R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-25-2007, 02:05 PM   #646
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Outside of Crook County Illinois
Posts: 1,949
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to A-Ko
Default

I think it is important and this forum re-energized my awareness for what I do on & off the track. Actually I just bought some heavy-duty blue chemical gloves at Walmart for $5.
__________________
Jeffrey
teamgravityrc.com - motivrc.com
USVTA National Points Member #101
A-Ko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2007, 10:46 PM   #647
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 35
Default

Before you propose to ban something, you must first think about how you would police the ban. The FIA thought it would be a great idea to ban traction control in the 90's. It was a great idea until some teams were still using it. Other teams started pointing fingers and things got ugly quick. Before you knew it, TC was back in F1. Why, because there is no way to police it. That is the only reason! How would we police the use of traction compound in the RC industry? Would every club race need a spectrum analysis machine to see if one racer is using compound and the other not? I think the number of people choosing not to race RC cars due to ill chemical reactions is very minimal. Bigger fish to fry for this hobby right now. No need for a newbie to worry about if the other guy is gaining that corner speed due to the fact that his tires have been "sauced" outside. He should be able to understand it's due to other factors.

I'm sorry to hear you can't handle the chemicals involved in RC racing. I hope your next hobby will be more conducive...
kklemmo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2007, 02:07 AM   #648
Tech Elite
 
flameoutgarrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Srcr Seattle, Wa
Posts: 3,642
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Send a message via MSN to flameoutgarrett
Default

sounds like its going to have to be a hobby that you do in a bubble...

cause thats the only place free of toxins...

ive sucked in enuf paragon, 20 times more nitro fumes....i bet i die in a plane crash.. or something like that.
__________________
Team fun-Www.rc-trim.com-Team Speedmerchant-Team Orca-Team Br00d
flameoutgarrett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2007, 07:10 AM   #649
Tech Elite
 
BP SHADOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: In the LAB paintin' bodies!!!!
Posts: 2,287
Trader Rating: 24 (100%+)
Default

I was going to stop posting on here, because with the exception of a couple of people, its like talking to a bunch of 2 year olds. However, I feel it necessary to say a couple of more things and then I will sit back and watch the stupidity from a distance. First off , yes there are more chemicals out there than just tire dope, and they are just as nasty and dangerous. Some of them could be substituted with safer stuff, and some cant. Putting the burden on the track operators to invest in ventilation systems for facilities that are more than likely leased is irresponsible, and will likely cause alot of tracks to shut down.
Although I dont know Martin personally, I have been at the Tamiya Nats when he won first as a TCS competitor and later as a past champion, and I respect the hell out him for his driving as well as his knowledge of chassis setup, and it really is a shame that he suffers from exposure to these chemicals.
If making a toy car run through a maze on a rug a second a lap faster is worth irreversable damage to your body, then keep using this stuff. When you're sittnig in the pits twitching uncontrollably because your nervous system is shot, rest assured I will laugh at your ignorant ass.
When I hear that your suffering from cancer, you know what the response will be ? "Yeah but did you see the lap times he turned?"
I love this hobby as much as the next guy, but it is just that, a hobby. It is not the F1 world championship, it is not LeMans, its not even the Indy 500.
It is toy cars, and it is fun, and it is not worth dying for!!!!!!!
__________________
I'll hit the brakes he'll go right by
http://f1rclab.com
http://f1rclab.mybigcommerce.com
BP SHADOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2007, 10:37 AM   #650
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Outside of Crook County Illinois
Posts: 1,949
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to A-Ko
Default

It all comes down to awareness and influencing your local track. When I first started the hobby I was made aware of certain chemicals and toxins. Usually I avoided the chemicals but lately with the change in classes I run I find myself using them more and more and pulling out the rubber gloves. I know where I race locally I find myself in a position of more responsibility and will bring up making changes for the better, as far as health issues go.

The one thing I find interesting is if you go with a "safe" chemical that does not smell, you still will be ingesting the chemical from the air. . .
__________________
Jeffrey
teamgravityrc.com - motivrc.com
USVTA National Points Member #101
A-Ko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2007, 04:43 PM   #651
JKA
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,000
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Crisp
yeah, I agree it is hard to capture everyones point of view perfectly, but hopefully the options I did post, provide some level of insight as to what people are thinking.
What they are thinking about what exactly? "Chemical use" or "foam tire vs Rubber tire". There have been countless threads where rubber vs foam was debated. I will promise you, that there were respondents to your poll that chose the very first selection based solely upon their desire to get rid of foam tires. And I'm not conviced that mistake is not at least partially to blame for response 1 being the most popular to date. Its pretty bad when the first 5 words on a poll selection list intended to determine peoples opinion's about using harmful traction compounds reads, "We should ban foam tires.."

As an analyst, I'm faced everyday with the challenge of collecting and analyzing data. I'm fully aware that increased options in polling is more likely to provide detailed and thus more representative views of the studied population, granted the sample size is large enough. You were right to provide more options than just "keep it" or "ban it". Your error came however when you riddled the options with an unrelated decision: Foam vs Rubber.

A-Ko's suggested choices would have yeilded a much more viable representation of the RC racers likely collective opinion.

And if you think that I'm being just a little too judgemental of a simple RC poll, think again. I've not even scratched the surface of all of the inherent nonsampling errors, won't pretend to think you care about all of the sampling errors, and I won't bore everyone else (more than I already have) with an explanation of how this poll is actually exponentially skewed by the latter causing numerous instances of the former.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm sure your intentions are great, regardless of how I feel about chemical use in RC. But lets not pretend that this poll proves anything specific or useful about the subject at hand. To be honest this issue isn't something that should be polled anyway. Its an issue of determining factual evidence of toxicity at common levels of exposure. Until that is done we are all debating something about which we have no clue.
JKA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2007, 05:00 PM   #652
Tech Fanatic
 
Martin Crisp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 827
Default

all good points....

I think the policing thing is one of the bigger issues to address...and it is not easy. Just in case you have not read my earlier posts on this subject, I think that policing a "spec" additive is more difficult than policing the Ban of additives. Both have their challenges, but I think if you allow additives, then people will use the best non-smelly additive available which is likely to be more harmful than the "safer" ones.

I think if nothing but awareness comes out of this then that is a good start. In my opinion not enough, but it is better than nothing. It is likely that, if I had used gloves, stored my tires in plastic bags, used respirators when truing tires etc etc, all along I would not be as sensitive and as affected as I am now. Don't get me wrong, I still strongly believe that no additives is the way to go, but I do understand the many challenges with that strategy.

One challenge for the local track owners in choosing to go the "no additive" approach is running larger events hopping to attract international drivers or drivers from other tracks. Tracks have a hard time staying open, and holding these larger events can help them maybe break even for the year. So the big challenge for track owners is do they take on the risk of being the first track to make the decision to go additive free.

If a track does go additive free they could do that for their local racing and for big races allow for additives if it turns out that they can not attract other drivers to their big race. This would not be perfect, but perhaps a step in the right direction.

The issue of course would be for the local drivers of that track...as they would not have much experience running with the higher grip levels afforded by using additives. This is an issue,... but I can say that the grip level at my local track is much less even using additives than I recently experienced at the roar nats at Josh's track. At first, my setup did not work at all when I went to Josh's track,... my car traction rolled the first couple of practices, until I made enough changes. My point is that from track to track and from race to race, there is often a difference in grip, that drivers need to adapt to even today with additives. Yes the differences would be greater if a track decided not to use additives but the difference can't be any greater than going from rubber tires to foam tires, which we already deal with today.
__________________
Martin Crisp
Power-Story.com | LearnSetup.com
Martin Crisp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2007, 05:17 PM   #653
Tech Fanatic
 
Martin Crisp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 827
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JKA
What they are thinking about what exactly? "Chemical use" or "foam tire vs Rubber tire". There have been countless threads where rubber vs foam was debated. I will promise you, that there were respondents to your poll that chose the very first selection based solely upon their desire to get rid of foam tires. And I'm not conviced that mistake is not at least partially to blame for response 1 being the most popular to date. Its pretty bad when the first 5 words on a poll selection list intended to determine peoples opinion's about using harmful traction compounds reads, "We should ban foam tires.."

As an analyst, I'm faced everyday with the challenge of collecting and analyzing data. I'm fully aware that increased options in polling is more likely to provide detailed and thus more representative views of the studied population, granted the sample size is large enough. You were right to provide more options than just "keep it" or "ban it". Your error came however when you riddled the options with an unrelated decision: Foam vs Rubber.

A-Ko's suggested choices would have yeilded a much more viable representation of the RC racers likely collective opinion.

And if you think that I'm being just a little too judgemental of a simple RC poll, think again. I've not even scratched the surface of all of the inherent nonsampling errors, won't pretend to think you care about all of the sampling errors, and I won't bore everyone else (more than I already have) with an explanation of how this poll is actually exponentially skewed by the latter causing numerous instances of the former.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm sure your intentions are great, regardless of how I feel about chemical use in RC. But lets not pretend that this poll proves anything specific or useful about the subject at hand. To be honest this issue isn't something that should be polled anyway. Its an issue of determining factual evidence of toxicity at common levels of exposure. Until that is done we are all debating something about which we have no clue.
JKA,

Thank you for agreeing that more questions is better than fewer questions. I can appreciate your knowledge on polling, and I am not claiming to have built the optimal poll, but to suggest that people choose the first one becaue they want to run rubber tires makes not sense to me. When you consider the fact that only 8 people choose the run rubber tires with additives option (option 3). If people were just speaking up about rubber tires, then yould would have seen a lot more people select option 3.

The large number of votes for option 1 and 2 which both opt to ban traction compounds, suggest that the vast majority of the voters wnat to ban the addtivies. It also shows close to a 50/50 split on the rubber tire versus foam tire desires, which is also interesting on its own, but does not take away from a clear message that the majority of the poeople want to ban the additives.

Also, just so you are aware, I was a CTO for a marketing solutions company, which did a lot of surveys and polling. I agree this poll is not perfect, and polls are only indicators, but to suggest it does not provide some insight into how our community is thinking is not accurate.
__________________
Martin Crisp
Power-Story.com | LearnSetup.com
Martin Crisp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2007, 05:26 PM   #654
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 676
Trader Rating: 15 (100%+)
Default

I never found the traction additives to be a problem until lately ..my local track switched to paragon and it made me sick for at least 6 hours afterwards.I guess i never noticed it because i could never smell before and had sinus surgery about a month ago.I understand why people complain now.
AARON YOUNG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2007, 05:50 PM   #655
JKA
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,000
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Crisp
I agree this poll is not perfect, and polls are only indicators, but to suggest it does not provide some insight into how our community is thinking is not accurate.
To suggest you can determine popular opinion based upon this poll is just as inaccurate. And all could have been avoided had only one issue been presented.

Rubber vs Foam has been a much more volatile subject, and to introduce it into your poll also introduced extremely significant skews. No matter how much post poll explanation you provide or how you attempt the seperation of these issues after the fact its undeniable that the data collected cannot be attributed one way or the other as the issues were inappropriately commingled during polling. As a former CTO with polling experience I would hope you would have never accepted this sort of data, and and likewise could understand the inherent flaws as well as their magnitude. Not to be crude but I'm positive I'd receive at least a verbal lashing from our COO were I to try and present data collected in such a significantly flawed method.

Again though... this issue isn't one appropriate for polling anyway. Until we know how harmful the chemicals are at the levels of exposure we experience, we are debating the unknown anyway.
JKA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2007, 06:08 PM   #656
Tech Fanatic
 
Martin Crisp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 827
Default

well keith...all I can say is lets agree to disagree. Just a thought, if you think this poll is not accurate, please feel free to test your theory by creating your own poll. If I am wrong, I am wrong.
__________________
Martin Crisp
Power-Story.com | LearnSetup.com
Martin Crisp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2007, 03:00 AM   #657
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,131
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JKA
To suggest you can determine popular opinion based upon this poll is just as inaccurate. And all could have been avoided had only one issue been presented.

Rubber vs Foam has been a much more volatile subject, and to introduce it into your poll also introduced extremely significant skews. No matter how much post poll explanation you provide or how you attempt the seperation of these issues after the fact its undeniable that the data collected cannot be attributed one way or the other as the issues were inappropriately commingled during polling. As a former CTO with polling experience I would hope you would have never accepted this sort of data, and and likewise could understand the inherent flaws as well as their magnitude. Not to be crude but I'm positive I'd receive at least a verbal lashing from our COO were I to try and present data collected in such a significantly flawed method.

Again though... this issue isn't one appropriate for polling anyway. Until we know how harmful the chemicals are at the levels of exposure we experience, we are debating the unknown anyway.
If you have to leave the pit area for fresh air, then there is a problem with the chemicals. If your nose starts to bleed or your hands are drying out in a couple of hours at the track, there is something wrong. We don't need someone or some company to tell us traction compuond is bad for us. If you want to give your opinion about this poll, I guess it is worth polling. Your starting crap with Martin that doesn't make much sense. Argue all you want, but there is definetly a problem with tire additives for our health.
Juan Aveytia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2007, 08:15 AM   #658
JKA
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,000
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

My family makes tons of hard candy every year around the holidays. When they start making Spearmint and Peppermint I always have to leave the house for some fresh air. If not I get headaches and have trouble breathing.

Then we eat the candy.
JKA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2007, 08:20 AM   #659
Suspended
 
McSmooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Served Fresh Daily
Posts: 1,631
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by JKA

Then we eat the candy.
The first round of Paragon Margaritas is on me.
McSmooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2007, 08:23 AM   #660
JKA
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,000
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by McSmooth
The first round of Paragon Margaritas is on me.
I prefer "Jack" and coke. lol

You coming down Friday?
JKA is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Traction Compounds srs64 Electric On-Road 1 09-13-2007 04:25 PM
Tyre Traction compounds etc Got Xray? Australian Racing 29 08-13-2006 06:24 AM
Traction Compounds Questions DiegoVVRacing Electric On-Road 3 11-23-2004 02:14 AM
what ingredients go into traction compounds ark Electric On-Road 0 05-05-2004 07:49 AM
Traction Compounds for Parking Lots Jared Kirkwood Electric On-Road 16 06-05-2002 09:06 PM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 10:28 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net