104 replies to this topic

[IRRA® Retro Racing]

The IRRA^® Board of Directors is announcing a moratorium on submissions of new Ti22 bodies for use in IRRA^® racing. The current Approved Body List contains a proliferation of this model, more than enough choices to satisfy racers' needs.

 
The procedure for submitting new bodies for consideration is also being amended and will now require a quantity of five (5) bodies, with one being sent to each BoD member.

 

(Posted for the IRRA^® Board by Joe Neumeister)

[JimF]

Have youse guyz been buried by new offerings?

[Noose]

No. None submitted since October 2015 and as of now we saw no reason to have any more.

[Cap Henry]

Was hoping to see a Chicagoland Ti22.

[Larry Labounty]

Good move by the board of directors.

[James Grandi]

I'd like to see some more bodies from Chicagoland too, like a coupe or another F1, but between Parma and O/S the TI22 is pretty much covered. Plus I gather Mike is busy enough with running the raceway and parts sales as it is. His M7 F1 is still my favorite though.

[Arne Saknussem]

The IRRA^® Board of Directors is announcing a moratorium on submissions of new Ti22 bodies for use in IRRA^® racing. The current Approved Body List contains a proliferation of this model, more than enough choices to satisfy racers' needs.

 
Well... at least that should stop the submission of an even more ridiculous interpretation of the car. I consider that a step forward.
 
You guys are on a roll... way to go!

[Dennis David]

I agree, maybe we can actually get rid of the Ti22 heresy. ;-)

[Eddie Fleming]

Good move.
 
I would like to see a Chicagoland Lotus 49 F1 body.

[Steve Deiters]

Just to expand on what Cap Henry said. 

 

Maybe this moratorium could be revisited at some point in time if an increasing number of new bodies of all types (which is a rare occurrence to begin with anyway) if the body molds are made using 21st century 3-D printing technology. We could hit the reset button on all the bodies and take a fresh look. The 3D technology will allow a more accurate representation of the 1:1 car.

 

I think we all realize that for Retro we are not racing "scale" bodies and have to accept  the "silhouette" nature of the past and current mindset of the slot car body manufacturer, but some of the versions of this car are beyond the pale. Frankly, I think vast number of the "approved" versions of this body would have the late Peter Bryant, designer and builder of the Ti22, shaking his head in amazement.

 

Let's not cut off our nose to spite our face on this and keep in mind all considerations for some point in the future when the 3D technology becomes more accepted, less expensive, and more widespread. In the long run this will be very good for slot racing of all types.

[A. J. Hoyt]

Last week I was told a story about ARCA czar, Marcum, getting very tired of Camaro bodies winning everything at his short tracks at Flat Rock, MI and Toledo, OH. He offered a bonus prize to anyone winning a Feature race in something other than a Camaro. It resulted in some of the top racers running other bodies, like a Buick Regal (Joy Fair, I think). I saw the pictures and couldn't believe it.

 

Perhaps a track owner (or more) could offer up some kind of extra prize incentive for a "non-Ti22 body" win at a Premier event?

 

No harm in suggesting...

[Noose]

The last Premier Can-Am race won by a non-Ti22 car was Matt Bruce at RetroPalooza 5 with a Parma Lola T163 at Port Jefferson. Didn't make everyone go out and run them. 

 

In Coupe it's the same thing. The Parma Lola has been "the" body of choice and has won all the Premier races.

 

Formula 1 is the only one where we have seen different winners.

 

The point of this announcement is that there are plenty of Ti22s out there and there is not a need for any more.

 

Be thankful for the bodies we have and the manufacturers that make them readily available.

[MSwiss]

Perhaps a track owner (or more) could offer up some kind of extra prize incentive for a "non- Ti-22 body" win of a Premier event?

 

I don't think most guys race Retro to see how much "booty" they can rake in.

[S.O. Watt]

So the Ti22 coupe won't be approved?

Durn it!

[Noose]

Not even if it's yellow, purple, and orange.

[A. J. Hoyt]

I don't think most guys race Retro to see how much "booty" they can rake in.

 
You are absolutely correct, Mike. The prize would have to be something novel and different, something worth having, something worth racing for and in theme with "doing it my way", like an AWD Indy turbine slot car, a modern adjustable electronic controller that is thumb controlled, a very cool shirt or a special "non-conformist" trophy.

 

Let the host track owner decide - most of them are pretty creative with special awards.

[JerseyJohn]

I'd like to see some more bodies from Chicagoland too, like a coupe or another F1, but between Parma and O/S the TI22 is pretty much covered. Plus I gather Mike is busy enough with running the raceway and parts sales as it is. His M7 F1 is still my favorite though.

 

The quality of Mike's pulls are outstanding, i would love to see more.

[tonyp]

We need a good P4 Ferrari.

[John Streisguth]

The last Premier Can-Am race won by a non-Ti22 car was Matt Bruce at RetroPalooza 5 with a Parma Lola T163 at Port Jefferson. Didn't make everyone go out and run them. 

 

In Coupe it's the same thing. The Parma Lola has been "the" body of choice and has won all the Premier races.

 

Formula 1 is the only one where we have seen different winners.

 

The point of this announcement is that there are plenty of Ti22s out there and there is not a need for any more.

 

Be thankful for the bodies we have and the manufacturers that make them readily available.

 

Everyone does try them, though. I experimented with the Lola Can-Am body at last week's RE race, it freed the car up slightly but at least on that day I did not see any distinct advantage.

 

IIRC, Matt also had his tires narrowed a bit. It comes down to how well the "package" works, and Matt is a master of that.

[John Streisguth]

We need a good P4 Ferrari.

 

Or Alfa T33.

[MSwiss]

Thanks for the nice comments.

 

It's terrific to see positive ones in an IRRA®  thread.

 

I was expecting some "What I am going to do with the bodies I didn't buy yet" posts. LOL.

[Cap Henry]

I'd love to see some new bodies that work, I think new bodies, and products in general, help build interest just because you see variation again.

[Noose]

"Some new bodies that work" is how we got the many, many Ti22s. LOL.

[John Streisguth]

I like the idea of a freeze on the Ti22 bodies. The only way another one makes sense is if it's just a little bit more... whatever. If you know what I mean. A slow but steady creep on aerodynamics is the last thing that's needed.  

 

Since it's probably impossible to make a variety of bodies that all race fairly equally (unless they are flying bricks like the stock cars) there will always be one body that dominates. Even in Jail Door cars... eventually everyone was running a Lotus 40.

[Cap Henry]

LOL understood Noose.

[James Grandi]

Personally, I kinda hope it inspires someone to pick a different Can-Am to model and make something that can be competitive regularly against the various Ti22s. Perhaps a McLaren or a Matra, etc.

[Phil Hackett]

Why not have a Ti22 free race? Not all races but a random race now and then just to mix things up. 

[Noose]

Personally, I kinda hope it inspires someone to pick a different Can-Am to model and make something that can be competitive regularly against the various Ti22s. Perhaps a McLaren or a Matra, etc.

 

Oh, there are lots of McLarens to choose from, James. The idea of "ones that work" quoting Cap is why, unlike back in the day when they dominated, those same molds/bodies aren't used much.

[Noose]

Why not have a Ti22 free race? Not all races but a random race now and then just to mix things up. 

 

The same could then be said of why not have a Lola GT-free race. That is the only body that is used these days.

 

A local thing - heck, run a Marcos Mantis! Travel 1,000 miles you run what has been winning.

[Phil Hackett]

The same could then be said of why not have a Lola GT-free race. That is the only body that is used these days.
 
A local thing - heck, run a Marcos Mantis! Travel 1,000 miles you run what has been winning.

I don't see the same number of comments about the Lola GT as with the Ti22.
 
So, call a Lola GT-free race, too.
 
BTW... home court was always an advantage for the locals...

[Noose]

Phil,

It used to be an all Chevron GT in the Coupe class.

[Cheater]

Personally, I kinda hope it inspires someone to pick a different Can-Am to model and make something that can be competitive regularly against the various Ti22s.

The "modeling" aspect of Retro is overwhelmed by the "racing" aspect, James. Don't think that's ever gonna change and, as the late Larry Shepard always said, the competition aspect of slot racing is probably its fatal gene.

Being the heretic that I am, I come at the issue from a different direction.

The IRRA^® Approved Body List contains 147 bodies for six classes and that's too many IMO. While some may feel that there are advantages to having a huge body list (just what are they, I might ask?), does it make much sense to have (now) three motors on the Approved Motor List and so many bodies on the body list?

The dedicated racer is going to test a lot of bodies, if he has the ability to do so, and while that will benefit those selling the bodies he's acquiring, it cannot be argued that it's going to cost the racer more money and more testing time. And make no mistake, time and money are the key factors largely determining who is able to participate in this hobby.

In comparing slots to many other hobbies, I am struck by how focused the slot car hobby is on the mechanisms we use to practice it. In many other competitive activities, the focus is more on the actual competition, and not not so much on the equipment: think baseball, bowling, golf, etc. In such sports, the "tools" are much more tightly controlled and I believe the competition benefits as a result.

Still feel simplification is a better way to go. How restrictive would it really be, for both racers and trackowners, to have just ten bodies approved for each class, with all of us knowing that only a couple of them are likely to be actively raced?

[Cap Henry]

Just because every option exists doesn't mean you have to try them all to be successful. At R4 for GTC, Can-Am, and F1 I only took one style of body for each class.

You could eliminate some of the older bodies that guys don't use any more, but does it really hurt anything having them on the list?

 

One big difference between our hobby and your listed examples is this, in our hobby good equipment vs bad equipment can make a huge difference. In other hobbies you very much rely on natural talent. Natural talent is obviously helpful, but the equipment is very important.

[Cap Henry]

But as others stated, a Ferarri Coupe or F1, or a good mclarens can am would be cool

[Half Fast]

A '71 Mclaren Can Am had side dams like a Ti-22 but that date is too late under IRRA® rules. It would be very competitive with a Ti-22 and would at least offer some variety.

 

Cheers

[James Grandi]

Greg, no argument against simplification from me. If it's a list of 10 bodies to choose from, or 2 bodies, I'll spend the money to run whatever I think is most competitive for my driving style and chassis setups. At the core I'm a racer, and building/racing slot cars along with turning wrenches on a nascar modified team is how I channel that, it's rather enjoyable on the whole.

Either way, it's been shown that there will always be more speed found one way or another. Even if bodies ever get locked in place and have no additions for years to come, more speed will be found in the chassis and the tires - it's a big part of what makes it fun, for those that like to tinker with things

[Noose]

Folks must remember the word "International" in our name and as such, other places in the world using he IRRA® rules do not run on the same type of tracks.  They also tend to like some of the more classic looking, scale type bodies.  So applaud their desire to use the rules and the bodies that work for them.

[JimF]

Still feel simplification is a better way to go. How restrictive would it really be, for both racers and trackowners, to have just ten bodies approved for each class, with all of us knowing that only a couple of them are likely to be actively raced?

 

The only ones that likely would not appreciate the simplification process are the manufacturers that get cut out. Remember when Rudy complained so vociferously about his Slick 7 stuff not being allowed. Eventually some of it was.....and now he's bailed on much of it. That's just one example but there are others.

[Noose]

Most raceways only carry the most often used bodies.  Some they can't get at all but that is another story as some racers seem to.  Again, another story.  Right now we are very lucky that the most used bodies are readily available.

[Cheater]

At R4 for GTC, Can-Am, and F1 I only took one style of body for each class.

Because you knew from previous testing what worked, or were you just guessing?

[Noose]

More like previous winning. LMAO.

[Cap Henry]

Well I've run the same three bodies at the past two R4s, so why change from what works? I run the wide nose Ti22 98% of the time in Can-Am; only time I change is for Hillclimbs where I run the narrow nose Parma Ti22. In GTC I use the Parma Lola, and I use the Parma BRM in F1.

[Cheater]

More than anything else, I wanted to give racers a taste of the kind of discussion that happens in the IRRA^® Boardroom when we're considering such issues as these. The points I've made here are similar to the ones I made during the BoD's discussions.

 

Cap, your #42 would seem to suggest that a more limited body list would do no harm.

 

I'm always wanting to give more weight to the new guy coming into Retro, and simply out, that hypothetical guy wouldn't have access to the knowledge you have, Cap.

[JimF]

We need a good P4 Ferrari.

 

Or a nice 712.......wicked looking car!!!

 

 

Or Alfa T33.

 

 

Personally, I kinda hope it inspires someone to pick a different Can-Am to model and make something that can be competitive regularly against the various Ti22s. Perhaps a McLaren or a Matra, etc.

 

 

A '71 Mclaren Can Am had side dams like a Ti-22 but that date is too late under IRRA® rules. It would be very competitive with a Ti-22 and would at least offer some variety.

 

Cheers

 

None of these posts are incorrect nor out of line but they all demonstrate the reason that we are all in this situation in the first place. The original TI-22, Lola 163, Ferrari 312-612, McLaren Mk8 were all reasonably competitive. Then came the longer bodies with higher side dams and also deep hollows between the fenders. These became the norm until folks started to realize that....."hey wade-a-minit here.....these is all the same things". And so now, we are getting suggestions about how to get bodies that are competitive with the newer wave, rather than perhaps re-thinking the newer wave that has created this situation in the first place. It would be much easier to create reasonable diversity on the grid if the body development had stopped with the "Kirby"

 

$0.02 please.............checks accepted.

[MSwiss]

Jim,
The JK Ti22 and one somewhat similar, from O/S, was legal from day 1, at both the first Sano/the inception of the IRRA®

[Noose]

Yup the 7081B and the OS 408L

[Cap Henry]

I'm not saying a smaller list would harm anything, but I also don't think it's needed. Also, like Noose said, not everyone likes the same stuff, you see guys run odd bodies just simply because they want to be different.

The new guy might not have experience but they can do the same things I did before R4, I looked up the top five from each class the year before and looked over the tech sheets and cars. Info is always available, sometimes you just gotta look. LOL.

[MSwiss]

Greg,

 

If new Retro racers were coming in cold, using only that body list to get involved, your argument for a shorter list would have more validity.

But that's not the case.

I'd say 100% get involved with advice from an existing racer or at the very least, a track owner.

[JimF]

Jim,
The JK Ti22 and one somewhat similar, from O/S, was legal from day 1, at both the first Sano/the inception of the IRRA®

 

Yup, I know that . Those are both faster than the Kirby and thus unlikely for anything else to be competitive at that time. Then stuff came along that bypassed those as well. And so now, here we are.

 

Not saying at all that any of this is wrong but it is obvious that there is at least reasonable sentiment for "something else" yet realistically, the time for that is well past.

 

Example.......I test bodies a lot and excluding the Parma 1036-B is there anything else that can compete with the Kirby? IMO yes. The O/S 414, 407-L and 410-L are some bodies that can compete with the Kirby. However, the current crop of HD TI-22's starting with the original JK and O/S 408-L and the subsequent O/S/Parma offerings have changed the playing field enough that it's unlikely anything else can compete.

 

And so now, the wishful thinking seems to be along the lines of "sooo....what else can we modify in order to compete with the TI-22s that we've already modified?"

[MSwiss]

Jim,
Most guys aren't looking for hard.

They are looking for easy.

As someone who puts slower motors in some of your classes, you should realize this.

IOW, swoopy bodies level the playing field just like slower motors.