Post Reply
Who Can Post?
All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username
Need to register?
Password:
Forgot password?
Subject:
(optional)
Icon:
Formatting Mode:
Normal
Advanced
Help
Andale Mono
Arial
Arial Black
Book Antiqua
Century Gothic
Comic Sans MS
Courier New
Georgia
Impact
Tahoma
Times New Roman
Trebuchet MS
Script MT Bold
Stencil
Verdana
Lucida Console
-2
-1
1
2
3
4
5
6
White
Black
Red
Yellow
Pink
Green
Orange
Purple
Blue
Beige
Brown
Teal
Navy
Maroon
LimeGreen
Message:
HTML is On
Smilies are On
BB Code
is On
[img] Code is On
[quote][i]Originally posted by sloefspeed[/i] Hi guys (and girl), Adding the extra ballast will definately kill the motors much sooner than expected. Now that we finally have decent motors, is that really what "the powers that be" want to achieve? I don't think so.... Especially if the sponsoring budget is less than expected, the purchase of more motors (or new armatures) is something that can be avoided. Furthermore adding weight high up in the car will only make it tip over more easily, in every corner on every lap creating the possiblity of major carnage to the cars involved. With all of the effort involved in building these little marvels (not especially our car, but the others...) this is not the way we want to go neighter! We could have the winners and 2nd and 3rd gear up differently for example, or reduce their maximum spur width... Gearing shorter would make them a little slower down the straights, reducing spur width would make them slide more at the back, but not tip over! Just my 2 cents worth... At least we could think about other solutions than dragging ballast around the track. Hey, it's a race car, not a truck! CU soon Raymond [/quote]
Disable Smilies?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email on reply?
Attachment:
Topic Review
This is a long topic, click
here
to review it.
»
The (unofficial) IMCA forum
»
EEC 1/24 FIA GT
»
EEC Oslo
» Reply