skater-deez1

iTrader: (78)

I stated earlier that tsr and motiv were great motors. My assertion that motors vary from one to another was NOT directed at either of those. More towards the motors most people buy because they're more affordable. I can take 3 hobbywing or whoever's motors and compare #'s. I'm just saying they are different, of course the exceptions are the companies that have good people looking over the quality control. Buy three speed passion motors and see how the same they are!

DesertRat

iTrader: (2)

If you think about it, ROAR and every other RC governing body really screwed the pooch when they dreamt up the rules, or lack thereof, governing the "stock" brushless motor. The rules for brushed motors were immense and draconian by comparison, with rules governing each part of its construction down to soldering techniques. We had none of these for the first decade of brushless racing, and as a result we had The Wild West where everything that could be used to increase power and RPM was. Anyone remember BOOST? I thought boost was the best thing in RC for a long time, but it was also a direct result of reading between the lines in the rulebook. It wasn't banned, so it was legal.

I guess at the end of the day, what SHOULD have been done was take the ROAR rule book for brushed motors and substituted in wording for brushless including having a required gauge and minimum length of wire, with a specified wrapping method around the stator, a spec thou-shalt-not-be-more-nor-less stack height, a fixed timing value, and all the rest. But they didn't. The interesting thing about letting the genie out of the bottle is that they are really hard to get back in again, so here we are.

The good news is that we can expect these leaps in brushless motor tech to slow down, rules are being implemented and will continue to be so, but it will be very, very hard to implement a rule that retroactively makes a large amount of currently legal motors illegal, such as requiring locked timing and a spec wind beyond requiring the motor to be a Y-wind motor.

jiml

iTrader: (3)

There is no stock. There never has been. There never will be. Every motor spec ever written has been tweaked to death to "get that extra advantage" over the other guy. Forget that the purpose of a spec motor was to insure those running a lower class had the same motor as everyone else. Want to play with the motor? Go race mod.

And now we're blaming ROAR for stuff we did. There was a rule concerning the max size of wire, but one company exceeded it. The next thing you know ROAR's being sued! Did we really need lawyers to get involved with RC racing? All in the name of getting that extra advantage.

And while motors are the biggest thing, it sure isn't the only thing. The only reason why VTA or USGT exist is because people didn't like the bodies that were coming out. Aerodynamic advantage was more important than the cars actually looking like something. Blobs and taxicabs were the comments back then. And the advances in chassis design are nuts. One look at an Awesomatix and you can't help but go "wow." And there really isn't anything you can do about that.

The problem has always been us, the racers. I've known too many people who are willing to max out their credit cards so they can dominate stock. It's the nature of competition that somewhere along the way we forget we're doing this to have fun. I'm fortunate enough to know a few people who haven't forgotten the fun aspect, and I enjoy racing with them, even though I still lose. It's another thing when you go to a race where you know some people are running those big dollar motors, but when you walk by someone's pit and you see 3 of those motors, how do you compete with that?

rccartips

iTrader: (3)

A person can only put 1 motor in a car no matter how many they buy. Compete by being a better driver and mechanic (car prep and setup)

DesertRat

iTrader: (2)

Ya gotta love the good ol' "Git Gud Skrub" comment after someone pulls you four feet every lap on the straight and out accelerates you in every power section. I've won my share of races when the guy behind me had more power, but when I bolted up a new motor and instantly cut tenths of my best lap time, was that because I was suddenly a better driver and mechanic? Power matters a lot, and the less of it the class you race in is allowed to have it becomes more apparent how much having just a little more than the next guy can improve your finishing order. This is why oval guys are so crazy about maximizing power.

niznai

I got that.

I just said I wouldn't like to know I hang around a crowd with psychotic issues.

I am in it for fun.

The wya to cure such issues I guess would be to buy a lot of top motors and give them for free to everybody who can't afford them, just to piss off the guys trying to buy their way to the top.

Or leave the class to the guys who can't control themselves to duke it out.

nexxus

iTrader: (315)

Maybe make it so that Spec classes are for your private racers only, ie no sponsored drivers (and that is a term that would need to be VERY well defined, to me it should encompass ANY level of sponsorship from discounts in exchange for comments to payments based on results / sales etc)

If you're good enough to be sponsored, run Mod.

bertrandsv87

iTrader: (2)

It is easier for me to run mod than stock, since I have a 2.5t boosted in my A700....lol....
No need to worry about power then, just setup....
If only I could make my 17.5t as fast with unknown exotic materials ...lol...

niznai

That is another problem, but in a way the same.

Admittedly if you're sponsored you have the same access to the latest and greatest as someone with endless pockets.

Not that big a problem if you have well controlled classes/competitions like the ETS where it don't make a difference if you're sponsored or not, you have the same equipment as the sponsored/uber-rich competition.

One thing I don't understand is why do people connect spec classes with slow classes? Why is spec supposed to be slow? I don't get it.

jiml

iTrader: (3)

Thank you Rat. I've said this for a long time. The problem comes from tracks where setup and skill are the only differences you need. Here in the northeast power is just as important as setup. There are enough good sponsored guys that it gets tough to keep up. You could have the best setup possible, but if you're down on power you're gonna have a hard time passing. All you can hope for is the other guy crashes. Oh, and yes I have won races where everyone else crashed.

There's another problem with setup and skill. Both of those take time. And time is money. I'm in a situation right now where I don't have a lot of both. So I go to the track when I can and do the best I can. But having to race guys who are at the track 3 times a week with all the best stuff gets old pretty fast.

And if I'm wrong about power, why do 75% of the racers have iChargers?

jiml

iTrader: (3)

That's a pretty good point. It seems like the slower the class is, the more a "better" motor is going to make a difference. Nitro classes don't have the same issue because everybody already has too much power. I always thought more power means you need to drive better.

liljohn1064

iTrader: (17)

I would have to say the only stock motor is 25.5 ROAR Spec. It is the most regulated build. All the motors from all manufacturers should end up pretty close on a proper test dyno. About the only thing that isn't specified is the can design and weight. Maybe a governing body should take the reigns and set those regulations so their is less wiggle room in the rules for all other winds? Set the limits to be inclusive of every motor legal at this time and move forward with a much stricter rule set. That governing body should set the standard for all manufacturers to follow. As a racer, this is what I want. I prefer stricter rules and less vague and gray areas. Will it be hard to enforce locally? Sure, but I don't cheat. It's not in my blood. I'd feel like less of a racer if I had to. I don't follow motor of the month, but I'd like to know the next motor I buy will give me the same results I currently experience and that both the sanctioning body and the manufacturer are behind me 100% in putting forth my best effort.

niznai

Manufacturers don't sell motors if people don't buy them. And why would people buy a new motor if the old one is just as good? See the incentive to push the envelope?

Threads like these always come back to two kinds of solutions. Regulate the bejesus out of the motor or try something indirect, like limiting the gearing or some such. I think the latter has more of a chance to stick, because regulating is never going to be perfect, or some ingenious manufacturer will always find some new technology that didn't exist last year and push the envelope again. Perhaps we could take a look at the TCS series and just measure some simple motor parameter (we can do rev, current, timing etc. at a given voltage or just go fixed FDR) and leave manufacturers to do whatever they want. After all you can't control what they're doing anyway. This approach would also have the benefit of removing the incentive to buy a million motors hoping you'll find the better one of a batch.

jlfx car audio

iTrader: (37)

The issue I see locking in a FDR is unless our using same motors the outcome (lap times ) will be different .. R1 and TSR I know like a higher FDR and a motiv and reedy prefer lower fdr... So if a track speced a 4.2 and flowed really well some motors will shine and the motiv and reedy will have no top end ... And if you was to spec a 3.8 the motovsand reedy would shine and the R1&tsr would burn up (or run flat)

niznai

That is exactly the point of controlling the FDR. It allows people to choose whatever motor they want, power isn't the outright winner anymore. You can in fact use whatever motor you want, but you will have to find the right timing for your motor to fit the gearing, so in effect you will give away some power for efficiency or torque.

I think a good (depending on track) choice of FDR would have to be somewhere in the middle, so you can't just drop the motor in and have a default advantage.

And even if on a certain track it turns out that motor x is always the winner, that will be only for that track. There will be no incentive for one manufacturer or another to manufacture 200$ motors for that track alone.

In some way, I think what I am saying is that we have to fight two fronts here. One is the desire to win and the other is the incentive for manufacturer to sell you the flavour of the month motor. I don't think we can fight the desire to win people have, but I think we can reduce the scope for companies to build their super duper motors.

Yeah, sure, motor X will be the best for track Y. Okay, how many motors will that sell? One or two dozens? Not enough to motivate a company to make huge efforts and not enough demand to command a premium price.