Originally Posted by trerc
Right, You were told that it is "basically" an "upgraded" GTB and besides I have seen too many GTBs fail to have any interest of owning one of my very own. Novak also claims that the Havok Pro is "faster" than the 2s right on their website. I guess there may be some truth to this from what I've been hearing.
I notice you bought the Pro, why didn't you save yourself a few bucks on a used GTB since "electronically they're the same ESC" instead of splurging on a Havok Pro..?
I bought one for several reasons.
First, I didn't know it was basically a GTB until it got here and I looked at it. First thing I found was that the wires come out from different locations than my Havoc. Compared it with my GTB. Said..."Hmmmm...I bet this is pretty much a re-tasked GTB". I didn't get around to asking for confirmation of this until yesterday, some two weeks after I received the esc.
Second, how much could I really have saved? I paid a whopping $60/shipped for it and it has VERY little use (in fact it looks brand new). Pretty much GTB priced at going rates.
Third, the Pro is rated down to a 3.5 motor...I'm always kind of of the opinion that more "head room" makes a product even more durable for my uses since I won't put anything nearly that low in anything. Well, maybe in my Slider (6.5 now and it's plenty crazy), but generally nothing that low.
I'm wanting a brushless esc for my ABC Datsun 510 so that's where it will probably end up, mostly because I'm too lazy to change esc's out on my VTA car. Besides, the regular ol' Havoc has been working great in my VTA car, running right with Tekin RS (running non-juiced) and SP esc's down the straights at the Prarie Knights race last week.
Originally Posted by Cain
Scottrik, explain why you feel what he has told us is a fairy tale? he has stated what class this was experienced in, what conditions, etc. Will this apply to VTA? maybe, maybe not, but to imply with your comment that its a "fairytale" is in poor taste and does a dissservice to yourself.
I guess I'm a bit confused. We've got someone here who has been grasping at every straw he can find trying to shoot down the supposed equality/improvement of the esc's that have been selected for the new rules ever since they were announced. Just like radio talk show fans (from either side of the aisle) he looks only for the information that supports his agenda, finds it, questions none of it, and reports it on as fact. Yet I'M
the one doing "disservice"?
His last "shot" at the spec was how he had to dial advance back into his RS to keep up with his buddy's Novak. Wasn't until he was called out on that that he added the "oh yeah, I'd never driven the car before and had a crappy setup on it". Well then of course it would struggle with a similar power spec. That's a fairy tale. A red-herring. Perhaps a straw man argument. Regardless what YOU choose to call it it's purpose was to sway opinion with "eye-witness" account that, in this case, proved out to be what I say it was. But yeah, reporting HALF the story was DEFINITELY in the interest of furthering the cause of VTA. I guess I can see how that works. Not.
This time it's "oh, these oval guys say there's .2 difference with the Pro over the standard Havoc." Let's think about this for just a minute. .2 seconds is a TON in oval. I can't remember exactly how long the lap times were when I ran down in Denver but they were under 4 seconds (21.5 class). So if I round up and say they WERE 4 seconds then .2 seconds is a FIVE PERCENT improvement. I'm no electronics engineer, but neither esc adds any boost, timing advance or anything else. They operate over pretty much the same range of available drive frequencies, etc. And the only real flat out performance difference is in on-resistance...where there is a whopping .0003ohm difference between the two
(look it up, I did...Novak publishes the specs on their site). That's right, three ten thousandths of an ohm. You do not want to imagine what the test equipment costs that can accurately measure differences that small, so suffice to say that differences that small can't be measured with something anywhere NEAR so imprecise as a toy car. Hence my comment regarding "theoretical" versus "real world" differences.
Just for craps and grins, let's say this fantasy five percent improvement DID directly carry over to road course racing and VTA. The lap times at Prarie Knights were just over 11 seconds. Lap times on our tracks here for VTA run about 10 seconds. That would be half a second or more...per lap. That's almost what the 203-loaded Tekins jumped up with God's own software update. Do you REALLY think it's possible two otherwise identical spec'd esc's (other than that massive .0003ohm on-resistance difference) can have that much difference? Don't you think, since both these esc's have been out far longer than Novak have been actively involved with VTA, that Novak would have pretty much published any big differences between the two?
Sorry, but there is no way on the planet (this planet or any other) that I'm believing for a minute there is a five percent difference there.
Do I think these oval racers lied? Not at all. What I think REALLY happened is that, again, people don't "test" in a proper manner. Very few people have the patience to slog through a proper testing regimen. The neat thing with oval is that it's probably easier there to do testing like what I talk about because of the nature of the activity. There the discipline of driving lap after lap after lap on the same line is the difference between success and not, plus they're driving flat-out or almost flat out.