protc3

iTrader: (13)

protc3

iTrader: (13)

Thanks buddy. I am really happy with the team we have. They are all very helpfull and are a knowledgable group of people. Im glad that they have been able to help you. I have heard your doing really well with the car.Lay it down this weekend buddy.

Nova F1 Racer

iTrader: (3)

Jason, start working on LIPO version of this car..... ROAR approved LIPO....

protc3

iTrader: (13)

I need to get a single cell lipo and see how it works. I am pretty much ready to go

ChrisP

iTrader: (11)

ROAR approved LiPo for 6c classes....doesn't look like a comparable package for 1/12 was decided upon...

Scottrik

iTrader: (261)

Yes, Dawn's "announcement" was that LiPo has been approved for SIX cell applications. Thankfully they've left 1/12 well enough alone.

AdrianM

iTrader: (4)

At some point in time 1/12th racers will have to start thinking about how to move forward with LiPo. We have tow options:

1. 2 Cell LiPo like sedans with special for 1/12th class MUCH milder motors like 21.5BL for stock and 17.5BL for 19T classes.

2. 1 Cell Lipo with existing but faster motors to get the speed back like 10.5 for Stock. We will have to run rx packs in this case in all classes.

I think option 2 is the way to go as the cars will be lighter, tire wear will be less and by testing currently availabe motors we can get back up to 4 cell NiMh speeds easily.

LeeS

Jason - Great talking to you yesterday. Thanks for all the help getting what I needed to get started. Could you PM me the tracking info please.

Adrian - What kind of cell are you using? I am very interested in figuring out a way to run 12th with a lipo. For a reciever pack are you using a small lipo or an old 5 cell style pack?

Thanks, Lee Schultz

protc3

iTrader: (13)

screw it,2 cell lipo 10.5

Scottrik

iTrader: (261)

Adrian,

I don't know if you saw on the "ROAR BL debate" thread where Brian Bodine and I posted some thoughts on incorporating LiPo into 1/12.

Brian is a VERY thoughtful/thought-provoking kind of guy and I had the opportunity of an 8-hour car ride last month from Minot back to Billings to chat with him about this very idea.

What we came up with was, as you suggest, going to the single-cell idea (or two smaller cells in parallel for T-bar cars) BUT we took it a huge step further. What if, at the same time we adopted LiPo we divorced ourselves from out ancient and by no means necessary forced marriage to the 540-size motor? Lets look 380's...maybe even smaller.

This will require a major re-design but I believe it would come up with a MUCH more suitable car for the future of 1/12. Since the idea would, undoubtedly, result in the obsolescence of existing chassis it should be phased in over a period of 2-3 years. Start out with the new "formula" in mod or maybe even the newly announced SuperStock (formerly 19T) for a season or two while people continue to get use out of their "legacy" chassis in what will now be 27T/17.5. Then if we've REALLY done our homework the speed of the new formula replacement for 27T/17.5 might be close enough in speed to allow the new formula to run with the legacy chassis, at least while people change over.

The idea behind this was the reality to the situation will require a new chassis design if single cell LiPo is going to be accepted. The further reality is that we will lose some racers that are "on the edge" anyway that choose not to "upgrade". THEN if we REALLY take 1/12 tech where it, arguably, already should be that's a SECOND major upgrade/re-design, a second obsoleting of (what would then be) existing chassis, and another round of "odd player leaves". Our thought was "why not do both at once?" and eliminate the middle phase of chassis obsolescence.

Whaddaya think? I honestly think that if folks like Jason, Adrian, B.Bodine and others were to really work on this there's no reason we couldn't have this new formula approved through ROAR and up and running by the '09-'10 season (about 18-19 months from now). OR at least by the '10-11 season. I recognize IFMAR has an interest in 1/12 specs but we're heading off the reservation, so to speak, anyway with accepting BL now so why not continue to lead the way. I've got to believe IFMAR would follow a well-crafted new formula.

Certainly leave the "basics" alone. Continue to require the solid rear axle, etc, that define pan cars. Let's just explore where we could be with similar/same chassis technology but maybe scaled-down a bit at the rear pod to accomodate the smaller motors, etc.

AdrianM

iTrader: (4)

I fly helicopters so I am familiar with the 300 and 480 class brusless motors you are talking about and they could certainly work and power the cars just as fast or faster than we are going right now. This only problem is the industry and consumer desire to standardize.

If I were Novak,LRP, GM, Orion or any other motor manufacturer I would work very hard to crush any talk of alternate motor sizes simply becuase it would increase costs and risk to my business. I would want to make as few motors as possible and have them used in as many applications as possible.

From a racer's standpoint you will get resistance to this too. Right now I run the same size motors in all my cars. If I fry a 10.5 in my sedan I can get one out of my 1/12 car and keep racing. If the motors were diffrent I would have to buy and keep special motors for each scale and would not be able to use one in the other car.

Even though it is a great idea I think it is probably not going to happen.

AdrianM

iTrader: (4)

Two 2000mah class cells in parallel to make a 3.7v 4000mah pack. The one I have fits in the stock DB12R batt position. If you use 2100 or 2200 cells you will need to run them as saddle packs... they still fit in the DB12R that way, but you have to put the electronics on top of them...lol!

For Rx packs I use 2 200mah LiPo cells in series to ake a 7.4v 200mak pack. I don't run a regulator but I am taking a chance here. So far it has not burned up a servo. If you are running 7.4v LiPo rx packs I recommend a Team Much More Micro 6v Regulator.

Scottrik

iTrader: (261)

I guess I'm looking at it from a completely selfish 1/12 racer (kinda like all the completely selfish sedan racers that pushed their LiPo/Brushless/whatever agenda on us) and my question is "what would make the BEST 1/12 formula?". And getting that enormous chunk of weight off the back of the chassis would be a HUGE start.

I don't buy for a minute that a different motor for 1/12 vs sedans and whatever would be a deterent for racers.

As far as manufacturers...the rumor I'D heard was that ROAR is a "racer-driven" organization. I also think the mfr's would come to the party if we, the 1/12 racers, created a groundswell. Hell, there are probably appropriate motors out there right now if we start with sensorless.

I maintain...if we're going to re-design 1/12 chassis anyway to incorporate LiPo, let's do the WHOLE job instead of piddling away at it.

CBear3

iTrader: (3)

It sounds nice, but I'll drag my feet like Adrian said.
Right now I'm building up my 1/12 with spare parts left over from my oval and TC cars. I run the same speedo, the same motors, etc. in all of them, so I can consolidate my spares. If you deviate too far from the mainstream I think you'll take more people away than you'll add to it. I mean its a cool idea but since this isn't my "core" class; I'd just find something else to use up my equipment in. And I think I wouldn't be alone.

AdrianM

iTrader: (4)

Thats actually an excellent reason to keep 540 motors. 1/12th cars need to have a rearward weight bias so weight can transfer forward and generate front grip to initiate turns. This is what we run batteries as far back as we can unless the traction is super high.

Running smaller motors would cause some serious handling issues. Have Brian look at the front to rear weight distribution of any of his currrent cars. Then have him put a 480 BL motor like a Mega 15/16/3 in the rear pod. Then try to move the electronics around to get the same weight distribution. I haven't tried it but I dont think the car will balance.