129 replies to this topic

[idare2bdul]

Mike Steube wrote to me asking if I would like to help in a motor development project. Those of you that were at the race Saturday saw the debut of this motor in the Checkpoint cars. It was an impressive and dominant debut. The cars had half a second on most of the rest of the field and seemed reliable. I think this is a good goal and the motor might be what we are looking for. My response to Mike is below:

Having a more dependable motor would be great. I have a real problem with how this was handled yesterday. D3 was sold to us as a place where racers could buy an over-the-counter motor and be competitive. Anybody that did not have one of the new motors was an also-ran.

Running the motors on an off day in a non-sanctioned race would have been more fair to the other 20+ guys that bought their motors over the counter and went to the track and paid their entry fee expecting a level playing field.

Rocky Russo was at the track yesterday running his Slick 7 motor that had a drop of epoxy securing the commutator. This motor has 20 hours of running on it now according to Rocky. That fix was suggested and rejected moths ago.

Over the past several months many people have come to me with complaints that some Checkpoint members were cheating on their motors. I consistently told them I did not agree with them. I feel running motors unavailable over the counter yesterday crossed that line.

I would be more than happy to help out in a practice race but won't run a prototype in a sanctioned race. Of the people currently racing in D3 I feel both Dennis Hill (aka Foamy), Bob Maxwell, and Gill Gunderson are all more qualified than I. I feel they would be better choices, but I'm still willing to help.

[Tex]

I agree that if it wasn't available to all and racers weren't made aware before the race, perhaps a publicized demo-run would have been more appropriate. Impropriety aside, it would be good to get a more reliable motor for D3. I'm only now coming to grips with what appear to be my first two motor failures. I was running well last night through five heats and then performance dropped off big-time . . . and I wasn't oiling the comm/brush end of the motor . . . no more than four hours running on the motor.

[Ron Hershman]

Sounds like it will be the '60s all over again soon with the motor manufacturers coming out with the latest and greatest on monthly or weekly basis.

What happened to the thoughts of speed-controlled motors?

Could "Speed Crazed Morons" be back???

Oh well . . . it's Retro.

Who is the manufacturer of these prototype motors???

[TSR]

This is the answer to a private message received from a D3 entrant a couple of hours ago:

X (name witheld),
The new motors were picked at the UPS depot in Aliso Viejo on Friday late afternoon after a race and an altercation with UPS personnel. They were never tested by anyone and were a complete question mark. They were installed in four cars (including one NOT from Team Checkpoint) late in Saturday morning practice, minutes before qualifying, with just enough laps to get some time on them. These motors have an identical specification to the previous TSRF motors, just better quality control and some reverse timing to use in TSRF chassis. In the race, they proved to be as even as a race motor ever can be. Only chassis setup and driving made the difference between the first four placings. In the straight bit, there were utterly even as I saw, staying with all three other cars, unable to gain an inch either way.

These four motors, the only available samples, will be loaned to four different racers for the next race as agreed with Mike Steube, the manager of Retro Can-Am in D3, so as to assess their durability while the actual manufacturing of a large number (2,000) will begin in China. You will be yourself loaned one of these test motors for the next Retro Can-Am race.
This effort, begun in September of 2006, has been financed solely by TSRF in an attempt to provide better and more even performance for the D3 classes. These motors, that will be only available over the counter of raceways where D3 races are run when marketed sometimes in June or July (including to me at full retail), will be used in both D3 TSRF, Retro NASCAR, Retro F1 and Retro Can-Am as well as Retro Pro for the racers not wishing to spend more money than they would like on Pro-Slot motors. These motors will retail for $9.95. As for the D3 Retro F1 class, I think that they will be "controlled", meaning numbered and surrendered after a race if one wishes to use it again, so as to stop dead-cold the discreete blueprinting performed by some in the class as clearly exposed yesterday. A marking system for each race will insure that no motor can be substituted by any cheaters. Interestingly, some of the people bitching and moaning are apparently the recipients (and possibly, instigators) of the cheating that has happened.

Addressing your question of fairness, the Retro Can-Am regulations were never violated as the rules clearly allow the use of any and all FK-type motors, and in fact, at least ONE car used a completely different FK motor in the race, and it was the fastest of any seen so far. This motor of Chinese origin was not available to anyone else, but was accepted as per the rules. The fact that the car had other problems does not negate its motor's performance. The perception of unfairness is strictly in the mind of people who are not the regular winners. Interestingly, the same four guys are winning, regardless of whatever motor they use.

Our aim is to provide D3 a motor that will be not only faster than before but at least as reliable and providing much closer on-track performance. At this time, there have been many complaints about the obligations to buy a large amount of motors to select the "fast" one in the bunch. First there was the dance with the Slick-7 grenades, then the many variations of Falcons available (I mean we are at what, #7 now?) are making the use of the FK a somewhat expensive proposition. We want to right this situation.

In other words, your assumptions, expressed in your message, are 100% false. Once the D3 participants will be made aware of the situation, be sure that they will applaud the new deal that will save them money, give them more equal and greater performance as well as probably increased participation.

I would like to address yesterday's situation as far as how it happened. With absolutely no data on the new motors, I took it upon myself to give one each to Paul, Mike, and Bryan Warmack simply to . . . test them, to see if they could "fit the bill" of what we have been trying to accomplish in the class. Turned out that they were faster than apparently all previous FK motors. I think that Mike, Paul, and I have won enough races that we could actually do this and take a chance, it might have been a wrong thing to do, but what if . . . they had been slow? Who would have protested then? We had no way to know until the very last minute, and we took that chance simply for the sake of advancing the class. The guys always making the "C" race because of lack of speed from their motors because they cannot afford to purchase enough of them will probably be dancing of joy knowing that they will soon be able to have the same straightaway speed as anyone.
Wrong or right in the mind of some, it violated no rules, stole nothing from anyone as there is no money to win, no championship points to earn.
Regardless of more performance or not, the first four placing would have more than likely be exactly the same with the motors used in the previous race. Simply look at the past results and get an average, and get real.
I await your comments, positive or not.

[Ron Hershman]

Quotable quotes . . .

1. Addressing your question of fairness, the Retro Can-Am regulations were never violated as the rules clearly allow the use of any and all FK-type motors, and in fact, at least ONE car used a completely different FK motor in the race, and it was the fastest of any seen so far. This motor of Chinese origin was not available to anyone else, but was accepted as per the rules. The fact that the car had other problems does not negate its motor's performance.

2. The guys always making the "C" race because of lack of speed from their motors because they cannot afford to purchase enough of them will probably be dancing of joy knowing that they will soon be able to have the same straightaway speed as anyone.

3. Interestingly, the same four guys are winning, regardless of whatever motor they use.

Response to number 1 . . . so if someone shows up with a FK type motor that is 10 feet faster down the chute . . . it's legal? Guess I better get the boys in China to work.


Numbers 2 and 3 . . . Kinda contradict each other . . . hmmmmmm??? Maybe the motor has better quality control for reliability . . . but that will not guarantee equal performance or speed.

[TSR]

so if someone shows up with a FK type motor that is 10 feet faster down the chute . . . it's legal? Guess I better get the boys in China to work.

This is exactly why we have been working on this project. The Division 3 management felt like it was time to control its own supply of motors. Hence and if successful (which remains to be seen), this new motor will be the only one allowed in D3 racing. It may not please some but it certainly will please most, especially the guys in the B and C races.

Maybe the motor has better quality control for reliability . . . but that will not guarantee equal performance or speed.

Nothing will ever be truly "equal" because it is virtually impossible to accomplish. However and if the first test is an indication, the motors will be much closer in performance than the ones currently used. The tech sheets from the dyno supplied by the Chinese manufacturer show that the extreme torque figures in the 10 samples (we only got four, the manufacturer kept six) are set in an incredibly narrow range compared to the previous batches. This is due again to better QC and better manufacturing methods.

By the way Ron, why would you be concerned? This is a class run in Southern California, the property of a group of racers and not any public institution, with all and every right to control any situation that may arise. The developing D3-like organisations run on the East or anywhere else have any opportunity to run what they want, we are not forcing them into anything. Indeed the Eastern organisation has chosen to run a different type of sealed motor.
So I am questioning why so much interest on your part in our form of racing?
Regards,

[Tex]

P,

I sincerely appreciate the effort expended to try and get us all a better, more reliable D3 Can-Am motor. What may have upset some folks and created the "appearance" of impropriety (I wasn't there) was the fact that, while the motors may have been legal FK motors, the motors were NOT available to everyone. You are correct that there would have been nothing said had the motors failed. But they succeeded apparently. A minor flap ensues. But the clouds will part and the sun will shine again. Let us know how the motor development project progresses.

[Pappy]

Dokk,

Ron, Ted Melton, and I are working on getting a D3 series going in this area. We just want to keep abreast of what you guys are up to so we can come out there and kick your arses. :mrgreen:

[TSR]

Thanks, Richard.
Several types of "unavailable" FK motors have been raced before in D3 in So-Cal and no one has ever opened their yap about it, because while the motors performed well in most cases, the drivers or their cars were not up to snuff. So "it's OK" unless you go too fast.

But you have to realise that because of the domination of the class by Mike Steube or Paul Sterrett or Yours Truly, and you may add Bryan Warmack, as he is now due for his first win, lots of "regulars" are a bit upset. So this test of yesterday is a good reason for some to beat the drums of discontent, and in my opinion for the wrong reason. :|

It is my opinion and that of others that there was nothing "unethical" about it, as there is nothing in the rules that says contradicts my action, that was utterly innocent. If these motors had been slower, no one would have said anything. We could also have hidden the truth but were totally forthcoming with anyone who asked.

The rules only say that the motors must be of the FK type and factory sealed. We KNOW that several racers have been using "blueprinted" motors, and we want to simply eliminate this problem, by first creating a valid powerplant of which quality control is superior so as to provide the most equal performance as possible, then and only if successful, only allow those motors in future D3 races. Turns out that we did a pretty good R&D job to make the motors not only much more even even, but a tad faster, quite a bonus. However, how much faster? The critics say "1/2 second". The facts show that the qualifying record moved 12/100th of a second, less than 1% on the lap time. This with the very same cars, actually improved in handling, raced last time there. It is very likely that this new record would have been set even with the motors used in the last race. The big difference promised by this new version of the TSRF motor is that instead of a crapshoot, the racers may at last be able to purchase a new motor knowing that it will be the same as everyone else, and because of the control system, the blueprinters will be out of THAT business.

The speed-crazed racers we may lose because they can no longer play that game may be replaced by many new racers who will love the idea of having to purchase only one motor, that will last at least a few races with even performance before being ditched for a new one, and save a lot of cash they can now spend on other necessary parts. I KNOW that we will gain more entries this way, where the guy used to go slow down the straight will see that he is as fast as a Steube or a Sterrett, that will give them a lot of hope.
My next move is to test the new motor in my Retro-Pro chassis to see how close I can get to the speed of my Pro Slot motor. I will keep you posted.

As far as I am concerned, I have thick skin and can take all the criticism, as I am working towards the refinement and more democratization of the D3 class, so whatever the critics have to say, goes right over my head. The next thing you know, I will be accused of profiteering, watch this space for the bitching to begin anytime.
Like my welfare depended on it. :roll:

[TSR]

The idea that they would be as good as they are has blown me away. In no way did I expect this.

And neither did I or anyone else because we did not know and could not have known.

[Larry LS]

Yes, indeed, according to the rules anyone caught or admitting cheating must be banned. All laps run are forfeit and lap qualifying records are expunged (sounds official, eh).

Yes, indeed, banned from any form of racing anywhere.

You guys have had it. Glad I had a sore back and could not come down and be humiliated again by the fast four.

If we buy this explanation, PdL, will you buy mine next time I slip a group 12 arm in my FX motor? :roll:

Well, we shall see what the post ex facto ad hoc ethics committee has to say about this travesty of unprincipled rank cheating. I thought we got rid of the USRA.

Just kiidding, guys!!

Ain't it all for fun? How much money was in the purse anyway? :naughty:

[idare2bdul]

Fun and purses are a couple of reasons why we race. I expect this class to offer a level playing field. A lot of guys in the B and C race would have moved into the A with the addition of one of those motors. Preparing a car, paying $3+ a gallon of gas to get there, and then facing this kind of horsepower disparity is just silly. I'm not against improving the motors but this could have been handled differently. When you went that much faster than the field you should have pulled the motors and put something else in the car or announced what you were doing. We let Yosh requalify; we would have done the same for you.

Mike Steube at least gave us a class answer:

Because hindsight is 20 20, we should have waited to run these motors in a separate race. I agree with Mike Boemcker that we should run a separate race. We run the new motor against the Retro-Pro motor. The idea that they would be as good as they are has blown me away. In no way did I expect this. I'm hoping this new problem can be sorted out. The end never justifies the means in my book. But, I try to learn from my mistakes and move on trying to make things better as we grow.

Let's learn from this mistake. Or we can now say a production run of one motor is OK. Rocky and Hershman, youv'e got my order!

[Ron Hershman]

I truly hope your production run of motors is as good as the samples provided by China. In all my many motor and motor parts dealings with China samples over there years . . . proved that samples were always better than the production run. It's a old Chinese trick to get the money. I know many other companies that would agree with me on this one.

As Butch already said . . . we are discussing organizing a D-3 series in this part of the country. We are concerned with what is going on elsewhere, so that is why I post comments, questions, and suggestions. I didn't know you HAD to be racing in California D-3 to do so.

My feeling is this, by giving the four motor samples to the "best" four drivers, you really didn't prove much by the results. Like you said, it the same top four guys doing all the winning. If you really want to find out how much better the motors are, they should have been given to the racers who always have motor problems and see how they did with them before making a decision to purchase 2,000 of them. But then again it's your money.

I like your idea of marking the motors . . . I think I may have suggested this months ago in several posts.

Maybe if this had been implemented like I had suggested, there may not be any blueprinted motors (I guess your tech guys can't catch 'em) out there by now and racers may have felt better about the whole thing. If you want to mark motors, then save your money on a new motor and just mark what's in the market place now. You will still have control over it.

[TSR]

Our Chinese factory is not your usual place. They are genuinely concerned about getting a good product out there.
But as you said, let's wait and see. As far as getting the motors to slower guys, this is what we will do in the next race. I had a thought about it at first, but I did not want to ruin their races in case of failure since we had no time and no data on the motors, and were ourselves in a complete fog as far as performance or reliability. At least if they had failed, it was on us, not on them. In the case of Bryan Warmack, he asked for one and I obliged. He also took a chance.

[Ron Hershman]

What you should try at the next race is . . .

Mark 30 or so of one of the current motors that are allowed to run and have each entrant draw one from a bucket and race it for the day.

Charge 'em extra in the entry fee and let em keep it afterwards.

That should solve all problems of suspected "blueprinted" motors, special picked motors, and totally eliminate those who buys lots of motors to find that good one.

That would "equal" things a bit and give everyone a fair chance.

Think the "fragile egos" would go for it or could handle this concept?

[Slotgeezer]

Ahem . . . :snooty:

Our current Division III open-wheel Retro F1/Indy class has already employed this system since our first race in January . . . and we impound the motors after the race, so as to discourage "tuning" motors away from the raceway . . .

Mr. Sterrett informed me this evening while I was purchasing parts at BP as to the FK motor testing controversy . . . :shock: . . . we had discussed the possiblitity of creating a "Division III spec FK-series motor" back some time ago, so learning of its existence wasn't a total surprise . . . as an un-informed observer, I can truthfully say that Mr. Steube's motor wasn't the fastest motor down the chute during Saturday's Retro Can-Am qualifying . . . but, he certainly had the fastest car everywhere else on the track .. . . I chalk that up to driving skill, experience, and proper car set-up, not do to the fact that his FK-style motor had some secret wind, timing, or break-in formula . . . :roll:

Of course, if the new motor turns counter-clockwise can-drive, like the original TSRF FK-style motors, I'll need to build myself a new Retro-NASCAR chassis . . . my chassis up until now have been built to run JK and Slick 7 direction . . . if the new motors require some racers to discontinue racing chassis that they've recently purchased, I'm worried that we might lose a few racers who are on a tighter budget than others . . . myself, included! :mrgreen: . . .

But the obvious merits of having a dedicated Division III spec motor, with improved and more equal performance, marked and built to discourage tampering, certainly would help those with limited expense accounts to compete with the "big boys" . . . so, as with all things in Life, it's a trade-off . . .

It will be interesting to see how this situation developes, as further discussion and testing continues . . . inquiring minds want to know!

Take care, everyone . . . and good racing!

[idare2bdul]

A Division III spec FK-series motor.

Is this sort of like the equal TSRF motors?

If you can hold to a 1% tolerance on a cheap motor, that's 4 tenths on a 4-second lap. So buying a boat load of motors to find the one good one pays off. This is why most USRA classes allow blueprinting so that you can get as close to optimum as possible. It's actually cheaper in the long run.

This also assumes I can do math when I have stayed up too long. I'm going to sleep. :wall:

[MarcusPHagen]

No, Mike, 1% is 0.04 seconds on a 4-second lap. It looks as though it would be easier to pick up that sort of difference by having a better-handling car, rather than trying to buy up a lot of motors - only to find that someone else lucked out and got one, too!

[Slotgeezer]

.As Butch already said . . . we are discussing organizing a D-3 series in this part of the country. We are concerned with what is going on elsewhere, so that is why I post comments, questions, and suggestions. I didn't know you HAD to be racing in California D-3 to do so.
...........
Maybe if this had been implemented like I had suggested, there may not be any blueprinted motors (I guess your tech guys can't catch 'em) . . .

My opinions follow concerning the previous two statements . . .

No, you don't need to be racing in California to post opinions about current Division III happenings . . . but, my Momma always told me, "If you've got nothing good to say, it's good to say nothing." . . . :roll:

I tech cars as Assistant Director of Retro-NASCAR on race days . . . if I turn the armature, and the windings on the arm are of the correct color for a stock over-the-counter TSRF motor, I'm going to consider the motor as "legal" . . . IMHO, if someone needs to run a opened-up FK-style TSRF motor, that has been blueprinted, in order to "compete" in Division III, well . . . :roll: . . . I'm sorry they've not yet learned the two most important needs within Division III . . . the need to support the local raceway, and the need to make slot racing fun . . . it shouldn't be MY job, as the tech inspector, to remove bodies and scrutinize cans to see if they've been opened-up and re-sealed . . . we're adults here . . . there's no prize money involved, only bragging rights for the month . . . again, if someone has taken their need to win in Division III to the extreme that it takes an opened-up "cheater" motor to race, then I pity that person . . . we're here to enjoy our hobby of choice . . . to support the raceway, and to bring some semblance of sanity to the ever-incresing cost of fieldng a competitive race car . . . if NASCAR can mandate series spec changes to control the cost of racing on a national level, then adjusting our Division III racing programs to better serve the intent and purpose of its mission statement is peanuts in comparison . . .

C'mon, Ron... :roll: .... If you're thinking of starting-up a Division III series, then asking questions and submitting bodies for approval is great . . . but stirring the pot to see how much sh*t will float to the top isn't only counter-productive, it's not the spirit we're trying to promote within Division III . . . Maybe you don't remember racing in the mid- to late-'60s . . . I do . . . and Division III gives me that feeling, now, in 2007 . . . sure, I wasn't a "pro" racer, back then . . . none of my racing friends were either . . . but that doesn't mean that the "pro" guys enjoyed their hobby more than I did, did it? . . . :roll: . . . We're close to getting it right . . . a few more "tweaks", and it'll be good to go for the vast majority of racers... Oh, you have a better idea, on how to run the current D-3 racing program? . . . :think: . . . Fine . . . start your Division III series, and prove that your ideas are better. . . and better serve your local racing fans . . . I'll be the first one to commend you, and tell you that you were right, all along . . . :mrgreen:

Thank you, Mr. Hershman! . . . Good racing! :dance:

[KenMiles]

Hi Racers.

I've long advocated the true handout motor method to address motor performance fairness issues. But D3 has so far employed only a buy-in handout system. The next fairest alternative is to pre-test motor performance to provide some assurance that the motor purchased is within reasonable performance.

Pre-measured motors, of course, must reflect an added surcharge. But such a surcharge is easily offset when compared against purchasing numerous motors to discover raceable ones. This assumes production motors from the factory do not vary widely to begin with.

We now know the new FKs are fast. But it remains to be proven whether the new FK motors in question meet the desired consistency or if wide variation of performance we have suffered continues to persist.

~~~~~~

It turns out that Phil Blanke's dynomometer will be permanently setup at Buena Park Raceway following its display at this weekend's Slotcar Convention. Phil Blanke is a professional dynomometer engineer, who tests full size automobile racing engines.


This pic shows the physical dyno component of the system where the motor is mounted to drive the flywheel mass.


Sensors from the dyno connect through an analyzer which data is fed through a computer.

Mounted in the unit is Jim Cunningham's unique but very fast Can-Am FK motor, which dyno results confirmed the motor's strength.

ThanX :mrgreen: 8)

[Ron Hershman]

Our current Division III open-wheel Retro F1/Indy class has already employed this system since our first race in January . . . and we impound the motors after the race, so as to discourage "tuning" motors, away from the raceway . . .

But, the obvious merits of having a dedicated Division III spec motor, with improved and more equal performance, marked and built to discourage tampering, certainly would help those with limited expense accounts to compete with the "big boys". , , so, as with all things in Life, it's a trade-off . . .[/b]

You continue to make my point. Thanks!!!

If you can do it in one class with the current motors, then why can't it be done in the other classes with the current motor?? Except for Retro-Pro class of course.

Why does it take a new motor, under development, to get this done? The neccessary tools (motors) are already in place.

The East coast guys are "getting it done" with their current and sealed Pro Slot motors.

[TSR]

The east coast guys are "getting it done" with their current and sealed Pro-Slot motors.

This is probably why my sealed motor was so slow in New Jersey? :? Ron, with all due respect, you know a lot about motors but you have no clue here. The PS motors I have used so far have been all over the place, not any better in consistency than the Falcons. I have also got reports from at least one East Coast D3 racer not too happy with the PS sealed motor situation for that very reason. In fact their only advantage, that of the possibility of a rebuild, is negated by the fact that they are . . . sealed. So if it is a turkey, it is a 40-dollar turkey. In California, we run these with no seal and the guys are allowed to blueprint and rebuild them, but guess what? The same guys are winning anyway. :?

Regarding D3 and the FK motors, our efforts at tuning the rules are paying off by increasing fields in now four classes, all inexpensive propositions. That we are looking into making the whole D3 a "one-motor" class, that we spend a considerable amount of our own money (and not Other People's Money) to study the possibility of much more even motors than what have been used (and that effort APPEARS to be paying off), that we will also have now the possibility of testing a motor for power and torque, thanks to this cool little dyno, shows that we are committed to having fun and also weeding out the cheater motors by having a simple motor control system.
Your proposed system of handout has been used all along in TSRF racing and is only as satisfactory as how good the motor is. If the new motors are more even (let alone as fast as the fastest previous examples), who is going to complain except for the ones dead-set against "rear view mirrors" motors, or the blueprinters?

As far as the Retro-NASCAR class and reverse rotation, I have the solution to keep the current CCW chassis from obsolescence, no sweat.

[Noose]

The East coast guys are "getting it done" with their current and sealed Pro Slot motors.

Yes, we are. John Gorski has won two of the Can-Ams and placed 2nd in another with the SAME motor and car. Mike Katz yesterday literally built his F1 there at the track and bought a motor from the raceway. It was a rocket. Since we allow the use of screws to hold in the motor as well as soldering in the motor, no one has had any problem with them since the first race. Rob ran my back-up F1 car yesterday with a stock sealed Pro Slot and did just fine. Everyone here seems to be very happy with our motor rule.

[TSR]

Actually, Joe, ALMOST everyone . . . and I am not talking about myself.
The Retro-Pro class here has also shown some disparity between the motors in a straight line, but it is to be expected. The PS as sold by BP and the sealed PS as sold to the East Coast D3 are a bit different: the sealed motor is wired in reverse (why . . . :? ) but the performance level is similar. However, of the five motors I have been through, while all have been so far very reliable, their performance in the same chassis with the same gearing varies greatly, the extremes being 4/10 of a second apart. That's a lot for a spec motor. Three are sealed (the ones supplied by John Gorski) and two are not sealed but none has been opened so far. One has been raced in anger twice and placed well, but it was obvious that there were faster and slower motors in both races, as there is with the use of the Falcons or Slick-7s. However, I like the motor once one accepts its weaknesses (can design allowing easy deformation of its nose unless solidly braced around it, or using screws as the tabs will quite easily pop open . . .) it is a great little motor with lots of promise. I also must praise the efforts of Dan DeBella to "make it right" during the teething period.

Now about the So-Cal motor. In attempting to manufacture a more consistent motor that would be as fast or nearly as fast as the $40 PS for 1/4 of the price, we hope to attract more local entries in the Retro-Pro class as well as all others, and if successful, will offer this motor to any raceway wanting to run a D3 racing program following the California D3 rules. The race Saturday showed that the new motors (at last the samples) are just about as fast as the PS, and all four motors were incredibly consistent. So we will wait and see what the actual volume-production motors will do and if they compare favorably with the samples. As I said, it is TSRF's money. The four existing samples will be dynoed then loaned to four other racers in the next race on the Kingleman, used in their F1 cars, and four more racers in a third race on the Hillclimb, before the actual production motors will show up.
Regards,