DaSloth

I seem to remember Randy saying 194 would be a bit slower for TC and thats certainly what i found. It just seems to lack top end compared to 189 and seeing as 198 and 194 dont bring any real "TC" upgrades, im sticking on 189 till the new TC firmware comes out.

Changes in gearing may fix the problem, but why change what isnt broken?

HTH

Ian

ghiro

ouch! . . . how about 40Mhz ? Does it have any porblem with the RS ?
I'm thinking to buy one for my Pan car. I love that dual drive feature.

Krio

iTrader: (159)

I personally have not used it with 40 mhz, but there is absolutely no reason it wouldn't work.

mikky32

The Tekin has with non of the transmitters problems.
LRP has but Tekin not.

Cpt.America

iTrader: (52)

How would a different version of the software make the ESC slower with ONE particular kind of car? This doesn't sound right.

miller tyme

iTrader: (5)

Not sure but 194 is 4cell pan car oriented, I would guess it has to do with throttle/current limiting curve. Lower voltage with lighter weight would have different needs than a 7.4 volt touring car.

hacker

iTrader: (141)

ive run mine on 40mhz and no worries.

Cpt.America

iTrader: (52)

That can't be right. Tekin guys care to chime in on this please?

Krio

iTrader: (159)

1.94 is meant for lower voltage mod applications (4-5 cell nimh) where the low voltage forces a lower turn motor and high current draws for power. It is meant to be more "efficient" so motors run cooler.


I think

e4rs

iTrader: (2)

HI glad i read this. updated to the 194 and it was bad 4 tc no top end thought i might have been the tekin 17.5 that i was running for the 1st time.Had temps about 60deg on a cold night about 17deg air temp i allways have fast motors but could not get this thing to work so i will go back to 189 there was my mate that was running the 189 same rollout but he was much faster every thing on my speey was set right and the control was calibrated right.any idea on this

bkspeedo

iTrader: (5)

I've ran 189 and 194 with my 7.4v 13.5 TC and have found 194 to be better overall. You just need to adjust gearing from the 189 software.

e4rs

iTrader: (2)

hi would you go up or down from the 189 to 194 as for temps the night was cold and the temp on the motor was 60deg and it was still slow and there was 1 guy runny 58 rollout and his temps was about mid 30deg

Randy_Pike

iTrader: (6)

189 and 194 should not show any speed differences. If you have an old version of 194 or got it from someone other than myself you might not have the right setup.

198 will be back on the webpage soon. If you use the same settings on 189 and 194 the speed should be the same.

So for those that run full boost setups you should notice no difference. Team driver Jason Moberly and myself along with a few other "test subjects" ran them back to back in the same cars with very controlled conditions and they're the same. We used a radar gun to prove it along with timing and scoring software.

While 194 had mostly updates and improvements for 4 cell and low voltage applications it can be just as fast if not faster than 189. If you were running different boost and motor timing setup you will simply need to make minor adjustments to get the speed back.

bkspeedo

iTrader: (5)

I'm in the 35mm rollout range with 63mm rubber tires, FDR 5.7 on a average size indoor carpet track. I geared down a few teeth from where I was with 189. Although I made other changes so as Randy mentioned there probably similar. Although some people are seeing there motors run cooler when changing from 189 to 194 without changing boost or gearing. I'm currently running full boost with min timing on a Trinity Duo 13.5 in an Xray and am just as fast or faster then everyone else at our track.

On a large track try starting with a 5.5 FDR and move either direction based on motor temp. I would set your motor timing to 15deg and boost on the ESC to 25 as a starting point and adjust from there.

STLNLST

iTrader: (32)

He said test subjects.....