150LikesThe future of stock brushless motors?
02-22-2017, 06:31 PM
#61
I think controls work very well if racers accept that winning a competition is meaningless when you have some sort of unfair advantage. Look at the ETS series with their slow stock motors and fixed gearing (we could simply adopt fixed gearing, by the way - not a solution to all problems but a limiting factor at least to the range of motors).
Which would certainly need a different value for each track of course.
Not being a spectator sport like F1, we can't motivate manufacturers to abide by and support rules, so it all comes down to what we are willing to accept. Well, right now it looks that we are happy to accept a money war. Unfortunately a money war is only going to run more people out of the hobby. We might snap out of it when we are the only ones left on the track. Or not.
Personally I just accept that my six year old motors are not going to be the fastest, so I can peacefully focus on my racing lines and do the best I can with that (they are at best about 1/2s to at worst 1s slower on a 18s lap track, so not too shabby). I have zero interest in stuffing the pockets of the manufacturer with my money because another motor is the flavour of the month. Been there, done that, not again, thank you very much. After all, you are racing against yourself.
But that is a problem of racer attitude, no manufacturer or regulating body can be blamed for that.
Sure, they aren't going out of their way to support me/you, but manufacturers are in it to make money, and regulating bodies are, oh well - you.
Good on the ETS organisers for their massive success, and good on all the little people who participate for being good sports and accepting values which we lost along the way.
Which would certainly need a different value for each track of course.
Not being a spectator sport like F1, we can't motivate manufacturers to abide by and support rules, so it all comes down to what we are willing to accept. Well, right now it looks that we are happy to accept a money war. Unfortunately a money war is only going to run more people out of the hobby. We might snap out of it when we are the only ones left on the track. Or not.
Personally I just accept that my six year old motors are not going to be the fastest, so I can peacefully focus on my racing lines and do the best I can with that (they are at best about 1/2s to at worst 1s slower on a 18s lap track, so not too shabby). I have zero interest in stuffing the pockets of the manufacturer with my money because another motor is the flavour of the month. Been there, done that, not again, thank you very much. After all, you are racing against yourself.
But that is a problem of racer attitude, no manufacturer or regulating body can be blamed for that.
Sure, they aren't going out of their way to support me/you, but manufacturers are in it to make money, and regulating bodies are, oh well - you.
Good on the ETS organisers for their massive success, and good on all the little people who participate for being good sports and accepting values which we lost along the way.
Last edited by niznai; 02-26-2017 at 06:47 PM.
02-22-2017, 06:44 PM
#62
I think controls work very well if racers accept that winning a competition is meaningless when you have some sort of unfair advantage. Look at the ETS series with their slow stock motors and fixed gearing (we could simply adopt fixed gearing, by the way - not a solution to all problems but a limiting factor at least to the range of motors).
Which would certainly need a different value for each track of course.
Not being a spectator sport like F1, we can't motivate manufacturers to abide by and support rules, so it all comes down to what we are willing to accept. Well, right ow it looks that we are happy to accept a money war. Unfortunately a money war is only going to run more people out of the hobby. We might snap out of it when we are the only ones left on the track. Or not.
Personally I just accept that my six year old motors are not going to be the fastest, so I can peacefully focus on my racing lines and do the best I can with that (they are at best about 1/2s to at worst 1s slower on a 18s lap track, so not too shabby). I have zero interest in stuffing the pockets of the manufacturer with my money because another motor is the flavour of the month. Been there, done that, not again, thank you very much. After all, you are racing against yourself.
But that is a problem of racer attitude, no manufacturer or regulating body can be blamed for that.
Sure, they aren't going out of their way to support me/you, but manufacturers are in it to make money, and regulating bodies are, oh well - you.
Good on the ETS organisers for their massive success, and good on all the little people who participate for being good sports and accepting values which we lost along the way.
Which would certainly need a different value for each track of course.
Not being a spectator sport like F1, we can't motivate manufacturers to abide by and support rules, so it all comes down to what we are willing to accept. Well, right ow it looks that we are happy to accept a money war. Unfortunately a money war is only going to run more people out of the hobby. We might snap out of it when we are the only ones left on the track. Or not.
Personally I just accept that my six year old motors are not going to be the fastest, so I can peacefully focus on my racing lines and do the best I can with that (they are at best about 1/2s to at worst 1s slower on a 18s lap track, so not too shabby). I have zero interest in stuffing the pockets of the manufacturer with my money because another motor is the flavour of the month. Been there, done that, not again, thank you very much. After all, you are racing against yourself.
But that is a problem of racer attitude, no manufacturer or regulating body can be blamed for that.
Sure, they aren't going out of their way to support me/you, but manufacturers are in it to make money, and regulating bodies are, oh well - you.
Good on the ETS organisers for their massive success, and good on all the little people who participate for being good sports and accepting values which we lost along the way.
As for ETS and success, well it's kind of relevant to their population catchment. 100 people with a catchment area of say 100 million within a 3-4 hr drive, is no better than 5 people with a catchment area of say 5 million but we consider one a success and one a failure and use it to support an argument dictating the need for change.
For these proposals to succeed there needs to be a plan, an opportunity for drivers to say "Ok they want to use motor x as a control, so I will pick one up (if I can fund it) try it out and make a decision from there." Not have a vague plan and beat down on anyone asking questions or having the audacity to offer a dissenting opinion.
02-22-2017, 06:51 PM
#63
I think how something is implemented also has a big impact. It's one thing to say "We want to enforce control motors" But if you can't advise what motor is being considered, how it would be controlled, the availability of it, etc then you can't really expect people to buy into the idea.
As for ETS and success, well it's kind of relevant to their population catchment. 100 people with a catchment area of say 100 million within a 3-4 hr drive, is no better than 5 people with a catchment area of say 5 million but we consider one a success and one a failure and use it to support an argument dictating the need for change.
For these proposals to succeed there needs to be a plan, an opportunity for drivers to say "Ok they want to use motor x as a control, so I will pick one up (if I can fund it) try it out and make a decision from there." Not have a vague plan and beat down on anyone asking questions or having the audacity to offer a dissenting opinion.
As for ETS and success, well it's kind of relevant to their population catchment. 100 people with a catchment area of say 100 million within a 3-4 hr drive, is no better than 5 people with a catchment area of say 5 million but we consider one a success and one a failure and use it to support an argument dictating the need for change.
For these proposals to succeed there needs to be a plan, an opportunity for drivers to say "Ok they want to use motor x as a control, so I will pick one up (if I can fund it) try it out and make a decision from there." Not have a vague plan and beat down on anyone asking questions or having the audacity to offer a dissenting opinion.
02-22-2017, 08:02 PM
#65
Yes, the original proposals did get voted down, but it was a very close call in one of the classes. So much so we would be remiss to not revisit the idea with a revised proposal in the future.
And this is not imposing what the committee want. A large reason behind the original proposals was actual racers coming to the committee and requesting a change, having seen the success of series such as the ETS etc.
Call it fiddling or whatever, but we have to make the hobby sustainable, which frankly it currently isn't, before we can even contemplate trying to attract new blood.
Last edited by TryHard; 02-22-2017 at 09:34 PM.
02-22-2017, 08:09 PM
#66
You are right that implementation and catchment area matter but these are serious reasons easily converted to excuses.
If you look at the participation in the ETS series, you will see people fly many hours to get to the races and in most cases it's not cheap (you could probably buy another car with the money spent on transport, accomodation and race fees easily). I've been there, trust me (or not - go and check for yourself).
That is a decision best left to everyone to make for themselves, the regulatory bodies can only try to make things easier rather than harder.
Which they tried, even in Oz.
Proposing a control motor rule is different from suggesting what motor. It was an idea to test the thinking of clubs. And the clubs responded that we want to know exactly what motor, and/or specs and so on, which basically invites regulatory bodies to tell people what to do, which you said people don't like in your very post above.
Why can't you vote on principle, yes we would like a control motor, and we are happy to decide for ourselves what motor to use? Then consult your members and see what best fits your conditions and intentions there, wherever you are? I think the proposal had exactly this intention, to allow room for our own decision, but the point was missed by most people who voted down the idea (not to surmise that most of these people had already bought or had the latest motor on the way).
Moreover, I think that proposing a motor (by the regulatory body) for the whole country would have given even more scope to protest against the idea, and perhaps for good reason. The regulatory body would have had then to assume responsibility to make the motor available or easily accessible, which is completely out of their control/power, especially in Oz.
As it turns out from some of the posts above, alternatives exist, and if we didn't manage to find these, we could simply look into what others have found if we have a real intention to have an even playing field.
Not having this intention is only going to make other impediments/costs even harder to overcome by anyone who wants to join or continue enjoying the hobby.
If you look at the participation in the ETS series, you will see people fly many hours to get to the races and in most cases it's not cheap (you could probably buy another car with the money spent on transport, accomodation and race fees easily). I've been there, trust me (or not - go and check for yourself).
That is a decision best left to everyone to make for themselves, the regulatory bodies can only try to make things easier rather than harder.
Which they tried, even in Oz.
Proposing a control motor rule is different from suggesting what motor. It was an idea to test the thinking of clubs. And the clubs responded that we want to know exactly what motor, and/or specs and so on, which basically invites regulatory bodies to tell people what to do, which you said people don't like in your very post above.
Why can't you vote on principle, yes we would like a control motor, and we are happy to decide for ourselves what motor to use? Then consult your members and see what best fits your conditions and intentions there, wherever you are? I think the proposal had exactly this intention, to allow room for our own decision, but the point was missed by most people who voted down the idea (not to surmise that most of these people had already bought or had the latest motor on the way).
Moreover, I think that proposing a motor (by the regulatory body) for the whole country would have given even more scope to protest against the idea, and perhaps for good reason. The regulatory body would have had then to assume responsibility to make the motor available or easily accessible, which is completely out of their control/power, especially in Oz.
As it turns out from some of the posts above, alternatives exist, and if we didn't manage to find these, we could simply look into what others have found if we have a real intention to have an even playing field.
Not having this intention is only going to make other impediments/costs even harder to overcome by anyone who wants to join or continue enjoying the hobby.
Last edited by niznai; 02-26-2017 at 06:49 PM.
02-22-2017, 08:30 PM
#67
Just have everyone purchase a HobbyWing JS6 Brushless system. ESC and 21.5T motor, Boom, $95.
02-22-2017, 08:51 PM
#69
Or run a handicap system to allow everybody and their dog use whatever they have. Penalise higher power output and you're done. Both motor and battery war problems solved in one hit.
02-22-2017, 09:21 PM
#71
Tech Adept
iTrader: (14)
Look at the quality of the cheaper brushless motors - they are terrible. Sensor variances all over the place. Rotor strength and symmetry all over the map. Windings that look like a monkey did them. No one wants to buy a paper weight - and that is what you get with the lower msrp. You get 10 paper weights and one ok motor. That also means you need a gauss meter to test the rotor, a resistance meter to check stator, and a motolyzer to check the sensors. Or you spend $105-150 for a motor that you know is good. I'll spend that $105 anytime rather than dealing with all that.
When Novak went to gold wire instead of red wire it caused the cars to go a good lap slower on the carpet track that I was racing at. How happy was I to buy one of those? The variance was just too high. But they kept under that msrp by using it.
Would something like the Tour 10.5 R1 "7.7" work for other classes? Maybe. But I doubt it would work that well across motor brands ... and it seems people want the ability to pick the brand they want.
Lots of people want "stock" to be the slower entry level class for new racers. It hasn't been that for a long time and I don't think it ever will be.
02-22-2017, 09:32 PM
#72
Tech Adept
iTrader: (14)
Doesn't work. The variance is too high. You just buy a bunch of them and go through them all to find the best. You then see a bunch of "new" motors for sale on rctech and ebay. Buy at hobby store, measure and test, and then sell at a minimal loss. Eventually you go through a good amount of motors and actually have a good one. It isn't fun for anyone, but the cheaper the msrp, the higher the variance, and the more likely to get motor that is better than all the rest. You pay someone $2 a day to wind motors and you don't get quality. Eventually you will get a 20.5T that is "borderline" on the resistance test ... you have a new rocket motor!
02-22-2017, 09:58 PM
#73
Doesn't work. The variance is too high. You just buy a bunch of them and go through them all to find the best. You then see a bunch of "new" motors for sale on rctech and ebay. Buy at hobby store, measure and test, and then sell at a minimal loss. Eventually you go through a good amount of motors and actually have a good one. It isn't fun for anyone, but the cheaper the msrp, the higher the variance, and the more likely to get motor that is better than all the rest. You pay someone $2 a day to wind motors and you don't get quality. Eventually you will get a 20.5T that is "borderline" on the resistance test ... you have a new rocket motor!
02-22-2017, 10:07 PM
#74
I completely disagree with $105 being the problem. Being able to buy a 1 motor for $105 is the best "stock" has ever been. I remember the 90s with Epic Pink stock motors and seeing turbodyno numbers ranging from 88 watts @20 amps to 102 watts. In oval, you could compare lap times to wattage of the motor. Sure, a better car could overcome some power disadvantage - but not 14%. You either needed to go through a bunch of motors, or have a "sponsor" doing it for you.
Look at the quality of the cheaper brushless motors - they are terrible. Sensor variances all over the place. Rotor strength and symmetry all over the map. Windings that look like a monkey did them. No one wants to buy a paper weight - and that is what you get with the lower msrp. You get 10 paper weights and one ok motor. That also means you need a gauss meter to test the rotor, a resistance meter to check stator, and a motolyzer to check the sensors. Or you spend $105-150 for a motor that you know is good. I'll spend that $105 anytime rather than dealing with all that.
When Novak went to gold wire instead of red wire it caused the cars to go a good lap slower on the carpet track that I was racing at. How happy was I to buy one of those? The variance was just too high. But they kept under that msrp by using it.
Would something like the Tour 10.5 R1 "7.7" work for other classes? Maybe. But I doubt it would work that well across motor brands ... and it seems people want the ability to pick the brand they want.
Lots of people want "stock" to be the slower entry level class for new racers. It hasn't been that for a long time and I don't think it ever will be.
Look at the quality of the cheaper brushless motors - they are terrible. Sensor variances all over the place. Rotor strength and symmetry all over the map. Windings that look like a monkey did them. No one wants to buy a paper weight - and that is what you get with the lower msrp. You get 10 paper weights and one ok motor. That also means you need a gauss meter to test the rotor, a resistance meter to check stator, and a motolyzer to check the sensors. Or you spend $105-150 for a motor that you know is good. I'll spend that $105 anytime rather than dealing with all that.
When Novak went to gold wire instead of red wire it caused the cars to go a good lap slower on the carpet track that I was racing at. How happy was I to buy one of those? The variance was just too high. But they kept under that msrp by using it.
Would something like the Tour 10.5 R1 "7.7" work for other classes? Maybe. But I doubt it would work that well across motor brands ... and it seems people want the ability to pick the brand they want.
Lots of people want "stock" to be the slower entry level class for new racers. It hasn't been that for a long time and I don't think it ever will be.
02-22-2017, 10:37 PM
#75
Tech Adept
iTrader: (14)
I think Rick had a few points in his post. Some of them I agree with, some I don't.
I'll agree with Rick that stock motors shouldn't be much more expensive than modified motors. The basic parts are the same, and I'm not qualified enough to determine if it takes longer to wind a 5.5 or 17.5. But I doubt it is $20.
I agree that stock racing can be more expensive than modified. I don't agree that stock is an entry level class (for better or worse). There was intent back in the 80s for it to be less expensive and for beginners. It just isn't the beginner class many wish it was.
I don't think $90 is more expensive when compared to the past. It is only more expensive when you compare one motor. If you look at the realistic costs of running stock I'm spending overall less now than with Epic Pink brushed motors, 19T handwounds, Novak brushless, or Trinity D3.5s.
I'll agree with Rick that stock motors shouldn't be much more expensive than modified motors. The basic parts are the same, and I'm not qualified enough to determine if it takes longer to wind a 5.5 or 17.5. But I doubt it is $20.
I agree that stock racing can be more expensive than modified. I don't agree that stock is an entry level class (for better or worse). There was intent back in the 80s for it to be less expensive and for beginners. It just isn't the beginner class many wish it was.
I don't think $90 is more expensive when compared to the past. It is only more expensive when you compare one motor. If you look at the realistic costs of running stock I'm spending overall less now than with Epic Pink brushed motors, 19T handwounds, Novak brushless, or Trinity D3.5s.