# HARC Points System



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

A good point was brought up at the meeting:

The current points system is a little confusing, and is hard to keep track of where you are.

The following system was proposed in place of the current one......similar to AMA Supercross/Motorcross points system:

50 points to first place
49 points to second place
48 points to third place
and so on and so forth

+1 point for TQ in your class

Person with the highest points at the end of the year is first place, next highest is second, etc.


The advantage of this system is that it allows you to see where you are in the points standings throughout the year. With the current system, it's difficult for people to tell where they stand throughout the year, as it is unknown until the last race as to what people's drops for the year will be.

The disadvantage of this system is that it basically eliminates drops.


Input please................?????

I'm going to leave this topic open for discussion for a few weeks, and once we decide either way, I'll update the rules and post them for the upcoming season.


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

Well with no drops if someone misses a race early on in the year their motivation for having a chance to be competitive through out the rest of the year goes down greatly. I know sometimes work, a wedding, funeral or other "have to go" event will knock alot of us out for the whole year. By summer you could see motivation for attendance of HARC points series drop like a rock when they know they cant win anyways.

I was never really confused with our current system as I would just print the points sheet out, X out everyones top 2 highest points race and readd to see where everyone really was. The math is pretty simple. As for points going up instead of down in points that does make more sense and might clear up some confusion.

But how about more points for quals? I mean the way quals are now the +1 TQ only buys you the equivalent of 1 position in the main. So they really just act as practice runs anyways with such little importance yet they take up almost 75% of our time on the stand. Then someone could do really good in quals and in a main some lap traffic nub could bump you the wrong way and brake an arm in the last 3 minutes and you are screwed points wise. How about 50points per race with half given for positions in main and other half for qualifying positions? this will reward more competition in the quals and yet not be such a do or die for great drivers who have a stroke of bad luck in the mains.


----------



## rex cars (Jul 8, 2007)

here's a suggestion that might cover the bases

Every driver that signs in will receive 20 points.
*A-mains finishes:
* 1st place - 40 points 
2nd place - 38 points 
3rd place - 36 points 
4th place - 34 points 
5th place - 32 points 
6th place - 30 points 
7th place - 28 points 
8th place - 26 points 
9th place - 24 points 
10th place - 22 points 
11th place - 20 points 
12th place - 18 points 
13th place - 16 points 
14th place - 14 points 
15th place - 12 points 
16th place through final finishing position - 10 points
​At year-end *the two lowest points races will be discarded*.

​ taken from 
http://www.houstonraceway.com/index.php?id=322​Ctrl+f, points awarded


----------



## Labrat99 (May 6, 2009)

I think the points system works pretty well as is. I'd really hate to see any changes in the drops. if I knew missing one race was pretty well going to screw me in the points for the whole year, I'd be much less likely to even try to make each HARC race. I'd treat them just like a club race then, I'd go if I didn't have anything going on that weekend.


----------



## killerkustoms (Nov 6, 2008)

Courtney Vaughan said:


> 50 points to first place
> 49 points to second place
> 48 points to third place
> and so on and so forth
> ...


This system works for me, real simple whoever has the most points win.


----------



## Earl_Sparky (Jan 12, 2008)

rex cars said:


> here's a suggestion that might cover the bases
> 
> Every driver that signs in will receive 20 points.
> 
> ...


+1:biggrin:


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

I do like the going down by two's instead of one's.......

anymore comments from anyone? Thinking of adopting this system for next year, so please speak up.


----------



## nik77356 (Jun 8, 2007)

As I stated at the meeting, I do like the new version. For drops we could ge rid of their two worst finishes (races they actually made)


----------



## Big Phil (Apr 27, 2007)

rex cars said:


> here's a suggestion that might cover the bases
> 
> Every driver that signs in will receive 20 points.
> *A-mains finishes:
> ...





Earl_Sparky said:


> +1:biggrin:


+2


----------



## nik77356 (Jun 8, 2007)

Phil, call/text me when you get the chance. 936-827-2724


----------



## kstoracing (Oct 30, 2008)

I like the 20 & 2 system also. I also like the idea of more weight on the qualifing issue too. However, when you think about it the same luck is had in full scale racing. So it falls back to it's better to be lucky than good at times.

20 & 2 systems is cool. 

Lowest points highest points doesn't matter as long as you can add and subtract. We should be able to figure it out.


----------



## Earl_Sparky (Jan 12, 2008)

The fewer points given the closer and more competitive the series will be.
That is why I would go with the Houston Raceway Park system, but I would NOT give the “20 sign in points”.
The 10 points for 16th place to final position is enough. Equals the old -50 point system.


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

I have to agree with Earl here on the 20 points just to sign up.....I would think 10 is a better number as well.


----------



## nik77356 (Jun 8, 2007)

I also agree that 20 points for signing up is too much. Just widens the gap for those that can't make a race.


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

10 to 20 points for moving your finger on the sign up sheet and standing there with a pulse??? Come on! Weight the Quals with points instead. People race hard on those and that would be more fair; not to mention they wouldnt walk away with nothing if they did get knocked out in the main due to a break (50/50). I do like the counting upwards and +2 off per positions mentioned so far. Keep up the feed back.


----------



## rex cars (Jul 8, 2007)

nik77356 said:


> I also agree that 20 points for signing up is too much. Just widens the gap for those that can't make a race.


I agree. how's this?

Every driver that signs in will receive 0 points for wiggling a pen.
TQ - 6 points
*A-mains finishes:
* 1st place - 40 points 
2nd place - 38 points 
3rd place - 36 points 
4th place - 34 points 
5th place - 32 points 
6th place - 30 points 
7th place - 28 points 
8th place - 26 points 
9th place - 24 points 
10th place - 22 points 
11th place - 20 points 
12th place - 18 points 
13th place - 16 points 
14th place - 14 points 
15th place - 12 points 
16th place through final finishing position - 10 points At year-end *the two lowest points races will be discarded*.

6 points for TQ is a suggestion. TQ should get a bonus. What do you think is fair?​


----------



## kstoracing (Oct 30, 2008)

So, in actuality you get 10 points for showing up anyway, for signing up. If you sign up run a qual then break whenever you position in qualifying still gets you a main. I've had a couple of breaks and still placed higher than people who didn't qualify up to my starting race.

So either way you get points for signing up AND racing weather it's the qual or main. It's just that it seems anyone not in 15th place or better will all be tied. If they all get 10 points.

Am I right in my logic here?


I guess it really wouldn't become an issue until I break top 15. Right now I am right at the bubble but, haven't crossed the threshold yet.


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

*Qualifier points*

*Sorta long post but worth it, please read completely!*

*Well here are a few reasons I think rewarding quals is a good idea:*

1) Rewards effort for what we are racing the majority of the day/night.
2) Gives good racers who bust out in a main due to bad luck some chance to walk away with points they rightfully earned from their quals.
3) Rewards those who even raced all day! Some one(s) (who were good) could come late for the mains take 1st or 1st 2nd and 3rd (group of guys) and walk away with all the top points. This would prevent that and reward effort and commitment to the whole racing process.
4) Conversely to #3 if you have an domestic or work emergency that you have to leave early before the mains you are not gypped on getting the all or none points on the main (like we do now) if you earned some in the quals!

*Some might say:*
_"But thats not how real racing is!" _
F**k that. This is play model racing, not real car racing. The real world racing points are messed up too but also have a different dynamics to them. Real world quals and positioning for a main are far more important than in R/C due to the difficulty of passing in the real world. Crashes due to passing and traffic in the real world put you out of the race more permanently and is harder to do, hence real world racers are more carful about passing, SO qualifying positions for the main are much more critical. Have seen how hard it is to pass on a closed course CORR stadium truck race? Its hard!

R/C passing by comparison is not as bad. Since we often recover undamaged from most of our tumbles qualifying for position 1st vs. 4th matters less on a 10-20 minute main. So dont compare to the real world. Here in R/C, quals should count for more to make up for that real world difference.

*Hence here is my suggestion:*

*Quals earn 30 pts out of 60 pts for night:*
1st place - 30
2nd place - 29
3rd place - 28
4th place - 27
5th place - 26
.... All the way down to...
20th place - 11 points
and 21st+ positions gets 10 points each for attendance

*Mains get last 30 points out of 60:*
Identical to Qualifier points structure.

This gives reward for all for racing the whole night/day. And 20 total points minimum for attendance. While I was not really a fan of the have a pulse and getting points it does reward showing up and contributing to the payouts too. We all have had domestic emergencies that call us away from our race and at least point wise you don't walked away with nothing and feel totally demoralized by your points standings. In the end, showing up is better than not showing up at all.

_"Why should 29th position get same amount of points as someone who got 21st place?"_ By the last quarter of year if you were not consistently getting in A-main in your division, maybe a few B-mains then you are not going to be competitive points wise for the series. Even if we had enough racers to make a C-main in a division if you are constantly earning points that far down, it will not matter (points wise) by the end of year anyways. Sorry but thats the truth.

And as I said before I am a fan of 2, and only 2 low drops at end of year. Seriously think about this as I make these suggestions not for me but for all the great racers that get the shaft on our current system. Its not a terrible system we have now but this is a hobby and real world emergencies takes precedence and I've seen people get demoralized by it when they fall out of points competitiveness because they couldn't make a race or could only stick around for quals or mains but not both and then not show up anymore since they are out of the running points wise. In the end, bigger races and more competition are more fun so lets keep more carrot (points) on that proverbial stick.


----------



## katjim00 (Jan 8, 2009)

This seems like a lot of debates over points. I guess HARC should give away a few trophies at the end of the year to make the points actually mean something. Just an outside observation


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

ummm.....we do give away trophies......$300 worth of them to be exact.....same as last year.


----------



## katjim00 (Jan 8, 2009)

and there you have it...did not know that. Let the debate continue then


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

Jason&#8230;&#8230;good ideas. I definitely agree that the qualifiers should be worth more than they currently are. However, it HAS to be simpler than that.

So, how about this:

*A-MAIN*
1st place = 100 points
2nd place = 98 points
3rd place = 96 points
4th place = 94 points
5th place = 92 points
6th place = 90 points
7th place = 88 points
8th place = 86 points
9th place = 84 points
10th place = 82 points

*B-MAIN*
1st place = BUMP
2nd place = BUMP
3rd place = 80 points
4th place = 78 points
5th place = 76 points
6th place = 74 points
7th place = 72 points
8th place = 70 points
9th place = 68 points
10th place = 66 points

And so on/so forth for below mains.

TQ in your class gets you +2 points&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.like gaining a position in the race.

Lowest two scores drop at the END of the year.

This covers up to 50 entries in a single class&#8230;&#8230;which we've never actually had up to this point, but you never know.

Example: you qualified 2nd in the A-main, but had a bad run in the main and placed 8th. You still get 86 points, so you are still rewarded for qualifying well.

Example: we had 30 entries in a single class. You break every heat and end up qualifying 10th in a C-Main. You still get 50 points just for making the effort to participate in the race with us.


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

katjim00 said:


> and there you have it...did not know that. Let the debate continue then


I knew that Jim.....just figured I'd jack with ya!


----------



## Earl_Sparky (Jan 12, 2008)

rex cars said:


> I agree. how's this?
> 
> Every driver that signs in will receive 0 points for wiggling a pen.
> TQ - 6 points
> ...


+1
Yes, everyone would get 10 points for racing.
I think this is the best point system.
TQ might be a little high. Maybe 4 points.


----------



## Earl_Sparky (Jan 12, 2008)

Courtney Vaughan said:


> Jason&#8230;&#8230;good ideas. I definitely agree that the qualifiers should be worth more than they currently are. However, it HAS to be simpler than that.
> 
> So, how about this:
> 
> ...


Too many points. There would be a big gap between racers.


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

OK, how about this..........

*A-MAIN*
1st place = 50 points
2nd place = 48 points
3rd place = 46 points
4th place = 44 points
5th place = 42 points
6th place = 40 points
7th place = 38 points
8th place = 36 points
9th place = 34 points
10th place = 32 points

*B-MAIN*
1st place = BUMP
2nd place = BUMP
3rd place = 30 points
4th place = 28 points
5th place = 26 points
6th place = 24 points
7th place = 22 points
8th place = 20 points
9th place = 18 points
10th place = 16 points

Everyone below 10th in the B-Main gets 15 points

TQ in your class gets you +2 points&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.like gaining a position in the race.

Lowest two scores drop at the END of the year.

Example: you qualified 2nd in the A-main, but had a bad run in the main and placed 8th. You still get 36 points, so you are still rewarded for qualifying well.


Example: you break every heat and end up qualifying 10th in a C-Main. You still get 15 points just for making the effort to participate in the race with us.


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

Looking good. Going by 2s with 100 vs. 1 point with 50 is semantics really so i agree with Earl. giving +2 for TQ still only gives you one position in the race and is not any different than our current system. You can walk up to a race late and only catch the mains get 4th in a-main and take away more points than someone who was there all day and got 8th in the same race. 

Your example of the guy who got 8th place didnt get 36 points for qualifying well really those points were for 8th place. In fact if that same guy busted his balls to get 2nd TQ the first 4-6 hrs of the night then had to leave before the mains for some emergency,, he gets no qual points and 15pts sign up minimum the guy who got 10th in B-main still earns more points (16) than him. Not to mention that 10th place B-main guy could walk up minutes before the main late do terrible and still make out better than the harder working racer who was there most of the race but had to go! Thats why I stick to the 50%/ 50% points schedule I put up on page 2 it prevents all that.


----------



## Big Phil (Apr 27, 2007)

Courtney Vaughan said:


> OK, how about this..........
> 
> *A-MAIN*
> 1st place = 50 points
> ...


Perfect.


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

The person who got 8th was rewarded for good qualifying by making it to the A-main being guaranteed a top 10 finish for the day, and an amount of points that's reasonable close to the podium positions.......at least giving you a chance to recover at the next race.

There have ALWAYS been people who could walk in at the last minute and bump their way up through the mains to a great finish.......and there will always be. 

There is no 100% fair solution to every scenario, and certain systems benefit others better. I think what we've come to in the above post is as close as we're going to get to satisfying everyone's needs. I have to settle with a system that balances between rewarding people the people that come just for the participation factor, the people that come for the TQ/qualifying, and the people that come for the finishing positions. 

I'd like to let this thread stay alive for a few more days, and I want people to think of ways this format might grossly miscalculate in any way. Again, I know it's not the best suited system for EACH person, but it IS one of the best systems we've come up with overall.

Remember, I'm looking for legit flaws in the system......not just slight unfairness issues.


----------



## Labrat99 (May 6, 2009)

You guys are making this way more complicated than it needs to be... there is really nothing wrong with the points system as it's set up now. Also, I think awarding points for qualifiers is a bad idea. Qualifiers are to work on car set-ups and to seed the mains. That's it. If you start giving points for qualifiers, the whole dynamic changes. You need to have a close to perfect setup on the car from the very first heat or you're going to be losing points. Not to mention it's going to complicate things for the scorekeeper (Courtney?). Instead of just scoring the mains for each class they'll have to add up points for every heat of each class.

My suggestion is to leave it alone, If it's not broke don't fix it.


----------



## kstoracing (Oct 30, 2008)

IDK, it's all Greek to me. The person tallying the points should have the last call. The more difficult he makes it for himself is on him, weather it be a hybrid of two or leaving the old one as is. I don't care it seem like you're on to something with the 50pt system with 10s after a B-main spots. 2pts 1pt doesn't make a difference overall, IMO.


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

kstoracing said:


> The more difficult he makes it for himself is on himQUOTE]
> 
> Exactly....this HAS to be a simple system.
> 
> ...


----------



## Big Phil (Apr 27, 2007)

Labrat99 said:


> You guys are making this way more complicated than it needs to be... there is really nothing wrong with the points system as it's set up now. Also, I think awarding points for qualifiers is a bad idea. Qualifiers are to work on car set-ups and to seed the mains. That's it. If you start giving points for qualifiers, the whole dynamic changes. You need to have a close to perfect setup on the car from the very first heat or you're going to be losing points. Not to mention it's going to complicate things for the scorekeeper (Courtney?). Instead of just scoring the mains for each class they'll have to add up points for every heat of each class.
> 
> My suggestion is to leave it alone, If it's not broke don't fix it.


I believe it is broke..I've never seen a negative points system before I'm sure there is a reason for that..Plus you never know where you are in points during the season..I do think your right about points for qualifier's though.


----------



## Earl_Sparky (Jan 12, 2008)

Courtney Vaughan said:


> OK, how about this..........
> 
> *A-MAIN*
> 1st place = 50 points
> ...


+2
Looks good.


----------



## kstoracing (Oct 30, 2008)

So basically, you're only calculating for the first 18 racers. Since the the B-main consist of 10 and the A-main consist of 8 new different people then the 2 bumps. 18 racers get 50-16pts, everyone that didn't make the B-main 15 pts. 

Qualifying always counted to your final race placement either way. It just that you now have a floor. 15pts. So no certain person will be dead last there will be a group of dead last people.


----------



## Earl_Sparky (Jan 12, 2008)

I hate to admit this, but now that I’m married, how about 3 drop races?


----------



## Earl_Sparky (Jan 12, 2008)

kstoracing said:


> So basically, you're only calculating for the first 18 racers. Since the the B-main consist of 10 and the A-main consist of 8 new different people then the 2 bumps. 18 racers get 50-16pts, everyone that didn't make the B-main 15 pts.
> 
> Qualifying always counted to your final race placement either way. It just that you now have a floor. 15pts. So no certain person will be dead last there will be a group of dead last people.


There is some truth to this. You could count all the way down to 0 then give 5 "sign up" points.
This would keep people racing even for last place.:headknock


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

Labrat99 said:


> You guys are making this way more complicated than it needs to be... there is really nothing wrong with the points system as it's set up now. Also, I think awarding points for qualifiers is a bad idea. Qualifiers are to work on car set-ups and to seed the mains. That's it. If you start giving points for qualifiers, the whole dynamic changes. You need to have a close to perfect setup on the car from the very first heat or you're going to be losing points. Not to mention it's going to complicate things for the scorekeeper (Courtney?). Instead of just scoring the mains for each class they'll have to add up points for every heat of each class.
> 
> My suggestion is to leave it alone, If it's not broke don't fix it.


Quals in R/C are Dynamically different than the real world! Read center post on my page 2 post & and also realize that in Real life racing Sponsors spend big $$$ and expect their racers to show up for publicity for the whole racing season regardless of how far a racer might be behind in a points series. R/C vs. Real world attendance motivations for points and quals are dynamically different.

Judging from the resistance to rewarding half the points to quals I think I might have Courtney's intent on this debate wrong (serves me right for missing the HARC meeting). I was under the assumption that the goal of any possible change to the point system is to reward effort and accomplishment in a way that will foster more "participation" throughout the year in the HARC points series by racers NOT typically in the 5 top point positions and keep the points tallies closer. Thus making more racers feel they have a fighting chance and attend more races.

And I thought by rewarding alot more points to quals it would 1) make quals more meaningful, competitive and fun and 2) it would give the guys in the middle and bottom of the race pack more points so they dont feel so disparaged by mid-year they look so pathetically low in points that they lose interest. Currently all that time on quals benefit 1 guy for points (getting to A-main happens automatically if you do well, so thats no change). Yes the dynamics of r/c and real world quals are fundamentally different in my rationale.

But if counting up instead of down in points (great for clarity, I like) and giving the fastest TQ guys even more points towards a series win will do the trick then I guess thats the way to go and we are better off keeping it fundamentally the same.


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

My intent of this post was to hear everyone's point of view&#8230;&#8230;so it's successful in that regard.

The main point of what was brought this up at the meeting was that it would be easier for people to know where they stand throughout the year by counting upwards.

However, the point was not to re-invent the system.

Like I said, over the last 3 years, I've had LOTS of feedback from people, and found out that there are basically three types of people that show up to race with us regularly:
1) People that are there for position and to win
2) People that are there for participation
3) People that are there for a varying ratio of the two

The different suggestions for the changes to the points system benefit each type more/less. What needs to be understood is that 75-80% of the people that race with us regularly fall into category 3, and therefore my responsibility is to find the benefit that lends itself best to category 3, while still trying to appease categories 1 & 2 as well. If I cater more towards the category 1 people, the category 2 people will be barking at me&#8230;&#8230;..likewise in reverse. 

This is my philosophy when dealing with rules for HARC.

Please understand that ALL input is appreciated, but I will be the one fielding the complaints once a rule is instituted (and believe me, you would be SHOCKED at how many complaints I get every time we race!), so I will most often choose the option that will produce the fewest complaints. So, please don't anyone take it personally that I cannot tailor the rules to any one person's suggestions.

Hence, the hybrid system of all the suggestions that have been made&#8230;&#8230;.I think it's a pretty good option to try for next year.


----------



## JustinK (Jan 17, 2009)

jasonwipf said:


> Looking good. Going by 2s with 100 vs. 1 point with 50 is semantics really so i agree with Earl. giving +2 for TQ still only gives you one position in the race and is not any different than our current system. You can walk up to a race late and only catch the mains get 4th in a-main and take away more points than someone who was there all day and got 8th in the same race.
> 
> Your example of the guy who got 8th place didnt get 36 points for qualifying well really those points were for 8th place. In fact if that same guy busted his balls to get 2nd TQ the first 4-6 hrs of the night then had to leave before the mains for some emergency,, he gets no qual points and 15pts sign up minimum the guy who got 10th in B-main still earns more points (16) than him. Not to mention that 10th place B-main guy could walk up minutes before the main late do terrible and still make out better than the harder working racer who was there most of the race but had to go! Thats why I stick to the 50%/ 50% points schedule I put up on page 2 it prevents all that.


? If you did well in Quals and TQ'd but left before the mains on a 50 point system going down by 2 points a spot for a 10 person main + 2 bumps you would get 28 point + your TQ bonus of say +2 so you got 30 points and the 10th place guy in the B main only got 15 points. So the last person in the B main did not beat you. Now if you don't TQ and have to leave there is no difference in qualifying 2nd or 10th since your in the A-main and not racing it. If you don't qualify in the A and B is the lowest class, then you did basically waste being there for points though.

If you want qualifying to mean more have Phil setup qualifers using qual points which scores everyone against each other so you need 2 good qualifiers not just one really good one. That rewards qualifying by needing to be consistent to get the chance to be in the A-main. I enjoy the points being rewarding on where you finish. It puts an efficence on no dnf's by having to maintain your car, tuning your engine right, not having flame outs, ect. Being fast for 5-7 minutes and getting as many points as the person who raced 20 minutes and won is a little odd.

Afraid of a battery dump in the main? :tongue: Just kidding! Smelly fumes forever!


----------



## troytyro (Feb 3, 2009)

Right on Justin! Smelly fumes! :cheers:


----------



## insaneracin2003 (Feb 22, 2006)

Originally Posted by *Courtney Vaughan*  
_OK, how about this..........

*A-MAIN*
1st place = 50 points
2nd place = 48 points
3rd place = 46 points
4th place = 44 points
5th place = 42 points
6th place = 40 points
7th place = 38 points
8th place = 36 points
9th place = 34 points
10th place = 32 points

*B-MAIN*
1st place = BUMP
2nd place = BUMP
3rd place = 30 points
4th place = 28 points
5th place = 26 points
6th place = 24 points
7th place = 22 points
8th place = 20 points
9th place = 18 points
10th place = 16 points

Everyone below 10th in the B-Main gets 15 points

TQ in your class gets you +2 points&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.like gaining a position in the race.

Lowest two scores drop at the END of the year.

Example: you qualified 2nd in the A-main, but had a bad run in the main and placed 8th. You still get 36 points, so you are still rewarded for qualifying well.

Example: you break every heat and end up qualifying 10th in a C-Main. You still get 15 points just for making the effort to participate in the race with us._
_Looks good to me. This system is a must I feel. The other system was good but confusing a tad._


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

JustinK said:


> Afraid of a battery dump in the main? :tongue: Just kidding! Smelly fumes forever!


Nope, When I ran Gas I was afraid of a:
Smelling fumes & burning eyes
Increased cleaning maintenance
blown clutch bearing
burnt out glow plug
Loose glow plugs
Loose cooling head
blown engine rod
Loose unpluged or leaking fuel line
Loose or leaking gas tank cap
cracked fuel tank
Runnning out of fuel
Loose or stuck carb
Broken throttle linkage
Receiver battery dump/runaway
Throttle servo receiver malfunction/runaway
Receiver malfunction runaway
runaways where marshal didnt want to or know how to turn it off and blow a connecting rod
Mysterious Flame outs
Air filter pop off
tuned pipe pop off
Burned fingers from pipe or flywheel accident
Going deaf and screaming over my motor
mid race tuning change
Clutch spring break
Clutch shoe malfunction
Clutch nut loosen / flywheel slipage
Motor bearing blowout
clutchbell screw / bell flying off
loose motor mount
engine over heats
panic when i ran out of fuel and no one carried my brand or would not share at a race
dead batteries in my starter box and glowplug ignitor or malfunction in either of them
and washing poisonous fuel off my hands before eating between heats

vs.

Elec:
battery dump
lipo fire
finding an electrical plug or 12v car batt
ESC/motor overheat or malfunction
loose wire or plug
motor bearing blowout
Pinion nut loosen / pinion flying off
loose motor mount
broken battery case
and gas guys complaining about us electric guys passing them on the straight, making jumps with shorter run up distances or doing mandatory time blower pits every 10 minutes


----------



## Big Phil (Apr 27, 2007)

Well said^^^^^lol


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

jasonwipf said:


> blown clutch bearing
> Loose glow plugs
> Loose cooling head
> Loose unpluged or leaking fuel line
> ...


That's pretty funny stuff Jason, but the rhetoric and logic you use is slightly unfair.....you have to admit that LOL.

Every single one of the above items you mentioned can be prevented by proper installation, setup, tuning, maintenance, preparation, and crashing less.....ALL of which are things that can make you better/faster than the average racer. Fine tuning and understanding of those things is what then makes you improve from average, to above average, to winning.

Yes, there is definitely more room for problems with nitro, but that's half of the fun IMO.....challenging yourself to be prepared enough and drive better so that you don't incur 90% of those problems. The other 10% is just racing, and even electrics are prone to the same things. So if you take all of those things that can be prevented, nitro is really only slightly more difficult to deal with than electric, but benefits you in other ways so it equals out in terms of fun factor and being competitive.

I'm all for new technology and changing times and what not, but you're painting nitro as if it's this old, dying, antiquated form of racing and we all know that's not true.

That's all just friendly debate, BTW.


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

I'm jacking my own thread LOL!


----------



## Earl_Sparky (Jan 12, 2008)

I didn’t want to alert anyone, but I just ordered my first Novarossi motor this week!
Yes, it’s true. I plan on giving Nitro a try this next year. I will be running 1/8 electric and 1/8 nitro in the RC Pro series this next year. 
I may need a bunch of help from you nitro guys to get up to speed!


----------



## insaneracin2003 (Feb 22, 2006)

Earl_Sparky said:


> I didn't want to alert anyone, but I just ordered my first Novarossi motor this week!
> Yes, it's true. I plan on giving Nitro a try this next year. I will be running 1/8 electric and 1/8 nitro in the RC Pro series this next year.
> I may need a bunch of help from you nitro guys to get up to speed!


 Awsome Earl!!! we will get ya hooked up!!!


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

Earl_Sparky said:


> I didn't want to alert anyone, but I just ordered my first Novarossi motor this week!
> Yes, it's true. I plan on giving Nitro a try this next year. I will be running 1/8 electric and 1/8 nitro in the RC Pro series this next year.
> I may need a bunch of help from you nitro guys to get up to speed!


***!?!?!?!?

LOL, nitro is fun in it's own way man....I'm sure you'll enjoy it to. Just make sure and give yourself plenty of time to learn the ropes.....it doesn't come quite as easy as learning to configure an ESC and select motors/batteries/gears. Learning to tune is an art form!

What motor did you get?


----------



## B4Maz (Aug 9, 2009)

Earl_Sparky said:


> I didn't want to alert anyone, but I just ordered my first Novarossi motor this week!
> Yes, it's true. I plan on giving Nitro a try this next year. I will be running 1/8 electric and 1/8 nitro in the RC Pro series this next year.


 NOOOO :headknock
Its not too late Earl. Electric is your friend.


----------



## GoFaster (May 4, 2005)

I like both but electric is less work and maintenance. I'm lazy and I know it. The only downfall of electric is increased likeliness of glitches.


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

Courtney Vaughan said:


> Every single one of the above items you mentioned can be prevented by proper installation, setup, tuning, maintenance, preparation, and crashing less.....ALL of which are things that can make you better/faster than the average racer. Fine tuning and understanding of those things is what then makes you improve from average, to above average, to winning.


Oh i know buddy. I put that out there as friendly debate too man. And yes, I got my gas buggy to where 90% of that stuff didn't happen; and i've also got my electric to where 90% of the stuff on electric doesn't happen either. But 90% of 1/3 less things to go wrong is still better. I guess I'm getting old and wrenching and tuning isn't as fun as it used to be to me. I just like to drive.


----------



## Earl_Sparky (Jan 12, 2008)

I ordered a Novarossi Plus 21-4.
I like challenges. I’m excited to see how hard the Nitro is to learn. When I started into the 1/8 scale electric two years ago, the electric was way more difficult. I stated with a boat controller and a helicopter motor. No one knew what to use. That was why I did it. I wanted to prove to myself that the electric 1/8 could be just as competitive as the 1/8 Nitro. Today it is easy to run 1/8 scale electric.
But, when it comes to true competition you must run apples with apples.
Now I’m interested in seeing what Nitro is all about.


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

excellent choice for motor! 

Try that motor with the standard head button, McCoy MC59 plug and Byron's Generation 2, 25% nitro, 11% oil and I think you'll find a killer combination of run time, power, and life expectancy


----------



## kstoracing (Oct 30, 2008)

Yeah, my next will be another Nova...lol.


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

Earl_Sparky said:


> Now I'm interested in seeing what Nitro is all about.


TRAITOR!


----------



## troytyro (Feb 3, 2009)

Welcome to the world of smelly fumes Earl!!!!:cheers:


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

I've been asked this question a number of times and I want to address it: 

"Using the current pit rules, an electric could pit on the first lap, or the last lap, giving them an advantage of a running a longer stretch before/after pitting than the nitros can. Shouldn't the electrics have to pit during a window?"

Everyone keeps forcing me to come up with rules that suit anything the ya'll don't agree with or like about the electrics running with nitro. Nitro guys, please remember that trade-off HAVE TO GO BOTH WAYS! Yes, the above scenario is a SLIGHT advantage. But what if I told the nitro guys that you couldn't use a Novarossi motor that gets 10+ minutes of run time between pits? Then you guys would be screaming at me!

The electric guys have been NOTHING but compliant with everything we've asked them to do. Electrics and nitros are SLIGHTLY different cars, with advantages going BOTH ways.

Guys, I've been listening to complaints for the last 2 years about electric vs. nitro, and I've done everything in power to level the playing field. At this point, they are equally competetive. 

So, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, CAN WE PPPPLLLLEEEEAAAASSSSEEEE STOP HAVING THIS DEBATE!!!!!!!!!!! 

I'm very sorry for sounding frustrated, and none of this is pointed at anyone in particular, but JESUS CHRIST, I'm so F'in tired of hearing it! I'm about to pull what little hair I have left out!

THE SYSTEM WE HAVE FOR NEXT YEAR IS MORE THAN FAIR TO BOTH SIDES.......SO CAN WE PLEASE NOT RE-HASH THIS TOPIC ANYMORE?


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

Sorry....had to vent here.....again, not pointed at anyone so no need to hate on me. It has been needed to be said by someone for a very long time.

Time to concentrate on racing and having fun......rules are done/set. Nitro guys will find plent of ways to take advantage of them as well....TRUST ME!!


----------



## Big Phil (Apr 27, 2007)

What he said^^^and
If everyone would stop crying and just race turnouts would be Sweet...


----------



## mmorrow (Jan 18, 2009)

That is it. I am going to get a nova like Adam Drakes. I want to go 13 mins. hahahahaha

I will be back for the Jan 2nd race. later


----------



## Courtney Vaughan (Apr 11, 2007)

I get 10+ minutes out of my P5 based Nova's consistently. Have gotten up to 12 minutes with a medium restrictor out of my old P5XS. So probably could've gotten 13 with the smaller restrictor.


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

mmorrow said:


> That is it. I am going to get a nova like Adam Drakes. I want to go 13 mins. hahahahaha
> 
> I will be back for the Jan 2nd race. later


Mark pavidis used to get 12 min on his old OS V. He told me privately he just leans the hell out of it and since he drives smooth it stays pretty cool and OS gives him a new motor every month so it wasnt a big deal if he was hurting it. He said he really didnt even brake in motors anymore either. Just run one tank at half speed to spread oil then run it like he wants till he got a new motor next month. lol


----------



## jasonwipf (Feb 23, 2009)

Courtney Vaughan said:


> Sorry....had to vent here.....again, not pointed at anyone so no need to hate on me. It has been needed to be said by someone for a very long time.
> 
> Time to concentrate on racing and having fun......rules are done/set. Nitro guys will find plent of ways to take advantage of them as well....TRUST ME!!


LOL and we love you Courtney. Dont every take our **** too seriously. You are an asset to our sport in Houston. We do need to be sensitive and logical about how we present problems to each other guys. Probably ask a few of us electric guys your concerns before going to Courtney. We wont bit your heads off we will do what we can to make sure things are fair and above board. So lets try more of that without stressing our HARC Director and making him referee stuff.

I tell you i'm one of those that pit early too. While it helps me avoid traffic in the pits around 5-7 minute mark it also makes sure I'M not traffic in your way around the same time period! Then pitting on one lap one helps thin out that crowded starting traffic for you gas guys to spread out (again helping you gas guys). I've done this often when I TQ too, which takes away my TQ advantage and puts be behind to fight lap traffic. Then you also have to remember if we pit when gassies pit asside from the traffic it will be harder to "confirm" if an electric guy pitted because of the noise and commotion of all the gas guys pitting at the same time. By pitting on lap one it is clear and apparent that it was done properly.


----------

