|
Post by pceng on Mar 15, 2014 8:54:29 GMT -7
Hey Alan, don't know about the rules being set-up for any particular platform. Seems though to definitely favor the G's. Have heard the same thing about a Tyco winning, probably from the same person. I have no doubt, that this is true. But doubt the validity of the win was within the rules. This is just my opinion mind you, but here's why. I have about 2 doz pr of 440 (Tyco/stock) magnets. Have gone through them several times measuring strenght for matching. None of them are as strong as any of the 3 pr of stock G's I have. Since the manufacturer fell out of grace with the road race guys when others started making faster cars. The stock magnets are getting harder to find. I don't think they were ever made in various grades as they are today. I might just be no good at it, but have never got a Tyco faster than a G. Unless poly mags were put in Tyco. Then the Tyco's would beat a stock G. The BSRT 290 & 277's in G's are as fast or faster than the poly Tyco's. Mine anyways, but thats why a Tyco winning in this class raises my eyebrow. Magnets just are not strong enough IMO. .................. PETER
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2014 9:35:15 GMT -7
Hey Peter!
PM me your tele number!
Alan
|
|
|
Post by pceng on Mar 15, 2014 9:56:04 GMT -7
Hey Rob, both you and Jeff are right, exhibition of sorts would be good. Mentioning the race was an attempt at expediting the matter. In truth don't think it's needed, just need change. Thought Racemasters had control over particulars, you know like tire color.....And voltages were sugested voltages. Anyway, not sure how to take the tent crack. But it reminds me of someting. Alot of homeless in this area, most of which choose to be so. A few years ago a guy was trying to pick up a girl at a local dump. After 20 min's of my not paying attention music stopped and I heard him say (with a smile). Got me a 6 x 9 Timberline and my own cooler. Almost fell of the stool..........
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2014 11:33:39 GMT -7
JJ,
Not sure how this "QUOTE" feature works so I did a cut and paste.
From JJ: "At that point....why do we have rules. I say again though, I believe in a level playing field and I see where the SG+/G3 seems to have an advantage with the timing."
As the rules are written now for MM/PS and you feel that the G3 with adjustable timing seems to have an advantage then how do those who desire to run a different chassis and want to invoke timing get to race? Would that not require a new class?
Sounds to me like the MM/PS class and rules need to be left alone and for those who desire to run a different manufactures inline with arm timing permitted then a new class needs to be established.
Just because a new class is setup does not mean everyone has to build and race it. Having a choice is wonderful!
Regards,
Alan @ MGDS
|
|
|
Post by SKR on Mar 15, 2014 12:27:06 GMT -7
had to chime in to clear a few things up. I did get a good laugh out of some of the comments here First off this class never started as an NTRA class, I do feel the NTRA should run a modified version of this class because of the interest for tweaking coms. I was a co-founder with a local racer and at the time we built the class around TYCO chassis with Wizzard parts. We all ran these type of cars here until someone got a Super G to work. We all switched over because it didn't take much to get them to run good. Yes the rules stated you can't advance the timing but with TOMY/BSRT chassis they were already manufactured in. With the orientation of the Super G bulkhead/brush set up is, you can't run a neutral timed armature in them, they'll burn up. This class was never built around a certain mfg. I wish it was so I could of received some kick back . I do agree that rules should not be changed a few weeks before an event. It would be best and fair to hash this all out before going into 2015's season. Match races sounds like a good idea for comparrisons. One revision that I'd like to see is to allow any machine wound armature with no retail limitations on them. Prices change all the time, some mfg's charge more for their stuff than others.
|
|
|
Post by Eagle Racing on Mar 15, 2014 12:57:23 GMT -7
Peter tent/motor home remark is cheaper arm to more expensive arm nothing more.
Sam, the problem I see when everybody starts talking Super G arm to Tyco arm is understanding neutral timing. They look at the Tyco and air gap on the commutator is center of the armature pole. They look at the Super G and call it advanced because Tyco's when off center are advanced. IMHO the easy way to understand neutral timing is when the air gap of the commutator is centered on the brush, the pole of the armature will be centered on the magnet.To find out if the Super G has neutral timing do the same. Take the Super G and move the air gap on the commutator to center of the brush, the armature pole will be centered on the magnet as well. That is neutral timing. The timing issue as you know comes into play with the movement of the bulkhead advanced or retarded. Also is the ability to tweak the brushs for more timing.
|
|
|
Post by jjwallace on Mar 15, 2014 12:57:32 GMT -7
JJ, Not sure how this "QUOTE" feature works so I did a cut and paste. From JJ: "At that point....why do we have rules. I say again though, I believe in a level playing field and I see where the SG+/G3 seems to have an advantage with the timing." As the rules are written now for MM/PS and you feel that the G3 with adjustable timing seems to have an advantage then how do those who desire to run a different chassis and want to invoke timing get to race? Would that not require a new class? Sounds to me like the MM/PS class and rules need to be left alone and for those who desire to run a different manufactures inline with arm timing permitted then a new class needs to be established. Just because a new class is setup does not mean everyone has to build and race it. Having a choice is wonderful! Regards, Alan @ MGDS No Al you cut and pasted my "quote" out of context. Go back and read it again. The comment that you cut and pasted was referring to Racemasters changing the rules as they are written before a race as Peter had brought up. I have no problem with any rule changes in any class as long as it is done properly and not last minute before an event. The way you qouted me makes it sound like I don't want any rule changes and that is incorrect. The way to use the quote button is very easy. You click on the button, it takes you to the message board, and you type your comments underneath. Then the whole qoute can be read with your comments underneath. Jeff
|
|
|
Post by Phantom B.S.E. on Mar 15, 2014 13:11:21 GMT -7
had to chime in to clear a few things up. I did get a good laugh out of some of the comments here First off this class never started as an NTRA class, I do feel the NTRA should run a modified version of this class because of the interest for tweaking coms. I was a co-founder with a local racer and at the time we built the class around TYCO chassis with Wizzard parts. We all ran these type of cars here until someone got a Super G to work. We all switched over because it didn't take much to get them to run good. Yes the rules stated you can't advance the timing but with TOMY/BSRT chassis they were already manufactured in. With the orientation of the Super G bulkhead/brush set up is, you can't run a neutral timed armature in them, they'll burn up. This class was never built around a certain mfg. I wish it was so I could of received some kick back . I do agree that rules should not be changed a few weeks before an event. It would be best and fair to hash this all out before going into 2015's season. Match races sounds like a good idea for comparrisons. One revision that I'd like to see is to allow any machine wound armature with no retail limitations on them. Prices change all the time, some mfg's charge more for their stuff than others. I just want everyone to hear it from me that I won't be changing any rules for the Nor'Easter Nationals in this class or any other for the matter. All classes will be run by the current rules as written and found here on Nitroslots.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2014 13:12:20 GMT -7
Hey JJ, At this point its hard to tell where the data is coming from ! I read it under the heading if ISRA Mountain Motor Pro Stock and took it at that Sorry if I gave the impression you are against rule changes however correct me if I am wrong but you do not want any new CLASSES? I like the original MM/PS platform that Sam and some others put together but I sure would like to see an inline class be developed that would allow timing adjustments period. As they say "Just my 2 cents" Thanks fr the tip on the QUOTE feature. Alan
|
|
|
Post by pceng on Mar 15, 2014 13:45:38 GMT -7
Hey Alan, think what Jeff, was saying. Was that he hs G's and intends to race them. But thinks rules need to be changed to allow timing advances in all cars. Level the field, I think he said.
Did forget to mention I saw something about limiting the degree of advancement. Don't think this is a good idea, alot of arms may benefit from a certin number of degree advancement, while others may not. I've always thought of the timing as fine tuning. Advancing the timing untill the peak is found. Or till you have a drop off and then backing off on the timing. I usually find tihis around 10 or 12 degree of advance. Though it varies from car to car. Even of the same make. So having a limit that could cut someone short isn't the right thing to do. How much an arm can be advanced I would guess varies to from one chassis manufacture to annother. So how do you set a limit, without just picking a number that could help one and not the other. Also to much advancement can hurt. More than I realized or never went to myself untill recently. Someone I....... er...we know put a pre-tweaked endbell in a G then advanced the timing by turning endbell. Car did not run good....... don't know what made me tbink of it...... but asked if he had done any more tweaking to the brushes.......he had......and turning the endbell in a retarding fashion fixed the problem. Going to far is not hard to do. .................... Peter
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2014 13:58:34 GMT -7
Peter, If that is what JJ is saying then I could not be more in line with his desires!
Regarding timing - I have a little back ground in this but as they say there is always somebody out there that is a little smarter or has more knowledge then you.
There are two ways to make an adjustment with timing to my knowledge. One is the mechanical way and the electrical way. I am lucky enough to have access to some very expensive test equipment that allows me to mechanically set the relationship of the brushes to the comm by reading test equipment. Its a science in itself for sure and time consuming too.
Nice to put a voice to a posting today. Enjoy the talk.
Regards,
Alan
|
|
|
Post by jjwallace on Mar 15, 2014 14:03:25 GMT -7
Thanks Peter. That is exactly what I meant. And no Al I am not in favor of new classes, but if it has to be, then it has to be. I would like to see other chassis run competitively in this class. If that means allowing timing options then so be it. But I also stated that I am not knowledgable enough about the other chassis to really comment on what should be done. I leave that to the experts. I am running the G3 because it is an easy build as Sam stated and plan on continuing.
|
|
|
Post by pceng on Mar 15, 2014 14:21:16 GMT -7
Hey Sam, any machine wound sounds good, assuming (oh-oo) you mean it to be kept at the 3ish ohm limit ? Changing the rules now or anytime before a race I can't see as anything but fair to those who would like to do advancing on something other than a G. Keeping things as they are all seem to think favor the G's. So why do it ? Is it you feel a couple of weeks is not enough time for people to adjust ? Then how much time is needed. We're not talking about something that will give someone an advavtage as much as taking the advantage away from one particular chassis type. Hey don't get me wrong the MM/PS cars I'm sending to race are G's. Just don't think rules are fair as they stand. And can't see why a time constraint should be a factor in making things fair. .............. Peter
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2014 15:10:54 GMT -7
Without creating a new class could a solution be as simple as:
1 - Allow other chassis to use advanced /retarded arms equal to the amount that the G3 bulkhead introduces or
2. Set the timing bulkhead to the center position in the G3
Alan
|
|
|
Post by pceng on Mar 15, 2014 17:25:51 GMT -7
Hey Alan,
#1 bingo !
#2 pre-tweaked bulkheads have brush position altered to advance timing. Can also be done to stock bulkheadss by bending little brush holder springy thingy.......
.......... Peter
|
|