PLEASE READ IMPBA SPORT 20/40 RULES

[Samuel Hagan JR]

That's what I want to know because I'm still confused. I was told to read the most recent rooster tail for the rule change but it says Auther has removed statements I think.

 

[glenng]

who started all this anyway?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: I;d like to know too! Personally I don't care where folks mount their struts or about recessed transoms or where the pipe exits the boat or if it has numbers or sponsor names on it . I'd just like to run what I brought with me like everyone else. The first gas T-Boat I built became illegal in NAMBA when the paint was drying(zippkit)-not wide enough. Namba and Impba should both give a little and let folks have some fun. IT IS NOT A SCALE CLASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Glenn

 

[Tim leyde]

Is that funny, once again the corporate does NOT come out. STEP up!

I have a good idea who it is. They dodge the question in the other thread about this same matter..... Go back and read this one, and read between the lines.

TL

 

[RodneyPierce]

It was me. But everyone else took it out of context. The rule change was a simple rule change to try and keep the class where I thought it needed to be. The entire rule change was to get rid of gray area. PERIOD! Most of the stuff that the people complained about in these threads are in the original rules that have been that way for YEARS! I think most just never took the time to read the existing rule set either, or at least not very thoroughly

It was an attempt to keep the sport 20 class from going the route the "gas sport hydro" class has went. If you dont have a clue about what dfirection that is, just look at a few of the boats in that class....

 

[Tim leyde]

who started all this anyway?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: I;d like to know too! Personally I don't care where folks mount their struts or about recessed transoms or where the pipe exits the boat or if it has numbers or sponsor names on it . I'd just like to run what I brought with me like everyone else. The first gas T-Boat I built became illegal in NAMBA when the paint was drying(zippkit)-not wide enough. Namba and Impba should both give a little and let folks have some fun. IT IS NOT A SCALE CLASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Glenn

GlennWe all know "It's not a scale class". However when the rules say past and present hull style, then say NOT recessed transom. YOU CAN NOT MAKE A HULL WITH A RECESSED TRANSOM and there are hull from past/present that have RECESSED TRANSOMS. That's my point. As for the 40, get with the Times and mount the **** strut on the transom!!!!TL

 

[glenng]

Tim and Rodney, I'm sorry if I took this out of context or didn't see the big picture. I'd just really hate to see another good class die cause of a rule change. Sport 40 !! and B-Mono are dead in Nor-Cal and I have to take my boats to UT to race. I know that NAMBA and IMPBA overlap in some areas and would hope they would do something to let more boaters run what they brung.I just do not want any more of my boats that were made to current rules become illegal.

Glenn

 

[RodneyPierce]

Glenn, what you listed above was not changed in the new rule set. Its been the same since the rule inception *as far as I know* and has always been the way it currently reads. This is why these arguments bug me. Not you in particular, but the people that bring up things and throw fits, when 95% of what they are complaining about, has been in the current rule set since day one. But, it is what it is, and I hope it continues in the correct direction, and not where I feel its destined to go.

I hope Im wrong, and hope that it continues to be the great class that it always was.

 

[Tim leyde]

I agree Glenn. Rodney Only a few words had to be taken out "past and present". It is a GREAT class, its my favorite ( to bad its dieing in my club ). I do NOT want it to go like that of the gas hydros or so called modified diggers. With saying that I believe the strut should be legal both on the transom or from underneath on the sport 40. I also believe the transom should be able to be recessed to a certain point or simply take out the wording in the rules as I first stated.

TL

 

[ron upton]

so where did the 65 per cent stuff come from?

 

[RodneyPierce]

Ron, are you referring to the transom width rule? If so, go back and re-read my post about the gas sport hydro class, and look at a few of those boats. You will then understand where the transom width rule came from.

 

[ron upton]

i see the lists of the boats that will be illegal but doint see the fe30 listed....is it legal or just not putr on the list yet?

 

[RodneyPierce]

if it was legal on the "old" rules then its still legal. As thats what they are running right now. If it was never made legal to the original "old" rule set, then it never was a legal boat. You will have to read the rules and see if it is a legal boat.

 

[tnrcboatracer]

I was very vocal about the proposed new rules making hulls that were previously legal (and in one case a record holder), suddenly illegal, and the timing of the rule release. There were several hulls that by one feature of the new rules would be made illegal; Including the current oval record holder and all of the Whiplash hulls. I agree that my Betke probably pushed the limit in regards to the modified rigger, but it was deemed legal by the IMPBA technical committee at the time it was produced. I would have been be satisfied if a way to grandfather previously legal hulls were provided. I think that a transom width percentage would address the modified rigger concern better than the keelson definitions.

I also agree with the strut on the transom, and just limit the distance to the rear of the prop and TE of the rudder. (I.E., not having a 6" long strut). The current rules attempt to address this with the drive dog limit, etc.

I think that any rule change should not make hulls that have been previously raced illegal for the owner who raced them before the rules change. If the hull changes hands after the rules change, it is no longer legal for competition.

I think that we need to be careful and not make rules based on a persons view of what a class should be. I personally think a mono should be allowed to have steps like the full scale ones do, but the rules say different. Anyhow, IMPBA has a technical committee to address these issues, and should use them before putting forth any rules changes. Particular attention should be placed on the affect a change might have on current competitors equipment.

 

[tnrcboatracer]

if it was legal on the "old" rules then its still legal. As thats what they are running right now. If it was never made legal to the original "old" rule set, then it never was a legal boat. You will have to read the rules and see if it is a legal boat.

I disagree Rodney. My Betke SP40 was judged legal by the technical committee 10 years ago, and the new rule proposal made it clearly illegal. Also, the 50% straight keelson detail would make the Whiplash hull illegal.

Clearly the affect of the new rule proposal on current hulls was not thoroughly examined. As written, the new rules would make hulls that were raced in February illegal in March.

That is my concern.

 

[RodneyPierce]

John, you need to go and re read what I wrote there. THEY PULLED THE TRIAL RULE SET DOWN from numerous people complaining. So the current rule set is the exact rule set it ALWAYS has been. As far as I know the "new" proposal that was being redone again has not been released yet. Correct me if Im wrong.

 

[SayMikey]

D-4 director submitted the rules,then pulled them. Currently they are being rewritten as to not remove any current hulls. No mention of transom recess or strut mounts are being looked at. If you have a problem with the new rules when they come out ask the author....

 

[Grimracer]

Nobody likes getting involved in the politics of toy boats, or at least if they have once they don’t...lol .. Having said this it’s important that our "group/IMPBA" see this as a whole and what is best for RC boating in the long run.

In my opinion the sport rules have been WAY TO LOOSE.. And I welcome a change. I personally see this as very important to sustaining what we have now.

No change will bring big changes “and very much change the sport boat as we know it” in the future.

Point being..

Want something close.., “Scale” “modified riggers-whatever that is” or whatever.. .. Make up a new class, champion it in your district and try to make it grow. If it’s fun, great and grows like a weed.. fantastic. If it bumps S40, B tunnel or whatever off the IMPBA roster then so be it.. it was meant to be.

Let’s just not ruin what we have now. Again.. not tighten the belt and the class is in trouble.

To better serve the people racing sport hydroplanes now.. lets see what Paul gets going.

Grimracer

 

[tnrcboatracer]

John, you need to go and re read what I wrote there. THEY PULLED THE TRIAL RULE SET DOWN from numerous people complaining. So the current rule set is the exact rule set it ALWAYS has been. As far as I know the "new" proposal that was being redone again has not been released yet. Correct me if Im wrong.

You are correct, the trial rule change was withdrawn. I thought that the discussion was regarding the trial rules that were withdrawn. My mistake. The new proposal has yet to be made public. The IMPBA is currently racing under the rules as posted in the rule book (I.E. same as last year).

 

[RodneyPierce]

John, you need to go and re read what I wrote there. THEY PULLED THE TRIAL RULE SET DOWN from numerous people complaining. So the current rule set is the exact rule set it ALWAYS has been. As far as I know the "new" proposal that was being redone again has not been released yet. Correct me if Im wrong.

You are correct, the trial rule change was withdrawn. I thought that the discussion was regarding the trial rules that were withdrawn. My mistake. The new proposal has yet to be made public. The IMPBA is currently racing under the rules as posted in the rule book (I.E. same as last year).

John, no biggy. I was referencing ron's question of whether his boat was legal to run now or not. I was referencing the fact that the original rules are whats currently being used is all.

 

[LarryConrad]

John, you need to go and re read what I wrote there. THEY PULLED THE TRIAL RULE SET DOWN from numerous people complaining. So the current rule set is the exact rule set it ALWAYS has been. As far as I know the "new" proposal that was being redone again has not been released yet. Correct me if Im wrong.

You are correct, the trial rule change was withdrawn. I thought that the discussion was regarding the trial rules that were withdrawn. My mistake. The new proposal has yet to be made public. The IMPBA is currently racing under the rules as posted in the rule book (I.E. same as last year).

Correct.