43 replies to this topic

[Ron Hershman]

I just have to ask now that the ball is rolling. The only popular wind we missed in the thread is the 12 wind. What was the original stack length for this wind?

55 turns of 29 ga. .400" or so stack length.

The only involvement of AMF in slot car racing is that in 1966, they purchased a license from American Model Car Racing Congress to manufacture and market tracks everywhere in the world EXCEPT the United States.

And Canada

[jimht]

I don't recall any particular stack length being mandated on the original 12 & 15 Group arms. They were all long, as long as the Group 20 that they were introduced after (and unbalanced).

Later Mura introduced the Challenger and the Wasp and the Superwasp as upgrades for the stock 16D arms from Parma.

The short Group 12 may have been an additional effort by Mura to make the Group 12 faster and still stay sorta in the Group 12 guidelines. I believe it was called an "Outlaw 12" when it was first introduced and was the same length as the Superwasp.

The USRA and it's adoption (and further rules strangulation) of the limited classes designed for the Raceways came after the short arm had been around awhile.

[Ron Hershman]

I don't recall any particular stack length being mandated on the original 12 & 15 Group arms. They were all long, as long as the Group 20 that they were introduced after (and unbalanced).

Later Mura introduced the Challenger and the Wasp and the Superwasp as upgrades for the stock 16D arms from Parma.

The short Group 12 may have been an additional effort by Mura to make the Group 12 faster and still stay sorta in the Group 12 guidelines. I believe it was called an "Outlaw 12" when it was first introduced and was the same length as the Superwasp.

Just going by what Bob Green told me about the NCC 12 arms and nothing was mandated...... because they sold for less they shortened the length of the stack and that required less wire per arm.... in their big picture it saved them money and the arms were more easily identified by the different stack length of a NCC 12 and NCC 15 arm. No tags back them and neither was balanced. I have never seen a NCC 12 with a long stack....... all have been shorter than the NCC 15 blank that was also used on the NCC 20's.

When I started racing in 1981.... the 12 arms from Mura were 50 turns of 29 ga wire on a .375 to .400 blank and no tags or tie or balancing. They all had piano wire shafts. As did the Int 15 arms that were .460" or so in stack length.

In 1985 or there abouts...Mura came out with the "Outlaw" X-12 arm that was balanced, tied and tagged and with a .350" stack length and a drill blank shaft. A year or so later they discontinued the unbalanced, untagged 12 arms.

It was bout this same time Mura came out with the Challenger I balanced Challanger II balanced ( replacement 16-D arms ) and then the Super Wasp balanced and unbalanced arms..... all were made with piano wire shafts then. Were not tied, not tagged had green wire and the Super Wasp was balanced. The Super Wasp used the same blank length as the X-12 arms and at .350" stack length.

Over the next 10 years Mura changed the number of turns off Challenger and Super Wasp, tied and tagged them and changed from the green colored wire to copper colored wire.

Also in 84-86 the Mura Int 15 arms went to a .440" stack and drill blank shafts as the USRA changed their rules.

[jimht]

Memories vs. data... ...I'll buy that book.

What's funny about all this is that one can look back and see how haphazardly this stuff developed, and how writing any kind of rules was kind of a waste of time.

Either the manufacturers changed what they needed to make a buck or the racers got the rules changed to allow what they liked.

It just confirms my belief that all racing classes should be defined from the top down, and if it fits under the body, it's legal.
Some motor types should be separated from others, because of cost, just as some chassis types should be, but armatures should be allowed to "run free" in each motor class.

The Group 12 motor for example...would it not have made more sense in the long run to have just said a 29 gauge wire armature in a ceramic magnet C can, and not worried about turns or length or diameter.
The production costs would have been the same and the gauge restriction would have sufficed to keep control over expense.
And, just like Opens, there would be many choices for different track and power configurations.

Sure, you still buy a bunch of arms to get the right combinations, but they're all usable, instead of some being duds...

[Ron Hershman]

1. Memories vs. data... ...I'll buy that book.

2. What's funny about all this is that one can look back and see how haphazardly this stuff developed, and how writing any kind of rules was kind of a waste of time.

3.Either the manufacturers changed what they needed to make a buck or the racers got the rules changed to allow what they liked.

4. It just confirms my belief that all racing classes should be defined from the top down, and if it fits under the body, it's legal.
Some motor types should be separated from others, because of cost, just as some chassis types should be, but armatures should be allowed to "run free" in each motor class.

5. The Group 12 motor for example...would it not have made more sense in the long run to have just said a 29 gauge wire armature in a ceramic magnet C can, and not worried about turns or length or diameter.
The production costs would have been the same and the gauge restriction would have sufficed to keep control over expense.
And, just like Opens, there would be many choices for different track and power configurations.

6. Sure, you still buy a bunch of arms to get the right combinations, but they're all usable, instead of some being duds...

1. Better hurry before CRS sets in and no one remembers anything.

2. Just think were we could be with no written rules. We would all be racing Gr 7 or maybe nothing at all as not many could afford racing with no rules.

How much stuff was made and sold when no rules applied for it? Think of Challenger and Super Wasp motors...was there ever a need for those? Wouldn't a Ceramic X-12 C-can motor have worked instead?

3. Kind of like International 15..... was that a East Coast thing or Texas thing when it got started?

4. Ever try that concept in your raceway Jim? If so how did it work out for you in the long run? Didn't you once support and promote the USRA circus for along time Jim? Did you ever "submit" your ideas of such for voting on by the USRA?

5. Sure no restrictions on number of turns.... I guess that works if I have a 45 Turn and you have a 55 turn....MFG's would just work harder to come out with less turns and make them reliable and win over their competition while giving the story of them all being the same and equal.... that didn't and doesn't work in Gr 7. If it did...everyone would be running the same number and turns everywhere. Some MFG's have a tough enough time making enough 50 t 29 X-12 arms and add it different number turns...whew. The Distributors and raceway owners would love that I am sure. Sounds like unlimited C-Can racing and not many want to return to that.

6. Duds...... depends on what track you are on. Wrong wind on a given day...and you got a dud.

[stoo23]

Perhaps Slightly Off Topic,..but seeing as AMF and Slot Car tracks was mentioned,..In Australia, AMF are currently having New Slot car tracks installed in quite a number of it's Bowling Centres around the Country.

Peter Hopkins who used to own and run AREA3 at Tuggerah and has built a number of tracks, has been building and installing the tracks.
They are 8 Lane and although I haven't seen any of them myself, a few that have suggest that they Look Great (peter Does build quite a good track) and apparently are proving to be quite Popular with the Kids.

Guess what Goes around Comes around,..History Repeating itself,..lol

I'll speak with Peter and see if I can get some pics and put up a post.
Cheers,
Stewart

[Marty N]

55 turns of 29 ga. .400" or so stack length.




And Canada

You're a gold mine Ron. Thanks. I learn more about the history of this hobby every time you post.

[jimht]

Hi Ron,

I guess you shut me down, huh?

Not.

And no fair answering your own questions to make your point.

Regarding the questions you did ask and didn’t answer, I guess it’s not too much thread drift to continue discussing how the history of what we’ve done affects what we’re doing now, eh?

I didn’t mean no rules, I meant less rules on the “Gp12” armatures. Consider, most of humanity that’s ever been involved with slot cars on 8 lane commercial tracks has peaked at 29 gauge performance or at an even lower level. It’s actually quite difficult to run away from 29 gauge horsepower even on the tracks that have been reconfigured to make it so normal humans can play without destroying their cars, sorta (You know I mean the “new” Kings, right?).

The various motors/arms/classes like Challengers and Wasps that have been introduced through the years are reflection of the fact that slower is sometimes enough for most tracks and racers.
When International 15 was introduced it was slower and more expensive than Gp12 and Gp20. I thought it was dumb but I went with the flow, why not? The customers liked it.
And, yes I try my concepts in my Raceway, constantly, to keep things interesting. I’ve got an Open Group F wing car class going currently that allows the racers to stick whatever arms they like into the rebuildable F setups, cheap fun.

The USRA has studiously adopted much of what I and other long term Raceway owners have come up with, you’re welcome. Doesn’t mean I was trying to help the USRA or present them ideas that they should adopt. Even though I was involved in the formation of a national USRA by adopting the USRA rules into the Texas Series, I only had races for USRA stuff as long as it was worth my while. “Submitting” anything to the USRA as you asked? No, not worth the effort, especially for the last 15 years. Besides, the USRA has always claimed it only writes rules for the Nats, what do I care about the Nats…it doesn’t pay my bills. You talk to them; I’ve done my duty…

And so to the real issue: why not allow the Group 12 class to use any 29 gauge arm? It’s not a big secret that the easiest way to make an arm spin up quicker to a higher rpm is to make it shorter and use less turns. So what? Sometimes grunt and brakes are the answer.
Limits exist regardless. The fastest arm is not always the way to come up with a race winner…or have you never been beaten by a slower car?

Why not allow more leeway? Those who like to spend will continue to spend. Those on a budget will have an option that’s better than buying the same thing they weren’t satisfied with the first time.

[Ron Hershman]

Hi Ron,

1. I guess you shut me down, huh?



2. And no fair answering your own questions to make your point.

3. Regarding the questions you did ask and didn’t answer, I guess it’s not too much thread drift to continue discussing how the history of what we’ve done affects what we’re doing now, eh?

3. The various motors/arms/classes like Challengers and Wasps that have been introduced through the years are reflection of the fact that slower is sometimes enough for most tracks and racers.

4.When International 15 was introduced it was slower and more expensive than Gp12 and Gp20. I thought it was dumb but I went with the flow, why not? The customers liked it.

5.And, yes I try my concepts in my Raceway, constantly, to keep things interesting. I’ve got an Open Group F wing car class going currently that allows the racers to stick whatever arms they like into the rebuildable F setups, cheap fun.

6.And so to the real issue: why not allow the Group 12 class to use any 29 gauge arm? It’s not a big secret that the easiest way to make an arm spin up quicker to a higher rpm is to make it shorter and use less turns. So what? Sometimes grunt and brakes are the answer.
Limits exist regardless. The fastest arm is not always the way to come up with a race winner…or have you never been beaten by a slower car?

7. Why not allow more leeway? Those who like to spend will continue to spend. Those on a budget will have an option that’s better than buying the same thing they weren’t satisfied with the first time.

1. Nope.....wasn't trying to do that.

2. Sometimes one has to do that to make the point. Oh and never answer a question with a question

3. Yep, but those will still faster than 16-D motors and classes. So it's OK to go a bit slower than a 29 ga wire class, yet still faster than a 16-D.

4. In our neck of the woods the Int 15's were always faster than the C-Can 12 motors/classes.

5. So in your Open Gr F class there is 4 American made arms that fit those set-ups P-S Puppy Dog, P-S Big Dog, P-S and Koford Gr 12 and P-S and Koford Gr 19 arms and some Cobalt 12 arms will fit in them.....what's the most popular arm/wire size used in your raceway? Do you allow the "hard" neo magnets too?

6. You can always order longer stack X-12 arms for your customers...do you do that? The minimum is .350" and you could order anything you want for your customers...are you doing that? You could always allow the Spec 15 arms made by P-S and Koford which are the same number of turns and wire size except on a .440" long blank. Yes agreed that some days more brakes and torque from a long stack is better than the alternative shorter stack. Been beat by a slower car...yep...usually when I crash out, break down or drive pretty badly. I have won more races with a slower car than my competitors, but that had everything to do with staying in the slot and making laps versus the others who had faster cars but crashed a lot or spent more time in the pits. It really had nothing to do with horsepower in those cases.

7. Yep....it's your raceway and you can do as you want and sell what you want.... no one is stopping you from doing that.

[boogieman1]

I was there,Burned up my motor,Bought new GR 20 RTR off shelf,
made the main,Finshed 5th ,1970 Tristate race,GrandPrix Raceway,Dayton,OH---
Bob Kennedy Team Champion---How did you make this main? I said---the car is good,
I drove my butt off!!! BOOGIEMAN WAS 18,Long time ago.
Boogieman

[jimht]

An update for the historians:
 
Found a Group 40 in this memorial plastic bag storage receptacle for just about every variation of A, B and C Mura, Champion, Associated, whatever.
 

 
(Yes that's a Thorp 26-27 in the lower right corner of the bag, the comm diameter is .197", I hardly used it...   )
 

 
And this Group 40 is .512" diameter, .490" stack length Mura blank.

[Samiam]

Jim,
 
Andy from AB Slot is looking for some two-hole Green cans.

Wanted: Two-hole Mura C-cans

[Cheater]

Andy has about a dozen two-hole Mura cans en route from me.

[Slot-Racer]

I know this is an old post but have a question;

 

I have a Super Wasp X-12 and found a Int. 15 arm new never used. It's colored red and balanced. The can is shot though so in the trash it went. So the question is if I put the Int. 15 arm in a Proslot X-12 can (using the magnets also of the PS can) will this setup run faster or same as an X-12?

 

I also have a spare PS can with Mega III magnets. Would the Int. 15 arm be better in that can?

 

Thank you.

[Rob Voska]

An update for the historians:
 
Found a Group 40 in this memorial plastic bag storage receptacle for just about every variation of A, B and C Mura, Champion, Associated, whatever.
 
j.1.jpg
 
(Yes that's a Thorp 26-27 in the lower right corner of the bag, the comm diameter is .197", I hardly used it...   )
 
j.2.jpg
 
And this Group 40 is .512" diameter, .490" stack length Mura blank.

Gosh Jim, with Havlicek around you can't post pictures like that!

[Samiam]

 So the question is if I put the Int. 15 arm in a Proslot X-12 can (using the magnets also of the PS can) will this setup run faster or same as an X-12?

 

 

When I ran Box-Stock, late 80s, we were allowed to run X-12s along with 15s. We all ended up running 12s. Same wind but shorter stack meant a faster motor. These were brass 'n wire wing cars. 

[Slot-Racer]

When I ran Box-Stock, late 80s, we were allowed to run X-12s along with 15s. We all ended up running 12s. Same wind but shorter stack meant a faster motor. These were brass 'n wire wing cars. 

 

Thank you for the info.   I am still learning about these motors.

[don.siegel]

I'm digging up this old topic again because I've got a question about Group 15. A friend is looking for a "Group 15 motor" for a friend in Italy. 

 

I know about International 15 and even have a couple motors, but I think he's probably looking for an earlier one with a regular size can, not a C can. 

 

Had to check the history, because I really wasn't too sure about the whole thing. The NCC was created in 1969 and basically had three classes: Group 12, Group 20 and Formula III for inlines (also classes for 1/32 and HO, but don't think they went anywhere). 

 

In 1970 they added Group 15 and Group 22; Nothing too specific I could find on Group 15, just that it was faster than Group 12, with a slightly more expensive motor. 

 

Does anybody know any more about this original Group 15? Were the motors tagged? balanced and epoxied? The wind was given in an earlier post. When did it become International 15? 

 

Have started looking around, but haven't found much of anything.  

 

Thanks, 

Don 

[Pablo]

Type in "int 15" in the Slotblog search engine, click on the green button, and then scroll down past the ads.