This week's Talk It Up Tuesday is a special two-for-one, featuring interviews with Murfdogg's Matt Murphy and Team Losi Racing product developer Frank Root. Both drivers are discussing - what else? - ongoing controversy surrounding the current state of 17.5 spec racing in the U.S.
Aaron Waldron: Shortly after the allegations of illegal spec motors at the Hot Rod Shootout broke, you announced that you would be releasing a new “Titan” 17.5 motor specifically for tracks who haven’t cracked down on cheating by doing tech inspection. How’s the development of that motor going so far?
Matt Murphy: Following the Hot Rod Shootout, my name was brought up all over the RC world in regards to catching cheaters. Some people knew me already, and many others did not. I saw an opportunity to use this "publicity" to try and help fix one of the problems in RC Racing today: Spec Motors.
The TITAN motor has never existed, and never will. In reality, TITAN was used to make racers, track owners, and sanctioning bodies think about the current state of RC SPEC motor racing. I found it truly amazing how many racers were "outraged" that a blatantly illegal motor was going to be built and sold to racers who want to cheat the rules. The reality of the matter, is that there are many motor companies already selling illegal versions of the ROAR Approved motors. What I find to be even worse, is that most of these companies sell illegal versions that are in the same can as the legal versions, meaning that spotting them is impossible without a full motor teardown and inspection. The hypothetical TITAN motor was going to be built, marketed, sold, and especially labeled as a motor that is NOT ROAR LEGAL. Meanwhile, more negativity surrounded the TITAN motor than is surrounding the other illegal motors being sold in disguise as legal versions.
AW: Wait, it was fake all along? Why announce something like that if you didn’t plan on making it?
MM: Yes. I wanted to see what kind of reaction the motor would get, and see if I could use the public reaction to grow momentum toward change. We are in need of spec motor reform. Not just the rules, but the way the motors are built and sold, as well as the way motors are teched. In general, I think this worked. A few tracks have contacted me in support of starting thorough motor tech inspections in an effort to make racing fair again.
AW: Don’t you already offer an “outlaw” motor on your website? What’s the difference between your outlaw motor and those that were found to be outside of ROAR specs at the Shootout?
MM: Yes, MurfDogg Racing does sell an outlaw 17.5 turn motor. We built this motor to mimic the D3.5 Motors. It is built with all of the same components as our SYNERGY 17.5 ROAR legal motor, except with wire larger than ROAR's maximum specified diameter. After the D3.5 lost its approved status, and tracks continued to allow the motor to race, regardless of legality, I found myself in an upside-down position in the market. I can’t sell my legal motors which are at an obvious disadvantage, because nobody was willing to tell racers they needed to run legal motors. In a purely business-related move, I built my own version of an Outlaw motor, known as the "OUTLAW 17.5".
The difference between my OUTLAW motor and the motors disqualified at Shootout is simple: motors that were DQ'ed at shootout were motors that were intended to pass as legal motors, as opposed to my OUTLAW 17.5 which blatantly has "NOT ROAR LEGAL" written on the motor can. Our motor is not trying to blend in with legal motors, regardless of what is really inside. We have always from day one told our customers that this is not a legal motor, and it says the same, right on the can.
AW: Do you think that the 17.5-class is too far out of control to ever return to a fair, cost-controlled atmosphere?
MM: Do I think it is way out of control? Absolutely. Do I think it is beyond the point of no return? Under current rules, YES!
I think that we need to look into the past of RC Stock class racing, and take some notes from our history, and apply them to our future. With brushless motor reform, we can fix the problems, give better parity, and reduce costs to help make motors less expensive.
AW: Back in the brushed motor days, ROAR rules dictated that the maximum timing for the stock class motors not exceed 24 degrees, but many manufacturers offered motors turned up as high as 40 degrees that were easily distinguished by different can colors. Do you think brushless motors should adopt a similar rule? Do you think using specific motor colors would work given the wide variety among current manufacturers?
MM: I think that brushless spec motors should be locked timing motors, with the sensor boards built to a specific mandatory amount of timing. In my ideal world, 24 degrees of can timing would be the new rule. Less timing means much higher efficiency and lower amp draw, resulting in cooler motor temps, less motor failures, and slightly reduced speeds. spec racing is too fast right now with all of the adjustable timing motors. Lower amp draw from the motor makes gearing a bit more forgiving, and helps keep newer RC racers from burning down $100 power plants.
AW: What are some of the most important problems with 17.5 racing that need to be addressed?
MM: I think that the absolute biggest problem is a lack of tech inspection on all levels except the most prestigious races. This is not 100% the fault of track owners, but fixing this problem starts with the attitudes of race directors towards tech inspection. Tech inspection makes racing feel more fair. One guy always has more talent or a better handling chassis than the next. That is acceptable. But racers need to feel like their legal motor purchased from the hobby shop is competitive, or else they wont be coming back. Tech inspection is the answer. Take the doubt out of the racers' minds that someone else is only winning because they are cheating. Race tracks need to think of their race programs as a product they are selling to the racers. Tech inspection makes that product feel more complete, like they are providing a better product.
The reason I do not blame the track owners solely for this problem is simple: ROAR has failed the track owners by not making tech inspection an easy thing for them to do. In my opinion, ROAR needs to revise their rules, and create new legal minimums and maximums across the board. Make all of these measurable items 100% available to the public. Also, explain what equipment was used to measure each item that can be inspected, and help the tracks know what equipment they need to purchase to mirror ROAR's technical inspection process. Next, I think that ROAR needs to get out ahead of the situation, and create some very simple, yet detailed, “how-to" videos on YouTube about how to properly inspect motors.
AW: What design tweaks can be made to help curb cheating in the future?
MM: I believe that spec class racing needs a complete directional shift. Adjustable timing, torque vs rpm stators, and tuning rotors are all things that should have NEVER been allowed in spec classes. Trinity had the right idea with their "Monster Locked" motors. These were spec motors intended for true spec racing. No timing adjustment, no optional stators, and one legal rotor. Unfortunately, the market was too busy racing toward the problems we face now. Ernie Provetti of Trinity warned racers of this problem long ago. I have been doing the same for years, but nobody has listened.
These are my ideas of how we can fix spec Brushless motors by changing the rules:
- Locked timing set to 24 degrees on the sensor board with it fixed to a non adjustable endbell. No timing adjustment whatsoever.
- 12.50mm spec rotors on 7.10mm shafts. Absolutely no tuning rotors. Spec rotors should have an easily distinguishable design so disassembly of motors is not needed.
- Minimum and maximum stator stack heights. Each manufacturer may have just one approved motor for each wind. Whatever stack height they submit to ROAR for approval is what they must sell for that wind. Offering rpm and torque stators only costs the racers more money. This also prevents companies from releasing a new and improved motor every 4 months.
- If a manufacturer is caught selling illegal versions of the approved spec motor, that motor loses approval immediately, and that manufacturer may not submit a new motor for approval for a period of 5 years. It is time that manufacturers are held accountable for selling legal products.
- Eliminate ALL software/firmware updatable ESC's from use in true spec Classes. People have been busted for cheating, and rumors are rampant about "team driver" blinky software with timing. Blinky ONLY ESC's are the future of our SPEC Classes.
AW: Brushed stock motors were very heavily cost controlled, but today’s brushless motors cost 3-4 times as much. Do you think cost control in a spec class is important? What components could be changed to make brushless motors less expensive?
MM: I do think cost control is important. By eliminating the timing adjustment, and tuning rotors, this will cut the costs of manufacturing these motors. Less complicated designs and fewer components will bring costs down as well as eliminating the need for a manufacturer to build up to 15 different rotors. You can rest assured, it costs less to build more of one specific rotor than to build smaller quantities of 15 different options. This wont cut costs in half, but perhaps can get motor down to the retail price point of $70 - $100, rather than today’s typical $85 - $150 per motor.
AW: Are you worried that racers would reject a potentially slower stock class?
MM: Yes and no. I am not concerned too much with this though. There are racers who don't belong in stock. These are typically the ones who are so adamantly against slowing down stock racing. The average racer wouldn't mind losing 2mph on the straightaway, as long as he feels the stock classes are a level playing field. Better drivers always rise to the top, but eliminating questions about legality makes everything more fun.
I remember a Hot Rod Shootout way back in 2003: a young kid named Aaron Waldron was running up front in Stock Truck, and I was the guy in charge of stock motor tech inspection. I had to tear down this kid’s brushed motor after each round because he was running up front. He was the fastest in the field that weekend, and his motor was 100% legal every time. Nobody was able to call him a cheater because his equipment was verified as legal. This, my friend, is what our sport is missing today.
AW: Do you think the 13.5 class should be subject to the same new rules you’re proposing for 17.5? Is the 13.5 class relevant anymore?
MM: Absolutely, right along with 10.5, 21.5, and 25.5. It just makes sense across the board. I believe that all of these winds are relevant still. Different genres use different motor winds for spec Classes. Let's get them all in line at the same time.
AW: Even if ROAR does revisit the current 17.5 rules, do you think the manufacturers would follow suit to help change the current state of the 17.5 class or simply continue selling motors that are out of spec?
MM: I think that the racers and track promoters play just as big of a role in this change. Brushless motor manufacturers will have to change with the rules to sell motors to racers. But if racers and track owners do not demand that the new rules be followed, then we are no better off. It will take a combined effort between ROAR, motor manufacturers, racers, track owners, and hobby shops.
AW: Do you think there’s any place for today’s “outlaw” motors?
MM: Yes and no. No because I don't want to see an industry dominated by illegal product. Yes because they will make great modified motors with a little boost. Once the rules are fixed, there are plenty of bashers and mod racers who can whatever is left of them.
AW: Would you be willing to share your ideas with ROAR in order to help revamp the current rules package?
MM: I have already shared all of these ideas in a private letter written to each and every member of the ROAR Executive Committee. I sent this via email to each of the email addresses listed as contact info on the ROAR ExComm page of the ROAR Website. I have spoken with Steve Pond about this on the phone directly, and he shared my concern for the status of spec motors in RC right now. I am hoping that these ideas are considered and help push for reform of brushless motor rules.
AW: Has ROAR responded to your offer yet?
MM: I have not gotten any response to my emails. I hope that they do give it a read, and that they show the RC world that they DO care about the racers. This is ROAR's opportunity to show the RC world that they are here for the racers, and are working to improve our hobby/sport. ROAR as an organization has had dwindling support over the past 10+ years, and I truly think that now is a chance to make or break the organization and its impact on our industry. MurfDogg Racing has been a ROAR Industry Affiliate for the past 5 years, and I truly hope that they are willing to make the appropriate changes to get our sport straightened out.
8/5/2014
Eng / Usd
Français
Deutsch
Italiano
Recent comments