NAMBA rules discussion

[AlanN]

I am posting this here to primarily state truths in FE opposed to disorder found on anther FE board.

The general racing crowd in the US has started to use lipo power(or other lithium based cells) instead of nimh.

There have been many trying and experimenting for several years. This has since been the basis for re-vamping the rules in FE. Most of the lipo followers are in the IMPBA organization and have agreed to change our class system and hull sizes. These rules have been in trial usage and have been found to work properly along side what has been the norm in gas and nitro racing.

Now NAMBA members are starting to question what and if they should do to match or change what has been done with their rules. There are many whom agree with the IMPBA format or at least concur with what has generally been drafted. But a rational discussion must be made and that appears to be highly unlikely on another forum.

I propose that those wishing to discuss this rationally and with intimidation from moderaters or managers of such boards. Do any of the moderators there wish to bring their ideology of FE here?

I personally have adopted to the IMPBA rules and have no such desire to bicker and debate with IMO a censored board. Does anyone care to discuss that topic here?

 

[Paul Pachmayer]

Hi Alan,

LOL, good luck. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Paul.

 

[lohring]

I'm not sure why you think most of the lipo racers are in IMPBA. Everyone racing in the Northwest is running lipos, and has been for at least a year. The issues as I see them are:

1 A good, quick way to tech amp limits

2 Too many classes

3 Length limits

My feeling on 1 is that weight may be the best, but the numbers would need to be changed frequently. I would really like to hear some other ideas. It seems to me that local spec classes are the most popular. After that there are 2S and 4S mono and sport hydro (including cat and 1/10 scale) classes. A few racers run 2S and 4S riggers. Otherwise there are a few 10S boats. I believe that the power groups should be 2S, 4S, and up to 10S with mono and hydro hull definitions. Scale and sport hydro will need special rules for the various categories, like the nitro classes. I think length limits will restrict hull design development and result in ill handling boats that only finish races under ideal conditions. An example of this was the Lazer 40 in the G1 gas mono class. As the engines became more powerful, that very fast hull finished fewer races. People didn't go back to their old engines, they bought the new generation of longer hulls that could handle the power. The Lazer 40 still might be a good SAW boat, but the Lazer 45 (and Insane, etc.) are the current heat racing favorites. Even these boats may be getting too small and the designers will be testing new hulls every year. This is what should be happening in electric. You won't be able to freeze development successfully.

Lohring Miller

 

[jimi911]

I think length limits will restrict hull design development and result in ill handling boats that only finish races under ideal conditions. An example of this was the Lazer 40 in the G1 gas mono class. As the engines became more powerful, that very fast hull finished fewer races. People didn't go back to their old engines, they bought the new generation of longer hulls that could handle the power. The Lazer 40 still might be a good SAW boat, but the Lazer 45 (and Insane, etc.) are the current heat racing favorites. Even these boats may be getting too small and the designers will be testing new hulls every year. This is what should be happening in electric. You won't be able to freeze development successfully.
Lohring Miller

I said this as well at the start and I have been testing the larger boats in E1 a lot this summer. If we allow for no limits or greater limits the racing "should" get a little better next year. You can use more of the available power and keep the boat on the water so less DNFs. The problem is that this starts to turn the non-spec classes into a bit of an arms race. If we freeze the limits at a certain level, whatever that is, you can use lots of different setups to hit the limits of the hull. You don't need a Neu, 240, 30C, and a new hull every year to compete. Also, the way the power is going ... we need some tight reigns on our stuff. I ran a 29" E1 Mono well past the limits of the hull. I think I could run the setup I had in a 33" hull and it would run well (it be an amp hog, but it would work). You just have to set that defined limit and people have to build to the limit. Otherwise, every year the DNFs will stay the same, and we'll all need bigger retrevial boats because our hulls will be bigger :lol: . It will mean growing pains, but thats the norm nowadays. People will build good fast dependable hulls, good racers will still win, and people will still have fun.

The cell weight thing is not the worst idea on the planet, but I would worry that it might lend itself to people finding that one Lipo manufacturer that hits that weight just right. I also agree with you that the constant change in cell wieghts every year would be a bad thing ... again necessitating the need for new cells more frequently.

I agree on the too many class thing ... 2s, 4s, Open, and select spec classes that would become national if the interest was there.

 

[AlanN]

I did not say that most lipo racers are in IMPBA. But there are a stable set of rules in IMPBA opposed to the NAMBA doctrine. Which is why there is a discussion/debate going on right now about what NAMBA should or could do.

We have gone over the mah thing many times before. There is not a practical way to do it. You can suggest your weight or size limits but they really don't matter. If you run 5000 or 10000mahs you can have a competitive boat. I think most are trying to keep the costs down which I am not opposed to. I have ran 2P setups for most of my hulls....but I am now testing 1P setups to provide a less expensve alternative for others. Ask those who actually race them and see if they think it really matters. I think only in classes like LSH or LSO or SV27 is this really a concern.

Also, the thing that changes the most rapidly is the cell tech. No one was opposed to runinng 3000 then 3300 then 3800 and now 4200mah sub c cells. Why is there such a concern over the lipo mah? What you intend to do with limiting this aspect is to stop any newer better cells to be used. then the rules would be in a bitter debate or dicussion AGAIN. No one wants to rebuild their fleet every year. A new motor of speed controller or cells but not their boats. See size limtis below.

Too many classes: I agree. If you have been following what those who have raced the IMPBA rules say....E1 E2 and Open size classes are all that we need to race. E3 is just a mild step less than open. Most racers I know and contend with are following these sizes for the up and coming year.

Length limits: I was 1st opposed to this. I thought the same as far as hull developent goes. But after using this system we have eliminated one of our major concerns with our latest cell tech. We were able to power much larger hulls than was the norm in any particular class. I was at one race where a racer had such a large hull in N2 offshore that his competitors could not even see their hulls when the larger boat passed by. This keeps everyone on the same playing field....kinda like we all use the same size frame for a car race. Anyone who has actually raced under these conditions find this to be a fair, easily teched and more apt to keep the racing tight. At Cafe this year the E1 and E2 monos where mostly well within reach of each other throughout the entire race. This not only proved the actual size limits to be pretty darn good but kept everyone on their toes for the entire heat.

 

[lohring]

I've been racing on the national level for ten years. During that time I've watched the gas classes go through the same development that the electric classes are going through now. The debate was even nastier. In the late 1990s we had 3 hp Zenoah engines and the boats ran 50 mph. This was a major improvement over the generic weedeater engine powered boats that ran in the 30 mph area. Nitro racers laughed. There was a huge debate around the issue of cost. It was decided to divide the engines into mass produced, inexpensive engines with limited modifications, and unlimited engines. This structure is still in place. However, the mass produced engines now have 6 1/2 hp and the custom engines have 8 hp on a good day. The boats run in the 60 mph range. Several hull manufacturers compete with new designs to handle the power. Nitro racers are running gas as well.

People still yell for new rules every time someone has a break through in gas engine power. IMPBA is the latest to do this when a cylinder was developed that fit their old rules but had more power. NAMBA District 19 did a similar thing when it was discovered that a cylinder swap among Zenoahs gave more power. From a technical standpoint it's not as easy to limit electric power as it is in internal combustion engines. However, measuring electric power is much easier. Electric has changed a little more quickly, but the issues are the same. Perhaps length limits will create innovative designs. Gas cats haven't changed in length over the years, but have gotten wider as cornering speeds went up. I'm not sure that wide monos would be appealing, but wider hydros aren't a problem. Your costs for a lipo setup are high, but have you priced a CMB 35? Racing is always expensive. The winners usually build new boats every year or so with the latest equipment. They carefully look at the rules, what hardware is available, and put together the winning combination. That is how we advance. A perfect rule set allows both level racing and innovation. It should allow a less expensive way for beginners and talented but underfunded racers to compete. Applying the same principals across all classes can't accomplish this. I believe that the spec classes are the perfect low cost class. The specs will need to change as the available boats change. Otherwise, let's not burden the more open classes with a lot of restrictions. Limit power available and let the classes develop.

Lohring Miller

 

[Darin Jordan]

Limit power available and let the classes develop.
Lohring Miller

Lohring,

You keep saying this but there IS NO PRACTICALY WAY to make this happen...

Limit the size of the boat and you limit the amount of power one can practically use... It works in EVERY other form of motor sports, no reason it won't work here equally as well... AND, there have been clubs proving this theory for two seasons now...

You said it yourself at the Nats... "those boats are too small for the power available..."... Well... Then I guess one doesn't need to be using all that power...

The IMPBA proposed length limits will work incredibly well at limiting the amount of power one NEEDS to be competitive... Without these restrictions, you are MANDATING that one use the MAXIMUM power available, which means high-dollar exotic high-amp setups... Kiss your Nemesis and Hacker setups good-bye...

 

[Dan Chase]

Darin, name one racing organization that has a size restriction that does not also have a power restriction??? Just name one?

Restricting the weight of the cells will effectively limit the power a racer can use, 150 grams per LiPo cell will restrict the size of the "fuel" tank, reduce the amount of amps drawn and keep hulls somewhat in check. Where is written that we need to adopt each new cell that comes along? At 150 grams per cells, this would give all 5000 mah cells with wire a healthy leeway, maybe even allow up to 6000 mah cells. If your still not compfrtable, bump it up to 160 grams or a 175 grams.

Alan, your argument that no one complained when the sub-c cells increased in mah really can't be compared to the new LiPo rule. Those were small increments of 200-600 mah with small power increases each time. The LiPo rule introduced into NAMBA this year more then doubled the mah. In electric we can make power two way, through voltage or amps, increasing the size of our fuel tank (mah) increases the amount of amps we draw. The 10,000 mah limit doubled our available power, it made entire fleets of racing boats obsolete over night.

Alan, you said "AGAIN. No one wants to rebuild their fleet every year. A new motor of speed controller or cells but not their boats. See size limit's below." Yet these are the most expensive parts of the boat, the hull is a drop in the bucket compared to the motor, ESC and LiPo which can add up to well over $1000 for a P class racer, double or triple that for the bigger classes.

I'm sure that the gas & nitro racers will welcome you with open arms in the open classes when our tech early next year allows us to put 16hp or more to the prop.

When I said last year that if the LiPo ruled passed as it was written we would have 200 amp boats, I was accused of dreaming and fantasy setups. Well, look around, they are a reality. If you really think hull restrictions alone will keep the racing in check, then your the one's dreaming.

 

[Darin Jordan]

If you really think hull restrictions alone will keep the racing in check, then your the one's dreaming.

Spoken like someone who truely hasn't TRIED IT! JUST LIKE with LIPOs!

This is where reality meets the water Dan... we aren't racing theories here...

 

[TRUCKPULL]

Why Battery weight will NOT work.

DAN - Your idea of Battery weight??

#1 - Ever racer would have to buy a good scale that does not change with temperature,

Also every club would have to buy a good scale also, and get it tested and inspected

if the want to hold a National race.

Up here in the north we still race when it is 40 F outside, most scales that I have looked

at up here are only accurate + or - to 45F

#2 - Does this weight include wires??

It would have too because we are not

going to cut them off or use an other set of plugs attached close to the

cells to put them on the scale.

So the person with the bad arrangement of cells in his boat and 8 inch. wires

of #10 gauge wire gets a penalty on weight.

The person that wants to use a huge 8mm plug gets a penalty also.

#3 – What happens when the best cell we have ever seen comes out and it is one gram

over our limit??

With every C rate improvement in Lipo cells – they gain a bit of weight and size.

Are we going to change the rule again?? Or have a big fight like the LSH length??

#4 - If a person wanted to make his lipo cells water proof, and dipped them in a liquid

Rubber compound they would be over weight.

#5 –1P, 2P, 3P, or even 4P - How do you want to do this Max weight per class??

Some people with newer cells can run 1P setups.

Some like me that have older 20C cells need 2P to run.

We have a new member in our club that has came from R/C aircraft, he wants

To use his small cells in a 2S4P setup to make a total of 6000mA.

What about the guys running A123 cells they need 2P or 3P to be equal to the rest of us??

Are you going to force me and these others to buy new cells??????

Length limits -

Batteries - ESC's - and Motors may change

the ruler never changes.

Larry

__________________

And May Your Prop Always Be WET

NAMBA #615

IMPBA #19671

 

[Darin Jordan]

Why Battery weight will NOT work.
#3 – What happens when the best cell we have ever seen comes out and it is one gram

over our limit??

With every C rate improvement in Lipo cells – they gain a bit of weight and size.

Are we going to change the rule again?? Or have a big fight like the LSH length??

Larry,

Good points... but you missed a scenario that is actually going to be VERY likely in the near future... (based on info I have from work...)...

Higher rated/higher capacity cells are actually going to be getting SMALLER at some point... considerably smaller than we have now...

Trying to tech by any of these specs is going to be a constantly moving target, requiring updated power rules EVERY year...

Length limits will NOT change... they will remain constant, and the benefits of some of this new tech will be limited as a result... you can ONLY put SO much power to the water with a certain sized hull...

 

[T.S.Davis]

"Most of the lipo followers are in the IMPBA organization"

Alan, I read that and knee jerked. I thought the same thing Lohring did. That you were saying that all the LiPo guys were IMPBA. I know you know that's not the case.

As for the "stable" set of rules from IMPBA, they're trial rules for 2008 that are to be voted on in 2009. That's hardly rock solid take it to the bank legislation. The rule structure (again, trial for 2008) has been run at one major oval event in the US in 2007 as far as I know. I could be wrong on that one of course. I think Valdosta for SAW's too. I know some clubs are using the lengths proposed but that's hardly a nationally tested program the way it's been presented.

Stepping back down from my box.

If length limits make sense and the NAMBA membership wants them they'll get them. They do make sense to me. More so all the time.

A question for those opposed. First, how come? Enlighten me. Honest. No attitude.

Second, a scenario. If you had 29" 2S mono with 10000 mah in it and let's say a 500 amp speed controller. How fast would it go? Also, would you make it to the start line with it?

 

[Dan Chase]

Spoken like someone who truely hasn't TRIED IT! JUST LIKE with LIPOs!
This is where reality meets the water Dan... we aren't racing theories here...

Are you insinuating that I have not tried LiPo's, Darin? The fact is, I have raced in Arizona, Georgia and the LA SAW along with all of my club races this year alone. The only time I didn't use LiPo's was at Arizona in LSH where they were not legal. Fact is, I'm sponsored by a LiPo distributor, I set a world record in RC Drag Racing using LiPo's and wrote the rules for IMDRA (International Model Drag Racing Association) to allow LiPo's into competition. Those are facts, Darin, not theory. Another fact is, I have raced boats with both 1P and 2P, another fact is I have raced longer then 2 years. Try and stick to the facts, Darin.

The Australians have been racing a similar weight restriction on LiPo's all year and it seems to be working quite successfully, that's another fact.

Good points... but you missed a scenario that is actually going to be VERY likely in the near future... (based on info I have from work...)...

Wow, we aren't racing theories here, huh??? That's good Darin, let's write rules for what "might" happen.

Anyway, I know it's pointless to argue against you, your mind is made up and you will only yell longer and louder until your realities are mistaken for truths. My job requires that I work, not post on forums all day long, so you win.

Larry, did you read my post??? Your answer would not indicate so. Please read it again and feel free to comment.

 

[TRUCKPULL]

Terry

AZ - ran the Length Limits

Also our club ran the IMPBA rules all year - 10 races - there are about 75 active boats in our club.

We have proven that Length Limits

keep the cost down,

boats of equal size on the water,

Better and closer racing,

NO high AMP setups.

One of the biggsest questions is other then Length Limits is how are you going to TECH them.

Larry

 

[TRUCKPULL]

Larry, did you read my post??? Your answer would not indicate so. Please read it again and feel free to comment.

DAN

Answer all 5 of my points about the weight of cells with NO "P" Limit.

Also how are you going to TECH any other rule that you can think off about Limiting Power.

Simple Length Limits do it all.

Larry

 

[AlanN]

First off hull designs will increase. If the size is restricted then the developement begins. All too often with the increase in power racers just get the same hull in a bigger size. I have done this myself. What happened (as if you did not read into my prior post) is that the hulls get out of scale in relation to each other. Visual it is not appealing and the actual racing suffers. A seasoned mature and pure racer would rather have deck to deck laps than just blowing away the field.

Second, the IMPBA rules have at least been tested to some extent with postive results and feedback. Is anything perfectly written...usually not but at it is in print and can be followed. Terry, I did not mean to say that noone in NAMBA is using or racing LIPO but it has been mostly held to club racing. I meant to infer in a national level. I support all efforts made in this degree and hopefully as Darin pointed out that 1p setups will become more prevelant due to advancement in cells. And since I am on that subject....Dan, at least Darrin has some insight for rules. He is looking to the future of what can be done.

Good points Larry.

 

[Darin Jordan]

Are you insinuating that I have not tried LiPo's, Darin?

Um, Dan... see... right there you are already heading off into a tanget that is OBVIOUSLY not what I was insinuating....

My job requires that I work, not post on forums all day long, so you win.

Dan... It's SUNDAY... I'm not working today... and I doubt you are either... (I did rewire a bedroom and closet lightswitch after moving a wall, and prepared a wall for sheetrock, however ...)... and I have no intention of carrying on with you about this... You will turn this into some kind of personal pissing match... Sorry, you're just not worth arguing with...

I've already stated my opinions and the information that I know to be true... Do with it what you will... Rational people will see it for what it is...

Great points Alan...

 

[raptor347]

I ran some 5500+mah 40/80C prototypes in LA. They are lighter than the current crop 5000's. They aren't hobby cells, and I have 4 of only 6 cells in the US at the moment. The battery tech keeps changing and the rate of change is accelerating. Do we go to two rule proposals a season keep tabs on the changes in cells?

Length limits make sense. If you can manage to put more horsepower to the water and make it behave, you deserve the win. If you design and build a hull that's much better than anything else, you deserve to win. If you can drive an overpowered, ill handling monster reliably, you deserve the win.

Actually we should apply the proposed length limits to the hydro classes as well. For SAWs I'd like to see battery weight limits on top of the length limits.

 

[T.S.Davis]

Alan, I know what you meant and you know what you meant. I just didn't want anyone else to get the impression that either organization had cornered the LiPo racing market. Larry mentioned Metro having used the length limits at the club level for 10 races and that AZ ran the limits. AZ ran under a NAMBA banner. Puget ran LiPo all season with no limits under NAMBA. Morris County ran under NAMBA and conformed. DMWB ran NAMBA with no limits. We could make the argument against limits just as easily as for if we were only using "it worked for us" to decide the right direction.

In defense of FE in both organizations, FE has suffered this season on a national level. By that I mean traveller type races. For a multitude of reasons. There just haven't been that many national level races to attend. We've all been figuring out what to do and where to go with this new tech. I think many expected this to happen. So we've been racing with our local clubs. Which lets face it, is where the bulk of the racing happens anyway.

Now that speedo and cells are getting better we're starting to really see the possibilities. It apparent (I think) that size will become an issue. If for no other reason, I'd like to see parity on the water. Used to be you could get away with a 30" P sport and it wouldn't look that weird running with the Larsony. They're close enough. How about today try to run a Sport20 Whiplash against a Sport 40 Whiplash pulling 180 amps? Perfectly legal by todays rule set. How about the handling? Fair?

Can someone tell me the downside of length restrictions? I really do want to learn. I'm not impervious to error.

 

[Dan Chase]

Terry, I am not against length limit, I'm against length limits without power restrictions. Since he brought it up, I asked Mr. Jordan to name a racing organization that has a length limit but doesn't have a power limit, he didn't answer, I can't think of one, I doubt he could either.

Length restrictions without a power restriction is putting a Band-Aid on the situation. Just because a new cell comes along, why do we have to use it? If we don't put some provisions for spending caps on classes up to a least P power, F/E will be playing to a very limited audience.