Waiting for the release
01-09-2012, 09:31 AM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Sassari, ITALY
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Waiting for the release
Waiting for the release.. of DKTQ40
On ground..
http://youtu.be/4pB0fiN2Uso
On sky..
http://youtu.be/SRMBXo6O5aQ
www.draketuned.it
On ground..
http://youtu.be/4pB0fiN2Uso
On sky..
http://youtu.be/SRMBXo6O5aQ
www.draketuned.it
01-11-2012, 08:49 AM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
Very nice looking engine indeed. It seem like a hybrid design between Jett and Nelson in term of an appearance wise.
The 25,000+ RPM with 7.4x7.7C prop on the ground is strong and seem to unload well in the air too, but we'll see how competitive it is in competition when it's ready.
The 25,000+ RPM with 7.4x7.7C prop on the ground is strong and seem to unload well in the air too, but we'll see how competitive it is in competition when it's ready.
01-30-2012, 04:53 AM
#6
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Liquored, FL,
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
Don't you worry Sam... I'd bet a lot of money on that motor! If it runs 1/2 as good as the FAI engines those guy build. We'd all be in a world of hurt.
01-30-2012, 12:07 PM
#7
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
RE: Waiting for the release
IF its a Faster Engine,,, I just might buy a couple
The problem is,,,
The engine committee voted to only allow 2 makes of engines for Q40 as per their addendum in late DEC 2011,,,
Amazing how this stuff works wouldn t ya say???
BV
The problem is,,,
The engine committee voted to only allow 2 makes of engines for Q40 as per their addendum in late DEC 2011,,,
Amazing how this stuff works wouldn t ya say???
BV
01-30-2012, 06:12 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Winter Haven,
FL
Posts: 624
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
ORIGINAL: Bill Vargas
The problem is,,,
The engine committee voted to only allow 2 makes of engines for Q40 as per their addendum in late DEC 2011,,,
Amazing how this stuff works wouldn t ya say???
BV
The problem is,,,
The engine committee voted to only allow 2 makes of engines for Q40 as per their addendum in late DEC 2011,,,
Amazing how this stuff works wouldn t ya say???
BV
1.) Control the pricing of the engines in 426
2.) Now be able to ditch the "once approved, always approved" idea
3.) Make sure all current engines aren't instantly made obsolete by a superior engine advancement
4.) Create some stability in the engine department
Buy why limit the manufactures to only 2 in Q40? I agree on limiting performance somewhat, limit cost if you want to, make the manufacture submit engines to test to ensure they aren't going to be a far superior engine to what we already have. But why prevent a new manufacturer from entering the market?? [&o] If their product is in line with the currently produced engines, let the people decide. No one is getting rich here, and none of us are getting any younger. Someday, there will be a real need for a new product, and pissing off a manufacture isn't going to help anyone in the long run. Test the engine and see if it is in line with what is currently available, then make the call. Even NASCAR has a Toyota you can use if you so choose....
Scott Smith
NMPRA 86t
02-01-2012, 02:57 PM
#10
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
RE: Waiting for the release
Scott, so long as a Race event CD puts on his Race Flyer,,, the rules of the Race, Airframes allowed in AMA Class XXX, Engines allowed in AMA Class XXX, Props Allowed in AMA Class XXX,,, etc,
Its the Race CD's prerogative to run and/or hold the Race as he Wishes.
The Classic example of this is featured over there on the NMPRA website Whittier Race thread
So once these engines start making there way here into the states,,, I hope,,, it could become a whole New local event Class of Outlaw Racing all to its own with MFG Race event sponsorship,,, who knows? A single engine class with any airframe,,, again who knows
Just because the 5 or 6 member engine committee,,, I can never remember their names because they are not posted anywhere,,, says no to them in Q40 does NOT mean no you shouldn t
BV
Its the Race CD's prerogative to run and/or hold the Race as he Wishes.
The Classic example of this is featured over there on the NMPRA website Whittier Race thread
So once these engines start making there way here into the states,,, I hope,,, it could become a whole New local event Class of Outlaw Racing all to its own with MFG Race event sponsorship,,, who knows? A single engine class with any airframe,,, again who knows
Just because the 5 or 6 member engine committee,,, I can never remember their names because they are not posted anywhere,,, says no to them in Q40 does NOT mean no you shouldn t
BV
02-01-2012, 04:55 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Stansbury Park,
UT
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
While I don't believe anybody that wants to support our events by producing products for them should be turned away, I'm sure a lot of the reason for this rule was due to the LS engines being introduced a few years ago. Many people complained because they had just purchased new engines, ect, that were basically obsolete. You'd get the same complaints if a new manufacturer brought out an engine that was 2 seconds faster. It's really a no-win situationf or the contest board. They can either piss people off by allowing any manufactures in, risking a repeat of the LS situation, or they can piss people off by not allowing more manufacturers. I'm just glad I'm not in their shoes.
02-01-2012, 04:59 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Stansbury Park,
UT
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
Oh...and if you're not happy with limited choices, feel free put your money where your mouth is and fly F3D, not only can you choose from whatever manufacturers that want to build engines from the class, you can even build your own!...LOL
02-01-2012, 07:02 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Stansbury Park,
UT
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
Bill,
You think it's hard to be competitive in F3D? Try F5D. Totally different ballgame.
Like I said, I'd rather allow anybody that's willing to invest in the events play, but the rules committee decided otherwise. I can't say I blame them, when the LS's came out, there were people that were willing to tell Henry Nelson to take a hike and just fly Jetts, so there are some that feel one manufacturer would be just fine (as proven with 426). Besides, if either Nelson or Jett leave, it's in the rules to allow another manufacturer in.
So in reality there wouldn't be a need to promote F3D, although as one of the few willing to invest the time and $ into it, I wish we could get more F3D racing in the USA.
Dave,
When you look at the events where the watt limiters are really checked, and you consider they get "flying" starts, they aren't really any faster. In fact, the average times at the last F3D World Champs were faster than the average times at the last F5D World's.
Not to mention, isn't the idea of fuel ingniting over 500 times a second more exciting that some electrons moving around? LOL
You think it's hard to be competitive in F3D? Try F5D. Totally different ballgame.
Like I said, I'd rather allow anybody that's willing to invest in the events play, but the rules committee decided otherwise. I can't say I blame them, when the LS's came out, there were people that were willing to tell Henry Nelson to take a hike and just fly Jetts, so there are some that feel one manufacturer would be just fine (as proven with 426). Besides, if either Nelson or Jett leave, it's in the rules to allow another manufacturer in.
So in reality there wouldn't be a need to promote F3D, although as one of the few willing to invest the time and $ into it, I wish we could get more F3D racing in the USA.
Dave,
When you look at the events where the watt limiters are really checked, and you consider they get "flying" starts, they aren't really any faster. In fact, the average times at the last F3D World Champs were faster than the average times at the last F5D World's.
Not to mention, isn't the idea of fuel ingniting over 500 times a second more exciting that some electrons moving around? LOL
02-01-2012, 07:47 PM
#17
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
RE: Waiting for the release
yea its to bad for f3d here in the states thats for sure otherwise I'd be there,,, E-racing doesn t do it for me.
All this hype for E-racing and now 426 a one engine make class when there should be 2,,, people are forgetting about the one most important Class for Pylon Racing,,, 424. How unfortunate for that class at this past Winterfest.
And now people are b i t c h i n g about what course length to run,,, and/or how they should be running their Race,,,, GEEEZE LOUEEEEZE.
Anyways,,, It was a bad idea/deal sliding that addendum in before giving that new engine a fair go and I am only saying that because I don t think it was or even looked at much less tested here in the states to provide the data needed to base the addendum on. I honestly think its sending a bad message to Q40 engine builders for the USA,,, and its gonna take the next generation of Racers to UN-DO whats been done.
BV
just an old former NMPRA Prez
All this hype for E-racing and now 426 a one engine make class when there should be 2,,, people are forgetting about the one most important Class for Pylon Racing,,, 424. How unfortunate for that class at this past Winterfest.
And now people are b i t c h i n g about what course length to run,,, and/or how they should be running their Race,,,, GEEEZE LOUEEEEZE.
Anyways,,, It was a bad idea/deal sliding that addendum in before giving that new engine a fair go and I am only saying that because I don t think it was or even looked at much less tested here in the states to provide the data needed to base the addendum on. I honestly think its sending a bad message to Q40 engine builders for the USA,,, and its gonna take the next generation of Racers to UN-DO whats been done.
BV
just an old former NMPRA Prez
02-02-2012, 12:47 AM
#18
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Sassari, ITALY
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
The engine was conceived, designed and built around the AMA Regulation.
Its price is in line with that required by the AMA.
We guarantee the parts and service for all our customers.
The engine and all its parts are available from 31/01, as promised.
Now is the time that pilots make their choice.
Ciao
Draketuned
Its price is in line with that required by the AMA.
We guarantee the parts and service for all our customers.
The engine and all its parts are available from 31/01, as promised.
Now is the time that pilots make their choice.
Ciao
Draketuned
02-02-2012, 04:45 AM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Winter Haven,
FL
Posts: 624
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
Well, no one asked my opinion either, so I guess I can only follow suit or submit a rule proposal to modify the emergency rule change. Let me first say that I AGREE with the new rule and its intent. I applaud the NMPRA rules committee for clarifying the engine rules, providing clear wording for how and when an engine has to be approved or re-approved and for placing wording into the rules to be able to remove a previously approved engine form being ever used again in competition. However, I find fault with only allowing 2 engine manufactures in Q40.
Dubb & Mike are both great guys and have done tons for our sport and I will support both of them in the future. But neither one of them need a rule to protect their market share. Both build a first class product that can compete with anyone. If not, the engine review subcommittee can disallow any new product from playing in any class per the new rule. So this is why I want to know why not allow more than 2 manufactures at a time?
Dubb & Mike are both great guys and have done tons for our sport and I will support both of them in the future. But neither one of them need a rule to protect their market share. Both build a first class product that can compete with anyone. If not, the engine review subcommittee can disallow any new product from playing in any class per the new rule. So this is why I want to know why not allow more than 2 manufactures at a time?
02-02-2012, 10:29 AM
#20
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Arlington Heights,
IL
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
ORIGINAL: Bill Vargas
All this hype for E-racing and now 426 a one engine make class when there should be 2,,, people are forgetting about the one most important Class for Pylon Racing,,, 424. How unfortunate for that class at this past Winterfest.
And now people are b i t c h i n g about what course length to run,,, and/or how they should be running their Race,,,, GEEEZE LOUEEEEZE.
Anyways,,, It was a bad idea/deal sliding that addendum in before giving that new engine a fair go and I am only saying that because I don t think it was or even looked at much less tested here in the states to provide the data needed to base the addendum on. I honestly think its sending a bad message to Q40 engine builders for the USA,,, and its gonna take the next generation of Racers to UN-DO whats been done.
BV
just an old former NMPRA Prez
All this hype for E-racing and now 426 a one engine make class when there should be 2,,, people are forgetting about the one most important Class for Pylon Racing,,, 424. How unfortunate for that class at this past Winterfest.
And now people are b i t c h i n g about what course length to run,,, and/or how they should be running their Race,,,, GEEEZE LOUEEEEZE.
Anyways,,, It was a bad idea/deal sliding that addendum in before giving that new engine a fair go and I am only saying that because I don t think it was or even looked at much less tested here in the states to provide the data needed to base the addendum on. I honestly think its sending a bad message to Q40 engine builders for the USA,,, and its gonna take the next generation of Racers to UN-DO whats been done.
BV
just an old former NMPRA Prez
Bill,
I think you are out of touch with what is really happening in pylon. 424 is not forgotten, infact it is stronger than it has ever been! You need to take a look outside your little area and look at the rest of the country.
Rules are a set of guidelines for competition. It is beyond me why you feel necessary to make your own rules. Your tone is very combative and it doesn't need to be. Instead of fragmenting we should be coming together, and reach common ground. If your comment is directed to me regarding course lenth, I simply asked a question. I would like to know why the course length needs to be changed. No B!@#$ing involved.
Lastly, the addendum that was just published was on the books for 2+ years, well before, RVDB or DKT published that they were making motors. These events are not connected.
Dan Kane
Current NMPRA prez
02-02-2012, 10:36 AM
#21
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Arlington Heights,
IL
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
ORIGINAL: Scorpion Racing
Well, no one asked my opinion either, so I guess I can only follow suit or submit a rule proposal to modify the emergency rule change. Let me first say that I AGREE with the new rule and its intent. I applaud the NMPRA rules committee for clarifying the engine rules, providing clear wording for how and when an engine has to be approved or re-approved and for placing wording into the rules to be able to remove a previously approved engine form being ever used again in competition. However, I find fault with only allowing 2 engine manufactures in Q40.
Well, no one asked my opinion either, so I guess I can only follow suit or submit a rule proposal to modify the emergency rule change. Let me first say that I AGREE with the new rule and its intent. I applaud the NMPRA rules committee for clarifying the engine rules, providing clear wording for how and when an engine has to be approved or re-approved and for placing wording into the rules to be able to remove a previously approved engine form being ever used again in competition. However, I find fault with only allowing 2 engine manufactures in Q40.
Just to be clear, the AMA contest board decides on the rules. The NMPRA does not have a rules committee. The NMPRA is the special interest group for the AMA and can have opinions on the rules but cannot change the rules. The NMPRA has the voice of its membership, members wishing to convey their opinions should contact me. As stated to Bill this addendum that was just published was not fly by the seat of your pants decision. It was discussed for the better part of a couple of years. Well before anyone knew that new engines were trying to be produced for the US market.
Some people truly don't understand how small our market has become and how fragile we currently are. But that is ok. We are trying keep what we have, with the smallest impact to our current competitiors.
DK
02-03-2012, 04:33 PM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Stansbury Park,
UT
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
Bill,
Out of curiousity, being that you haven't raced in several years, why are you even concerned about what the rules committee decided? Or are you just trying to stir the pot?
Out of curiousity, being that you haven't raced in several years, why are you even concerned about what the rules committee decided? Or are you just trying to stir the pot?
02-03-2012, 05:28 PM
#24
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
RE: Waiting for the release
Gary, no body ever quits Racing and i got burned out from it,,, uncertainty with nelson engines and looking at having to run jetts. Nothing against those makes of engines as they are now but back then as i am still today,,, I'm still a nelson guy. Thru a back door chat with Dan I said to him that being a NMPRA Prez is a job that only a true dedicated Racer would want to have!,,, its a never ending challenge if you will. I believe that every past, current and future NMPRA President is of that mind set.
I still dable with helping out a local 424 guy(s) here at my field,,, an editor for a magazine called Model Aviation News. He told me of his experience at the past winterfest and having to run 426,,,
So, I saw this thread about DKT and checked into it and i was stumped at what I read, the Q40 engine rule that is. Amazing,,, and I'll leave that as it is.
How come you haven't become a NMPRA President Gary?
BV
I still dable with helping out a local 424 guy(s) here at my field,,, an editor for a magazine called Model Aviation News. He told me of his experience at the past winterfest and having to run 426,,,
So, I saw this thread about DKT and checked into it and i was stumped at what I read, the Q40 engine rule that is. Amazing,,, and I'll leave that as it is.
How come you haven't become a NMPRA President Gary?
BV
02-03-2012, 05:40 PM
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Stansbury Park,
UT
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Waiting for the release
Actually I was planning on it a few years ago, and was the district VP for a bit, but then the economy took a dive, I changed careers and moved out of state, spent another year on travel for work, a year overseas supporting the military, moved to yet another state, and am now finally getting back into racing somewhat regularly, although I'll be lucky to hit more than a handful of races. I'll probably look into getting more involved with the NMPRA in a couple years, but for now I really don't have the time for the additional duties it really requires.