Top Chassis' Comparison Test
11-11-2003, 10:45 PM
#1
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
Top Chassis' Comparison Test
You all know how car magazines regularily do comparison tests between cars in similar class and price range. They test things like acceleration, top speed, maximum cornering force, slalom speed and then add their subjetive opinion from different testers...
Wouldn't it be cool if one of the RC mags do one between cars like Barracuda R2, Yokomo SD, TB Evo III, TRF 414M, Assassin, TC3, etc. all in one big article?
I know that certain things are hard to compare and each motor, battery pack, driver, tire etc. could be different even though they might be the same, but this is no different from cars. In fact, with RC cars you can get even more objective data as you can switch motors and battery packs and take an average.
Of course building and setting up make a big difference, but the tests could be limited to the stock setting or each company representative can submit settings for the test.
Finally, have a couple of top drivers take the cars around the track and see what kind of time each can get for these cars and get their opinion on the handling etc.
I've seen such tests done before in RC mags but usually between 2 cars only. Even when they have more than 2 cars the tests are hardly comprehensive. When they are comprehensive, they do only one car without other cars as points of reference. The results are generally praises for the cars and frankly not very useful.
I know some of these data is just plain useless but they sure are fun to know and makes good reading. It's useless to know your car can go 155 mph as you probably will never go that fast but car mags keep publishing these data--why--because people like to know.
Having been in the publishing business I know sometimes magazines don't like these tests as it's a sure way to piss off advertisers. I hope that does not stop magazines from doing it though.
Come on, will one of you magazines out there do one? I will be the first to pick one up in the newsstand!
Wouldn't it be cool if one of the RC mags do one between cars like Barracuda R2, Yokomo SD, TB Evo III, TRF 414M, Assassin, TC3, etc. all in one big article?
I know that certain things are hard to compare and each motor, battery pack, driver, tire etc. could be different even though they might be the same, but this is no different from cars. In fact, with RC cars you can get even more objective data as you can switch motors and battery packs and take an average.
Of course building and setting up make a big difference, but the tests could be limited to the stock setting or each company representative can submit settings for the test.
Finally, have a couple of top drivers take the cars around the track and see what kind of time each can get for these cars and get their opinion on the handling etc.
I've seen such tests done before in RC mags but usually between 2 cars only. Even when they have more than 2 cars the tests are hardly comprehensive. When they are comprehensive, they do only one car without other cars as points of reference. The results are generally praises for the cars and frankly not very useful.
I know some of these data is just plain useless but they sure are fun to know and makes good reading. It's useless to know your car can go 155 mph as you probably will never go that fast but car mags keep publishing these data--why--because people like to know.
Having been in the publishing business I know sometimes magazines don't like these tests as it's a sure way to piss off advertisers. I hope that does not stop magazines from doing it though.
Come on, will one of you magazines out there do one? I will be the first to pick one up in the newsstand!
11-11-2003, 11:10 PM
#2
I have been wanting to do something like this on R/C Tech for some time, but sadly I don't have all of the cars to do it, only about 2/3 of them.
Still, I think they are all so close performance wise that it will be difficult to see any definitive results. But I know I would like to read it.
Still, I think they are all so close performance wise that it will be difficult to see any definitive results. But I know I would like to read it.
11-11-2003, 11:30 PM
#3
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
Generally the car manufacturers provide the test vehicle--won't the RC car maker/distributers do the same (as kits I hope)? Especially if they are confident of their product, this is going to be free advertising for them.
11-11-2003, 11:42 PM
#4
Most magazines are biased towards positive analysis of the kits they review. It's very annoying and any faults they find (unless glaring) are dismissed as quirks or due to their driving skills. That's business I guess... can't piss off your advertisers.
So if this were to happen, all 5 cars (or however many) would be deemed worthy and one would be better or worse than the next.
So if this were to happen, all 5 cars (or however many) would be deemed worthy and one would be better or worse than the next.
11-12-2003, 10:01 AM
#5
Originally posted by jeffreylin
Generally the car manufacturers provide the test vehicle--won't the RC car maker/distributers do the same (as kits I hope)? Especially if they are confident of their product, this is going to be free advertising for them.
Generally the car manufacturers provide the test vehicle--won't the RC car maker/distributers do the same (as kits I hope)? Especially if they are confident of their product, this is going to be free advertising for them.
I am hopeful that people will recognize R/C Tech as a good marketing tool. I know that some already do!
11-12-2003, 10:09 AM
#6
Regarding which (current) cars *I* would choose to stack up against one another:
Associated FT TC3
Losi XXX-S G+
Yokomo SD
Corally Assassin
Tamiya Evo III Surikarn
Alex Racing Barracuda R2
Schumacher Mission
XRay T1
I think those are the major players. It looks like Tamiya has a new 41x car in the works, as well as the upcoming HPI Pro 4.
Another thing: most tests of this nature are pointless because they DO use the stock setting. To really compare these cars, you'd need to spend enough time to come up with a reasonably good setup for each. In fact, the process of finding that setup should have a lot to do with the car's final judgment! Simply using the stock setup tells you nothing other than which car to buy if you are racing at that particular track and don't want to do any work.
The problem then, of course, is that it is obviously time and resource intensive.
To do it correctly, you'd need to same gear in every car. I would actually choose a brushless setup (yes, you heard me!) to run the test. I think you'll get the most consistent results from car-to-car that way.
The great thing about defining a performance metric like this is that it could be easily repeated when new cars arrive. Use the same track, same brushless motor and batteries, same body, same tires, and so on.
But even then, any final judgment is still not going to get you very far. I know it would be interesting and informative as an article (or series of articles), but it would still be hard to prove that any one of those cars is better than the others.
I'd love to try, though!
Associated FT TC3
Losi XXX-S G+
Yokomo SD
Corally Assassin
Tamiya Evo III Surikarn
Alex Racing Barracuda R2
Schumacher Mission
XRay T1
I think those are the major players. It looks like Tamiya has a new 41x car in the works, as well as the upcoming HPI Pro 4.
Another thing: most tests of this nature are pointless because they DO use the stock setting. To really compare these cars, you'd need to spend enough time to come up with a reasonably good setup for each. In fact, the process of finding that setup should have a lot to do with the car's final judgment! Simply using the stock setup tells you nothing other than which car to buy if you are racing at that particular track and don't want to do any work.
The problem then, of course, is that it is obviously time and resource intensive.
To do it correctly, you'd need to same gear in every car. I would actually choose a brushless setup (yes, you heard me!) to run the test. I think you'll get the most consistent results from car-to-car that way.
The great thing about defining a performance metric like this is that it could be easily repeated when new cars arrive. Use the same track, same brushless motor and batteries, same body, same tires, and so on.
But even then, any final judgment is still not going to get you very far. I know it would be interesting and informative as an article (or series of articles), but it would still be hard to prove that any one of those cars is better than the others.
I'd love to try, though!
Last edited by futureal; 11-12-2003 at 11:35 AM.
11-12-2003, 10:30 AM
#7
Originally posted by futureal
For a major magazine, they probably would. For me? I dunno, haven't had much luck so far. I do have a few kits that I received to do reviews on that I am still waiting to put online, simply because I have too much to do and too little time. I'm sure the companies in question are ready to shoot me.
I am hopeful that people will recognize R/C Tech as a good marketing tool. I know that some already do!
For a major magazine, they probably would. For me? I dunno, haven't had much luck so far. I do have a few kits that I received to do reviews on that I am still waiting to put online, simply because I have too much to do and too little time. I'm sure the companies in question are ready to shoot me.
I am hopeful that people will recognize R/C Tech as a good marketing tool. I know that some already do!
Seriously, I have loads of free time and as a bonus, I have an actual education and have pro web design experience (read: got paid lots of money)
11-12-2003, 10:38 AM
#8
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
Now you are talking!
As to the list of cars, how about the XRay and the Mission? I am curious about them as well.
One of the reason I suggested using stock setup is because it can be repeated by everyone. But I also think that people wants to know that you can realize a certain level of performance with xxx car right out of the box. As to the true potential of the cars, we see them on the tracks in the hands of good drivers and read about them in the race result of the mags. I know that stock setup is no where close to the potential of the car but it is what we all start with. There is something to be said about a stock setup being close to what you need as opposed to having to re-configure the entire suspension (although that is part of the fun). There is a lot to learn with this hobby and a well designed stock setup will get more people in the hobby and into racing. There has been too many people get discuraged out of the hobby or racing because their new $$$ car is too hard to control...
That's not to say I am not interested in knowing what a seasoned driver can get out of each of these cars if he/she spend some time tweaking them. Maybe you should do both!
As to the list of cars, how about the XRay and the Mission? I am curious about them as well.
One of the reason I suggested using stock setup is because it can be repeated by everyone. But I also think that people wants to know that you can realize a certain level of performance with xxx car right out of the box. As to the true potential of the cars, we see them on the tracks in the hands of good drivers and read about them in the race result of the mags. I know that stock setup is no where close to the potential of the car but it is what we all start with. There is something to be said about a stock setup being close to what you need as opposed to having to re-configure the entire suspension (although that is part of the fun). There is a lot to learn with this hobby and a well designed stock setup will get more people in the hobby and into racing. There has been too many people get discuraged out of the hobby or racing because their new $$$ car is too hard to control...
That's not to say I am not interested in knowing what a seasoned driver can get out of each of these cars if he/she spend some time tweaking them. Maybe you should do both!
11-12-2003, 11:15 AM
#9
Jeff the only issue with a "stock" set-up is that the track is different for every stock set-up. Tamiya's set-up track is in Japan and a very bumpy high-bite track. Associated have SoCal and others, Losi etc. you can see where this will lead to a MFG having a very distinct advantage to other having a pig. The car would have to be adjusted to suit the track for that day. You would need 4-5 drivers who can set a car up and drive identical electronics.
11-12-2003, 11:23 AM
#10
Difuser is right on!! I had an EVOIII on carpet and was okay untilll I made a major change to it and it really woke the car up. Its unlikely the magazine writer would do what I did!!
All I did was raise the front roll center by raising both hingepin blocks up 0.030", but its still a major change!!! Not the usual-go from 2 t 4 caster!!
But I felt strongly had I not figured that out-the car would have not been nearly as fast on my track conditions. LIke 0.4 sec slower per lap!!!
All I did was raise the front roll center by raising both hingepin blocks up 0.030", but its still a major change!!! Not the usual-go from 2 t 4 caster!!
But I felt strongly had I not figured that out-the car would have not been nearly as fast on my track conditions. LIke 0.4 sec slower per lap!!!
11-12-2003, 11:35 AM
#11
Originally posted by jeffreylin
As to the list of cars, how about the XRay and the Mission? I am curious about them as well.
As to the list of cars, how about the XRay and the Mission? I am curious about them as well.
So that's 2 more cars I'd need to get ahold of. haha
11-12-2003, 12:22 PM
#12
Do I miss one?
Yokomo SD
Tech Racing MY02
Tamiya 415/EVO3
Alex R3
HPI Pro4
Kawada SV10
Atlas YM34 T
Kyosho KX-one
X-Ray Evo2 FOCE
Corally Assasin
Shumacher MI2
Robitronic (forgot the name)
Tenth Tech (predator based sedan)
Hong Nor/GM Street Hero
SpeedMind Daytona
Academy STR4-Pro
Associated TC3 FT
Losi XXX-s G+
RC-Lab 7-Ven 6.0
PTI Revolution
Tech Racing MY02
Tamiya 415/EVO3
Alex R3
HPI Pro4
Kawada SV10
Atlas YM34 T
Kyosho KX-one
X-Ray Evo2 FOCE
Corally Assasin
Shumacher MI2
Robitronic (forgot the name)
Tenth Tech (predator based sedan)
Hong Nor/GM Street Hero
SpeedMind Daytona
Academy STR4-Pro
Associated TC3 FT
Losi XXX-s G+
RC-Lab 7-Ven 6.0
PTI Revolution
Last edited by utieh; 11-12-2003 at 12:48 PM.
11-12-2003, 06:05 PM
#14
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
I understand that and agree with it. Yet I still think a stock setup should stand for something (not terrible for most situations).
I think the only other way to do this is to ask manufacturer/distributors to submit setups for the test track.
The key to me is being objective and being able to repeat the results. If you were doing the testing and you personally races car X, you can set it up a lot better than car Y as you are already experienced with X. The review ought to be about cars and not the reviewers' ability to dial in some of the cars.
Perhaps what would be interesting is to assign reviewer only cars they have no experience of whatsoever so at least everyone is starting off the same point.
As I said before, ultimately what matters is the hours of setup-test-practice that we all do to get better. But if I was to get a new car, I want to know what I will be starting with right out of the box. After that, I know it's all up to me as all these cars are capable of winning in the right hands.
I think the only other way to do this is to ask manufacturer/distributors to submit setups for the test track.
The key to me is being objective and being able to repeat the results. If you were doing the testing and you personally races car X, you can set it up a lot better than car Y as you are already experienced with X. The review ought to be about cars and not the reviewers' ability to dial in some of the cars.
Perhaps what would be interesting is to assign reviewer only cars they have no experience of whatsoever so at least everyone is starting off the same point.
As I said before, ultimately what matters is the hours of setup-test-practice that we all do to get better. But if I was to get a new car, I want to know what I will be starting with right out of the box. After that, I know it's all up to me as all these cars are capable of winning in the right hands.
Originally posted by Difuser
Jeff the only issue with a "stock" set-up is that the track is different for every stock set-up. Tamiya's set-up track is in Japan and a very bumpy high-bite track. Associated have SoCal and others, Losi etc. you can see where this will lead to a MFG having a very distinct advantage to other having a pig. The car would have to be adjusted to suit the track for that day. You would need 4-5 drivers who can set a car up and drive identical electronics.
Jeff the only issue with a "stock" set-up is that the track is different for every stock set-up. Tamiya's set-up track is in Japan and a very bumpy high-bite track. Associated have SoCal and others, Losi etc. you can see where this will lead to a MFG having a very distinct advantage to other having a pig. The car would have to be adjusted to suit the track for that day. You would need 4-5 drivers who can set a car up and drive identical electronics.
11-12-2003, 06:56 PM
#15
if only one person doing the comparision test, by the time the test is done, most of the cars in the test will be replaced by newer updated models already
