Outboard Motor verses Inboard Motor that acts like an Outboard

[RonShaw]

Ron you are 100% right, the only problem is that this line has never been cross in this way. So things need to be re-written.

When the O/B tunnel class was started. It was based off the scale tunnels. The O/B class is dead where I am at, and I have to fly to race, I just hope that this kind of thing does not hurt you all in the IMPBA.

Baxter,

That was my concern when I saw the boat in Charleston. I could not believe it had been allowed to compete in sanctioned IMPBA and NAMBA events without concern or protests. To me, it was a blatent violation of the rules and prompted the creation of this thread when I saw posts from others attempting the same design. This is far reaching and if it does not end here, it will cause un-needed turmoil that could really hurt ALL of the OUTBOARD classes. I am all about out-of-the-box thinking but this thinking must stay within the rules!!!!........

 

[topfuel443]

Ron, your perception is that the term outboard should be clear to everyone, even though its not written in our rule book. I get that, and I think everyone reading gets that. However, that doesnt change the fact that its not clearly defined in the rule book, creating a loophole in which a few people have found and capitalized on. Even though, as Jerry said, I dont see the advantage. These hulls are not really designed for this type of set-up...

If you are basing your argument that everyone should know what the term outboard means, it needs to be clearly defined in the rule book. In my opinion. If it didnt need to be in the rule book, and everyone agreed on the same thing, we wouldnt be having this disucssion.

 

[RodneyPierce]

Holy smokes. Is it winter yet or what? Good lord....

 

[RonShaw]

Ron, your perception is that the term outboard should be clear to everyone, even though its not written in our rule book. I get that, and I think everyone reading gets that. However, that doesnt change the fact that its not clearly defined in the rule book, creating a loophole in which a few people have found and capitalized on. Even though, as Jerry said, I dont see the advantage. These hulls are not really designed for this type of set-up...
If you are basing your argument that everyone should know what the term outboard means, it needs to be clearly defined in the rule book. In my opinion. If it didnt need to be in the rule book, and everyone agreed on the same thing, we wouldnt be having this disucssion.

Yes, I believe everyone should understand what the word outboard means. This has never been an issue in the past and should not be an issue here. Outboard only means one thing, the unit is mounted outboard. It doesn't mean only the drive needs to be outboard but the engine can be inboard, it doesnt mean that all engine and/or drive components can be inboard as long as only the cavitation plate, rudder, and prop are outboard. It means exactly what it says. Outboards are complete units, we all agree on that. Mount that complete unit OUTBOARD of the hull. James, I love ya man, but you are getting caught up in the definitions and not the obvious reason this class was originated, designed, and clarified solely of of that first word, OUTBOARD..........

 

[topfuel443]

I couldn't agree more Ron, getting caught up in definitions is what RULES are all about - unfortunately. The problem is that its not clearly defined, and even though it may not have been needed to be clearly defined in the past, its painfully "clear" by this thread that it should be now.

Competition breeds envelope pushing, that's the nature of the beast. The only point I am making here is easy. The way I see it (there's that perception thing again) you (the general 'you', not Ron Shaw) have a few options.

1. Abide by the rules as they are written, knowing there will ALWAYS be folks who push the envelope.

2. Campaign for changing the rules to read what you think they should be, to ultimately stop the folks to try to push the envelope.

Love you too Ron, and I'm ok with agreeing to disagree.

 

[Baxter Walton]

I remember when the first I/B motor Showed up to a race, up-side down with a belt start, mounted to a K&B lower end. I gave him an A+ for that innovation(is the creation of better or more effective products, processes, technologies, or ideas that are accepted by markets, governments, and society).

And many followed suit, but even then, they respected the O/B thought. Still got whip but I understood what they were trying to do. So same goes here, while I do understand, the problem is that PPL have a problem with it and the other was accepted whereas this one is not.

 

[Doug Smock]

Hey fellas,

Any pictures available of this type of tunnel boat??

Thanks,

Doug

 

[jaxracer]

I've taken some time to further look into this subject and after reading through some technical articles on outboards, the confusion comes between the terms "stern" and "transom" when describing where the engine is mounted. Throughout the articles, the two terms are used interchangeably when they are clearly not the same term. Utilizing the Merriam-Webster definition of outboard, it is described as:

outboard motor

noun

Definition of OUTBOARD MOTOR

: a small internal combustion engine with propeller integrally attached for mounting at the stern of a small boat

If we continue on to the definition of stern in Merriam-Webster, it is described as

2sternnoun

1

: the rear end of a boat

or if we consult Dictionary.com, stern reads as:

stern

2   [sturn] Show IPAnoun

the back or rear of anything.

Therefore, depending on where you seek the definition of outboard, I stand corrected. While, yes the engine might not be fully mounted outside of the hull, based on the definition given, it looks like Otto is legal. He falls right in the gray area because his engine is mounted at the rear end of his boat and it meets all of the other classifications as outlined by the IMPBA rulebook. Like Gabe said, unless there is an amendment passed spelling out the IMPBA or NAMBA definition of outboard, I don't believe that anyone could successfully protest the hull, because across the English language it seems that the definition of outboard is subjective to interpretation.

While I agree with where you're going with this Ron, I think it's going to be hard to get a general consensus on this issue given that the English language doesn't even quite know what it's talking about.

-Jr.

 

[topfuel443]

is subjective to interpretation.

-Jr.

As with ANYTHING written. Its semantics yes, but??

Dont get me wrong here, I agree with 90% of what you are saying. But my agreeing with it, or anyone else for that matter, doesnt change how the rules were written, intended or not.

 

[Chris Wood]

back in my rc car days the term GRAY AREA would come up in a situation like this lol

and i was ALL FOR GRAY AREA'S

 

[julianconde]

We can talk about this all day a all year. Get with your district director and get the rules defined until then you can run anything you like talking about it and doing something about it are 2 different things.

Julian

 

[RonShaw]

We can talk about this all day a all year. Get with your district director and get the rules defined until then you can run anything you like talking about it and doing something about it are 2 different things.
Julian

Julian,

I didn't expect that type of answer from you. The just "run what you brung" attitude is what causes issues.............

 

[julianconde]

I don't mean it like that. I mean to say let's put a plan in action to get the rules more defined or more specific like that we wont have any issues. I'm a supporter of what you are trying to do. I 100% agree with you on this matter.

 

[julianconde]

I agree 100% that a outboard tunnel should be that a outboard using what we have available today. With that being said we should collectively put a plan in motion to fix this issue and get everyone on the same page.

But until we do that te run what you brung still stands until we do something about it. In conclusion let's stop talking about this and do something to fix it and be happy and race

 

[RonShaw]

I don't mean it like that. I mean to say let's put a plan in action to get the rules more defined or more specific like that we wont have any issues. I'm a supporter of what you are trying to do. I 100% agree with you on this matter.

Ok, your post didn't put it that way..... Being an old outboard racer yourself, I would have thought you would support this and it looks like you do. I think I am figuring out what is going on here. I will post separately. Thanks Julian.....

 

[RonShaw]

Ok, I am a little slower these days so the light was flickering but it is now shining brightly!!!!!!!...... Sorry I am so slow. I see EXACTLY what is going on here. This controversy is only a controversy, not because of what being done, but who's doing it. I have been scratching my head for a while now, when I see posts from seasoned tunnel boaters being selective in their comments and words, instead of posting how they really should feel. No true seasoned outboard boater, either nitro, gas, FE, or outboard hydro, would even think about supporting what is being tried with this inboard/outboard contraption. Some of you guys are worried about upsetting John Otto. I guess my re-entry into this sport has made me kinda immune to that, even though I raced with John on many occasions before I exited this hobby for a while and have the utmost respect for him as a friend and competitor. Just because we may disagree with what he is trying, doesn't put a mark on our back or black list us in this hobby. If most ANY other boater in our hobby was trying this at a race, and it was proven to be competitive, people would line up at the CD stand to have it protested as soon as it finished the first heat. Come on guys!!!!! Are we REALLY not sure the true meaning of an outboard, or are we hoping this will simply go away and one of the masters of outboarding himself will not get this to work, and we can all get back to the way things were without upsetting John or the many people including myself, that appreciate what he has helped accomplish for our sport? I consider John a friend as well, but causing an uproar in our sport at a time when we should be all pulling together to grow our sport is not a good idea, unless we want to end up like Baxter and start flying planes again.

John, shame on you for trying something like this that you know is very controversial and against the rules to say the least. We have all tried ways to get around the rules but really, you know this is NOT an outboard engine. You are well aware of what the true meaning of an outboard engine really is, and you know what you are running is not an outboard. Don't play on the IMPBA's definitions of types of propulsion systems that are allowed for outboards, and stick with the basics. Ok, you tried it, got your wrist slapped, it but it's time to walk away for a legal setup and admit it was wrong. Are you really going to force all of us that love to compete with true outboard engines to define the term OUTBOARD to make this go away? If you run outboard tunnel, outboard hydro, outboard FE tunnel, outboard gas, or any other outboard class, run an outboard assembly, contraption, or what ever you want to call it, mount the outboard on the stern of the hull, and bolt it to the transom. Don't mount it inside the boat.....................

Web definitions of an OUTBOARD engine:

An outboard motor is a propulsion system for boats, consisting of a self-contained unit that includes engine, gearbox and propeller or jet drive, designed to be affixed to the outside of the transom and are the most common motorized method of propelling small watercraft. ...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outboard_engine

An engine used to power a small boat. Outboard engines are mounted on a bracket aft of the stern of the boat.

terrax.org/sailing/glossary/go.aspx

 

[topfuel443]

Ron, im not sure how you read into all of that as 'us' protecting John, but speaking for myself, I would say the same thing for anyone trying it. I dont agree with it from a traditionalist standpoint, but he or anyone else is within the written rules here. Period. The IMPBA rule book pretty clearly defines what a hydro is, what a mono is, etc etc... it does NOT clearly define what constitutes an outboard.

Calling him out on it personally like you have done above isnt how I would expect you to handle it. Then again, I havent known you long.

If you have a problem with how hes doing it, bring it before the powers that be and do something about it. Otherwise, get your stuff dialed in and beat him the old fashioned way. Continuing to quote random definitions from the internet does not change our rule book.

If you find somewhere in our rule book that says an outboard has to be mounted on a transom, I will respectfully bow out of the discussion.

 

[RonShaw]

Ron, im not sure how you read into all of that as 'us' protecting John, but speaking for myself, I would say the same thing for anyone trying it. I dont agree with it from a traditionalist standpoint, but he or anyone else is within the written rules here. Period. The IMPBA rule book pretty clearly defines what a hydro is, what a mono is, etc etc... it does NOT clearly define what constitutes an outboard.
Calling him out on it personally like you have done above isnt how I would expect you to handle it. Then again, I havent known you long.

If you have a problem with how hes doing it, bring it before the powers that be and do something about it. Otherwise, get your stuff dialed in and beat him the old fashioned way. Continuing to quote random definitions from the internet does not change our rule book.

If you find somewhere in our rule book that says an outboard has to be mounted on a transom, I will respectfully bow out of the discussion.

Gabe,

I traditionally do not like to call someone out for something, especially in a public forum, but John of all people knows exactly what an outboard is and trying something like this will eventually destroy the outboard classes. I have already PM'd John and told him how I felt and that it wasn't personal. I also invited him to join the conversation. You haven't been receiving the PM's that I have, so no I usually would not do it this way. If there is anyone within our hobby that should know the true meaning of an outboard engine, John would be near the top of the list. This has been going on behind the scenes since way before I came back into the hobby, but it only hit me in the face when I saw it in Charleston. There are people already copying his design, and are looking at doing this with FE as well. John should pull his design, period, and if it means we clarify the description of the word outboard to stop this from ever happening again, then let the members get together and do it.

 

[RonShaw]

BTW, leave it to me to uncover such a hornets nest as this!!!!!............ I hope it goes away soon.....

 

[topfuel443]

Ron, im not sure how you read into all of that as 'us' protecting John, but speaking for myself, I would say the same thing for anyone trying it. I dont agree with it from a traditionalist standpoint, but he or anyone else is within the written rules here. Period. The IMPBA rule book pretty clearly defines what a hydro is, what a mono is, etc etc... it does NOT clearly define what constitutes an outboard.
Calling him out on it personally like you have done above isnt how I would expect you to handle it. Then again, I havent known you long.

If you have a problem with how hes doing it, bring it before the powers that be and do something about it. Otherwise, get your stuff dialed in and beat him the old fashioned way. Continuing to quote random definitions from the internet does not change our rule book.

If you find somewhere in our rule book that says an outboard has to be mounted on a transom, I will respectfully bow out of the discussion.

Gabe,

I traditionally do not like to call someone out for something, especially in a public forum, but John of all people knows exactly what an outboard is and trying something like this will eventually destroy the outboard classes. I have already PM'd John and told him how I felt and that it wasn't personal. I also invited him to join the conversation. You haven't been receiving the PM's that I have, so no I usually would not do it this way. If there is anyone within our hobby that should know the true meaning of an outboard engine, John would be near the top of the list. This has been going on behind the scenes since way before I came back into the hobby, but it only hit me in the face when I saw it in Charleston. There are people already copying his design, and are looking at doing this with FE as well. John should pull his design, period, and if it means we clarify the description of the word outboard to stop this from ever happening again, then let the members get together and do it.

Understood Sir, I am getting my fair share of PM's as well, rest assured.

BTW, leave it to me to uncover such a hornets nest as this!!!!!............ I hope it goes away soon.....

I can lock it if you like, just say the word.