What the best esc for Zero Timing Class
10-21-2010, 03:58 PM
#91
I haven't been directly involved in this from the beginning, but I am part of ROAR and I'm at least familiar with the discussion.
It's become clear that the rapid development in ESC technology has put a wrinkle into the concept of fair competition and reasonable expense as it relates to stock and spec classes. Those who originally fought to preserve the open development of this technology and originally embraced these developments, are now realizing that it has elevated speeds to a point where it's difficult to control in the spec and stock classes, and it's added hours to the amount of time you need to spend setting up your ESC via your laptop computer to get the best possible performance. These same people are now regretting the development of this technology, related mostly to the ridiculous cost and the exceptional amount of time it adds to the set-up process. So then, the issue becomes how can ROAR address this.
Due to a considerable number of racers and manufacturers insisting that a new, and easily tech-able configuration of ESC would "obsolete" too many of the latest generation of ESCs with dynamic timing, ROAR requested feedback from the racers and manufacturers as to how we can accomplish the objective of bringing the speeds, expense, complexity and amount of time need to take best advantage of this technology, back to a level that's appropriate for stock or spec class racing. Keep in mind that it's THEIR desire (some racers and manufacturers) to allow the continued use of ESC's that still have these programmable features; yes the same ones that created this problem in the first place.
Fast forward to today, and we have a proposed new standard that includes a stock mode in these ESCs, but one that requires a complex and extremely expensive piece of test equipment to verify that the ESCs are in compliance. This is a standard created by a consortium of manufacturers, not by ROAR. Before this standard could even be implemented or a testing process established for approval by ROAR, the limits were already being tested. So, another, much more detailed and specific standard was established by, and with the tacit endorsement of, the very manufacturers whose input was fundamental in creating the original standard. So, the manufacturers themselves helped to create this standard, and the concern all along has been the ability to tech these products. Not by ROAR, because ROAR can always find a way to make it happen. But, tech inspection of these features requires an oscilloscope, and while ROAR may find an independent source to perform compliance testing, track operators will not be able to spend the $10,000 to $50,000 on the equipment needed for ongoing compliance testing at the track level.
I don't say the following on behalf of ROAR, because that will be a group decision, but I think we need to go back to non-programmable ESCs in the stock and spec classes. ESCs without a single programmable feature. It's my opinion that once you have an ESC with programmable features, it becomes nearly impossible to ensure the use of fair, inexpensive and reasonable technology. Like an X-Box or Playstation, a programmable ESC can include programming that would activate features that are not allowed in the rules, but are completely undetectable. For example, by a certain sequence of throttle and steering input commands, features within a programmable ESC can be activated after passing through tech inspection, and shut off immediately after the completion of the event, that would make any "illegal" features impossible to detect. The only way to ensure that these features can't be used, is to enforce a specification that doesn't allow for any programming other than that which is needed for the basic operation of the ESC.
Perhaps it's time to push for a non-programmable standard to eliminate the possibility of these types of features. It's becoming clear that these are features that only benefit a very small minority of racers that have seemingly unlimited time to program the vast number of options that are present in the latest fully-programmable ESCs. I've always insisted that allowing any technology that requires a computer or programmer has no place in stock or spec racing, and the mod racers don't need it anyway because they get their power through choice of motor. I frankly don't see the continued need for these types of ESCs. In hindsight, perhaps this is the standard that should have been required from the start.
It's become clear that the rapid development in ESC technology has put a wrinkle into the concept of fair competition and reasonable expense as it relates to stock and spec classes. Those who originally fought to preserve the open development of this technology and originally embraced these developments, are now realizing that it has elevated speeds to a point where it's difficult to control in the spec and stock classes, and it's added hours to the amount of time you need to spend setting up your ESC via your laptop computer to get the best possible performance. These same people are now regretting the development of this technology, related mostly to the ridiculous cost and the exceptional amount of time it adds to the set-up process. So then, the issue becomes how can ROAR address this.
Due to a considerable number of racers and manufacturers insisting that a new, and easily tech-able configuration of ESC would "obsolete" too many of the latest generation of ESCs with dynamic timing, ROAR requested feedback from the racers and manufacturers as to how we can accomplish the objective of bringing the speeds, expense, complexity and amount of time need to take best advantage of this technology, back to a level that's appropriate for stock or spec class racing. Keep in mind that it's THEIR desire (some racers and manufacturers) to allow the continued use of ESC's that still have these programmable features; yes the same ones that created this problem in the first place.
Fast forward to today, and we have a proposed new standard that includes a stock mode in these ESCs, but one that requires a complex and extremely expensive piece of test equipment to verify that the ESCs are in compliance. This is a standard created by a consortium of manufacturers, not by ROAR. Before this standard could even be implemented or a testing process established for approval by ROAR, the limits were already being tested. So, another, much more detailed and specific standard was established by, and with the tacit endorsement of, the very manufacturers whose input was fundamental in creating the original standard. So, the manufacturers themselves helped to create this standard, and the concern all along has been the ability to tech these products. Not by ROAR, because ROAR can always find a way to make it happen. But, tech inspection of these features requires an oscilloscope, and while ROAR may find an independent source to perform compliance testing, track operators will not be able to spend the $10,000 to $50,000 on the equipment needed for ongoing compliance testing at the track level.
I don't say the following on behalf of ROAR, because that will be a group decision, but I think we need to go back to non-programmable ESCs in the stock and spec classes. ESCs without a single programmable feature. It's my opinion that once you have an ESC with programmable features, it becomes nearly impossible to ensure the use of fair, inexpensive and reasonable technology. Like an X-Box or Playstation, a programmable ESC can include programming that would activate features that are not allowed in the rules, but are completely undetectable. For example, by a certain sequence of throttle and steering input commands, features within a programmable ESC can be activated after passing through tech inspection, and shut off immediately after the completion of the event, that would make any "illegal" features impossible to detect. The only way to ensure that these features can't be used, is to enforce a specification that doesn't allow for any programming other than that which is needed for the basic operation of the ESC.
Perhaps it's time to push for a non-programmable standard to eliminate the possibility of these types of features. It's becoming clear that these are features that only benefit a very small minority of racers that have seemingly unlimited time to program the vast number of options that are present in the latest fully-programmable ESCs. I've always insisted that allowing any technology that requires a computer or programmer has no place in stock or spec racing, and the mod racers don't need it anyway because they get their power through choice of motor. I frankly don't see the continued need for these types of ESCs. In hindsight, perhaps this is the standard that should have been required from the start.
10-21-2010, 04:20 PM
#93
Firmware hacking might be possible, but the likelihood of it becoming an epidemic is slim to none. I honestly don't understand why anyone would ever cheat, but especially in this hobby. How can you feel any sense of accomplishment if you cheated to win a stupid bowling trophy? It's retarded. Then again, human stupidity is infinitely vast.
I have no desire to ever race sportsman even though I'm a newer racer. I find it painfully boring going that slow. I'd rather finish 12th in 13.5 boosted than be on the podium of snails.
As for spending hours with a laptop. I've not seen it. Maybe a few minor tweaks here and there, like when new firmware is released, but I haven't seen what you are talking about and frankly most of your post seems like a massive exaggeration.
I have no desire to ever race sportsman even though I'm a newer racer. I find it painfully boring going that slow. I'd rather finish 12th in 13.5 boosted than be on the podium of snails.
As for spending hours with a laptop. I've not seen it. Maybe a few minor tweaks here and there, like when new firmware is released, but I haven't seen what you are talking about and frankly most of your post seems like a massive exaggeration.
10-21-2010, 04:28 PM
#94
wouldnt that be hilarious.. walk up to tech, 0 timming on the esc. pass tech. put your car on the track... OK!
full throttle, full brake, left steer, left steer, right steer, full brake... *tekin rs beep.. beep, beep beep*... 50 DEGREES OF TIMMING!!!
Im getting that bowling trophy for sure now!
full throttle, full brake, left steer, left steer, right steer, full brake... *tekin rs beep.. beep, beep beep*... 50 DEGREES OF TIMMING!!!
Im getting that bowling trophy for sure now!
10-21-2010, 04:56 PM
#95
wouldnt that be hilarious.. walk up to tech, 0 timming on the esc. pass tech. put your car on the track... OK!
full throttle, full brake, left steer, left steer, right steer, full brake... *tekin rs beep.. beep, beep beep*... 50 DEGREES OF TIMMING!!!
Im getting that bowling trophy for sure now!
full throttle, full brake, left steer, left steer, right steer, full brake... *tekin rs beep.. beep, beep beep*... 50 DEGREES OF TIMMING!!!
Im getting that bowling trophy for sure now!
Im sure there is a mini cooper class or something that would fit what you are looking for..
10-21-2010, 05:09 PM
#96
Steve, I appreciate your idea but non programability will not save this class or idea.
Technology can it's use must be agreed upon. The issue will be that those that have the knowledge of today's electronics must be the ones to create rules and establish guidelines.
Why force the industry's customers to go out and buy a new esc just to compete in a class? Granted we would sell more esc's which is great but for the customers it's a loss.
If ROARs goal is to make a steady playing field look to the manufacturers making the products for ideas and support in making the class. This has been attempted in the past with poor results. However perhaps if done properly it could succeed.
Limit what you can control, eliminate what you can't. If timing is the hot topic eliminate the possability of it's use. Use sensorless drive. This drive is phyiscally limited to around 25 degrees or so REGARDLESS of where the motor sensors are timed, period. No turbo can be applied either. The celing for available timing is limited due to the physical construction of the motor.
Hit me up if you'd like to discuss this: [email protected]
The companies that offer sensorless technology: Tekin,LRP,Speedpassion, Castle, GM, Team Powers, Orca, and others.
Technology can it's use must be agreed upon. The issue will be that those that have the knowledge of today's electronics must be the ones to create rules and establish guidelines.
Why force the industry's customers to go out and buy a new esc just to compete in a class? Granted we would sell more esc's which is great but for the customers it's a loss.
If ROARs goal is to make a steady playing field look to the manufacturers making the products for ideas and support in making the class. This has been attempted in the past with poor results. However perhaps if done properly it could succeed.
Limit what you can control, eliminate what you can't. If timing is the hot topic eliminate the possability of it's use. Use sensorless drive. This drive is phyiscally limited to around 25 degrees or so REGARDLESS of where the motor sensors are timed, period. No turbo can be applied either. The celing for available timing is limited due to the physical construction of the motor.
Hit me up if you'd like to discuss this: [email protected]
The companies that offer sensorless technology: Tekin,LRP,Speedpassion, Castle, GM, Team Powers, Orca, and others.
10-21-2010, 05:52 PM
#97
even though i love the idea of everybodies esc and motor being the same in speed, i cant see it ever happening. i havent been doing this for long, starting racing when brushless and lipo was already a year in.
but in everyform of racing i think of off the top of my head, no two motors in any two race cars are equal. theres always one guy who has a preformance advange over the next guy because he has more cash.
wasnt the guys with the money for the best cells, best brushes, dynos, and zappers the fastest guys back in the brushed age? (more money). i find it just to be the nature of racing.
personally i find 17.5, non timming esc (say novak havoc), timming on the motor to be very tight racing. everybody who has a brushless motor has timming on the motor (yes i know some have more than others). i really dont see the problem with this type of racing.
its funny to read over the rctech onroad forum compaired to say the nitro onroad, or offroad forums and compare the bickering. electric onroad guys never seem to stop complaining...
the only way i see true stock racing is a handout esc and motor at a race... (would hate to pay that entry fee)
the technology is here, and it wont go away because its quicker. and the quickest car always wins the race.. just my 2 cents
but in everyform of racing i think of off the top of my head, no two motors in any two race cars are equal. theres always one guy who has a preformance advange over the next guy because he has more cash.
wasnt the guys with the money for the best cells, best brushes, dynos, and zappers the fastest guys back in the brushed age? (more money). i find it just to be the nature of racing.
personally i find 17.5, non timming esc (say novak havoc), timming on the motor to be very tight racing. everybody who has a brushless motor has timming on the motor (yes i know some have more than others). i really dont see the problem with this type of racing.
its funny to read over the rctech onroad forum compaired to say the nitro onroad, or offroad forums and compare the bickering. electric onroad guys never seem to stop complaining...
the only way i see true stock racing is a handout esc and motor at a race... (would hate to pay that entry fee
)the technology is here, and it wont go away because its quicker. and the quickest car always wins the race.. just my 2 cents
10-21-2010, 06:09 PM
#98
Perhaps it's time to push for a non-programmable standard to eliminate the possibility of these types of features. It's becoming clear that these are features that only benefit a very small minority of racers that have seemingly unlimited time to program the vast number of options that are present in the latest fully-programmable ESCs. I've always insisted that allowing any technology that requires a computer or programmer has no place in stock or spec racing, and the mod racers don't need it anyway because they get their power through choice of motor. I frankly don't see the continued need for these types of ESCs. In hindsight, perhaps this is the standard that should have been required from the start.
10-21-2010, 06:16 PM
#99
To spend another $60-$75 for a non-programmable speedo for the No/Zero Timing Class is not going to hurt anyone's pocket.
10-21-2010, 06:16 PM
#100
Tech Master
Wow, maybe it's time to bring back the old servo operated wiper controllers?
10-21-2010, 06:26 PM
#101
Tech Addict
even though i love the idea of everybodies esc and motor being the same in speed, i cant see it ever happening. i havent been doing this for long, starting racing when brushless and lipo was already a year in.
but in everyform of racing i think of off the top of my head, no two motors in any two race cars are equal. theres always one guy who has a preformance advange over the next guy because he has more cash.
wasnt the guys with the money for the best cells, best brushes, dynos, and zappers the fastest guys back in the brushed age? (more money). i find it just to be the nature of racing.
personally i find 17.5, non timming esc (say novak havoc), timming on the motor to be very tight racing. everybody who has a brushless motor has timming on the motor (yes i know some have more than others). i really dont see the problem with this type of racing.
its funny to read over the rctech onroad forum compaired to say the nitro onroad, or offroad forums and compare the bickering. electric onroad guys never seem to stop complaining...
the only way i see true stock racing is a handout esc and motor at a race... (would hate to pay that entry fee)
the technology is here, and it wont go away because its quicker. and the quickest car always wins the race.. just my 2 cents
but in everyform of racing i think of off the top of my head, no two motors in any two race cars are equal. theres always one guy who has a preformance advange over the next guy because he has more cash.
wasnt the guys with the money for the best cells, best brushes, dynos, and zappers the fastest guys back in the brushed age? (more money). i find it just to be the nature of racing.
personally i find 17.5, non timming esc (say novak havoc), timming on the motor to be very tight racing. everybody who has a brushless motor has timming on the motor (yes i know some have more than others). i really dont see the problem with this type of racing.
its funny to read over the rctech onroad forum compaired to say the nitro onroad, or offroad forums and compare the bickering. electric onroad guys never seem to stop complaining...
the only way i see true stock racing is a handout esc and motor at a race... (would hate to pay that entry fee
)the technology is here, and it wont go away because its quicker. and the quickest car always wins the race.. just my 2 cents
at the last Nats held at NorCal, Speed Passion made an offer to provide both the speed-o and motor,(with 0 timing) available at a very reasonable price.
ROAR chose not to allow this because of possible complaints from the other manufacturers. was this in the best interest of the racers, or the best interest of the other that could have thier products used for this race??
10-21-2010, 06:35 PM
#102
I as a budget racer would have to dissagree with this comment. I buy my stuff bit by bit and all my cars ar used and most my equipment has been bought from the Buy And Sell forum on this site to save money. If you are fortunate enough to say that $60-$75 is not going to hurt your pocket book must be nice but others are not so fortunate.
10-21-2010, 06:41 PM
#103
I as a budget racer would have to dissagree with this comment. I buy my stuff bit by bit and all my cars ar used and most my equipment has been bought from the Buy And Sell forum on this site to save money. If you are fortunate enough to say that $60-$75 is not going to hurt your pocket book must be nice but others are not so fortunate.
My point is, it's not going to put a hurting on those that will need to downgrade and make it affordable for new hobbyists that are entering this arena.
Also remember, this is a one time investment.
10-21-2010, 06:48 PM
#104
Here at our local track we are considering making a POS 30a non-sensored esc spec in our VTA and Spec SCT classes. Initial pay-in on first night $30 and you get the esc and race entry. Just a little scared of the long term reliability. They are cheap but have worked well so far.
10-21-2010, 06:52 PM
#105
Seems strange........when everyone is pushing for brushless and lipo, we were told to not hold back technology........
So now, we've all embraced Brushless.....the savior of RC racing......we are being told to we have to limit technology?
I was reading old threads and found this funny quote by one of the original pro-brushless guys
Funny eh?
Later EddieO
So now, we've all embraced Brushless.....the savior of RC racing......we are being told to we have to limit technology?
I was reading old threads and found this funny quote by one of the original pro-brushless guys
Later EddieO