Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

All things related to racing at FRC
Post Reply
User avatar
gordon
Site Admin
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:34 pm
Location: Trinidad & Tobago
Contact:

Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

Post by gordon »

Guys,

Ramesh has asked us all to consider a suggestion regarding the motor requirement for Scalextric Ford GT40s in our Vintage Sports class. His suggestion is that we allow them to run the Scalextric 20,000 RPM (yellow can) motor. Now if this is agreed upon we need to allow this motor in a few other cars. I've checked the FRC database for all cars that ever raced in VS and came up with the following cars which also use the same type of FC130 motor as the Ford GT40:
  • Scalextric Chaparral 2F
  • Scalextric Ferrari P4
  • Revell-Monogram Cobra Daytona
  • Revell-Monogram Lola T70
  • Revell-Monogram McLaren M6A
There are several other cars which use FC130 motors listed as eligible for VS. These also will have to be considered if ever any appear at FRC.

So... let's get some feedback below by everyone airing their thoughts on this topic.

Gordon
steveaca
Posts: 1574
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

Post by steveaca »

Hi all,
my feeling is that the Vintage Sport class cars retain the standard motor as per current regulations. Allowing motor changes will mean that this supposedly standard class will now become a modified one. The cars in this class I think , are fairly evenly matched, with the edge, if any, going to the Scalextric GT40s. Looking at the results of the last VS event, we see that the pole time was set by a Scalextric GT40 running a standard motor. All 5 races were won by Scalextric GT40s. This spec. car also captured 2nd place in 3 of the 5 events.
Steve
arden100
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 9:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

Post by arden100 »

All,

I agree with Steve in leaving motors standard, however I believe all cars should be similar in performance and competitive.
I believe we need to choose the best car possible for each class. WRT to the gt40 we need to make a decision based on our intellectual knowledge of the car. By saying yes or no I need to justify my decision.
I will make a comparison and I believe it will answer all question why it should be increased to 20k.

Scalextric GT40
Motor.....................18K.............. Giving up 2-3k rpm
Gearing.................Limited............Only pinion change
Tyres....................Silicone
Ride Height............. 1mm

Slot it
Motor..............21K
Gearing........Pinion/Spur
Tyres.............Silicone
Ride Height......1mm

NSR
Motor...............20K
Gearing.........Pinion/Spur
Tyres..............Silicone
Ride Height.......1mm

If I am running a scalextric 18k gt40 and winning that tells me that the other racers are not doing their homework.
The potential of the Slot it and NSR is far Superior without a doubt. If the scalextric gt40 is allowed a 20k it will bring it up to spec but still limited based on gearing.
I will never let a Scalextric GT40 with a 18k beat my NSR.
Gordon with this in mind ALL cars should meets the 1mm requirement In this class. I say this based on the handling capability of the Scalextric GT40.
There has to be a trade off.

Arden
Luke
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 5:54 pm

Re: Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

Post by Luke »

You'll just resolved one & now another issue in less than a week? By chance, going and have a next meeting instead of racing?

Know things need fixing sometimes but not everything so, all at once..!

No hard feelings but I certainly not beating up okay :)

Sorry for airing my thoughts on this topic this way guys but you'll got to be kidding right?

Luke
arden100
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 9:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

Post by arden100 »

Luke,

It is nice to air your thoughts, however Gordon is trying to make the playing field as level as possible. That was a request made during the meeting. The only outstanding item will be G5.
If you read his topic and give your comments you will clear the air and enable him to make the right decision. if you don't have anything to say remember ........... . LoL
The result does not matter to me, however I will stand and support anyone who's point is valid.
No hard feeling. :lol:

Arden
Luke
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 5:54 pm

Re: Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

Post by Luke »

You're quite right Arden,

Sorry about that okay...

I will go back and keep quiet in my corner because the results really doesnt matter to me too...

So for me - End of decision ;)

Luke
User avatar
gordon
Site Admin
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:34 pm
Location: Trinidad & Tobago
Contact:

Re: Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

Post by gordon »

Arden,

There's one other important variable to be considered - magnet. The magnet in the GT40 is significantly larger than the NSR and Slot.It magnets. As you said, I want all cars to have the same performance capability and to me the best test is in actual racing. As Steve pointed out, at the moment the Scaley GT40 is the class winner. I suggest we leave the motor as an option when we see how the new 1mm gorind clearance and tyres affect performance at our first VS event and have a better idea of how the different cars perform with these new specs.

Gordon
Luke
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 5:54 pm

Re: Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

Post by Luke »

BTW - Dont mean that its doesnt matter at all but meant to encourage rather than discourage ~ so whatever decision this topic comes too...

I G2G :D

See you'll later.

Luke
arden100
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 9:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Suggestion for amendment to certain VS motor specs

Post by arden100 »

Gordon,

NP. Point taken.
See you all tonight. Have a great day guys.

Arden.
Post Reply