IMPBA Internats 2007

[P THOMAS]

ONE more fan of the flames,

Maybe the clubs that have a site problem, because some bigger boats cant seem to meet the new rules, just wont run Fmono and Fhydro or Twin class any more. that will solve the problem.

Small boat board members is not your problem, sounds like politcal BS to me. Get over it.

 

[dr gary turner]

Unless the db rule is fixed and the testing is done to follow National testing standards the attendance at the Nats will be poor. I have attended about 20 Nationals. We go for the following reasons, 1. to have a good time 2. To have the best most fierce competition with individuals with whom we don't get to race only at the Nats,3. Getting to see my friends of 20+ years that we get to see once a year.

I have just returned this morning from a medical missionary trip to Peru and my first e-mails were fellow competitors who were giving up R/C model boat racing. These indiviuals brought at least 4 boats a peice to race at the Nats. If these trend persist, either IMPBA will have to raise dues to $100 or $200 to pay for the cost of operations or go out of business. Brian Nelsin said he was glad these people left the Nats. Will he be happy to pay a major increase in dues?

There is no question that the rule is flawed and the implimentation was flawed and biased. When 18 out of 20 of the f-hydros were given warnings and then tried with everything they had in the trailers and spent another $100-$200 buying more muffling devices and then could not get the boats to run and finally put them in the trailer and/or went home, THERE IS A PROBLEM.

I would not speak so cavalier about being happy people went home from the Nats especially representing IMPBA as a board member, nor be so closed minded not to recognize a serious problem, BECAUSE THE VIABLITY OF IMPA IS AT RISK!!!!!!!!

I would caution any club in their considerations of hosting the Nats until there is resolution of the means of testing and until National standards are followed in the implementation of an improved db rule. At the present time the reasons for attending the Nats as stated above do not exist. Why would the 18 f-hydro participants want to attend a Nats with the same conditions???????? By the way these individauls raced 4-5 other boats. I entered 5 other boats and classes. Do the math!!!!!!!!!!Dr.Gary TurnerM.D.[Otolaryngology, US-1 f-hydro 2005]

 

[Chris Wood]

Unless the db rule is fixed and the testing is done to follow National testing standards the attendance at the Nats will be poor. I have attended about 20 Nationals. We go for the following reasons, 1. to have a good time 2. To have the best most fierce competition with individuals with whom we don't get to race only at the Nats,3. Getting to see my friends of 20+ years that we get to see once a year.

I have just returned this morning from a medical missionary trip to Peru and my first e-mails were fellow competitors who were giving up R/C model boat racing. These indiviuals brought at least 4 boats a peice to race at the Nats. If these trend persist, either IMPBA will have to raise dues to $100 or $200 to pay for the cost of operations or go out of business. Brian Nelsin said he was glad these people left the Nats. Will he be happy to pay a major increase in dues?

There is no question that the rule is flawed and the implimentation was flawed and biased. When 18 out of 20 of the f-hydros were given warnings and then tried with everything they had in the trailers and spent another $100-$200 buying more muffling devices and then could not get the boats to run and finally put them in the trailer and/or went home, THERE IS A PROBLEM.

I would not speak so cavalier about being happy people went home from the Nats especially representing IMPBA as a board member, nor be so closed minded not to recognize a serious problem, BECAUSE THE VIABLITY OF IMPA IS AT RISK!!!!!!!!

I would caution any club in their considerations of hosting the Nats until there is resolution of the means of testing and until National standards are followed in the implementation of an improved db rule. At the present time the reasons for attending the Nats as stated above do not exist. Why would the 18 f-hydro participants want to attend a Nats with the same conditions???????? By the way these individauls raced 4-5 other boats. I entered 5 other boats and classes. Do the math!!!!!!!!!!Dr.Gary TurnerM.D.[Otolaryngology, US-1 f-hydro 2005]

VERY WELL SAID DOC,

I to enjoy going to the nats for the VERY same reason..

One thing people don't think about and SHOULD.. I see people posting about just not running the classes..

Ask some like ANDY OR JOHN BROWN if nobody runs e-f hydro or e-f mono will that effect there business.. YOU BET..

You can only sell so many 20 motors and boats. ( TRUST ME I KNOW FIRST HAND )

If this trend continues and people fall like fly's, manufactures ( including me and my father ) will all suffer in one fashion or another.

Remember folks. we are a SMALL SMALL pc of the pie, and motor company's and other company's that produce products for our hobby would loose valuable dollars if nobody is running there stuff..

then what happens.. a motor that used to cost 400.00 now is 700 or more, why?? they don't produce as many and tool and overhead goes up..

I started this sport when i was 10yrs old.. I am now 29. I used to race cars, slot cars.. you name it. My dad got me into boats because it was something we both could do, and the POLITICS OF CARS was getting OUR OF HAND.. LOOK WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE.

I am by no means saying it is one or another's fault, but since we have to VOTE or DECIDE as a organization we REALLY REALLY need to look at this and not just assume it will go away this winter and all will be well next year.

Doc is right, there is NO WAY a club should volunteer to do the nats until this gets resolved.. Other wise they are liable to have the same situation on there hands next year.. That is no good for the club or the impba.

Chris

 

[Don Ferrette]

This BS is starting to sound like chicken little....

THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!

:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

 

[Bob Finn]

This BS is starting to sound like chicken little....

THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!

:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

I guess my twin was one of the two w/o a noise problem. They checked mine and it was 86-88 with twin EVO 90's. No problem at all. Ernie LAFluer must have been the second legal twin. His was at 90-91 I think. I believe we can easily reach an 88db limit or less, IF WE TRY! Most folks would rather figure out ways to defeat the rules, than spend any effort to conform and be prepared. I certainly don't see the sky falling, but racing w/o so much noise is sure more pleasant. For the most part, the people complaining so much are the same people who were so much against any form of noise reduction before the rules were passed.

 

[Don Ferrette]

This BS is starting to sound like chicken little....

THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!

:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

I guess my twin was one of the two w/o a noise problem. They checked mine and it was 86-88 with twin EVO 90's. No problem at all. Ernie LAFluer must have been the second legal twin. His was at 90-91 I think. I believe we can easily reach an 88db limit or less, IF WE TRY! Most folks would rather figure out ways to defeat the rules, than spend any effort to conform and be prepared. I certainly don't see the sky falling, but racing w/o so much noise is sure more pleasant. For the most part, the people complaining so much are the same people who were so much against any form of noise reduction before the rules were passed.

Absolutely. This crap of suggesting that we waive the current rule or something similar before the next Nats is just that.

 

[Chris Wood]

I am going to say this for the final time and i am done with this topic.. I AM NOT AGAINST THE NOISE RULE.. What i am against is the way it was handled at the nats and the way we go about checking them.

What part of that don't people get......

I see people on here posting about it like it isn't that big of a deal AND THEY WASN'T THERE..

All i want is a way to comply. and if i can make something for people that would help I am game. But until we have a BALANCED way to go about this we will continue to spin our wheels.

chris

 

[Joe Warren]

I am going to say this for the final time and i am done with this topic.. I AM NOT AGAINST THE NOISE RULE.. What i am against is the way it was handled at the nats and the way we go about checking them.

What part of that don't people get......

I see people on here posting about it like it isn't that big of a deal AND THEY WASN'T THERE..

All i want is a way to comply. and if i can make something for people that would help I am game. But until we have a BALANCED way to go about this we will continue to spin our wheels.

chris

Don, I have said before your boats would have had a Problems @ the 2006 nats...... If you are running the engine Pipes & Add one mufflers I sold you in Atlanta They would have Failed BIG TIME....... Now I agree they will pass @ your race & pond Now Maybe??. But the Point is They would have failed miserably @ Evansville. Parobolics Drilled & Undrilled failed......

This BS is starting to sound like chicken little....

THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!

:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

I guess my twin was one of the two w/o a noise problem. They checked mine and it was 86-88 with twin EVO 90's. No problem at all. Ernie LAFluer must have been the second legal twin. His was at 90-91 I think. I believe we can easily reach an 88db limit or less, IF WE TRY! Most folks would rather figure out ways to defeat the rules, than spend any effort to conform and be prepared. I certainly don't see the sky falling, but racing w/o so much noise is sure more pleasant. For the most part, the people complaining so much are the same people who were so much against any form of noise reduction before the rules were passed.

Absolutely. This crap of suggesting that we waive the current rule or something similar before the next Nats is just that.

Bob Your Twin exceeded the Db limit while your were racing thru the rocks in the front stretch..... Even that rock re-arrangment was making Noise & exceeding the Db limit.....

 

[Don Ferrette]

Don, I have said before your boats would have had a Problems @ the 2006 nats...... If you are running the engine Pipes & Add one mufflers I sold you in Atlanta They would have Failed BIG TIME....... Now I agree they will pass @ your race & pond Now Maybe??. But the Point is They would have failed miserably @ Evansville. Parobolics Drilled & Undrilled failed......

I'm no longer running those pipes Joe but I am testing new prototype stuff with results to be made public shortly. B)

 

[Joe Warren]

Don, I have said before your boats would have had a Problems @ the 2006 nats...... If you are running the engine Pipes & Add one mufflers I sold you in Atlanta They would have Failed BIG TIME....... Now I agree they will pass @ your race & pond Now Maybe??. But the Point is They would have failed miserably @ Evansville. Parobolics Drilled & Undrilled failed......

I'm no longer running those pipes Joe but I am testing new prototype stuff with results to be made public shortly. B)

Hey man, Carried the family out today in the Big Boat, Some Cold KOOL-AID, fine eats, Music, & Good times..... No Db problems today... Make you wonder my we put up with the crazy sxit....

Well the 2006 Nats is Over...... Someone ask for the input for Pics of Good times & stories. I seen little of Both & I believe that was the response to Johns post...... Your Good Luck cannot be bought or produced @ the nats. But the fun is normally there....

 

[Joe Warren]

ONE more fan of the flames,

Maybe the clubs that have a site problem, because some bigger boats cant seem to meet the new rules, just wont run Fmono and Fhydro or Twin class any more. that will solve the problem.

Small boat board members is not your problem, sounds like politcal BS to me. Get over it.

PHIL, CAN I QUOTE YOU ON SAYING( SOME OF THE SITES MAY HAVE A SITE PROBLEM TESTING.....) IF THERE ARE site variables this must be addressed for Future DB testing.

 

[P THOMAS]

ONE more fan of the flames,

Maybe the clubs that have a site problem, because some bigger boats cant seem to meet the new rules, just wont run Fmono and Fhydro or Twin class any more. that will solve the problem.

Small boat board members is not your problem, sounds like politcal BS to me. Get over it.

PHIL, CAN I QUOTE YOU ON SAYING( SOME OF THE SITES MAY HAVE A SITE PROBLEM TESTING.....) IF THERE ARE site variables this must be addressed for Future DB testing.

Yea what ever the problem is I can see them doing that. Not saying Eville will ever do that, they like the big fast boats too.

Soon as the measuring problem gets solve everthing should go smooth.

Maybe the DB meters that Eville used can be brought to the Huntsville race this fall so they can be compared to what the other club uses, maybe any one that uses a db meter can get together in one spot for testing.

PHIL

 

[Ron Olson]

Gary, seeing how you are a doctor that works with hearing, do you have any suggestions for the dB rule? Maybe you know about how the surroundings affect dB levels.

I hate to see this thread turn into another pissing contest over the noise levels but should see if there will be a 2007 Internat's and who is willing to take on such a huge task with big shoulders and Kevlar armor.

What if a site was found that didn't require a noise limit or a more reasonable one then couldn't the rule be over-ridden? Anyone ever thought about that? It's not that I'm not for noise abatement but maybe a more reasonable way to get a group to host the meet.

For instance, anyone who's ever run at the Saginaw site knows that it's at a Conservation club pond and that there is a target range off turn one. The firearms are a lot louder than the boats. If you're a jumpy person, it's not a site to race at for you.

 

[Don Ferrette]

What if a site was found that didn't require a noise limit or a more reasonable one then couldn't the rule be over-ridden? Anyone ever thought about that?

The rule is in place & it will be followed. All this bitchin' about the dB's is not coming from the majority membership who voted it in place. The talk of suspending or scaling back this rule needs to stop as the BOD does not have the authority to over-ride a rule voted in place by the IMPBA general membership. Contrary to what a few are trying to get most to believe there are already pipe options that do work, Bobby Himmel ran one of the NAVIGA pipes from CMB @ E-Ville & he was fast & quiet as was posted by Rod Geraghty. Funny how some of those screaming to recall this rule chose to read right past that. <_<

I'm in process of testing a set of pipes on the twin that if they work as I expect them to will run in the low 80's range dB wise. These have been made special for heavy breathing big block motors & if they get the "thumbs up" will be readily available to all. I would have run them yesterday except for the fact my trailer tow vehicle is still @ the dealership getting serviced (seems they couldn't fix it right the first time). I also have pipes on the way from a couple of European friends to test on my single big block as well. Rather than sit & *****/moan/complain I have chosen to do something about it, which is more than I can say for some others involved in this "debate".

Once we get a way to get everyone's meters calibrated set in place & a few more test sessions of new stuff (I hear the Coopers are hot on this too) we will be just fine. Time to stop listening to the chicken little's out there, the sky is not falling..................

 

[bzubee]

Thanks Don you are correct the board does not have the authority per our IMPBA constitution to override a rule voted in the the membership. We can however make proposal once the results and recommendations from the Noise committee that Mark Bullard had voluteered to be the chairman for gets done with their testing.

 

[Chris Wood]

Bobby Himmel ran one of the NAVIGA pipes from CMB @ E-Ville & he was fast & quiet as was posted by Rod Geraghty. Funny how some of those screaming to recall this rule chose to read right past that

Don,

I chose not to say anything but since your bring it up. I was there with a radar gun and was shooting bobby's boat.. a 91 jag with that pipe and testing multiple props in open water was 71 mph... Do i need to say any more....

IT WAS A TURD.

That is why i didn't say anything.

chris

 

[Don Ferrette]

Bobby Himmel ran one of the NAVIGA pipes from CMB @ E-Ville & he was fast & quiet as was posted by Rod Geraghty. Funny how some of those screaming to recall this rule chose to read right past that

Don,

I chose not to say anything but since your bring it up. I was there with a radar gun and was shooting bobby's boat.. a 91 jag with that pipe and testing multiple props in open water was 71 mph... Do i need to say any more....

IT WAS A TURD.

That is why i didn't say anything.

chris

Well I guess you saying Rod G. has no conception of speed? :huh:

While nobody is saying that there will not be tweaking needed to get the speeds we need, it is flat wrong to say this can't be done. I am part of the committee Mark Bullard is heading up as previously mentioned & we will look at what needs to be done to insure uniform repeatable testing, NOT a way to repeal the rule. I have said it before & I'll say it again, r/c boat racers are some of the most resourceful people I know & I'm totally confident that once we have established a way to calibrate these meters & the set testing procedure that the rest will take care of itself. B)

 

[Chris Wood]

Don common now..

The gun doesn't lie.. It was what it was.. period..

And no offense to rod. That is just what it was.

chris

 

[Don Ferrette]

Don common now..

The gun doesn't lie.. It was what it was.. period..

And no offense to rod. That is just what it was.

Well Chris sometimes a step back is required to move 2 or 3 steps forward. A few years ago when we first started with the muffler rule in our district (we implemented a muffler rule over a year before the org. did) I initially lost some speed. HOWEVER with a few heavy duty test sessions at the pond I was running FASTER than before using a bit less fuel. THAT was on radar & you're right, the gun doesn't lie. Maybe I would feel as you do if I hadn't had the opportunity to race against a couple of NAVIGA hydro champs to see that this can be done. The difference is they've had their noise restrictions in place longer than we have & have learned to tune accordingly, the is absolutely NO reason we cannot do the same. All it takes is effort & desire rather than this thickheaded resistance to change that some choose. :blink:

 

[Geraghty]

Don common now..

The gun doesn't lie.. It was what it was.. period..

And no offense to rod. That is just what it was.

chris

Chris,

Remember you started this........ .......the magic words are "cosine or angle error".

Unless a radar gun is applied,by its operator,100% perfectly,the information coming out of it is absolute junk and all the radar gun can do is "lie"!

I also saw the radar gun out at the Nats during open water and the way it was being used was a complete waste of battery power and I guarantee you the gun was lying like a politician caught in a brothel.

Zaker,David Preusse and I were all watching Bobby Himels boat run with that pipe and we were all guessing his boat was running every bit of 80 and probably faster and it was whisper quiet.In fact the first words out of Davids mouth were....quote," I want one of those pipes"un-quote.Bobbys "F" boat might be a lot of things but it is was anything but a turd.

go to........ www.stalkerradar.com/pdf/sport_manual.pdf ......and read page 11.

For any of you that are interested in knowing how radar works,read this instruction manual,especially page 11 and the next time you see someone standing on the the beach on the front straightaway panning boat speeds as the boat goes by,you will understand what awaste of time this is.

Just taking the speed while turning into a corner is also pretty much worthless.The gun has the ability to acquire,average and display but the boats speed and angle isn't constant long enough to get an accurate reading.

If you want an accurate boat speed reading from a radar gun,the boat has to be going dead straight away from you or be coming dead straight at you with absolutely no traversing angle.

Rod Geraghty

Note:This is what makes GPS readings so repeatable.The GPS usually is tracking off 4-5 satellites and all the triangulation and math is being done off these 4-5 satellites and the cosine error is being removed in the GPS.