1441 replies to this topic

[slotcarone]

For you local Retro Stock Car fans we have been racing them on the HVR oval every Friday night. The track voltage is now lower than when we had official series races there bringing the lap times to the 2.2-2.4 range and everyone that races is having a blast.

Come join the fun!!!

[John Streisguth]

" like Jett's in a gymnasium ". LOL. I'm not sure who's quote that is. Might be Buddy Baker. I'm sure someone will be able to give us the correct answer. I will try to make the summer race there. Stock Cars are on the schudel, correct

I know I've used that term... the F1s are even more towards that, because the lane spacing is just a little narrow, so you really have to pick your passing points.
Yes, GTC and stock cars Aug 4.

Now should we end the thread drift?

[Noose]

Correct on 8/4 along with GTC-FK and JD-SC.

[usadar]

Hi, IRRA BoD,

I would like to ask about the coverage of the F1 chassis front section by the body as explained in the following red letters:

17. All front chassis parts, to include the guide flag, must be covered by the unmodified body with the following exceptions. The guide may be visible on the sides of the body when the guide is turned. Otherwise, no front chassis component (uprights, wire, or any other part) can extend past the chassis width and the only part that can be wider than the chassis width is the axle/axle tube itself.



The front axle carriers are visible outside of the F1 body. Is this IRRA™ legal?

If the front section of the chassis including the front axle carriers are within the maximum chassis width of 1-5/8 inch, the front axle carrier uprights can be seen outside of the body?

Now, Kamo-san, Nobu Hanada, and I are designing IRRA™ F1 chassis kits.

Thanks in advance.

Haruki

[Cheater]

Hi Haruki,

What you are labeling the front axle "carriers" are what the rule you cite is calling "uprights", thus the pictured car does not meet the requirements of the quoted regulation IMO.

[Noose]

I believe this example is legal as the uprights are not wider than the frame. Some of the new bodies in the front do expose part of the front axle as the rear does.

[Tex]

I don't think Haruki is disputing whether or not the uprights are wider than the frame. I think he's questioning why the uprights aren't covered by the body; the only exception noted is the guide flag.

[Cheater]

Exactly, Tex, and the BoD is going to need to take a look at the wording on this reg.

[usadar]

I posted this question because the regulation may imply the uprights carrying the front axle can be seen from above as long as they are not wider than 1-5/8 inch.

I will follow the decision of the IRRA™ BoD.

Thanks in advance,

Haruki

[Duffy]

No dispute, the way I read it. Haruki rightly asked if the exposure when viewed from above is illegal, and Noose addressed the question in dimensional terms. Actually, the text of the rule -
no front chassis component (uprights, wire, or any other part) can extend past the chassis width and the only part that can be wider than the chassis width is the axle/axle tube itself
- addresses it dimensionally as well; the uprights (and how 'bout the BB flanges?) have to be 1.625" or less, and there's no callout about visibility in there!

I personally think the wording of this section is fine. I suspect the question came up because we are accustomed to thinking that no component can be visible and blah blah, so we weren't ready for this clearly-worded exception to our expectations!

Duffy

[Noose]

Bingo, Duffy.

[Jay Guard]

I feel the present wording, while not technically wrong, is confusing and therefore I agree with Greg. I believe a simple rewrite, which allows the uprights (assuming they are not wider than 1 5/8") to be seen from above through the body axle opening would be appropriate and would serve to eliminate confusion.

[Matt Bruce]

Somebody is posting using Duffy's name. That actually made perfect sense!

Who are you, and what have you done with Duffy? LOL.

[Cheater]

Matt,

Duffy was heavily drugged earlier this week and perhaps the sedation has not fully cleared... LOL.

[The Number of]

Or he wasn't heavily drugged, hard to tell the difference.

[Matt Bruce]

Duffy is a really sharp dude if you ever get to meet him in person. When he wants to, his attention to detail with his cars is really awesome. He is exactly what Retro is all about. He knows his limitations as a driver, and that's fine, but excels in so many other aspects of this hobby. You always get a great version of whatever the topic. LOL.

Just one of the many characters in Retro East and it wouldn't be as much fun without him. He is getting his hip welded and I hope he makes out OK, and gets back racing with us soon.

[Samiam]

Saw some car pictures from Japan with wire axle supports extending to the wheel hub. Awesome detail but is it legal here?

[usadar]

Saw some car pictures from Japan with wire axle supports extending to the wheel hub. Awesome detail but is it legal here?

I am not quite sure which cars you are mentioning, but in Tokyo both IRRA™ and SCRRA cars are allowed to race.
SCRRA F1 chassis may have front axle carriers wider than 1-5/8 inch in the limited dimension.
Pro Slot PD motors are allowed for IRRA™ F1s as long as they weigh more than 100 grams.
Only TSR D3/Falcon7s are allowed for SCRRA F1s, with no minimum weight requirement.

Haruki

[Duffy]

Duffy was heavily drugged earlier this week and perhaps the sedation has not fully cleared.

Or he wasn't heavily drugged, hard to tell the difference.

Beat me to it, Bill! Perfect.

Duffy is -

Aww, Matt, that was darn nice. Thank you for getting who I try to be, and sometimes succeed in being.
Six days past the operation I'm steadily better and working out like a maniac; and should be getting around in reasonable time, but my great frustration is that I cannot assume a building posture for at least six weeks! And just when things're getting exciting. It'll pass.

- And,listen: I may hurt and all, but this is really small stuff. I am lucky in ways I can't express. I wish I could collect all the nice wishes (and some brilliant snarks) in one place, but instead I'll just close this hijack by saying, Thank you, Gentlemen, all.

Duf[*creak* ow!]fy

[usadar]

I believe this example is legal as the uprights are not wider than the frame. Some of the new bodies in the front do expose part of the front axle as the rear does.

No dispute, the way I read it. Haruki rightly asked if the exposure when viewed from above is illegal, and Noose addressed the question in dimensional terms. Actually, the text of the rule -
no front chassis component (uprights, wire, or any other part) can extend past the chassis width and the only part that can be wider than the chassis width is the axle/axle tube itself
- addresses it dimensionally as well; the uprights (and how 'bout the BB flanges?) have to be 1.625" or less, and there's no callout about visibility in there!

I personally think the wording of this section is fine. I suspect the question came up because we are accustomed to thinking that no component can be visible and blah blah, so we weren't ready for this clearly-worded exception to our expectations!

Duffy

Bingo, Duffy.

I feel the present wording, while not technically wrong, is confusing and therefore I agree with Greg. I believe a simple rewrite, which allows the uprights (assuming they are not wider than 1 5/8") to be seen from above through the body axle opening would be appropriate and would serve to eliminate confusion.

Is it better for me to wait for the official announcement of IRRA BOD on this matter?

Best regards,

Haruki

[Noose]

Better wording and examples wil be provided. No change as to the legality.

[usadar]

Better wording and examples wil be provided. No change as to the legality.

Joe,
Thanks.
Now Nobu Hanada will start working on the proto-type of IRRA F-1 kits.
Kamo-san is starting to build IRRA F-1 chassis for me to race at the coming Fall Brawl.
Please stay tuned,
Haruki

[usadar]

On behalf of a racer here, I would like to ask about the motor rules about the motor shaft of PD motors.
Is it legal to cut off the extra portion of the endbell side shaft?

Thanks,

Haruki

[slotcarone]

Hi Haruki--this one I can answer with a yes you can cut the shaft.

[usadar]

Hi Haruki--this one I can answer with a yes you can cut the shaft.

Hi, Mike,
Thanks a lot.
Haruki