THe 2004 ROAR rules are out and posted in pdf format...

http://www.roarracing.com/rules/pdfs/2004rules.pdf

Here is one peice that should be note worthy...

5-65: 19-turn modified oval motors shall be based upon any ROAR approved modified motor combination (arm and can) with an armature wound with 19 turns of 19 AWG round wire per pole. Components from different approved combinations may not be mixed. Quad magnet set-ups are permitted. Any brush type is allowed.Both drill-balanced and epoxy-balanced armatures are permitted. A maximum of 36 degrees of timing is allowed.

why would they approve 2 different types of 19t motors, that's just assanine!

Interestingly enough... There is no mention of the 'wrap technique' (hemi, cross wrap, mabuchi, etc...). As clearly stated above in section 5-65 'any brush type is allowed'. Since it's any Mod motor, presumably that means any of the aproved blanks for that model motor. Since you can use custom brush hoods in modified and this is a sub set of the modified class... you can put any brush hoods you want on the motor to suit your needs...

Just be glad your not a Road Course guy... For them in the 'super stock' Fixed timing, machine wound, 2 magnets, brushes must be as aproved in orginal config, etc... Unless you like that kind of thing... All those new 19T 'spec' quad motors will not be alowed to play...

Personaly I like the new oval rules for 19 turn modified... but I know there will be those that do not. So... brace yourself for some serious fireworks...

What is the point of 19turn? Originally it was a limited modified for racers in between stock and full blown mod. Faster than stock but cheaper than mod. Now it's gotten away from it's roots. I mean how many possible combinations are there now, with 4magnets or 2 magnets, laydown, stand up, p94 brushes. I think this is getting out of hand. I'm glad i dropped back down to stock when i did, i like knowing everyone is running the same stuff for the most part, and not having to buy tons of motors if you don't want to.

Curtis.

It seems like that's exactly what the ROAR 19 turn modified class for oval is... in between stock and full mod. Faster then stock but cheaper then mod. Motors are based on aproved mod motors, with a 19 turn 19 gauge wire and 36 degree timing limit.

There is also a $65 price cap in these 19 turn limited modified motors as well... Full mod has none of those limits.

dyno...this is why I favor arcor's rules, everthing must be submitted for aprovale...everything..roar seams to have left the barn door wide open here..they had done better to not allow aa 19 turn class for the headaches this is gonna cause.
the rules are WAY to broad

That's what i'm trying to say. I mean brush options alone, alow for 3 different options per can/armature. And then there are 2 and 4 magnet cans. And what about flat wire, could trinity hand wind flat motors for their team guys if that works better? it's just way to open, not specific enough.

has to be round wire

For me there will be only one brush choice... laydown standard size. Arms... I'll leave that up to someone like Todd Putnam to figure out what is the best...

I do agree that as the rules are stated as of this moment the barn door is wide open. I don't really see anything to stop some major lightening of arms... However I beleive basicly each of the major motor manufacturers will wind up with one perticular motor that works best for this class and virtualy every one who races this class will wind up running pretty much the one combo of ROAR aproved motors that works best for this. It might take a month or so, but eventualy there really should be only one combo that works well, and no one will run anything else.

Dyno, why wouldnt you use a p94? doesn't it have more surface area than a laydown?

I would use laydown for two reasons... I like the variety of brush compounds available in the laydown type brushes and I also like the ablity to adjust the width of the brush slighly if I so choose.

Cool, thanks. I agree with the number of brush combos, everything from putnam, reedy, trinity, whereas with p94 there are only like 2 compounds from trinity. Have you tried those new diagonally serated brushes from trinity??? supposed to keep comm cleaner, and not cut into the comm as much. Thanks.

Yes I've tried them. I didn't like them much really. It seems to me that you loose something in terms of the way the motor runs when you make the serrations diagnal. It's really just about like runnig a non-serrrated brush. I'm not even sure they break in as fast as the normal serrated brushes. Basicly I tried them a few times and gave up on them.

So what is your favorite stock laydown brush? Personally i use nothing else but putnam greens, and occasionally a green and a blue. My motors allways have monster power and are as fast as anyone elses at my track. But i'm allways looking for that edge, sorry to get off topic of the 19turns though.

Well I'm not sure I have a favorite laydown brush. I use Putnam Green and blue combos alot. I've also had really good luck with the Trinty 99+ compund brushes. Reedy 728s or 29s or whatever they are work well too.

I've also recently been playing with Trinty 4500 brushes, but so far this has only been in testing but I liked they way they survived realtively long periods of abuse. What I've been seeing on 19 turn motors is that they are really hard on brushes when you have the timing cranked to 36 degrees and I'm trying to find a brush combo that will get me through a whole nites racing without having to re-build... For 4 cell stock these brushes are probably not a very good choice however.

Beleive it or not, I've also had pretty good luck in the past with RacePrep type "R" brushes. The only really bad thing about them is they take forever to break in.

I never cared much for the Reedy 766 brush... too brittle and also take forever to break in.

FYI... KennyB ROAR region 5 director has stated over in the 'Talk to ROAR', that we should not panic based on the 19 turn oval rules as they now are... he says they are 'incomplete'.

Kenny is not only ROAR region 5 guy, he is also the 'oval committe chairperson'.

That still leaves us not knowing exactly what the 19 turn oval rules are.

Well, that figures. The Manufacturers have not told ROAR what the rules are yet :D


www.echeconneesuperspeedway.tk

LAydowns will kill the class nad make everyone need 420 batts ......

I tried a motor with laydowns its a MOD 126 poower and the amp draw with no fan at 2 volts is 30 plus AMPS .

ROAR is not getting a stinking dollar from me until they get thre heads on straight ...

SRM :dude:

Issues that definitely need to be settled ASAP. The Oval NATS are coming officials.

DAMN rocket, what all did you have in that thing? We had some guys play with that stuff around here a little and it wasn't any faster than stand-up stuff. It actually finished better than stand-up stuff but was a little slower up front. But then again we were also a bunch of mod guys with the 420 packs!!!!!! I used as much battery with one of them Binary Outlaw motors with the square brushes as I do in open mod. :eek: So yeah, huge sticks will need to be the norm now, that sucks, they are hard enough to find to run mod with and now everyone will want them. :cry:

p94, or laydown brushes are about a lap faster than standups on a 175ft. runline flat track. :thumbsup:

It's kinda hard to imagin that the manufactures are dictating these rules to ROAR. If you look at the section for non oval racing 19 turn "super stock" motors... Both Reedy and Trinity have 19 turn 'spec' motors with quad magnet cans, yet ROAR is not allowing quad magnets in that class. No, I don't think the manufacturers had much to do with the rules choices.

SMRocket, I think you need to put that Fantom facts machine away... a 19 turn motor will not put out 126 watts at 5 volts, not even with laydown brushes. About 90 is closer to what the peak power on a 19 turn motor should be. Aside from the Fantom's numbers you'd better do something differnt if your motor is pulling 30 amps with no load at 2 volts input. I can pretty much guaruntee that motor will never win a race operting like that. Narrow the brushes a bit or something, cause that just aint going to work pulling 30 amp with no load.

Lest you think I'm ROAR's cheerleader... I think it's utterly redicioulus how these rules changes have proceeded. Months ago we were told one thing, there was alot of debate on many things. People got impatient, and started asking for clarification on things. Some things were seemingly clarified, we were told some more, and we were told to wait for more answers, etc... Rules have gone to print, and have been published, and at this point they don't look very close to what we had been told they were going to be. I mean I beleive we were told there would be rules that would make it clear the armature's stack would be FULL, and that there would be minimum weights and ohter specs for a legal arm... The rules as they stand NOW (pubished) don't have anything to keep someone from wacking away on the stack and/or doing all sorts of crazy things to the 'aproved modified motor', etc... Now we're being told the rules are 'not complete'... but I just don't understand how it is so difficult to get the rules complete before they go to the printer and/or are published.

Now quite frankly the "any brush" thing should be the least of our worrys about these rules ast they currently are printed.

Dyno, you would be foolish to believe that the manufacturers have nothing to do with ROAR's rules. Also, 100+ watts is not unusual for a 19t motor. All of mine are 96-105 watts. They are T1 cans hand wound by Bulit motorsports with the orion brushes they don't make anymore. :thumbsup:

DYNO HOHHUM , really you think that it would never win a race.....HUM thats exactly why I put it up so everyone can see hOW MUCH OF A FARCE this ROAR discission is ......

THEY DID NOT DO what was put up on this and other site plain and simple ......

SRM :o

Echeconneee are you talking about peak power as given from a Fantom Facts machine? If so, then yes I know they will somtimes say 19 turn motors at 5 volts are over 100 watts... In many cases I just simply don't beleive that is accurate. Perticularly if/when the Fantom says a 19 motor is 125 watts at 5 volts. It just simply isn't true.

It seems that a with a Fantom, you can turn the timing on a 19 turn motor down to 0 degrees, and the Fantom will often tell you it has about the same amount of power as a really good stock motor (65 watts or so) then if you crank the timing up to 36, you might read well over 100 on a Fantom... As reported by more then one person now, the Fantom might even tell you a 19 turn with laydown brushes can put out 125 watts peak at 5 volts. Let's analyse this a bit... Track records for 0 degree 19 turn motors are tyicaly 10 percent better then the track records for 'stock', yet the Fantom will often tell you a stock motor is more powerfull then a 0 degree 19 turn. That is primary evidence that the Fantom's "Facts" are incorrect. Take dyno data from the CE TurboDyno, the Robitronic, or even the CS PowerCheck and you will see that a 19 turn motor at 0 degrees is significantly better then any stock motor on the market today. Take one of those dynos and check a 19 turn with timing cranked and laydown burshes, and you'll never reach 125 watts peak at 4 cell voltages. The Fantom's Facts are not accurate, and to use them to suggest that a 19 turn with laydown brushes is somehow the equivant of a full modified motor is just not right.

I beleive what you'll find on anything other then a Fantom, is that once you crank the timing past 24 degrees or so, the peak power actualy decreases. I also beleive that if you go from a stand up brush to a laydown on a 19 turn motor, you won't see more then about a 5% increase in power if you see any at all. I know they will draw more no load current, but that doesn't nessaraly translate into more output power. A well tuned 19 turn motor with laydown brushes may very well be slightly faster then the same motor with standup brushes, but not likely more then a tenth of a second or so on just about any oval track in the country. (that's just a rough guess, not based on anything scientific)... But when you consider the differance between track records for 0 degree 19 turn vs. 36 degree max 19 turn oval, I beleive my estimate is in the right ball park.

Robitronics dyno
Averages at 7.5 volts

Stock Monster motor - 125-130 watts
19t 0 degree - 165-170 watts
19T at 36 degrees - 175-182 watts

Fantom
Monster 65-72 watts
19T at 0 60-65 watts
19T at 36 95-100+ watts

I dont get it why so low at 0 degree on the fantom

Because a Fantom gets power off of RPM and a 19turn at zero degree's is around the same as a Monster. That is why on a Fantom dyno you don't look at power you look at the second screen!

Brooks

Dyno, in Lansing I went a lap faster with p94's over standups. And they were both geared PERFECT. :confused:.....The p94 brushes make WAY more power than the standup's, and a regular laydown is close to a p94. p94's are the fastest brush in a 19t. (on track tested) P94 brushes also make the most power on a turbo dyno.

I need to revise some of my previous comments... I went back and looked at some of my dyno data for 19 turn motors... When I crank up the voltage on my Robitronic to 6 volts, I get peak power output of about 120 watts... When this happens on my Robitronic, the voltage is about 4.3 volts. If I were to crank up the voltage a bit more, so I could achive 4.8 volts when the motor is hitting peak power, the motor would very likely put out 125 watts peak. So when i said earlier that a CE, Robi, CS, etc would never reach 125 watts I was wrong.

However this still deosnt' mean I accept the Fantom's power numbers as accurate. On the contraray. I just need to revise my statements a bit... What I will say now is that ther is no way that switching from standup to laydown brushes on a 19 turn motor, will not produces anwhere close to 20% more power output.

I intended to do some of my own testing with stand up vs. laydown... I guess I'll have to proceed with my plans, just so I know for myself exactly what happens. I in no way shape or form expect to see more then 3 or 4% differances in output power at any given timing setting. I expect that in many cases (depending on timing) the output power might actualy go down with laydown brushes if they remain full faced.

Frank, I beleive you... 1 lap is just about .1 second per lap on the Lansing track. The P94 brushes are pretty close to the ideal width for these motors I think. Given that with the laydown brushes, you can trim just the trailing edge and still get the same width as a P94 brush, then you may go alittle faster then you would with a P94. That'd probably yeild something close to another .1 second per lap. All total you might gain up to about 2 laps going from a stand up brush to a idealy cut laydown brush.

the motor in question was 105 25000 rpm before we changed to laydown brushes .......after it was 125 and 2650 on the rpm ......To me this is a mod motor like we use to run 10-12 turns /////////

ROAR is stepping on there own feet with the lack of reasonable decisions........

ARCOR had the perfect setof rules and everyone knew them and racing was good .....I will not support ANY ROAR racing from this poin on and will go to ARCOR and NORRCA races only this year .Some could say we do not need you anyways BUT I am sure that most oval racer would agree that ROAR Stepped on there units this time ......SRM :o :roll: :o

Dyno, That could be, I haven't messed with different brush cuts. Both being full face the p94 is the way to go. On a fantom dyno, which I only use to entertain Zubak a 95 power standup brush motor will be a 104-108 power with p94's. That is with both motors at 36deg. I have seen some 120+ power motors, but that was at 40+deg. of timing.

Back to Frank's observations... What's the track record at Lansing for 19 turn? 59 or 60 laps? at 59 laps, the average lap is 4.07 seconds... if you went to 60 laps by going to a P94 brush, that's like .07 second/lap improvement. My suspision is that if you ran a full faced laydown brush, you would not go any faster, but if you trimed both edges so the brush with was .175" or so, you'd go about as fast as you went with P-94 brushes. If you trim only the trailing edge of a laydown by about .015", you might go slighly faster then you would with P94 brushes. If we be generous and say you gain another lap, that's a total of about .15 seconds per lap gain. That's about 4% decrease in lap times going from stand up to laydown. That's about as much as I would expect from the change from stand up to laydown.

I fooled with laydowns a little bit this past weekend. All I can say is "DON"T USE COMM DROPS!"

I put a drop down each brushhood before the race and for the first five laps it was hanus fast. Then all of a sudden it ways about 3/10's slower at least.

So, i pull it off on about lap ten to see little trails of smoke coming out of the endbell and I don't see a comm in there.

So, I rush baclk to the pit and pull the motor apart and see nothing but brush dust built up between the comm segments. and two segments of the comm where completely black. :mad:


I will try it again, more trailing edge cut and a lighter negative spring and blue and green shunt brushes rather than 4499s.

I am going to give P-94's a shot also. If it was up to me though, we would't be having this problem. We would still be runnin standup brushes and two magnet cans. :)

Kenny B posted this on the R/C Conference:

For the record....the rules as published are not correct! Please don't go off on ROAR as I am working on a rule clarification. The rules should actually read full stack arms, standup brushes (laydowns in 2005) and a minimum armature weight.
Kenny B ROAR Oval Committee Chair


So that simplifies alot, no need to worry about laydowns or p94's, you can't run them. I guess 4 magnet might still be in there, but that's not that big of a deal.

Curtis Jr. :thumbsup:

I know that's what Kenny has basicly told us in the past. What I don't understand is how so much could have been left out of the rules as they were published. Apparently it was also published in Rev-Up that any brush would be allowed (as it is in the currently published rule book) I don't understand how the head of the Oval committe can have one understanding of what the rules are suposed to be, yet a completely differt thing gets published. You would think that who ever's in charge of actualy publishing the rules, would send out the draft and let everyone check it for errors before it gets released to the world.

KENNY B is the best at helping oval make a comeback in his area and nationaly .....I did not see his post ...From what I have now read ,it looks to me that Kenny did not have as much inut as OVAl guys would have liked .And after reading the comments of Mr Howirt I can say that ROAR is a group with their respective heads buried in the sand .....He bad mouth ARCOR saying their rules are incomplete with out offering any reasonable set of rules from his org.

39cents a pound :devil:

SRM :o

SMRocket,

Where did you see comments from Mr. Howirt? You seem to be impling that someone higher up has over ruled KennyB and that the rules are as they are written regardless of what KennyB is saying. If this is not actualy what your trying to say then please clarirify...

I read his statements and JB recanted his statements on the ROAR thread [i believe]ormaybe the ARCOR thread .ITS ON THIS SITE somewhere.........I was very surprized to see his statements because he has been involved with racing for20 years plus .His son owns and opperates a company in this hobby and his statements were to say the least condisending ......SRM :o

So only standups then???

What company is that rocket? We should not buy from them either maybe? Unless they straighten things out soon they won't be getting my membership $$ this year either.

Mike, and everyone else...

KennyB, chairperson of the ROAR 'oval committe' has come out and said that the ROAR 2004 rules as they were published are "not complete". He has also said repeatedly over the past two months and even after the 2004 rules were published, that for 2004 only standups would be allowed. Apparently the plan is to allow them in 2005. One of the things left out was wording to make sure all arms remain full stack with a minium weight...

Kenny said this most recently on the 'talk to ROAR' section in a thread related to the 2004 rules and as recently as about 3 days ago.

Now... we wait to see if/when the published rules get changed to what KennyB beleives they are suposed to be.

If someone has a direct link to something someone higher up in ROAR then Kenny has said to indicate that these rules will NOT change, then I'd like to see it. I have not seen that type of statement myself.

oops... I may have been dreaming... I went to try and find Kenny's recent statement about this matter. What I found was where he stated that the rules are not complete as the currently are published. I could not find any really recent statments that stand up brushes would be required this year. I still think he has said that stand up would be required this year, but I can not find the evidence of any recent statments to that effect.

FYI.

I have spent the past hour or so reviewing most everything I can find about the ROAR 2004 rules with regard to the Oval racing 19 turn motor. Here is a synopsis of what I found.

The original Exex-Commitee report was that it would be any ROAR aproved Modified motor(this would allow Quad cans since there are modified motors that are ROAR aproved with Quad Magnets), with ANY brush style (since modified rules alow you to use custom brush systems). It was also stated in that orgininal report that there would be some minimum weigh for a legal 19 turn arm, and there would be specs given for the type of wind and/or wire/lenght used, etc...

Later KennyB reported that the most complaints he heard were related to allowing laydown brushes, and therefore he and/or the oval committe was going to recomend that stand up brushes be required for this oval 19 turn modified class.

It is unclear to me at this time if the Oval committe has final say on the rules, or if they merely make suggestions on what the rules should be. Along the same lines, it's unclear to me if the Oval committes recomendation that only stand up brushes be allowed was ever heard and/or implemented by who ever it is that actualy decides what to put in the rule book.

So in short... We still wait for some official clairification on what the actual rules are. At this point I think you have to take the 2004 rule book at face value as it is printed, and consider everything else as hearsay and/or suggestions that may or may not ever be implemented.

39 centsa pound BANANNAS is what ROAR is getting from me I sent a box out today ....


SRM :p

I intend to send the following to the ROAR President and/or Administrator.

http://www.wiltse.net/dear_roar.txt

Which is basicly the offical way to ask for revsions to the rules... (as described in sections 11-1 though 11-3 of the ROAR 2004 rule book)

Well written, I hope you get a timely and intelligent answer.

From ROAR???????

We'll see. I fired off the email a hour or so ago, to both Prez and Administrator...