P-Limited Motors - Im going to jump on the hot seat.

[Darin Jordan]

I guess a simple yes or no would be good. Because that analogy still has to many factors I could pro and con.

You are overthinking this...

The motor with more torque is going to load up LESS under load, therefore spinning the prop up faster.

RPMs are great... How fast the motor is able to GET to those RPMs determines acceleration rate. The larger motor (the one with MORE TORQUE) wins...

[Darin Jordan]

So they buy an RTR and can run in some sort of rooky class around 50ish mph. Then when they get good enough they can graduate to slower boats they have to build themselves. we.............hoo...........

Well EEXXXXUUUUUSSSSSEEEE MEEEEEEE for helping to build such HIGH QUALITY RTRs!

The local solution is simple... RTR Class... ANY RTR, you pay your money, you take your chances...

Nationally... Isn't any way that, on a National Scale, with the motor allowances per these specs, that a purpose built race boat is going to lose very often to an off-the-shelf RTR, I don't care how big of a motor they put in it. If they can, more power to them.

We can't keep NOT doing things just because of what MIGHT be... Unless it just doesn't matter anymore.

If that's the case, why have any classes or restrictions?

[dethow]

You are overthinking this...

The motor with more torque is going to load up LESS under load, therefore spinning the prop up faster.

RPMs are great... How fast the motor is able to GET to those RPMs determines acceleration rate. The larger motor (the one with MORE TORQUE) wins...

So what if we reduced the prop sizes even further so the smaller motor was not over loaded and it could accelerate similar to a larger motor?

Yes, this may slow down the boats a couple mph but this would bring longevity to the class and also make it so guys learning how to tune a boat for max speed are not burning up motors and speedos on a regular basis.
There's a guy in our club that fried a motor in one boat and an esc in another boat a couple months back. He fixed those items.. came out last month fried another motor in the same boat he just put a new esc in. He runs modified RTR hulls in P-limited. And he's not a newbie. I don't know exactly how long he's been doing this but I assume at least 3 years.
Myself, as a newbie... (first season doing this) I have burned up 3 motors this season trying to push the limits of my AQ2030. Speedos are fine because I went overkill with SK180's. I'm not rich but I have the funds and desire to stick it out. But I could see how other newbies may get frustrated trying to keep up with the faster boats and just get sick of speeding the money on new motors and speedos.

I'm just throwing out some possible ways around this so that all motors and thus all RTR boats (both existing and in the future) could fit the class. While at the same time add some dependability to the motors we're using so guys aren't burning them up all the time.
My concern is much like Terry's
"So they buy an RTR and can run in some sort of rooky class around 50ish mph. Then when they get good enough they can graduate to slower boats they have to build themselves. we.............hoo........... "

Or, that RTR guy wants to go faster but doesn't have the $$$ to go open P. And that RTR guy has no place to race at a national event.

[Darin Jordan]

So, I'm not interested in discussing limiting props. There are WAY too many reasons why I think it's a terrible idea, and frankly, it's not what this thread is about. This thread is about figuring out what, if, how, when, etc., to address the Motors offered for the P-LTD class. Limiting props is GREAT when you have a "one-hull/one-power-system" style class (Like Spec-SV27), or where EVERYTHING is very similar. Otherwise, it's a mess.

People are freaking out over adding more 36mm motors, and now we are trying to stuff motors almost twice that size in...??? It doesn't make any sense.

I'm interested in simplicity, as few rules as possible, as easy tech'ing as possible, and a very narrow range of performance differences between the $ motors and the $$$ motors.

If we start adding a bunch of other arbitrary rules and restrictions, etc., the classes won't be any fun, and won't be well subscribed.

To me, the spec I've listed here, once it's honed in to be JUST inclusive enough, is the way to do this. That's just what I think.

[raptor347]

So, my first thought was let the class die a natural death. On further reflection I had another thought.

Just stick a band-aid on it and ignore it. Add the TP motor to the current list.

Here are the advantages:
1. It will buy us a couple more years with the current rules.
2. Allows time to see what direction RTR's go.
3. Keeps choices easy for the average racer building boats.
3. Holds with our tradition of reactive rule making.
4. Steven gets to sell a bunch of TP motors.

Disadvantages:
1. We get to do this again in 2 years.
2. We get to do this again in 4 years, etc.
3. Still doesn't address where the new gen RTR's fit.

It almost wouldn't be FE without the biennial rule debates.

I may get some interesting phone calls tonight over this post.



BTW. I agree with Mike B. Don't expect a bunch of support for P-ltd from AQ in the future.

[T.S.Davis]

HAHAHA I sure am enjoying your responses guys. Darin, just tell PB to knock it the heck off. Then we can back to doing serious racing on not so serious power plants.

Brian may be on to something. Buy some time and/or let it croke on it's own.

We touched on this briefly at our winter club meeting. We have an SV class. Some didn't realize you couldn't buy a fresh one off the shelf anymore. Unless you stumbled on to one or what ever. Consensus was run it till we can't find em or can't get parts. Then move on.

How about we just make it TP and nutt'n else? Didn't I say something like this about 30 posts ago? Screw all this hand wringing and run that till the supply beefs.

[dethow]

No one is freaking out about adding more 36mm motors. On topic of motors ONLY it's a good idea.

I think this thread did get de-railing a bit leaning towards the discussion of where the future of P-limited is heading.

Currently there is no need to add those other motors because we have supply of what we need. But you are making this proposal because the future does not look good for them and you want to be ahead of that. What I'm saying is that by the time there is actually such a big problem we actually need this new list of motors, there MAY be other issues that will exist within the P-Limited format.

The biggest being 'ease of entry'. If these existing 36mm motors dry up and/or the RTR boats they come in dry up... We will be left with a new class of RTR which will have no place to run in NAMBA without making significant changes to your new RTR boat. And it's not like these required changes will make that boat faster. They will actually slow it down. So ease of entry is shot and potential for promoting the hobby to new people is shot.

I'm discussing this and any other potential changes to P-Limited (such as prop limits) in an effort to understand if there is more then just a list of motors that will need change within the next 3 to 4 years in order to keep the intent of this class.

To me... to just put together a list of motors that fixes potential future problem for those already in the hobby is great. But what about addressing the new guys that will be buying RTR. Right now it seems the only response to that is, that we shouldn't concern ourselves with what's going on in the RTR market. If we go down that road then we're basically saying we shouldn't concern ourselves with getting new racers in the hobby and thus should do nothing to accommodate them.

[Doby]

Lets get rid of P-limited classes....wait a minute, than lets get rid of the majority of the boats at past events.

FE Racing ends.

Sigh.....

[Darin Jordan]

How about we just make it TP and nutt'n else?

If we add the TP, that's basically what we've done...

I'm about ready to just jump on Brian's boat and say screw it.


OK, If we are going to add ONE TP, why not add 4... AT LEAST give people KV Options...


TP TP-3630-10D 10D 1950
TP TP-3630-5Y 5Y 1870
TP TP-3630-6Y 6Y 1750
TP TP-3630-7Y 7Y 1500

[longballlumber]

I am still confused what this INTENT is.

I hear performance equality (parity)
I hear cost control
I hear "protect the RTR entry level boaters"

But we keep talking about a class that is a speedcontrol away from full P. Many of the motors listed, from a cost standpoint, would only take a few more $$$ to get you the correct motor wind and size for full P power. As a matter of fact there are plenty of successfull full P set up's using TP, Lepoard, Typhoon budget motors that cost the same or near the same on the current list.

Parity, Spec, Stock (call it whatever you want) in other racing formats comes with a Rule Book "This Thick" (think of any imaginary thickness). Let's face it you can’t have "unlimited" (or 37) motor options and have parity. Only a few motors will rise to the top. Only it’s going to take longer to find out the more motors we have on the list. We saw with the current (successful) rule set. A majority (not all) of the racers in P-limited run AquaCraft branded motors, even in there ProBoat hulls. Of those using the AquaCraft branded motors, I would be willing to bet the 2030 version was used 2:1 (maybe more) compared to the 1800kv. Point is there might be 5%??? of the motors on that list that will actually be “close” when using all three INTENT criteria; performance, quality, and cost.

I would also like to add that NO class should be called a “beginners” class. In many forms of racing (including RC boats), Stock or Spec racing is a tuners/drivers class. I does quite the opposite from what most people think of “stock” IMO.

As for RTR’s - The power system showed up before we started the class. NOW we have a structured class and new RTR’s that are being released without any concern with NAMBA’s P-Limited classes. That’s a what came first; chicken or egg scenario. It was a stroke of luck that we had to competing manufacturers that supplied off the shelf equipment that was “close”. I don’t think we can expect that in the future. The manufactures are no longer in touch with racing; Darin stated that about ProBoat and we all know that Mike Z is no longer at AquaCraft. I don’t think it’s something the NAMBA org (us racers) are going to be able to benefit from.

[raptor347]

If we add the TP, that's basically what we've done...

I'm about ready to just jump on Brian's boat and say screw it.


OK, If we are going to add ONE TP, why not add 4... AT LEAST give people KV Options...


TP TP-3630-10D 10D 1950
TP TP-3630-5Y 5Y 1870
TP TP-3630-6Y 6Y 1750
TP TP-3630-7Y 7Y 1500

Covers all the existing applications that are slowly disappearing. The 5Y is listed at 2070kV though. How about the 10D, 7y and 6y?

[Darin Jordan]

I am still confused what this INTENT is.

I hear performance equality (parity)
I hear cost control
I hear "protect the RTR entry level boaters"

Mike, I'm actually getting unclear about that myself. I know what I think it is, but I'm hearing all the same mixture of thoughts you are.

I'll add one to the list.

4) ARE we considering this for a NATIONAL class? A Class that does 1, 2, and 3, above, and also gets run at a National event?

1, 2, and 3 can be taken care of at the CLUB level, without any special inclusion into the rules. "Club-RTR", etc. No brain-er.

4... If you answer that question "YES", then we that's a whole new can of worms. HOW exactly would one do that with all the current, and imminent future variations?

You'll never satisfy all of these on a National level. You show up with a Revolt and I show up with an IM31 V3... who do you think has the distinct advantage?? How excited are you going to think racing is then? How can you POSSIBLY anticipate what RTR manufacturers are going to do? WHY do we care at a Nats?

I don't know ANYONE who starts out racing an RTR that, if they catch the bug, ONLY sticks to racing RTRs... Give them a club class where they can race locally and CATCH that bug. Then, they can build towards a structured class if they want to compete at one of the Nats events.

I'll go back to my original intent statement:

The intent of the P-Limited class is:

1) To provide a lower powered and lower cost alternative to the regular "P" class by:

a) restricting the number of motors allowed to a single motor
b) restricting the allowable motor size to a specific maximum set of dimensions and RPM

2) This class will provide a place for amateurs to gain experience, and for everyone to enjoy a lower cost, more evenly balanced competitive class of racing.

Maybe I'm over-thinking this. LORD knows I'm over posting about it... (sorry guys! )

[Darin Jordan]

Covers all the existing applications that are slowly disappearing. The 5Y is listed at 2070kV though.

Ooops... my bad...

How about the 10D, 7y and 6y?

TP TP-3630-10D 10D 1950
TP TP-3630-6Y 6Y 1750
TP TP-3630-7Y 7Y 1500

What the heck... Why not... Would probably put the nail in the other motors, but that will happen eventually anyhow.

Heck, Even Peterson may approve??

Pros and Cons??

[80mac]

Dave, I don't know what anyone else has planned but my intent is for a spec to get run at some club capacity over the 2016 season and then propose something only if it's working. How to do that without pissing off club racers I'm not sure yet. I suspect what we'll need to do is have a handful running experimental motors for no points. Maybe one guy in each of our classes tinkering? IDK yet. It's a sacrifice some of us are willing to make.

Terry, I have 2 of the TP 3630 motors that I purchased before the season started. I would be up for running the TP motor in either my P Limited Cat or P Limited Sport Hydro for next season if that will help out. Since I am still new to FE boats anyway it might be a good learning tool.... Just a thought.. Bill

[dethow]

TP TP-3630-10D 10D 1950
TP TP-3630-6Y 6Y 1750
TP TP-3630-7Y 7Y 1500

I like the band-aid idea and like the simple addition of a few extra choices.

I think Mike B. is right that of all the choices which will become available from the defined specs there will be a couple that will rise to the top and become the top pick of racers. It will just take time and money spent to figure out which those are.

From the long list you have going I was personally excited about the TP3630 and the Neu1409. But I think the Neu is a stretch to put in that list of possible motors just because it hits the spec requirements. My gut says it will rise to the top and then we're asking people to spend big money on a limited class motor to compete. As Mike said... might as well just upgrade the esc and spend an extra $50 on a motor that can compete in full P.

And I'd think if you just go with these additions it could be implemented sooner then later. Maybe for next years' (2016) race season??

Can you tell I already own two of these TPs and sick of burning up AQs??