Winter rules - Mardave / Supastox

[Simion Wabs]

Question: Do we run Supastox with Mardaves or do we run them seperate for the winter series?

Answers: Yes together
Answers: No keep them seperate

[ChrissieL]

Oooooo well it depends initial thoughts are combined by depends on how many and how regular people turnup

[RCMadShane]

At the moment I cannot see any performance difference between the SuperStox and Mardave CE edition… however the old slab Mardave “May” have a performance disadvantage… Having said that I do not think that will show up at Gloucester…
I personally feel we should allow all in one class and then just have two motor settings
Blinky – Up to 13.5
Timed – Up to 17.5
It will be interesting to see how the Blinky 13.5 get on at Chippenham..

[ChrissieL]

I raced mine at Chippenham Tuesday (13.5 1s). It's very manageable. Personally happy with the initial proposal Shane. Not sure others will be. Needs to be considered re batteries and fixed timing on motors. A 17.5 timed will blow a 13.5 blinks out of the water.

[LongRat]

I believe motor power has been established as not a controlling factor over who wins at Gloucester. With this in mind I see no point in controlling battery cell count or motor wind. I think any combination should be allowed - 1S, 2S, 4 cell, whatever. I certainly think Supastox and Mardave should be considered as the same class, race together and score points together. No distinction. The biggest problem with racing at Gloucester is the excessive class count, giving rise to many many heats each containing 2 or 3 cars. We should be racing touring cars and GT12, in my opinion.

[grayslick]

I agree with LongRat, no restrictions, run Mardaves and Superstox together, scoring points together. My experience of running them both over the past couple of weeks is they are very very similar in terms of performance over 5 minutes with the same motor/esc/battery combo.

[grayslick]

I dont think its a good idea to force people to buy more esc's and motor's that will not benefit them

[RCMadShane]

As much as I understand the annoyance of “May Be” having to buy a different motor there needs to be some thought at where people go from here on… a very good example is the Chippenham winter series this is a fantastic race meet and I would champion anyone going to it.. What became clear this year is that the Gloucester Club has strayed too far away from the BRCA rules which put many of us into a spin trying to get our cars race ready… Many clubs follow the BRCA rules and we need to aim towards them… This is our guide book remember and everyone should have one. I am not saying we need to Ban anything and I am not saying we all need to go out and buy new but there are a number of new drivers who we should be helping on the right path…. And the right path is not to say “Just run whatever you like”
Chippenham this winter will be a good opportunity for quite a few of us to experience the Lock down approach and take the best bit of this system to our benefit… I think already the 13.5 Binky may have been poo poo’d as it’s just too dam slow…
Yep LongRat… We could shut down some of the classes and just have the Touring Cars and mini/mardave/superstox… but that has never been the Gloucester way.. not to say that may be a good change…

[grayslick]

Shane - I agree, having decided to run at Chippenham, I was quite shocked how far my car was away from the rules and I'm still waiting for parts from Hong Kong grrrrr!

LongRat - having bought a buggy and an F1 this year only to see the class disappear overnight, I think other classes should be allowed but should run together if number are too low. Buggy vs F1 nice!!

GT12 and Touring seem to be the constant.

In the Mardave class we certainly would have enough runners who would comply with the BRCA rules, just to be clear we are talking about these rules yeah?

http://www.gt12.co.uk/p/brca-gt12-rules.html

I think we could easily split the class (for point scoring) between BRCA and Open Class BUT still have all cars (Mardave and Supastox) running together in the heats as currently. I don't think it would make any difference to what happens currently every week!

[Paul Bristol]

I raced Supastox at Chip on Sunday. As previous comments I was surprised how far from BRCA rules we are in Glos. 1c 13.5t or 2c 21.5t is the Chip classes. Last Christmas at Glos we had a long debate about 17t for Mini class. I have been using 17t but not even listed at Chipp. Don't think many others bought a 17t for Glos. Then there is the 1 or 2 cell issue and hard cases for safety and not helicopter packs. I think we need to be clearer what we do. Fully agree motor does not make much diff at Glos as down to driver but we should folow some class or some rules.
I wish to use 1c 13.5 t Supastox for the Winter series at Glos. Anybody else? of course I also now have option on 2c 21.5t from a defunct F1 could give it a go in Supastox.

[J'MM'N]

I would like to see more competetive racing, weather it be 1c 13.5t or 2c 21.5t, we should be trying to follow the BRCA standards.

With such a small venue that we have, I cannot see the point of us running things like 13.5t and 10.5t motors on 7.4v. It just a case of horsepower overkill and doesn't really help on setting up or learning to drive a car. So much more could be learnt if we tried to follow some of the standards set out by BRCA and would probably make for a lot more enjoyable racing.

[Mike Snelling]

I would prefer to race to rules closer to BRCA's. Last week i raced at Bedfordshire that follow the rules and it was great close racing throughout all the abilities.
I also think it would be a benefit to the club as more people may join.

On the question of splitting the classes i think the cars are fairly evenly matched. I cant see the point in physically splitting the classes further as we only tend to have two sets of "Mini" heats at the moment.
A alternative if required would be to split championships but run them in combined races (this may have been the intention of the origional question ).

Mike

[grayslick]

Originally Posted by Mike Snelling

A alternative if required would be to split championships but run them in combined races (this may have been the intention of the origional question ).

Mike

Yes, this is what I am trying to say too.

All cars run together, as currently, but split the championship - BRCA and Open.

In practice nothing much will change though

[J'MM'N]

Some thoughts on how we run it, I thinks Mardaves and Supastox's should run together. We dont have eough members to seperate the classes, so we should carry on as we are, heating drivers on their ability and not their chosen drive, as the Mardave in the right hands is more than capable of winning.

Also as we are a small club with a relaxed approach to racing and we don't want to have to police everybody cars, so we only follow the BRCA rules as a guidline.

Motor/Cells, may I possibly suggest something around the lines of the following, which would give a little more choice on configurations:

1c 13.5t blinky
1c 17.5t non blinky or 2c 17.5t blinky
and 2c 21.5t non blinky

No seperate classes, we all race together and hopefully have some fun as we normally do.

[Paul Bristol]

I agree we should run Mardave and Supastox together in the same class. A few Supastox are already creeping in and running at Glos but in reality a well driven Mardave handles well on our limited and tight track space.

Let's go back to the BRCA regulations which say:
Cars with 13.5 Brushless Motors will be powered by cell/s with a maximum nominal voltage of 3.7v
Cars with G2 Brushed motors will be powered by cell/s with a maximum nominal voltage of 4.8v
Cars with 21.5 Brushless motors will be powered by cell/s with a maximum nominal voltage of 7.4v.

I can see nothing about 17.5t brushless and think we are just adding confusion here. Do we know how many current club members actually race Mini and use a 17.5t motor in the club ? Anybody a view ? Why not encourage "Mini racing" and in the main sticking to the three choices above.

There will need to be a degree of honesty about "blinky" mode as this is difficult to police. The only other combination is 13.5t or G2 brushed motors using a 7.4v battery. But only the most proficient will not just slam in to the barrier and others will have the accelerator turned right down to compensate anyway.

This would probably provide a more level playing field then we give ourselves credit for.

[ChrissieL]

I ran a 13.5 1S blinky with motor timing at CWIC, as per BRCA rules. Although I won my heat, I qualified fifth in the A - a full two laps behind 21.5 2S BLINKY without timing. In the finals I was truly outpowered. 13.5 1S will be fine at Gloucester but allowing 17.5 or 21.5 timed is just silly.

BRCA all the way I'm afraid for me.

[ChrissieL]

Originally Posted by ChrissieL

I ran a 13.5 1S blinky with motor timing at CWIC, as per BRCA rules. Although I won my heat, I qualified fifth in the A - a full two laps behind 21.5 2S BLINKY without timing. In the finals I was truly outpowered. 13.5 1S will be fine at Gloucester but allowing 17.5 or 21.5 timed is just silly.

BRCA all the way I'm afraid for me.

Just to confirm running BRCA 13.5 OR 21.5 is fine.

[Gunter]

As Chris said brca rules only really anything with timing will be far faster than blinky setups BUT it dose make cheating easy so honesty will be important

[LongRat]

I can see there is a (surprising) love of the BRCA specs. I can respect that, but, I have to say we must definitely not subscribe to the body shell rule:

The following is the list of approved bodies for the GT12 class.



Mardave Lotus GT1

Mardave GT2

Mardave / Kamtec Ascari GT3

Mardave Porsche


This ridiculous state of affairs would serve to improve nothing about the GT12 class whatsoever. The only thing I can say I'm happy about here is that the Mardave Mazda shell is not allowed.

[RCMadShane]

LOL.. I agree with you there LongRat.. and in essence the Body shell is a high consumable so I could see this as being a rule the committee could be lenient on. It is very unlikely that someone will use their battered old shell at a bigger meeting..