86 replies to this topic

[Mike Patterson]

Has anyone at IRRA™ World HQ ever unwound a Hawk Retro motor, and established that that particular motor did meet specifications? If so, I would recommend unwinding a new one, and compare the results, just to see if any other running changes were made on the production line.

[DOCinCanton]

Markg:

 

We will have the same problem in flexi car racing. In Florida My Series we run both motors, but in different car classes. H7 in Indy Car and GTP and RH in 4" NASCAR and LMP.

[Markg]

Yeah, we run American arm motors... S16D, Contenders, X12. Lower classes are PS4002FK and Hawk7... makes things easy...

[Bryan Warmack]

I've unwound several Retro Hawks and all were exactly the same and within specs... but now we have a lighter motor with a lower center of gravity. I know it isn't much but every little advantage helps and out here on the West Coast, many racers would cut the shafts until we disallowed it to eliminate the possibility of running a Hawk 7.

[Mark Wampler]

That was my immediate concern since I just bought four new "old' RH motors. I'll use them up I guess. 

It is what it is.

[MSwiss]

I just got off the phone with Tim and he is working on a solution.

 

Further information to follow in the next 24 hours.

[Pappy]

Maybe it's time to take a different approach to Retro racing.
 
Do away with all airfoils or any bodies that have an aero advantage like the Ti22's, put a maximum weight limit on the cars like maybe 100 grams, put the minimum clearance back to 1/16 of an inch like it was in the sixties. That way you can overpower the cars and then let people run whatever motor they want to.

[Tom Thumb Hobbies]

I like you, Butters, but GROW UP! This is a real problem that took everyone, including the BoD, by surprise.

 

My suggestion, why don't you sit back and wait while the adults work on a solution?

[MSwiss]

I just got off the phone with Tim and he is working on a solution.

 

Further information to follow in the next 24 hours.

[Tim Neja]

Another update on the Retro Hawk motor. It is more than obvious that I made a major mistake and didn't communicate well enough what our full intentions were regarding the shaft length change. My apologies to all affected. Please understand the goal here was to further improve the motor, primarily in reducing variability but I will try another way now going forward. I am working on resolving this issue as quickly as possible. Please stay tuned.

 

Tim Homola just posted this on Facebook! FYI...

[Tom Eatherly]

Awesome! Another stinking issue in Retro racing. I hope the heck SCRRA dumps that damn RH and just makes the TSR or F7 our standard motors. Both are better than that pile RH. Too many issues with that damn thing, as others have mentioned.

[Phil Hackett]

Get the popcorn out. How many thousand hits will this thread rack up?

 

There's not enough popcorn butter around here... will have to check in when the tanker truck appears... 

[Mr. GoFast]

It's really simple to tell the difference between a Retro Hawk and a Hawk 7: just weigh them – a Retro Hawk is heavier. I am talking about the new Retro Hawk.

[Mark Wampler]

At least the new RH will  be on par with the TSR in low CG and weight. I have a few new "practice motors' and then they will be phased out. Just like when it was suspected that some H7s were having the shaft pressed out the endbell to appear to be an RH so, cutting endbell shafts were banned. Cutting the shaft on the old RH motors would necessarily prove they were still old ones and could not appear at all to be either a H7 or a new RH. 

 

So... If someone is inclined to cheat, there's ways around anything... The old ones will still be old ones even with cut shafts to an extent by leaving enough shaft to eliminate the possibility that an H7 was being made to appear as an RH.

 

Some compromise should be considered in order to give time to phase out old stock. A huge investment was made in this new run of motors so do completely ban them can't happen overnight.

[Half Fast]

Wow, every person with an agenda or axe to grind uses this as an excuse to argue for their own personal idea of how Retro should be run.

 

Take a chill pill, will ya!

 

Cheers

[Mark Wampler]

Those who have a stock of earlier versions of RH should be considered in a reasonable phase-out schedule. So let it happen.

[gc4895]

OK, I'll bite. What's the big deal? I own one Retro Hawk and it seems OK. Not much for brakes but fast enough. I have one Mini Brute also but that's for F1.

 

So what's wrong with using TSR D3? Or just use the Hawk 7? I have never tried either of those but they would appear to be very similar.

 

I must admit that the motor woes are remarkable.

[MSwiss]

Those who have a stock of earlier versions of RH should be considered in a reasonable phase out schedule. So let it happen.

Go back and read posts #30 and 32.

[Mark Wampler]

OK, I'll bite. What's the big deal? I own one Retro Hawk and it seems OK. Not much for brakes but fast enough. I have one Mini Brute also but that's for F1.

 

So what's wrong with using TSR D3? Or just use the Hawk 7? I have never tried either of those but they would appear to be very similar.

 

I must admit that the motor woes are remarkable.

 

For what my small track does, most of the time it doesn't matter, BUT at these more serious-minded venues, every gram of weight and every turn on the armature is viewed under the microscope. As long as the new RH comes up with around 65 wraps on the arm, there's really no problem. The short endbell shaft has stirred up a temporary hornets nest. Old stock will be phased out. I now have some extra 'practice' motors and didn't invest heavily. 

[Mark Wampler]

I've already read through JK's Facebook page. This is a temporary situation for me. Others who have invested heavily in old stock will suffer more. That's all I'm saying.

 

Old stock will be phased out eventually. 

[MSwiss]

Mark,

Quit assuming you know everything that has transpired, and will transpire in the future, when you don't.

Don't assume anyone will suffer.

Everything is going to work out.

[Mark Wampler]

Yep, it will work out. I have my viewpoint and it's valid.  

[Arne Saknussem]

Oh, joy!  Another pothole in the track. Come on, guys... if we put our dunce caps on more firmly I'm sure we can come up with some really stupid stuff to say.

 

BTW: See "Recent batch of dog 4002FK motors" thread elsewhere on Slotblog. Damn Commies.

[Don Weaver]

It makes me wonder that with all the problems these things have where in the industrial world are these things used? Slot car use has to be a miniscule part of the overall usage so what other applications are there that would accept/tolerate such poor quality in the real world?

 

Don

[Samiam]

Don,

 

These are standard industrial sized motors spec'd out specifically for slot car use.

 

Commonly used in automotive.