Jump to content

T.S.Davis

Members
  • Content Count

    535
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About T.S.Davis

  • Rank
    Club Racer

Profile Information

  • Location
    Chesterfield, Michigan

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. T.S.Davis

    ABC props for sale

    I forgot about this. Sorry Walt. 48150 would be my ship to zip. The 2014-17-45 is even better for my purposes. My email is h2o-racing@comcast.net
  2. T.S.Davis

    ABC props for sale

    Walt, Looks like you have a number of props I would like to add to my collection. 1617-19-38 1717-19-38 2014-19-38 2215-19-38 1816-10-50/3R Let em know and I'll get the paypal to ya.
  3. T.S.Davis

    FE faces some interesting challenges.

    That is a mess if you run at a NAMBA race. Cut a buoy and you're a lap down. The lap counter has no idea. I wonder will it have a transponder?
  4. T.S.Davis

    FE faces some interesting challenges.

    We tried that one race with Nimh and Lipo. Back when about half the sparkies had LiPo. Ever been lapped twice? It's very confusing for racers, pit guys, and contest directors. Terry, I think time trials are a little different. New guy should know what he's getting into when he comes to a time trial. If I know I'll need to prove my boat is legal I'm bringing a scale. They're 20 bucks at harbor freight.
  5. T.S.Davis

    FE faces some interesting challenges.

    Yep. Could do that but that wont help someone looking to get into racing. Just went through this with a potential new guy trying to understand the FE rules. If the rules fluctuate from club to club and from venue to venue................ Again, I'm not suggesting I have a solve. Just more think'n out loud. This is why I would prefer to have spec be an actual rule set instead of a recommendation. I'm certainly willing to wait to get it right though. As successful as limited is/was I still think we screwed it up. Don't wanna screw it up again. The motor list was un-techable. That weight restriction was aimed at the Neu 1415 motor with a modified can. I still haven't been beaten by one. I thought the same thing about the weight. What a pain in the a$$! Then Mike talked me down. haha We're not going to be weighing every motor at an event. Ever. The only time either rule set requires us to weigh one is if it is officially protested. That's only going to happen when someone is stomping the crap out of the field. You weigh it with the can...........crap it's over. Take the can off........dang close but still over. Take off the connectors. If it's still over it's illegal. That's a worst case scenario. Going to happen maybe once per year. As race/builder.........if I get out close to the edge of the spec......I'm likely aware. I know there is a chance I'll be proving it. If I know that I may (MAY) have to have my motor weighed I'm build accordingly. Ease of extraction being a real thing. The onus is on me the racer not the organization or the CD to make my life as easy as possible. A better idea for me the racer is to get no where near that specs edge and focus on driving a lane. That's where I pis away all my chances anyway.
  6. T.S.Davis

    FE faces some interesting challenges.

    Just sharing thoughts. What if twin classes existed only for time trials? Then allow clubs to do a twin sprint class on their own should they have the desire. Honestly we could do that with half of our current class list. Nobody oval races N anything anymore. Well few. I know of none but I don't know every electric gang of misfits. We keep things like N on the books for two or three guys that run that once per year at a SAW event. What's our goal here? I guess for me..........I want guys on the water together. That makes races. Like minded fools running together is where it's at for me. Time trials are cool. I do that too but it aint racing. Has anyone ever seen a heat of say.......Q outboard tunnels? Cool and all but 1 guy per 1000 racers isn't a very good reason to have it on the books. New guy looks in the book. Finds Q tunnel. "That sounds sweet! I always liked tunnel boats!" Builds it. Finds zero places to race. Quits. Having too many classes is the result of us FE guys insisting on having national rules for every idea we ever had. Raising my hand. Guilty! That dates back to us being told in my NAMBA days that we had to follow class rules in the book or we were not insured. Having studied the book close enough to recite it..........it was a BS interpretation. Ancient history. Back then IMPBA kinda followed NAMBA's lead in an effort to accommodate crossovers. Voltage, length limits, sport hydro dims all came from NAMBA. Now we're stuck with too many in both organizations. Getting something IN the book......not that hard. Getting something out? Forget it. It's there forever. Think NAMBA still has ECO. Cool idea. Nobody races that in the states. If we just separate twins out it could potentially double our class count. There aren't that many FE nuts to begin with. Are we wanting heats or not? Giving us twice the classes has the potential to end organized events. Again, I can't get my head around a solution. Other than the time trial only idea. Circle back to spec/limited. Does it make sense that the BOD might be apprehensive? Adds 4 more classes to spread us across what's already too many. We never let old classes go away ever so it would just be............more. Plus, if we don't test it to death and get it right it's literally like rocket surgery to fix it. Look how many years NAMBA guys have argued about limited. The IMPBA BOD has had fellas threaten to "blow the whistle" on them or some such nonsense for not just slamming it through. That always makes people hop to it. Level heads prevailed. We're close on spec rules. We've not seen signs of motor dominance. No buying a custom one off motor killing everyone. Every fuel source has had the new hotness motor you just gotta have. We'll still get that. We went through it with batteries. Sub C cells had a new version sometimes twice per season. Talk about dollar racing. Then it was motors. Aveox, Hacker, Lehner, Neu.........ahhhhhhhh. Lately it' been props. So many new ways to push. It's racing. We're all looking for edge of the envelope. I think for now it's safe to let the numbers tell us if spec needs to be in the book. Just my opinion. Previewed it. Sorry guys. Wrote a novel again.
  7. T.S.Davis

    FE faces some interesting challenges.

    My concern is that we already have a LOT of FE classes that don't get filled. If you're not racing then who cares? Build a quad cat if it's just fer your own grin. If you have 4 FE cat guys in one city that want to race though. 2 build twin Q cats, 2 build single Q cats. They get to..........not race..... at all. No heats. That's what they get. We already have this problem. I don't think we have the population to justify both. Again, I don't have a sensible solve for everyone. May actually BE offensive but us FE guys are scatter brained. Me too. Makes it hard to field heats.
  8. T.S.Davis

    FE faces some interesting challenges.

    True Tyler but I wouldn't put you in the "average" boat guy category. No offense to the rest of us intended. You're Q mono set the record that was held by my Q mono. Those two are not the norm. Where is that sticking my tongue out emogy? There!! I whooped up on a Larry with the Wildthing in offshore the first year he brought it out myself. I can't say for sure if I was faster or Larry was not on the pins. Could have been either or. The hair pin definitely gives us an edge I think. That was the last time I beat him I think. I got noth'n for him now. It's gotten even better......or he's gotten used to it. Not sure.
  9. T.S.Davis

    FE faces some interesting challenges.

    The spec classes still have the best dollar to giggles ratio of all of our classes in my opinion. They were never intended to be a beginner class. The intent was for it to be a place for everyone that wasn't necessarily dominated by someone's wallet. A class for the new guy and the veteran to coexist in pieceful harmony. (picture me typing with butterflies flitting about) If you look at Mike's IMPBA recommendation for 4s spec motors you'll find very little hand wringing over it. With the exception of the weight. It may need to be shaved a tic. 260 grams maybe vs 265 grams? We've raced the crap out of this for a couple seasons now. Ran all kinds of variants too. From the most expensive to the least. Middle of the road cost motors are still the best option we've seen so far. My brat kid killed everyone this season with the relatively inexpensive Proboat motor option in spec sport. My point is, you can't buy wins with the Mike's suggested guide. Not so far at least. I really think it could be a rule but getting the BOD to agree to it is a tall task. Primarily because some have been such complete jack holes while we prove the concept. The perception is that it's too controversial and no matter what someone will be crying. I think this latest rendition that Mike has outlined is so close to correct that it should/could/would put it to rest for quite some time. The twins thing you have to see to appreciate. A single cat no matter who set it up is absolutely not in the same league as a well set up twin cat. SAW or oval. Sorry, it isn't. Watched PAGS and Baffer run with Larry at the CanAm. PAGS has won so many national championships in Q cat that he probably has more wins than anyone since LiPo were added to the rule book. Baffers boat is a direct copy. So two of the best cats in the country. Larry's twin boat will leave them for dead. He's got multiple stable mph on them. That's not to say Larry can put it on the pins but put that boat in the hands of someone that can and then what? Hosed. I don't have a solve for that either but don't kid yerselves, a single and a twin Q cat have no business competing with each other. As it sits today, if you're going to race Q cat in the north you better be building a twin. PAGS is working on one right now. One of our locals is too. Not sure on the mono twins. They don't work as well. We saw a twin Q mono in Flint for the trial. The problem appeared to be (to me at least) that the props lift the boat up and out of the water quite a bit. So almost no keel in the water. Just the rudder. Especially at 75mph+. If a wisp of wind or a lateral wave tilts the boat even a few degrees you end up with one prop in the water and no keel in the water. Shawn finally killed his boat this way. Came off in the mid 70's
  10. T.S.Davis

    Electric Rules

    Fortunately, you likely will never have to deal with it. IMPBA has that added layer of review where a rule set doesn't turn the apple cart over and throw it in the lake.
  11. T.S.Davis

    Electric Rules

    Been thinking about this a lot although I'm apparently not supposed to according to one guy. Maybe a kinder gentler splane'n. Doug, there is no difference between this new 1/8 rule and the old P Limited rule. Same exact problem. Can't verify the motor. Did I mention my dead horse? Looks like he was hit by a train now. Body parts strewn all over the tracks. So, we've been beating up the guys that proposed this new set for not having tech'd anything. That made me think.....notice the smoke? They've written a rule that requires reliance on the manufacturers labels and put faith in the racers to not have tampered with them. Not weird. We've done it before. So if you think about it, the limits of their technical inspection would be the same as we used to do with limited. You look at the motor, nod yer head, and assume it's okay. It's bad tech but is in compliance with the rules they were running under. So technically they were following the rule the way they understood it. The "tech" part of the equation actually has been satisfied. Where the criticism is valid is in the rule itself. Some have been critical of the old limited rules for the inability to verify a motor. That was true. The writers have since acknowledged as much too. Not that it satisfies the critics. I'm still required to jump in a well after the nats. I'll check with Dave on his demise. He wrote the danged thing. haha The impact on existing racers aside, the problem with the new 1/8 set isn't "what" it is but "how" it is. There are a number of things that although they sound/seem reasonable they simply can't be verified other than reading the labels. The motor and the batteries can't be proven on site. Reliance on the labels isn't sustainable. Also brings every result here after into question. Just heat racing results alone will be looked at with a microscope by people that it doesn't even matter too. This will happen a lot BTW. We know this because we already screwed it up ourselves with limited the same way despite our good intentions.
  12. T.S.Davis

    Electric Rules

    Did I mention we made a mistake with the limited rules? Been a couple days. Memory is fading. I can't throw myself down the well until after the nats for it. In our defense, there wasn't a TP motor, or a Turnigy, or a Raider, or an SSS, or a Leopard. When we wrote that set we were trying to make it so you didn't have to be "in the know" to get into it. Which in truth is what the want to believe was intended with the new 1/8 scale rules. That part I applaud. They just blew it the same way we did. Un-techables. Has anyone seen my horse? I think it died. I wasn't done beating it.
  13. T.S.Davis

    Electric Rules

    The solution is there is no solution. It can't be "fixed". This is the part that keeps getting ignored. "tell us how to fix it" "ya can't" "yeah but how would you fix it?" "I can't fix it either" "instead of being weeny about it, tell us what's wrong with it" "we did. the chairman told you it wasn't detailed enough and you went for it anyway" "well at least tell us how to tech it" "Holy crap! ya can't. aren't you listening?" "yer so negative. clearly the problem is you" The rule book isn't intended to lay out a shopping list for racers. Well, it shouldn't be. It's there to define the parameters of the classes, safety, organization guidelines, etc. We have a description of a mono in there too. It doesn't say to go buy a Titan 33 for P mono. So how do people find out what to buy? They ask. It should have been left as it was and those groups that wanted to do something different could have done exactly that. Our little group is doing this with limited/spec. It did get proposed to IMPBA. The BOD looked it over decided it wasn't quite ready for prime time. Which is what should have happened with this proposal. As has been mentioned, there is no provision like the in NAMBA. The fix is for NAMBA to step in and recognize the impossible to tech parameters and dial back to the original rule set. As far as I know there are no provisions for such a thing. I doubt it's ever happened where a rule that was unenforceable was passed. Wasn't there some hiccup with the gas rules a few years ago that needed some emergency intervention?
  14. T.S.Davis

    Electric Rules

    Come on man. Really? How about don't submit rules you claim work when your testing is incomplete. Nobody has ever verified a boat in the 3 years of claimed success. Bill says basically that "how" to verify compliance is for someone with more knowledge than himself. The guy that penned the proposal that doesn't know how to verify it sells equipment to the guys running the "new" rules. What? Everyone is cool with that? We appreciate the effort you're putting into making the voices of reason out to be a'holes but NAMBA was duped. At the pond, practically, you can't tech the C rating, the mah, or the motor wind. You could have a kv checker on site but that still doesn't account for bearings etc. I'm sure im forgetting some. There are no practical solutions. The rule as written only requires that those things be verified by reading the manufacturers label so it doesn't really matter. No solve for that. See above. Proposing a rule you don't know how to manage because you haven't managed it is wrong regardless of experience level. We know this because we have screwed up in this regard ourselves. Insert P Limited. The set also renders setups that some have spent nearly a decade with.....obsolete. No fix for that other than for them to drop more coin. Or sell it to someone who is going to drop more coin.
  15. T.S.Davis

    Electric Rules

    You proposed a rule set you don't understand and sold it to members that didn't understand it either. The guys smarter than you, the guys that wrote the rest of the electric sections are telling you verification of compliance can't be done at races. Wait.....not fair. The rule only requires it be labeled correctly. Anybody can read the C rate on the sticker. It's verification that the label is correct that is near impossible. NAMBA guys......you need to take notice. The motivation for this proposal is/was "tell me exactly what to buy". By this thinking, all the classes should change to this. For P mono you by motor X from the book. For Q Offshore you by motor Y from the book. For T mono you buy motor Z from the book. This thing is a disaster. There is no solve the way NAMBA is structured so you guys are stuck with it. I've recieved multiple text from guys that are very concerned. Not over "scale". Numbers are still small regardless of the rule. The concern is over the relative ease with which this turd got through. The fear is what might be next. Maybe a Rev limiter? Who knows. Does not bode well for NAMBA.
×