NAMBA rules discussion

[Darin Jordan]

a question would you build this 36 monster just to race locally? what's the sense to it? or is this the travel unit???

We're a NAMBA club currently, so I'd build it to the NAMBA rules... In order to be competitive in our club, or at a National level, that's what one has to do... We have a member who was planning a 39" Delta Force Mono, and two with 41" DF Monos, destined for P-Mono if our club didn't decide to impose our own (IMPBA proposed) length limits within the club... BUT, if NAMBA doesn't see the light and impose them Nationally, we'll do what we have to do to be competitive on that level...

 

[T.S.Davis]

Eddie, you have to remember that RR has close to 4 million hits. Somebody is reading it. Being a moderator over there carries a burden even if you don't feel you've earned it. I think that's kind of what Darrin is saying too. Folks read your thoughts, have respect for you, and feel your probably right because your "you". haha No matter how qualified you think you aren't you're still stuck with baggage of being a moderator over there.

For the record, I respect your opinion. Although, it might just be that I'm afraid of you because....... well....... your a giant. LOL

 

[eddieh]

For the record, I respect your opinion. Although, it might just be that I'm afraid of you because....... well....... your a giant. LOL

Terry, I also have access to cement, and there's lots of lakes in Michigan......

Terry I have stated truthfully what I believe on Both Forums, and the questions posted were legitimate question I and My club have. as well as the issues. as I said I will honestly look at all information posted, I mean who would not. I think the other thread was productive to a point, counter productive in other ways, as all debates end up being over there.

probably everywhere.

I know that there should be some changes, and I realize this is on a National Event level, because in essence clubs will do what they have always done, I also know what works in the midwest won't always work on the east coast and west coast. so there will need to be compromise on all sides.... this will not effect your point series etc just thing like the NATS ... so a compromise would be good ....sorta like eating a water buffalo sometimes ya get the brisket, other times the ballz... so we need to make rules that are somewhere in the middle.

We do not have Darin Jordans in our club, both a pity and a blessing, I would love his enthusiasm, and gung ho spirit, but am glad I do not have to race a 2500 dollar p-sport... but I would..... we race to have fun, and because it is a hobby, I dismantled my 80 griffon

I would say the same about Alan, except we now have Mike Pags, these guys came from the same dang mold... he is a great guy and throws a few coins at the hobby but the racing IS good.

I am glad to hear the Canadians had a great year under their rules, and hopefully there is room to make the rules similar enough so we CAN get bigger events. I hear lots of rumbling in District 1, and I do hope you guys have your a game ready for michigan 2008.... douggie is already talkin what he will be racing.... and I want to see the Miss US, and finally my bud with everything worked out....

that said I would love to see a set of the draft rules..... so we can discuss them on the club level

and what's gonna happen to N-1?????

Speed On.............

 

[Darin Jordan]

We do not have Darin Jordans in our club, both a pity and a blessing, I would love his enthusiasm, and gung ho spirit, but am glad I do not have to race a 2500 dollar p-sport...

I really wish that somehow or another, I could explain it clearly enough for everyone to get it... As I've said a zillion times on RR and elsewhere... I DO NOT have a ton of $$$ to throw at this hobby... I never have... I choose my classes carefully, and try to buy the right stuff the first time... and I keep things on the conservative side so as not to destroy anything... I get a lot out of the equipment I have... and I recycle old equipment in order to buy new...

I cannot, and never have been able to, afford a "$2500 P-Sport"... I don't know many who can...

It's to counter this that I SUPPORT the length limits as proposed by IMPBA... we will be able to afford to compete again once this arms race settles down a bit and we know what rules we'll be building to for the forseeable future...

BUT... If somehow NAMBA decides to up the limits for P and beyond to 40"+, I'm afraid those classes will be only for the elite, becuase they WILL cost that much to race... People need to remember that going bigger means more than just a bigger motor and ESC... Hulls, hardware, support equipment... EVERYTHING has to "go-big" to make it work, and that's when the $$$ increases...

 

[eddieh]

I cannot, and never have been able to, afford a "$2500 P-Sport"... I don't know many who can...

Darin that is my point, few folks would race the class if it came to that, that is something we realize in our district, we sorta build boats that are equal nobody has that kind of cash to throw around , and we need 3 of us to make a race, you don't have 3 there is no race so the boat would sit on the shelf, this is what makes the NAMBA point program so cool, of course everyone has their own pet class(s) for me it is p - sport and 1/8th scale, we stick to what keeps it fun, and surprisingly fast, we now have 5 active 1/8th scale boats, racing 1/8th scales at EVERY club race is a hoot, and we do it for class points etc and we love coming out to MichiganCup, it is already all Jim and I are talking about and now others in the club, it wouldn't be this way if everyone ran what is legal up to the max, look what Ken Joye did with a less powerful set up, I believe it was 8s 1p against a 10s 2p set up, closer racing there was not.... so while folks "Could" build up to a certain size will they? won't your slightly smaller hydro, with a cheaper set up be almost as quick? and don'y you have enough confidence in your driving skills ?? jim and I traveled to michigan to race our 1/8th scales, we only had NiMh, we didn't think man we don't have a chance, we didn't BTW lol... but it was the challenge and the **** great people we got to hang with.. I have only been going since 2005 but I wouldn't miss it for any other race... none better IMHO

BUT... If somehow NAMBA decides to up the limits for P and beyond to 40"+, I'm afraid those classes will be only for the elite, becuase they WILL cost that much to race... People need to remember that going bigger means more than just a bigger motor and ESC... Hulls, hardware, support equipment... EVERYTHING has to "go-big" to make it work, and that's when the $$$ increases...

Raced by whom? I really would not consider building a p=sport at that price, unless I HAD to win, I don't, I would rather add a few bucks and race an 1/8th scale, MOST folks would think like that, alan said it somewhere past regarding 200 amp set ups, that very few people would actually do that, I also believe with high performance on the edge comes risk in reliability....

anyway I think after rereading all the pros and cons, I could accept SOME length limitations ( I will only comment on sport hydros) but I disagree with the 34"

and I will say again if there is a proposal I would love to read it and see what works and doesn't work for us, and look hard to see if the things that don't work are really deal killers... or if we can compromise

And for the record Darin, my previous post regarding you was meant in the best possible way

 

[TRUCKPULL]

Eddieh

Why do you disagree with a Max length of 34" for EP2 Sport Hydro??

Any thing longer and you need a 1521 or 1527 Power, HIGH AMP, HIGH DOLLAR.

I run a 30" Sport Hydro

Hacker Motor

CC125

4S2P - 20C cells

65- MPH

Any lenght over 34" and you cannot use this cheaper equipment.

Larry

 

[Paul Pachmayer]

Hi Guys,

Eddie, I understand why you would want the length increase for P Sport but a sport 40 size hull is a big increase over a sport 20 size boat. Sport hydros don't scale up like a cat or mono. With a cat or mono the few inches more doesn't increase the beam so much and they "look" close enough. OTOH a sport hydro scales up much bigger in overall size.

With the IMPBA proposal you could run your sport 40 size hydro in E3. You could use your 4S setup in that class, heck if you thought you could do it you can use 2S in the E3 classes. You see the IMPBA proposal only has max voltage set which means you could run any voltage up to the max. I mention this because your probably thinking I wouldn't want to run against 6S (E3) boats. Oddly enough a 4S boat can compete with a 6S boat but will draw more amps. either way you look at it if your just out to have fun racing why not put your boat in the next step class? The outcome would be the same Eddie, that's not meant as a slam it's just the way it is. I've been there done that. I've raced a sport 40 on 6S in the open class (can run up to 10S) and won. I've raced 4S monos in the open class also, a dnf kept me off the podium. Bottom line Eddie, a guy that's going to go to the Nats most likely isn't going there to lose. If a sport 40 is a P boat than he will have the gear to win. I can guarantee if I was coming to race my boat would have a 1527, 4S2P and a pop tart to back it up. And I wouldn't be the only one.

Also, I honestly don't believe that the 10th scale guys are going to want to mix it up with full tilt boogie sport 40 boats. They would have to pony up for motors, controllers and cells to compete in one class? Aren't they about "scale" over speed?

It's a shame, RRR lost way more valuable contributers than it was worth pumping up their egos by banning or just pushing them out. As I see it the players changed but the field is still the same.

Paul.

 

[lohring]

I know I keep saying that all we need to do is figure out a way to limit amps. How accurate does this limit need to be? I bet for all local racing you take the manufacturer's word for the battery capacity. Has this been an obvious problem? I know Brian and Darren set up a standard way to measure tha capacity of the batteries on boats that set records. For everyone else we took the manufacturer's word on capacity. At the nitro or Gas nationals we take the manufacturer's and racer's word on displacement even though there are cases where a larger bore sleeve can be used. We only tech engines when a record is set. As I stated before, there can easily be a 20% difference in power between engines of the same displacement.

Speed with a given hull varies as the cube of the power. A 20% power advantage will give you a 6% speed advantage. That's about 3 mph at 50 mph. I usually figure it takes at least 5 mph to pass in the 330 foot straight of a 1/6 mile course for boats running around 50 mph. In most of the close racing I see, the winners pass in the turns. Cornering speed is much more important in heat racing than straight a way speed. The fastest heat time of any gas boat at this year's NAMBA Nationals (third fastest of all boats) was set by a gas sport hydro. It was not any faster than others in the straight, but didn't loose much speed in the turns. Only two nitro riggers with much higher top speeds were faster.

This means winning is a lot more about props, setup, and driving than available power. I watched Mike Zabaroski make some mild prop modifications that really helped several racers at the Electric Nationals. I have limited experience with batteries, so I depend on those of you who do to apply both experience and creative thinking to the problem.

Lohring Miller

 

[AlanN]

The classes are limited not only by size but voltage based also.

There is not a need to limit amps.

Simple reasoning. The more amps you pull the more batts/mah reequired. Then the hull gets heavier and heavier (this is where the length limits come into play). The heavier the hull the large the motor needs to be to sustain the load. If you think you can pull 250 amps and finish the heat with out destroying your equipment you did your homework. Is this feasible though....not likely. I have witnessed some of those trying to run ultra high amp draws and they were not able to finish a heat without melting something. For SAWS it can be done since the heat buildup is not sustained for long. When running a mile the heat doesn't dissapate quickly....therefore your setup should not be top end. And your cells will most likely suffer. I don't think that some of you are getting that we allow 2P+(in IMPBA) to keep our investments safer and running longer.

Oh and Eddie...do what you want with N1 mono. Keep it as a club or what ever style of racing. We are not trying to kill something that a club or member really wants to race.

 

[TRUCKPULL]

I know I keep saying that all we need to do is figure out a way to limit amps. How accurate does this limit need to be? Lohring Miller

Say you get 2or 3 of the big ESC companies to make them, what about the other 10 companies out there that racers are using.

Also now you are going to tell every one that they have to buy new equipment when they have 4 or 5 of these units at home already. ( and they cannot sell them off now)

We have ESC that cost up to $600.00 each, now you want to tell the racer that has 4 of them that he can not use them.

Even a plugin unit will not work with a lot of ESC's

You asked ( How accurate does this limit need to be?)

For racers it better be within 1AMP or 1%

Larry

 

[Darin Jordan]

I keep seeing talk of raising the proposed P limit to 37"... This is just CRAZY... If that happens, then you'll make even the highly sought after Whiplash Sport 21 uncompetitive in that class... and for WHAT?? So people can get Sport 40 hulls and HUGE Neu Motors... parallel cells, BIG ESCs, etc... and go race a bigger boat??? THAT is what you'd FORCE real competitors to do...

I am certain that there are WAY more Whiplash, Larsony, and other similiar 30-ish inch hulls out there that are targeting P-Sport than there are 37"+ Sport 40s... at least built ones... If the proposed limit is increased to 37" for NAMBA, ALL of these hulls will be rendered IMMEDIATELY useless... Can't use them for N2, and they'll be totally outclassed in P...

As for the idea of this increase somehow saving people $$$... that's rediculous... You would FORCE a real P-competitor to HAVE to run 2P... to HAVE to buy BIG motors... to NEED to have a $600.00 ESC... and again, for WHAT??? How is racing going to be better???

I'm sorry, but if NAMBA heads this direction, I can say with some certainty that there will be a LOT of racers out there that will head down the road... Just look at the numbers in those NAMBA clubs who have already agreed to run under the proposed IMPBA length restrictions... Are YOU going to tell them that suddenly their Whiplash isn't going to work well for P-Sport... AND that it's now too long for N2???

The IMPBA proposed limits were put into place in an honest effort to help keep racing affordable and competitive and to try to utilize some of the equipment we currently have available... Basically, N2/E1 ~= "Old-P", P/E2 ~= Sport 21, and Q/E3 ~= Sport 40... S/T/E4 = OPEN... Their proposed limits make a ton of sense, offer graduated steps between power levels, and they WORK... We've already "grown" these boats in the past three seasons by a large amount... they don't need to get any bigger... that just requires that we use MORE power still... which is EXACTLY what they limits are suppose to be controlling...

I'll choose to stick with what I know will work.

And, for the record, to those of you who are clamouring for "compromise" on this issue... please keep in mind... these are all SECONDARY discussions... this compromises already took place for most of us LAST year when IMPBA was discussing what the limits should be... back when some thought that 30" for E2 would be best and others thought 37" would be best...

 

[D. Newland]

Lohring-Thanks for your input on this thread.

The concept of limiting power to the motor has been a focal point for FE racers for some time now. However, we just can't seem to come up with a viable option. Fuses won't work because of amp spikes (Typically 2X the average amp draw when running). Electronic limiters add cost and complexity to a setup. But nobody has anything manufactured. It's another failure point, etc. We could limit ESC max amp ratings, but that will tend to favor one ESC manufacturer over another. Limiting cell capacity/weight is probably the only reasonable option to limit power, but I don't agree with it. Weight and capacity values will change over time, new products will come, etc, etc, making us revisit this topic again...and again...Plus, for purely selfish reasons, we've already been tickled with 10,000 mah and for Offshore Heats, I won't give that up. Already addicted.

Eddie-thank you, too for your contributions to this thread.

Another item to point out is that even though IMPBA's P/E-2 limit is 34", the median length of hull that actually will be running is probably closer to 31". We set the limit at 34" by design so there is a little room to grow, but still yield a field of boats that can be competitively powered by 8XL's. 100 amps. Want more powerful ESC/motors? That's fine, but it won't gain you too much. Probably a DNF.

Increasing that limit 37" is only a 3" increase, but it opens the door to shift the median size of that class, which IMO doesn't fair well for that class and the vast majority of racers that will field it. Me included. Maybe it's fear of the bigger/faster hull or the drama that unveils itself when a racer feels he needs a Neu/Castle 240 just to compete, but I like to think of it as a parity issue. We strived to set up that class limit so all racers will feel comfortable entering the class with equipment they probably already own. If not, it won't cost them an arm/leg to set up a power system for that class. The budget racer was squarely in mind when we came up with 27' and 34" limits.

I see a 37" boat as a Q or E-3 boat. IMO. Also, I didn't even think about what Paul wrote above. No voltage minimums gives you a place for a 37" sport hull to run. And at the voltage you chose. Run it in Q/E-3 on P power. A little quirky, but it can work. Is that an option? Understanding we're really only talking about classes at a NAMBA Nat's.

I don't think anyone has specifically stated why they feel a power limit is needed in conjunction with an appropriate size limit. Can you state specifics as to why you think this is needed?? Is it a SAW's thing??

The other side of the discussion has already been said/heard. Basically, you can only put so much power in any given sized hull.

Why do you (no one directly) feel a power limit is also needed?

 

[JimClark]

I will stay out of most of the discussion as I have decided to not race in Namba but Paul brings up a good point why ERCU and CT scale clubs don't cross over. They run smaller motors and the hulls generally are designed with deeper sponsons and wider air tunnels. I seriously doubt they would stay on the water in an all out namba race with more power.

Jim

Hi Guys,
Also, I honestly don't believe that the 10th scale guys are going to want to mix it up with full tilt boogie sport 40 boats. They would have to pony up for motors, controllers and cells to compete in one class? Aren't they about "scale" over speed?

Paul.

 

[Ctonez]

I'm in favor of 34" length limits in Pmono. Keeping the high end @ 34" keeps alot of common hulls competitive and in play:

Titan29, NoStep3, Triton, Delta 29 & 33, etc.

This allows for people like me, relative newbies to the sport/hobby, to get used equipment at a reasonable price and still have the ability to be competitive within the class.

I can say from experience that when powered enough to keep pace, my 27.5" hull could not hang with the larger hulls...if we are allowed to build boats in Pmono that are larger than 34", then I will be outclassed with my 31.75" Pmono for 2008. Honestly, I would likely bail out of Pmono if that were the case. I've raced twice against a 43" hull with a 27.5" hull in Pmono, and it is not cool at all.

Many of the vets on this board and on RR have alluded to trying to bolster the FE community and having rules that attract new members rather than scaring them off. I believe hull length limits accomplish this now, and on into the future. I am attracted by rules that allow a variety of setups, both low and high cost, to exist and run competitively together. I am repelled by rules that force me to get something specialized and high cost just to have a chance at being competitive.

I want to bring my Miata of a boat and run it against other Miatas, not Corvettes and Ferraris. This isn't F1, this is club racing. So what if your Miata has a bigger carb and exhaust and better tires...it's still a Miata and that means I've got a chance in my mind, or I can get better parts to gain more parity. (please forgive the auto racing analogy)

Even though I raced my SV in Pmono last season, I also advocate a minimum length to keep them seperate from the big P boats...they just don't belong in the same class and have the most potential of creating carnage when raced against bigger, more powerful boats.

my .02

 

[Jeff]

WOW! What a refreshing opinion based on personal experiance and open mindedness from a fairly new person. Thank you for your post. I do think hull limits would be easiest of all to tech and would be inclusive not exclusive. It would be less likely to rebuild the entire fleet each year, saving some money but mainly having parity among all participents.

Once again, THANK YOU.

Jeff

 

[Darin Jordan]

I'm in favor of 34" length limits in Pmono. Keeping the high end @ 34" keeps alot of common hulls competitive and in play:Titan29, NoStep3, Triton, Delta 29 & 33, etc.

Nice post Corey! You definately fit right in!! Talk with you soon!!

 

[Paul Pachmayer]

Hi Guys,

Again, just so you don't loose site of the "big picture", it's a total package that needs to be adopted.

One mile heats are mandatory. I don't care if your club runs in a bathtub, you run for one mile on ANY given course size. Point system on buoy cuts.

Five heats over 2 days! Anybody going to a race knows up front they have the opportunity to race more and have a better chance of recovering from a bad round. There's no need to run 15 classes over 2 days to make it worth your while too attend. A guy can have 3 well setup E1 or N2 boats and have fun racing...ON A BUDGET!!! Cheap in comparison to what used to be done.

Length limits. No crossovers. Better matched hulls.

Those are the big three. Obviously there's more to it but those are the main points. It's also time to trim the dead weight like N1. Comments like "it's our biggest class" are ridiculous. If, as a club you promote N1 your doing nobody, especially a new guy, any favors. A competitive N1 boat costs what, about 400 bucks. WAKE UP!!!!! An SV27 is 280.00 and I guarantee a newbie is going to be way happier with something like that. Those days are long gone. Even if as a club you spec a SV27 power system in a boat legal under the proposed E2 rules your ahead of the game. At least a new guy, when ready, can step up the power system in his "club spec" boat and be competitive at a national level.

You can go round and round debating the NAMBA rules and accomplish little to nothing. Or...someone can step up to the plate and spearhead a proposal. Make the hard choices and put them down on paper. I wasn't 100% happy with the IMPBA proposal but it was a compromise of ideas that took over a year to finalize. But what was accomplished was a well thought out rule set that wasn't just paper theory, around 50 guys started building boats and running courses based on just the idea of it. That, in itself, speaks volumes about how solid the proposal is.

Paul.

 

[Darin Jordan]

It's also time to trim the dead weight like N1.

Our club did for next year... and it WAS one of our biggest (if not THE biggest) class in our club... Just TOO BORING for most after they experienced the SV27s... and takes WAY more skill and time to get setup... not a true "beginners" class at all...

Puget Sound is on board... B)

 

[lohring]

I was trying to explain why you DON'T need to measure everything so accurately to have races that are fairly equal. The voltages vary from 4.2 volts down to 3 volts or less per cell now during a race. That's a change of 40%. If you run enough extra capacity the curve is very flat for all practical purposes. That's why everyone likes 2P. What is the variation in current between manufacturers that a given size (according to the manufacturer) battery will deliver? I'm sure it's significant between battery chemistries, but how about between batteries from the high quality lipo suppliers?

Lohring Miller

 

[AlanN]

So little that it is not worth picking over. Unless someone has some really awful cells out there.