Sport 18 Hydro

I thought there was an old post about this but searched and can't find it.

Anyway, should the RTR Hydro class be changed to Sport 18 Hydro? This would allow more engines to be used and different hulls. Even home builds at the same dimensions as say the Miss Vegas. What are some other rules that should be added for this class?

All comments are welcomed but please keep it civil.

vegaskiller73 said:

I thought there was an old post about this but searched and can't find it.
Anyway, should the RTR Hydro class be changed to Sport 18 Hydro? This would allow more engines to be used and different hulls. Even home builds at the same dimensions as say the Miss Vegas. What are some other rules that should be added for this class?

All comments are welcomed but please keep it civil.

Click to expand...

This is only my opinion, but there are already 9 million classes in which the only limit to the boat is the size of the engine....even the rtr class in some areas already allow the engines to be modified...we really need 1 or 2 classes in model boating that keep the boat and engine stock,A) to get begineers into the hobby, and B) to finally keep the cost down so that people on limited budgets can go boat racing.....I personally like just about all of the classes that are offered in model boat racing..and i have raced in everthing from stock outboard tunnel to 1/8th scale unlimited, but i purchased a rtr just to go to something simple,cheap, and FUN!!! I mean really, just pick any hydro or mono class and you can make just about any cheap or expensive modification you want on the hull or engine...just my 2 cents worth....thanks for readin, Bill

Vegas Killer

Thats a good question and one that (in my opinion) needs to be very carefully thought out.

The NAME IS VERY IMPORTNT.. once you have a name STICK WITH IT.

What is the intent of the class? If you can conclude that up front you are going to save a TON of problems down the road. Im not going to open up a can of worms on this but for instance the intent of IMPBA B sport tunnel was to give the current/expert RC tunnel boat racer a bragging class to hone his skills... It had a nothing to do with saving money or making a place for a new racer to step in..

Having said that..

We have had more then one heated debate on what IMPBA sport tunnel is.. To add to the confusion some have called it Stock Tunnel.... (remember that naming thing)..

The intent of the class was never made public and was just assumed by all at the time of its start.. OK.. here we are 11 years later and we have no history that says what the Intent of IMPBA sport tunnel is.

I have seen this a bunch of times and its nothing you can ever fix regardless of what class you run… new people coming in thinking they should just be able to by an engine and beat up on the others. But when you are racing the likes of Otto, Kinsell, Preusse Zaker, Brown, Wood, Lafluer, among others you better have your crap together. You can not buy that and for most its nothing you are going to get in a hurry.

O yea I would have mentioned Shindlers name but he is easy to beat.. GOT YA MIKEY.. get a hair cut man..

Good Luck

Mike

vegaskiller73 said:

I thought there was an old post about this but searched and can't find it.
Anyway, should the RTR Hydro class be changed to Sport 18 Hydro? This would allow more engines to be used and different hulls. Even home builds at the same dimensions as say the Miss Vegas. What are some other rules that should be added for this class?

All comments are welcomed but please keep it civil.

Click to expand...

A sport .18 class would only be for a couple boats. What about the RTR cats and monos? What about the sport hydros that have larger, or possibly smaller engines? What about gas or electric RTR boats? Any attempt to define a specific RTR class will leave out lots of boats and will become obsolete when the manufacturers and consumers end up choosing a different boat, engine, or power source. These issues were part of why Kelly and I developed rules that intentionally did not specify a hull style, engine size, or even type of fuel/power. They define a framework for RTR, while leaving things open for the manufacturers to change. They also allow each club to setup classes based on the boats that are popular in their area.

And one final comment about sport .18, it's so close to sport 21 that it seems redundant.

piper_chuck said:

vegaskiller73 said:

I thought there was an old post about this but searched and can't find it.
Anyway, should the RTR Hydro class be changed to Sport 18 Hydro? This would allow more engines to be used and different hulls. Even home builds at the same dimensions as say the Miss Vegas. What are some other rules that should be added for this class?

All comments are welcomed but please keep it civil.

Click to expand...

A sport .18 class would only be for a couple boats. What about the RTR cats and monos? What about the sport hydros that have larger, or possibly smaller engines? What about gas or electric RTR boats? Any attempt to define a specific RTR class will leave out lots of boats and will become obsolete when the manufacturers and consumers end up choosing a different boat, engine, or power source. These issues were part of why Kelly and I developed rules that intentionally did not specify a hull style, engine size, or even type of fuel/power. They define a framework for RTR, while leaving things open for the manufacturers to change. They also allow each club to setup classes based on the boats that are popular in their area.

And one final comment about sport .18, it's so close to sport 21 that it seems redundant.

Click to expand...

Z MAN i have a hair cut and a MASTERS B Sport Jacket............ha ha ha

District 8 ran something we called Sport 18 RTR Hydro for district points in 2007. It drew more entries than any other class we raced last year. From the first race race in April to the final race the last weekend in September some boats in the class evolved from basically stock RTR Miss Vegas, and a few Pro Boats, into sponson modifications, forward radio boxes, and running props used in 20 tunnel class. The desire to make modifications to increase the speed was greater than the will to "leave things alone." A problem we are now facing is "how much is too much?"

JD

Another class????

My opinion, like mentioned in the past is the same; there are already a few dozen too many......

Also, now there are 4 organizations.... 2 is good, three is a crowd, 4 is a cluster......and that is exactly what we have at this time

Have fun!

Rw

vegaskiller73 said:

I thought there was an old post about this but searched and can't find it.
Anyway, should the RTR Hydro class be changed to Sport 18 Hydro? This would allow more engines to be used and different hulls. Even home builds at the same dimensions as say the Miss Vegas. What are some other rules that should be added for this class?

All comments are welcomed but please keep it civil.

Click to expand...

A better question might be "what would it take to get Aqua Craft or one of the other mass market hobby retailers to build more boats to match existing engine displacement classes?" Both NAMBA and IMPBA have 3.5cc classes and 7.5cc classes. An RTR .21 powered Miss Vegas or Nitro Vee type boat with a mass market air cooled buggy engine would probably be a lot of fun and relatively inexpensive to produce. The manufacturers could offer hop up kits with HP piston/sleeve combos, different pipes, hop up kits, HP motors, etc... The newbie could grow into the hobby. Think of mass market RC cars and trucks, and apply the same marketing concepts. Some folks are on the right track, but it would help the entire hobby if we had a little more standardization, and a little less segmentation.

Keep it simple,

Mike

BINGO BINGO BINGO...

Mike you have a very clear vision...

If you and tell im excited... you should think deeper into this post.

Mike

Right on!

Rw

Mike Mooers said:

A better question might be "what would it take to get Aqua Craft or one of the other mass market hobby retailers to build more boats to match existing engine displacement classes?" Both NAMBA and IMPBA have 3.5cc classes and 7.5cc classes. An RTR .21 powered Miss Vegas or Nitro Vee type boat with a mass market air cooled buggy engine would probably be a lot of fun and relatively inexpensive to produce. The manufacturers could offer hop up kits with HP piston/sleeve combos, different pipes, hop up kits, HP motors, etc... The newbie could grow into the hobby. Think of mass market RC cars and trucks, and apply the same marketing concepts. Some folks are on the right track, but it would help the entire hobby if we had a little more standardization, and a little less segmentation.
Keep it simple,

Mike

Click to expand...

Mike Mooers said:

A better question might be "what would it take to get Aqua Craft or one of the other mass market hobby retailers to build more boats to match existing engine displacement classes?" Both NAMBA and IMPBA have 3.5cc classes and 7.5cc classes. An RTR .21 powered Miss Vegas or Nitro Vee type boat with a mass market air cooled buggy engine would probably be a lot of fun and relatively inexpensive to produce. The manufacturers could offer hop up kits with HP piston/sleeve combos, different pipes, hop up kits, HP motors, etc... The newbie could grow into the hobby. Think of mass market RC cars and trucks, and apply the same marketing concepts. Some folks are on the right track, but it would help the entire hobby if we had a little more standardization, and a little less segmentation.
Keep it simple,

Mike

Click to expand...

Man, I completley agree with this statement!! This idea would take so much of the frustration that goes with the learning curve out of model boating....think about how many people have rc boats sitting in a closet becuase they simply didnt know how to get them to run...i remember my first rc boat, it was a dumas hot shot with a K&B 3.5 outboard, short skeg, slide exhaust throttle for those of you that remember...if it wasnt for a guy named Cal Lang, who was willing to spend evenings working on my boat instead of working on his on stuff, I would have NEVER gotten that boat together AND RUNNING! Now comes the real challange that goes with that great idea....can it be made affordable to the average person??

After looking at the engine clssifications, I guess the easiest way to get rid of the confusion is to just run in the "B" Hydro class, but that would then exclude the Vegas and the ProBoats. Then just have a RTR class dedicated to stock. Man this can get complicated.

I know some are fighting the issue of adding classes, I understand this. But you could just offer them at very least. No one shows no extra class. Just as with all the other classes that are offered.

Piper I remember you guys building the rules (along with others) but I just don't feel all RTRs should be bundled in the same class (i.e. Hydros, Monos/Vees, Cats).

can it be made affordable to the average person

Click to expand...

Some think it can be done and some don't. Some actually feel that Sport 20 is the way to go. What is the average cost of a ARTR Sport 20? Is this cost effective for a 19 y/o in college and working a minimum wage job? I don't think so. But I have been wrong before. What about the minors? I mean my son owns his own Vegas but it is not fast as a Sport 20, but he paid for it with his own grasscutting money. You got to allow newcomers to race and the only cost effective way is with RTRs.

I agree with the manufacturers changing designs that fit the Associations, but the million dollar question is "Will They"? We have a couple of users here that helped design the Vegas. Is it legal? No, why? They knew the rules before Aqu designed the boat right? Why did AQU continue to build it the wrong way? Not trying to bashing these guys (Russ. Grim & Jerry) just wondering why a design that doesn't fit in the classes and asking myself why didn't AQU listen?

Off the podium, NEXT.

Didn’t listen?

Dude... Do you really think that boat was DESIGNED FOR RACING?

Be truth full….

Mike

Grimracer said:

Didn’t listen?
Dude... Do you really think that boat was DESIGNED FOR RACING?

Be truth full….

Mike

Click to expand...

No. But did you not think that people would try? Now you be truthfull.

vegaskiller73 said:

After looking at the engine clssifications, I guess the easiest way to get rid of the confusion is to just run in the "B" Hydro class, but that would then exclude the Vegas and the ProBoats. Then just have a RTR class dedicated to stock. Man this can get complicated.
I know some are fighting the issue of adding classes, I understand this. But you could just offer them at very least. No one shows no extra class. Just as with all the other classes that are offered.

Piper I remember you guys building the rules (along with others) but I just don't feel all RTRs should be bundled in the same class (i.e. Hydros, Monos/Vees, Cats).

Click to expand...

The RTRs are not all bundled together, other than having one set of rules to define what an RTR is, but neither is there any attempt to create an individual class for every boat, or even categories of boats. As has been shown, there is too much variety out there. Does it make sense to define a class for every boat when the odds of having enough of them at a race are limited, and when the manufacturer could change the boat, or discontinue it?

IMO, the variety is best handled at a club level. Let's look at some examples:

Club 1:

3 Miss Vegas, 1 SV27 nitro, 1 TC 31

What does the club do for these members? Do you define a Sport .18 class and tell the others they're SOL? I wouldn't. Do you look at the speeds of the boats and if they're in the same range, have them all to run together? I certainly would consider this. For reference, my club has some people with .15-.18 monos and some with MVs. We run them together, and have lots of fun doing so...

Club 2:

4 Miss Vegas, 3 Pro Boat gas hydros, 3 Black Jack 55s, 4 SV27 brushless

Since there are enough of each type to make a viable class, they could split them by boat type.

The examples could go on....

can it be made affordable to the average person

Click to expand...

Some think it can be done and some don't. Some actually feel that Sport 20 is the way to go. What is the average cost of a ARTR Sport 20? Is this cost effective for a 19 y/o in college and working a minimum wage job? I don't think so. But I have been wrong before. What about the minors? I mean my son owns his own Vegas but it is not fast as a Sport 20, but he paid for it with his own grasscutting money. You got to allow newcomers to race and the only cost effective way is with RTRs.

Click to expand...

If you rephrase it as one cost effective way is with RTRs, I could agree. Another cost effective way is to buy second hand boats. I've had lots of fun with a .45 Twincraft mono that I bought for $300. All I had to add was batteries, and it even came with a spare engine.

I agree with the manufacturers changing designs that fit the Associations, but the million dollar question is "Will They"? We have a couple of users here that helped design the Vegas. Is it legal? No, why? They knew the rules before Aqu designed the boat right? Why did AQU continue to build it the wrong way? Not trying to bashing these guys (Russ. Grim & Jerry) just wondering why a design that doesn't fit in the classes and asking myself why didn't AQU listen?
Off the podium, NEXT.

Click to expand...

The Vegas may not be legal in NAMBA, but I hear they're working on a rules revision, but it certainly is for IMPBA Sport 20.

Grimracer said:

Dude... Do you really think that boat was DESIGNED FOR RACING?

Click to expand...

Put a motor/engine in it, and someone'll want to race it. For example....

piper_chuck said:

Grimracer said:

Dude... Do you really think that boat was DESIGNED FOR RACING?

Click to expand...

Put a motor/engine in it, and someone'll want to race it. For example....

Click to expand...

Man that is the absolute TRUTH!!! Another examle of that is in full size boat racing.... Jersey speed skiffs...those boats were NEVER designed for racing..they were built to haul "stuff", and go fast.......

piper_chuck said:

Grimracer said:

Dude... Do you really think that boat was DESIGNED FOR RACING?

Click to expand...

Put a motor/engine in it, and someone'll want to race it. For example....

Click to expand...

That's funny right there, I don't care who you are.

Back to topic.

With everything said it seems that all we are looking at is the Vegas hulls (or hydro anyway). What would be opinions of someone build their own hull out of wood or fiberglass, and equiping it with all Aqu hardware or anything else? With a max engine size of 18.

At the last VooDoo race we had a guy that scratch built a hull (nice and almost identicle to to vegas) and put all the stock hardware and engine in it. Very cost effective to build and ran great (2nd to me).

Maybe I'm concentrating on this too much. I should be trying to figure out how to make my gas boats faster.

Sport, stock, RTR whatever you want to name things I think what is trying to be done is to create an entry level cost effective class. Maybe the manufacturers should get on board and to keep it simple .21-.45 -.60 are pretty well established. Does it really cost more to produce a .21 over a .18? Or making a .21 would put them into a competative arena they are trying to avoid? Having an sport .18 & sport.21 makes little sense in my opinion. Let the .18 run in the .21 class for sure. If we need to regulate competition have something like a $300-400 claiming class. If cost is the real issue then regulate Nitro down to 10%. Great for larger displacement RTR's and dampens effect of expensive highly modded motors. A club could deignate the fuel to be supplied A reputable accessable manufacturer who might donate to get their name in the hat. Morgans-Red Max-Odonells? More manufacturer involvement. For the race charge a couple bucks more for fuel in the entry fees. You know ahead of time what will be furnished and if you feel it will damage your engine don't race and help out in the pits. House fuel only for the race you check in with an empty tank and fill up in the pits. Gets you all staged and ready with your clips. Your buddies will be watching and keep you honest here. Less noise as a side effect. No need for technical inspections that never happen anyway. Just a thought.

Mic-

Wher can I git entry form?? I got a Bocsh pushing around 3.5 hp, and a Porter cable that has never been beat (or raced), both r set up with hi-speed sanding belts wth some spares depending on track conditions hi sap ratio?,knot sizes?,etc. etc., garnet or silicon carbide decisions, decisions, interested to know what bearings there running I have Wibs in mine.Building a open class Rockwell as we speak! Does this give new meaning to JUST DUSTED YOUR ASS?. Any helpful input would be appreciated

Steve H.