type of racing was the addition of more and more classes.It would (as another person mentioned) ultimately water everything down until racers would just get bored or frustrated and ultimately disappear.
I think the biggest advantage (especially in the current economy) to this scale is the low cost/high performance value compared to 1/10th 12th etc. The initial and continued investment is so much lower then any other scale but still offers fast competitive racing.Limited classes really helps to keep that in check and allows newer drivers (which the entire hobby desperately needs) to focus and invest in what they already own and slowly build up their arsenal of cars/parts as their budget allows,and MOST IMPORTANTLY KEEPS THEM RACING!
Half the fun is of course noodling with aftermarket parts and set-up's but theres no bigger downer then investing in your car (especially if you're a kid and have a limited income) and then everyone moves onto something else.
Maybe I'm a competition junkie, but the other half of fun was (is) gritting it out trying to becoming a better driver week by week and working your way up the mains on regular race nights against a solid core of 40-60 local drivers consistently.
I know that can be intimidating for some but if there's ever a huge gap in the caliber of drivers, I'm always an advocate of seperating them by talent/age but keeping the classes the same so they can learn/get support using similar cars/set-ups and then step up when they are ready but keeping classes controlled and minimal...

ANYWAYS enough soap box from the peanut gallery, I'm just glad to see you guys working on this. It's long over due, and a great piece in moving what I think on of the funnest types of racing (with the highest potential) I've done to date....
__________________
Ancient Artist is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 02:36 AM   #23
yasuji
PN RacingTEAM Driver
 
yasuji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: southern calfornia
Posts: 1,529
Send a message via AIM to yasuji Send a message via Yahoo to yasuji
just to let everyone know....the base rules were a collaboration of the 2 of the top miniz drivers joe c aka ruf and ct....i am just a small part of the 1/28th scale comity which agreed to the initial rules.....a year has pased and now i believe that we are ready to take a step in the right direction....
i hope to see more input by all of the major clubs in america and all over the world......hoping
__________________

Grant "Yasuji" Matsushima

PN Racing Team Driver
www.pnracing.com
gm@pnracing.com

yasuji is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 02:56 AM   #24
Ancient Artist
Registered User
 
Ancient Artist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Midwest
Posts: 50
...thats a great point Yasuji ! oh and BTW I totally apologize for hacking your name to pieces in my other post. I'd like to blame it all on the fact that I'm using my work Dell laptop keyboard instead of my personal Macbook Pro but the truth is my typing just sucks in combo with my ever diminishing brain functionality!

I also wanted to add that if you guys need any help let me know.As you mentioned you've got the core of 1:28/Mini-Z already on this thing so there probably insn't the need for much more but wanted to throw it out there none the less.
once again HATS OFF to you all -not only for the work on the ROAR Rules but for the dedication and efforts you've put into 1:28 racing in general!
__________________
Ancient Artist is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 10:57 AM   #25
hrdrvr
MBMZR
 
hrdrvr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC
Posts: 3,274
First off Id like to say I think this is a big step for the community, sport, and scale. Ive been making a bid (along with a few other semi-locals) to push for more unity and competition in the SE. This would be a big step in doing that direction for the entire US. Im all for it, but I do have some suggeestions

I would like to see Formula-1 covered in the rules. I agree that the other spec classes (minis, LeMans, sportscar, etc..) that fall in ot the same platforms (MRs, MAs, MRCGs, P28s, etc..) should be left to events and special type races. However, the Formula-1 has its own platform, and Id hate to see that platform get left out of this 'rules guidline'. Our club has recently experienced a huge amount of growth (since the 2.4 revolution. Thanks Kyosho!!) and every one is interested in this platform. Ive been pushing for our LHS and to enforce the same rules our local club applies, which are as global as I can make them. They are basically built on the same concept as what CT and the gang are pushing for. Now, back to the point at hand, our club will soon have a ton of new F1 racers, and Id like a guideline to push our rules towards. Right now, I run with no limitations on anything. If this is what the "norm" is going to be, then Ill continue, but if there could be a set of rules stating thats what every one is going to do, Ill feel better about it. If its a platform that the general populous (or deciding parties) wants to limit its power plant (calling it 'stock') then Ill comply and run those rules. I just think if it gets left off of this roster, it will become a forgotten platform, and I dont want to see that happen. Also, the clubs (like mine and a few others I know of!) that are determined to run it, will have a baseline to follow just like the other platforms included in these guidlines.

The other thing I think EMU really hit on was the weight. I like that you see his points, and that you have compromised somewhat, but I sitll think the minimums are set too high. I have a 98mm AWD running a 46g body (ASC McL GTR) and Im sitting at 182g RTR with Giro-Z transponder, and while NO weight dropping techniques (stock screws, steel ball bearings, no shaving of the body or chassis, etc.). Its not fair that I (or others in my situation) still run at the disadvantage of adding weight to comply with the regulations. I also dont like that the weight limit is set so far off of the 2wds. I understand that in this format that 2wd is going to be stock, and AWD is going to be mod, so I accept this, but still dont make the guys who dont want to run alloy, have to incur a penalty. Id push for you to move the weight limits down to 170g and 180g for 2wd and AWD respectively. I know 5g isnt much, but I do think its the difference of adding weight or not adding weight, which is where I belive the line should be drawn.

Thanks for taking my comments into consideration!

Grant, it was a grat idea to open this up to the public. In saying that, Id like to say to the public, even if some of thse rules arent perfect, or fit every club ideally, we should still try and remember what it will do for the global community by conforming. I will comply and enforce whatever rules will help or club be successful at the events we attend/host, and joining into a group effort like this is a great way to make steps in that direction!
__________________
Landon

LET's Go Racing!
hrdrvr is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 11:51 AM   #26
imxlr8ed
Registered User
 
imxlr8ed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Reading Pa.
Posts: 4,123
I would always wonder why the minimum weights were not closer to an out-of the box RTR weight + 4 AAA cells. Would seem to make more sense, but then you'd have to find the lightest RTR body to find the true minimum weight for the class.

As far as motors and windings go... yes, it can get over-complicated fast as far as wire gauges. There is also some non-round wire available out there as well where you could possibly put a tighter wind on the armatures.

Rules are a pain... but I think anytime we all take a look at where this is all going is a good thing! Always good to see just how many real thinkers and planners there are on this site!
__________________
My Online Design Studio and Shop!

http://www.shapeways.com/shops/UID

http://www.howfastareyou.com

SUPPORT LBR!!!
(Local Basement Racing)
imxlr8ed is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 01:15 PM   #27
rocketman
Thom Rocketman Belmont
 
rocketman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lake Sam Rayburn
Posts: 131
One idea that I have used to limit technology from entering a slower/more restricted class and upsetting the whole concept is to include a clause that states that if an item is not specifically permitted then it is not allowed. That allows all involved in that more restricted class to not have to go out and buy brand new stuff each time a new idea comes along but can be put off until the beginning of a new racing season. Keeping a racing season on a more even basis and the money/cubic dollars out of the more restricted classes.

Good thoughts from all involved and it is the involvement that is making the difference.
rocketman is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 01:16 PM   #28
yasuji
PN RacingTEAM Driver
 
yasuji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: southern calfornia
Posts: 1,529
Send a message via AIM to yasuji Send a message via Yahoo to yasuji
Quote:
Originally Posted by hrdrvr View Post
Its not fair that I (or others in my situation) still run at the disadvantage of adding weight to comply with the regulations. I also dont like that the weight limit is set so far off of the 2wds. I understand that in this format that 2wd is going to be stock, and AWD is going to be mod, so I accept this, but still dont make the guys who dont want to run alloy, have to incur a penalty. Id push for you to move the weight limits down to 170g and 180g for 2wd and AWD respectively. I know 5g isnt much, but I do think its the difference of adding weight or not adding weight, which is where I belive the line should be drawn.
ok.... here A SENERIO ....if YOU were to add all of the good hop ups to your rtr you would gain weight and strength.....but now you find that youe car is 20 g over weight...... now you must find a way to lower your cars weight....now you will shave the body......the chassis.....the aluminum parts....next thing you know....you are within 1 g of minimum weight....
then you get on track and it handles great....super fast.....then you snag a wall and i come barreling in there with my 190 g pancar....BAM!!!!
NOW YOUR CAR IS TWEAKED AND BENT AND BROKEN......an d the hours and hours you spent shaving and balancing your car is all for not.....your PISSED OFF.....THEN THE ARGUEMENT.......THEN A FIGHT.....THEN THE EMBARRASSING MOMENT......LOL
THIS WOULD NOT BE GOOD FOR THE SCALE!

also....a lower weight limit will encourage some drivers to stay with the stock plastic parts.....feeling no need to buy the aftermarket parts.....
it will also makes for second guessing when buying an aftermarket part
if we do not buy upgrade parts.....they may get out of our scale
its kinda like the economy.....no one is buying so there is no money going in to buisness..... and now many businesses are "going out of business"
the higher weight limit is to encourage drivers to buy the aftermarket parts without thinking...."will this make my car too heavy????"

landon....as for f1.....i think that the pn rules are the best rules for f1......
i will add it to the discuss
__________________

Grant "Yasuji" Matsushima

PN Racing Team Driver
www.pnracing.com
gm@pnracing.com

yasuji is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 01:20 PM   #29
yasuji
PN RacingTEAM Driver
 
yasuji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: southern calfornia
Posts: 1,529
Send a message via AIM to yasuji Send a message via Yahoo to yasuji
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketman View Post
One idea that I have used to limit technology from entering a slower/more restricted class and upsetting the whole concept is to include a clause that states that if an item is not specifically permitted then it is not allowed. That allows all involved in that more restricted class to not have to go out and buy brand new stuff each time a new idea comes along but can be put off until the beginning of a new racing season. Keeping a racing season on a more even basis and the money/cubic dollars out of the more restricted classes.

Good thoughts from all involved and it is the involvement that is making the difference.
i have considered adding "homoligation".....but we must grow first.....
__________________

Grant "Yasuji" Matsushima

PN Racing Team Driver
www.pnracing.com
gm@pnracing.com

yasuji is offline  
Old 2009.03.20, 02:10 PM   #30
hrdrvr
MBMZR
 
hrdrvr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC
Posts: 3,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by imxlr8ed View Post
I would always wonder why the minimum weights were not closer to an out-of the box RTR weight + 4 AAA cells.
I think the decision should be made geared around this thought, and not the one that says, the guy who buys all the hop-ups has all the benefits with no penalties. This hobby is the most affordable form of racing, and most people can afford to have mutliple cars because of that. If we set the rules based around fully hop upped cars, then that will up the cost, and eliminate racers (as well as deter potential new ones) at every local track.



Quote:
Originally Posted by yasuji View Post
ok.... here A SENERIO ....if YOU were to add all of the good hop ups to your rtr you would gain weight and strength.....but now you find that youe car is 20 g over weight...... now you must find a way to lower your cars weight....now you will shave the body......the chassis.....the aluminum parts....next thing you know....you are within 1 g of minimum weight....
then you get on track and it handles great....super fast.....then you snag a wall and i come barreling in there with my 190 g pancar....BAM!!!!
NOW YOUR CAR IS TWEAKED AND BENT AND BROKEN......an d the hours and hours you spent shaving and balancing your car is all for not.....your PISSED OFF.....THEN THE ARGUEMENT.......THEN A FIGHT.....THEN THE EMBARRASSING MOMENT......LOL
THIS WOULD NOT BE GOOD FOR THE SCALE!

also....a lower weight limit will encourage some drivers to stay with the stock plastic parts.....feeling no need to buy the aftermarket parts.....
it will also makes for second guessing when buying an aftermarket part
if we do not buy upgrade parts.....they may get out of our scale
its kinda like the economy.....no one is buying so there is no money going in to buisness..... and now many businesses are "going out of business"
the higher weight limit is to encourage drivers to buy the aftermarket parts without thinking...."will this make my car too heavy????"

landon....as for f1.....i think that the pn rules are the best rules for f1......
i will add it to the discuss
I understand your train of thought, but I still think that their should be advantages and disadvantages to both sides. If the weight minimum is set high, then there is no advantage to the plastic/delin or stock parts, and with that comes the expense. I think this rule commity can do wonders for for unity, but I dont want to do anything that deters people from joining into 1/28th scale racing. That would be the worst thing for the Mini-Z economy. I still buy the neccesary parts from PN, and ATM, but I prefer to buy plastic or delrin in place of alloy, becasue of weight (performance in braking and acceleration), and price. I can afford to have an assortment of knuckels, as opposed to one set (more tuning options), and they are less expensive to replace once they brake, bend, or wear out. It does mean Im buying a cheaper product, but its still a product, and its still from aftermarket companies when it comes to everything except plastic Kyosho knuckles for my AWD, and plastic Kyosho tie rods. Every one of my cars support aftermarket companies (non-disciminatory), and has nearly every upgrade posssible, just not in alloy.

I know we could debate this point over and over, and get many followers for both sides, but I think in the end we should do whats best to make the racing interesting and affordable for every one.


I think the PN rules for Formula-1 are nearly perfect as well. The motors are fast enough, and controlled enough to have fast, exciting, open-wheeled racing. I still think the weight limit is too high, and should be lowered closer to (if not at) RTR running weight.
__________________
Landon

LET's Go Racing!
hrdrvr is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3D RC RACING , 1/28 scale computer online racing Blackno3 Red Hill Games 3D RC Racing 25 2012.02.14 09:53 AM
Stock Class Rules Discussion AtlRC Atlanta Mini Scale Racing 5 2008.11.28 11:46 AM
3D RC RACING released, 1/28 scale online racing Blackno3 Parts and Hop-ups 25 2008.03.01 11:51 PM
Would like to see an 1/24-1/28 scale Open Class revzalot Mini RC 5 2004.09.27 03:45 PM
DISCUSS! Mini-Z / Scale 1:27 Proposed rules and regulations Kagan Events 29 2003.09.24 08:05 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2011 Mini-ZRacer.com
Mini Inferno Sale - Up to $85 Instant Savings!
Micro-T Hop-Ups
RC18R, M18, Micro RS4, Mini-LST, TamTech-Gear, Minizilla, RC18T, RC18B, RC18MT
shop.tinyrc.com Products

more»
Tiny RC Community News
[03/22/17] MZR was on vacation, didn't... : All kidding aside, the host experienced a bit of a server meltdown last week and efforts to restore the site to a new server took longer than anticipated. The current server is temporary until - more»
[11/25/15] Did You Hear? Our Black... : Hey Racers,
We're getting started a bit early with our Black Friday sale this year.  Generally we're not supporters of retailers opening early on Thanksgiving, but in our case, we're - more»
[06/30/15] shop.tinyrc.com: Have You... : Hey All! Just a quick reminder to everyone that we post all of our shop.tinyrc.com Newletters here on the MZR Forum. If for some reason you miss them in your email inbox, you can always see the - more»
Mini-Z, Mini-Z Racer, MR-02, MA-010
M18, M18T, RC18T, Mini-LST, Mini-T, Micro RS4, XRay, 1/18, 18th scale
XMODS, XMOD, Micro Flight, ZipZaps, ZipZaps SE, Bit Char-G, MicroSizers, TTTT, Plantraco Desktop Rover, SuperSlicks, Digi Q
Mini Inferno, Mini Inferno ST, half EIGHT, 1/16, 16th scale
Epoch, Indoor Racer, 1/43, 43rd scale
E-Savage, eSavage, eZilla, e-Zilla, HPI
Robots, Bots, Bipeds, Wheeled, Manoi, Roomba, NXT, Lego, Hacking
Crawling, Crawlers, Micro, RC, Losi Mini-Rock Crawler, Duratrax Cliff Climber
Kyosho Minium, Caliber 120, Minium Forums
Mini-Z Hop-Ups, Mini-Z Parts, Mini Inferno Hop-Ups, Mini Inferno Parts, M18 Hop-Ups, M18 Parts