Ok so sorry to be a little off topic but speaking of roar legal motors, any idea when there might be some sensored CC motors I can use with my nice new MMPro?

I have a ROAR rep., puppet whatever one likes to call these technology enders fools (hope that made sense, but in Portuguese it did :lol:) saying 4 and 6 pole motors are ROAR legal. It's in RCTech's forum and I also have a screen shot of the post. It seems to me if one wants to make a 540 or 550 sized motor with a 4, 6 or 8 pole rotors and a stator with more then 12 slots will basically only have the bashers for support, but this also proves how ROAR only makes the rules to help a few companies and they will keep our technology from getting better.

I don't think ROAR rules keep technology from getting better.

Look at the 1410 and 1406 motors.

In fact, from my understanding, we have this awesome 1410 motor partly because of ROAR rules: Castle wanting to show the world what you can do with good motor design within those limited parameters set forth in the ROAR rules.

To me racing should be all about new products that can improve the hobby and having too many rules and regulations won't allow new the new products to be used in sectioned races. Remember the wonderful days of full scale race cars? Well, I do and I miss it and with all the rules and regulations, it seems full scale racing has taking a few steps backwards in power and speed.

Look at how long it took ROAR to allow people to use the Neu/Castle motors. Have you been following the boost, turbo, timing advance and (I don't know if I missed anything else) discussions? If I have a ESC that can make a 17.5 motor act like a modified motor, crap I should be allowed to use it. Let the other manufacturers figure out how they can do the same or better. That's how technology moves forward.

Imagine if the PC market had rules and regulations. This would be the perfect saying:

Hey sectioning body people, the Intel CPU is blazing fast and our best AMD CPU is 20X slower. Tell Intel to make their CPU slower and if they don't ban the from using it until we catch up. (Add different ones if you guys want to spark some laughs in this thread :rofl:).

Different people want racing to be about differnet things.

Some people want it to be about ever improving technology. They want the "go faster" to come from some one/some thing other than themselves. Faster, more powerful motors, more cells in series for higher speeds, bigger, stickier tires, better aerodynamics, etc, etc, etc. The corrolary to this is continuous and ever increasing expenditures.

But not everyone wants ever increasing expenditures to go along with the new gizmo of the week.

There are people want racing to be be about driving and the improvements that come from within (like a better understanding of car setup or tuning to improve performance by making what they have work better). These people don't want to spend money to go faster (at least not to the extent of the other camp). They want everyone's car to be the same speed so racing is a test of your skill, not your wallet. They encourage rules that limit the impact technology has on making cars faster. ("Protect your investment", approximately what Steve Pond said.)

"Never the twain shall meet."

I understand the "Protect your investment" deal in racing and that is why you race in a certain class. But I also side with Lutach. There are just too many limitations.
A good driver can win a race with a "slower" car.

Patrick del Castillo layed the smack down on this issue(12 post down) when Ernie Provetti posted about this on RCCA blog:rofl:

Ernie Provetti RCCA blog

Do you actually race? (that is enter organized racing with rules, not necessarily ROAR Rules, but rules)? Does Lutach? What class or classes?

I race lots of different classes at a few different tracks. I've never heard people complain that racing was unsatisfying or they were unhappy because they couldn't spend the money on the latest and greatest technology. They would rather save money and have it for entry fees, or lunch. Of the people that I race with, that actually race, I can think of none that fall into the first category I described above. They are pretty satisfied with the limitations. They remember the dark days when each month brought a newer, higher capacity, higher voltage NiMH cell that you had to have to be compeitive (at least in Oval). They know that racing (Note: racing, not bashing) isn't about lack of technology limitations but is about the people.

Not electric, but nonetheless a good example is the Nitro Late model class at our track. The rules specify .21 engine max, tractionless tires (DLM spec tire) and no side dam. Could the racers go faster around the track with bigger nitro engines, tires that give ultimate traction but only last for one heat, and side dams? Absolutely! But no one who races in that class wants to do that. The rules for that class were chosen so the racing was a contest of driver and setup skill, not wallets.

(A complaint about ROAR rules of the SCT class is no ribbed front tires, but for most people that is again about saving money, not spending it because the ribbed tires work in more places than the typical tread patterns used for the rears, so they would need less front tires if ribbed tires were allowed.)

An oft' quoted old saw. And true.... if and only if an equally good driver doesn't have a faster car. Then it is no contest.

I race. I happen to agree with the premise/intent of ROAR.

I also agree with the premise/intent of our welfare system.

In both cases, I think the intent and result aren't in line with each other, largely due to politics.

Amen! Good idea, crap implementation...

Very true,

Only issue is that I do not race, and thus do not spend any money on racing or anything related to that. Pity that does not work the same way with the welfare system.

I appreciate you paying taxes buddy. My $29,000 wheelchair wasn't paid for with my good looks.

Maybe if the $3000 wheelchair didn't cost $29000, our tax dollars could be put to better use elswhere. I simply can't imagine any wheelchair costing $29k in the real world - maybe I just need to get myself a gov't contract instead of crying about it, though - who wouldn't love to sell $15000 emaxxes under contract!?

But then only people on welfare could afford them...

True enough, but I would only need to sell a couple yearly under contract to make a living - should be easy enough to scrounge up a few sales from the local hood - I will even submit the paperwork for approval so the poor, overworked welfare recipient doesn't have to leave the comfort of their gov't paid couch and gov't paid TV. :)