More limited motor discussion

[dethow]

These discussions have turned more potential racers away than a National rule set would ever bring to the pond.

99% of the potential racers have no idea these discussions are taking place. And I’d wager that 90% of actual current racers also have no idea these discussions are taking place.
Not everyone hates these discussions as much as you do Doug. Do we want them to be done? Of course… but that doesn’t mean we hate them. We’re trying to fix flaws and get to a better place. A BETTER place… not a PERFECT place. Perfect doesn’t exist.
I’m sure there are some opinions of flaws in the gas/nitro class rules. Does that mean IMPBA shouldn’t have national rules and records for them? Because that’s where we are basically at. There is a possible rule set on the table that is 100% techable and it’s starting to sound like IMPBA is going to shoot it down and defiantly won’t allow records because there will be some opinions of flaws.

The MMEU proved you can offer these classes without a National rule set.

Sorry… but literally the only thing MMEU has proven is that there is a way to use a dominant motor within the simple dimensions rule. And what are the clubs going to do??? Just say no Neu 1415 motors allowed? Then someone cuts down a Lehner 1940, then a TP3640, and so on… until all the clubs have a long list of excluded motors. Great, until someone says the hell with them I’ll build my own. Then what? Do we say no custom built motors? Talk about not techable… We might as well just have a list of motors which are allowed. Sound familiar and flawed?
That’s what MMEU has proven. No offense intended to MMEU guys. I’m the a-hole in MMEU who shined light on this.

[raptor347]

Dave,
For what it's worth, I'm certainly not upset that you flipped the light switch. IMPBA has the advantage of not having a flawed (but very successful) rule set on the books. By advantage I mean they can be a more agile when it comes to fine tuning the class. That being said, we're moving forward to get the best class we can.

For the record, my issue with stock/spec FE classes for time trials is the nature of those event's. They are by definition, event's where you REALLY push equipment. When played at the bleeding edge, running spec/stock classes is the most efficient way to turn money into smoke. I've seen an awful lot of P-ltd charcoal produced chasing those records at NAMBA events. Much of the reputation for poor reliability came out of that. But who am I to tell people how to spend their money. If it ever did get opened up for records, I know just the motor to build.


Everybody,
Considering this is the class we throw all our newbie racers in (not to be confused with "beginners class", there's nothing beginner about it), there's a line of thought that dropping the performance a bit wouldn't be the worst possible outcome. Before everyone screams at me, a quick history refresher, consider the following: If you look at the performance we're getting from out current spec boats and compare it to what we were getting out of full P systems 10 years ago, would you be shocked to know our current spec boats are faster? The thought of handing a new racer a hot P mono was pretty scary back then. I believe it was 2002 (might be 2000) when the first FE boat broke 80 mph, with 32 NiMH cells (40 odd volts), a big Schulze esc and a big lehner motor. I can do that today with my heat race spec rigger with only a prop change and a set of slippery sponsons. The same hull goes 140mph with a full P system. Point is, we've lost perspective on the kind of performance we should expect.

My first experiment with spec power was to drop the original SV-27 motor and esc into my then record holding N2 rigger (Pags still races that hull as a P-ltd). It ran 54 mph, this was 2007 and it was seriously cool for a dirt cheap brushless system that was very reliable. Then comes the infamous UL-1 motor and up goes the performance. My current spec rigger will heat race right at 62 mph. Yes, hulls and props have changed (point your fingers at me if you must, I probably deserve it), but does the extra 8 mph make the racing better? For those that were there, how good was the racing in LSH at 42 mph and LSO at 37?

We're going fast enough in the spec classes now that it can be intimidating to new racers and far more difficult than many veteran racers want to admit. There are many reasons the open class participation has decreased over the last 10 years. Expense is one, but entry cost for capable equipment has come down significantly. I'd argue that the raw performance gains are a big part of it, even a really good P or Q hydro is a serious handful. Check the vids Tyler posted from Valdosta Speed Week, that's his Q heat race boat.

I truly hate the statement "in the spirit of" when applied to racing (scale guys drive me nuts with that one), but in this case it applies. We've all enjoyed what has been a pretty level playing field in the spec class. The big goal in all this is to maintain that while opening up the motor options.

The point of this rant is to get people to consider what holding the power level where it is will do for the future of the class (and FE in general). In the long run, our default entry class will be healthier for it, and still be just as much fun.

OK, body armor strapped on under flame suit. I'm ready!!!

[CraigP]

Ahhh, at last an island of sanity in a sea of insanity! You hit the nail right on the head Bryan. It will be interesting to see if others see the wisdom in your words. These classes should be about driving and setup skills, not who can squirrel around with a motor the best...

[ray schrauwen]

You will never get the USA to conform to the NWO of electric boat racing. Never I say!!!!

An outsiders view here, take it or leave it.

It seems that you are trying to limit power by using the motor as a fuse, and are having issues with people pushing the motor too hard and blowing them, motors changing spec within production, and going out of production, but it looks like if you open the motor spec up
to allow decent non RTR motors, you will allow full on P power with it, which is likely to kill either the limited or the full P class.

Have you thought about limiting the power electronically, instead of with a very expensive fuse? https://neumotors.cartloom.com/store...imiter-2017-18 From what I gather 1KW is a decent but fairly conservative power for P Ltd, that should not result in lots of blown RTR motors, even if you didn't get one from "the magic batch", you could open it up to any motor, and while expensive books will have a slight efficiency advantage, the difference will be a heck of a lot less than the difference between 2 people with the exact same motor, one of which runs conservatively as they need it to last for years, and one who poo uses the limits as they don't mind burning one now and again.

I haven't used the above device, I just saw it and thought of you guys, maybe it is the answer to your prayers, maybe due to the peaky nature of boat power vs the steady power of an aeroplane it can't work, or maybe New could do some mods and make it work.

In Naviga are just going away from using our batteries as fuses and are using electronic energy limiters instead, which is perfect for us as we have a set run time, but with the right energy limit set could work for you too, if boats are too peaky for a power limit to be feasible. There are 3 manufacturers of boat energy limiters, and they have 2 years of national level testing behind them, but are just being legalised internationally this year. China race to Naviga rules too, so I expect we will see an energy limiter come out of China at a lower price point than the European made ones before too long.

[Doby]

About the motor being used as the "fuse"...when has it ever not been?

Scenario:
Stock Motley Crew Cat...
1)Must go faster in order to be "competitive"...install an AQ 2030 (or whatever the motor dejour is)..after-all, more kv always equals more speed...that helps.
2) Must go faster...install a BIG prop...that helps. (nothing in the rules says I can't)
3) Must go faster.. add 500 amp esc to handle load of big prop...that helps. (nothing in the rules says I can't)
4) Must go faster...buy 400C batteries...that helps.(nothing in the rules says I can't)
5) Must go faster...carve out the "heavy" tub and add carbon fiber to save weight...that helps (nothing in the rules says I can't)
6) Prove I'm now faster...place boat on water, hit the throttle and pray!


Surprise...guess what the only thing that blow is...THE MOTOR!
I can't for the life of me figure out why the motor blew???????

Solution..
1) Start a thread on the internet about the motor dejour's apparent unreliability.
2) Sit back and watch the sheep on the internet jump on the bandwagon, well, for the simple reason that its on the internet and everyone knows, if its on the net..its gotta be true!

Actual Truth: The motor is ALWAYS the fuse as people will ALWAYS try and get the most out of it. As its the only thing that is "spec'd" and can't be changed it will always be considered the fuse.

Want a simple solution to burning up motors?

Look in the mirror.

[T.S.Davis]

Come on John. We're not going to revisit the motor failures.

There actually was an issue with AQ motors. Different lots had different thickness wires. That's a real thing.
Proboat actually did discontinue motors and/or replace them with new versions requiring rule changes.
The rule set actually did cater to two manufacturers and kept others out. Not deliberately but definitely resulted in them being denied. Other motors could be "allowed" at an event but that didn't make them legal forever and ever.
Those two sources absolutely do make decisions based one $$$ and not on our silly rules. (That wont change either)
Nobody actually could prove a motor was correct if asked to.

We blew it. It worked for a while but it was never quite right. Created havoc in the ranks too. Sure, we have done a ton of racing but.......... bad feelings exited too. Stuff I mentioned. Even made some guys get out of FE.

This new approach is smarter in my opinion.

Even still, there are guys so pissed that we are trying to make this work that they're talking about leaving FE. I'm completely lost on that. I've been through some rule dances over the years. All most all of them in fact. Getting out over this one? Make no sense to me. How about the intro of brushless motors? Throw away your whole fleet technology anyone? NiMh vs Nicd was a hoot.

[NativePaul]

You will never get the USA to conform to the NWO of electric boat racing. Never I say!!!!

I did not suggest you conform, I just sugested an alternative way of doing things that may or may not be better for you. If you noticed I linked to an American made power limiter that may well be suitable for the type of sprint racing you do, and not any of the energy limiters that are more suitable of the endurance racing we do (or the offshore racing that you do for that matter), I only mentioned them as they are a proven alternative if the power limiter can't be made to work in boats.

Oh and we've been racing FE in one form or another since well before Churchill coined the phrase NWO, or HG Wells re-appropriated it, maybe OWO would be more appropriate.
PB-Clyde.jpg

[CraigP]

Paul, this power limiter idea makes sense to me. But to the guys currently at the top in these limited classes, this would be very bad news. They like their advantage! But to me, this seems like the fair way to level the playing field. If the class had these, my interest in racing my UL-1 would go up considerably. Would help in not burning down batteries, esc’s and motors, thus saving in expenses. If you have other part numbers, could you share them? I would like to check these out... Thanks for bringing some new ideas to the table.

[T.S.Davis]

They like their advantage!

What advantage? The fastest guys I know run $79 motors. Those guys aren't burning down motors, esc, and motors. Guys that are winning national championships are not burning down.

[Doby]

Come on John. We're not going to revisit the motor failures.

There actually was an issue with AQ motors. Different lots had different thickness wires. That's a real thing.
Proboat actually did discontinue motors and/or replace them with new versions requiring rule changes.
The rule set actually did cater to two manufacturers and kept others out. Not deliberately but definitely resulted in them being denied. Other motors could be "allowed" at an event but that didn't make them legal forever and ever.
Those two sources absolutely do make decisions based one $$$ and not on our silly rules. (That wont change either)
Nobody actually could prove a motor was correct if asked to.

We blew it. It worked for a while but it was never quite right. Created havoc in the ranks too. Sure, we have done a ton of racing but.......... bad feelings exited too. Stuff I mentioned. Even made some guys get out of FE.

This new approach is smarter in my opinion.

Even still, there are guys so pissed that we are trying to make this work that they're talking about leaving FE. I'm completely lost on that. I've been through some rule dances over the years. All most all of them in fact. Getting out over this one? Make no sense to me. How about the intro of brushless motors? Throw away your whole fleet technology anyone? NiMh vs Nicd was a hoot.

Terry..you're missing the point where I said motor "dejour"..not picking on the AQ...but what ever motor seems to be flavor of the day at any particular moment in history will be pushed (and over pushed) by people trying to get out every last bit of performance they can. Reliability of setups come second.

[Doby]

Paul, this power limiter idea makes sense to me. But to the guys currently at the top in these limited classes, this would be very bad news. They like their advantage! But to me, this seems like the fair way to level the playing field. If the class had these, my interest in racing my UL-1 would go up considerably. Would help in not burning down batteries, esc’s and motors, thus saving in expenses. If you have other part numbers, could you share them? I would like to check these out... Thanks for bringing some new ideas to the table.

Craig..the guys that keep on winning are the better drivers who spend time and effort in their setups...plain and simple.

[TheShaughnessy]

In regards to attracting Joe new guy, are any rtr boats coming with information about NAMBA or IMPBA? I just checked the UL19 manual and there is no mention of any racing, not sure if a separate page might be included. I know the only way I found out about organized racing was from either a flier or a page in the owners manual of my SV27. It read something like, when you get tired of boating on an open lake try making some buoys from milk jugs and racing around them. Still bored? Check out what organizations might be close to you, either NAMBA or IMPBA, boating with friends is always more fun.

I think the boat precedes the book.

[longballlumber]

In regards to attracting Joe new guy, are any rtr boats coming with information about NAMBA or IMPBA? I just checked the UL19 manual and there is no mention of any racing, not sure if a separate page might be included. I know the only way I found out about organized racing was from either a flier or a page in the owners manual of my SV27. It read something like, when you get tired of boating on an open lake try making some buoys from milk jugs and racing around them. Still bored? Check out what organizations might be close to you, either NAMBA or IMPBA, boating with friends is always more fun.

I think the boat precedes the book.

I can only speak for AquaCraft RTR boat, but YES they used to have an IMPBA application and a NAMBA application included with the other boat specific documentation. Heck, they also included decals on the decal sheet representing both orgs. I have been multiple years since I've gotten a NIB RTR, so I don't know if its still currently being done or not.

Wait the more I think about it...

SV27, SV27R, and UL-1 came with decal sheets
Revolt, Lucas Oil, and Motley Crew all came with decals pre applied under clear coat

I still think in all instances both orgs were represented with decals and paperwork.

[T.S.Davis]

I have a couple questions. Who knows. Maybe Brian or Dave are still seeing these. If we rolled back the hands of time and proposed this class way back when with L x W x Weight...........would there have been any discussion of these rules for last 8 years or so? I personally think there wouldn't have been nearly the hand wringing. We also wouldn't have had this thread. If that's fair (at all) it begs another question.....................what's the down side to having a national rule set for these? What's the deterrent so to speak?

Mike had asked what the benefit to IMPBA was. Participation is the short answer. Participation is the only reason for any rule set at the hobby level. We could ask that of all the classes. What's the benefit of having rules for say Thunderboat or gas hydro, or sport 20? Guys wanted to race them together. Needed a guideline. Made sense. So why not just let the clubs decide what Thunderboat is? Give them a suggestion but let them do what ever? Why not do that?

For that matter.....................why have any national rules? It's a leading question obviously. The idea is for people to know what they're getting no matter where they race.

[ray schrauwen]

I know Paul. Ivwas just kidding around. There are a few guys like Darin setting up mono1 etc to race internationally possibly, so there is hope!

I did not suggest you conform, I just sugested an alternative way of doing things that may or may not be better for you. If you noticed I linked to an American made power limiter that may well be suitable for the type of sprint racing you do, and not any of the energy limiters that are more suitable of the endurance racing we do (or the offshore racing that you do for that matter), I only mentioned them as they are a proven alternative if the power limiter can't be made to work in boats.

Oh and we've been racing FE in one form or another since well before Churchill coined the phrase NWO, or HG Wells re-appropriated it, maybe OWO would be more appropriate.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]157226[/ATTACH]