R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-10-2006, 04:20 PM   #31
Tech Elite
 
Francis M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 4,719
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Ambient temps is always a factor and i'm sure thats part of the reason for multiple fans but there is no denying that the new cells are creating a lot more heat.

Terry its nice to know your esc will handle a 6 cell low turn mod combo but I wonder if The MRT would hold up just as well under the performance criteria the A main drivers were putting thier equipment through at the worlds?
Francis M. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 04:24 PM   #32
Tech Master
 
DerekB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T. Hodge
The reason that 4 or 5 cells was brought up was simply to reduce the heat issues we are experiencing in TC racing with 6 cells. There was not a decision made just an idea brought up. In A2 Hohwart was leading and his ESC shut off. Also in A2 Drescher's speedo went into thermal shutdown. Also the concern is that the cars are too fast. It is hard for people to drive these cars at the speeds they are going today. With that being said, it is hard for new comers to jump into the sport and have the ability to drive a car that goes 45-50mph.
The Worlds isn't for newcomers and also isn't that what's great about electric is that you can run stock or 19-turn?

Rick had one problem the entire time, and brushless is still figuring things out when it comes to heat.

Limiting the world is dumb...how do you sell slower? The whole appeal of RC is that it is fast, so now you want to sell slow? Novak tried that and didn't do well until they have faster brushless. I agree that speeds are hard for new people and that's why Nitro touring never took off, but why is it hard to tell people to work their way up? I think that's more an issue of racing not supporting the new guys in racing, not that racing in it's highest form is too hard? Is that really what you're saying is that it's hard to control a car at 40?
__________________
Velocity RC Magazine
www.vrcmag.com
DerekB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 04:28 PM   #33
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 30
Default

even if we get rid of a cell or 2, we are just going to get faster and faster. a while back, every one in off road was running 7 cells. now its 6 and we are way faster. once we are running 5 or 4 cells, we will find a way to go faster, and we will be in the same spot as we are now.
Fantomcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 04:29 PM   #34
Tech Master
 
DerekB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,421
Default

I'd also like to say that there were complaints of tires not being good enough for the speeds, but this is a direct result of "spec tires" were racing on tires that we're designed to be good years ago and nobody cares.

If there was a rule tires had to be run for ALL of qualifying I bet you see tires that last...and if they couldn't, learning to slow down to make all of qualifying would be a better "restriction" than saying we need to limit the batteries.

Also, like I voiced their, limiting voltage to 6v or less is a slick way for battery companies to push LIPO technology out of racing...something to think about.
__________________
Velocity RC Magazine
www.vrcmag.com
DerekB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 04:32 PM   #35
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 30
Default

hmm, in 5 or so years, ill bet that tc and off road will be 4cell, and 1/12th will be two. haha
Fantomcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 04:47 PM   #36
Tech Master
 
DerekB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,421
Default

In 5 years if we aren't running some form of LIPO/Nano battery we have a serious issue.
__________________
Velocity RC Magazine
www.vrcmag.com
DerekB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 04:49 PM   #37
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 902
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis M.
Terry its nice to know your esc will handle a 6 cell low turn mod combo but I wonder if The MRT would hold up just as well under the performance criteria the A main drivers were putting thier equipment through at the worlds?
Francis M. I'm just stating a fact. I know what is possible with ESC designs and these days it's not easy to 'up the spec' of the MOSFETs on a speedo to make special ones for the A main drivers at the worlds. I know our current MX speedo is very good and that we can (and will shortly) have twice as many FETs in the same sized speedo case which is itself already a very small size. We have a ESC fan and heatsink due out but we're in no rush as we don't need either yet. What I'm saying is it is possible but it would add to the cost to manufacture a speedo with that many 'world best' FETs. As I said if it's what people want it can and will be done by MRT and other ESC manufacturers.

I'm in favour of anything that will encourage more people to race rc cars. If we all (manufacturers/racers/organisers) can come up with some good proposals and they are agreed I will support them. We need solutions that will be popular and encourage more newcomers to race.
Terry_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 05:12 PM   #38
Tech Master
 
johnbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Malta. G.C.
Posts: 1,762
Default

I totally disagree with any dumbing down.

To say that the rules need to be addressed because the cars are too fast is an insult to the 10 brilliant racers who made the A final at the worlds.

They don't think they are too fast, and they proved it. Andy Moore was in complete control. Granted there aren't many drivers of Andy's calibre, but that's why he's world champion and we are not.

In any case, more restrictions will end up with more costs because at the end of the day everyone is constantly trying to find ways to go faster, no matter what the cost.

Touring car racing is still on the increase all over the world. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
johnbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 05:26 PM   #39
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 271
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbull
I

They don't think they are too fast, and they proved it. Andy Moore was in complete control. Granted there aren't many drivers of Andy's calibre, but that's why he's world champion and we are not.
John I'm sorry but one current world champion told me exactly that at the weekend.

Ignoring the Thermaling, one of the things that struck me at the Worlds were the ammount of cars breaking down mechanically.

with the speeds and acceleration now avaliable most accidents resulted in something breaking - be it a wishbone, or hub or belt, and these were the best drivers in the world.

It is hard to beef the cars up any more as they need to make the weight limit, and with all the extra cooling appendages not many cars were carrying much lead.
exint2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 05:28 PM   #40
Tech Master
 
DerekB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,421
Default

[QUOTE=exint2]
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbull
I

They don't think they are too fast, and they proved it. Andy Moore was in complete control. Granted there aren't many drivers of Andy's calibre, but that's why he's world champion and we are not.QUOTE]

John I'm sorry but one current world champion told me exactly that at the weekend.

Ignoring the Thermaling, one of the things that struck me at the Worlds were the ammount of cars breaking down mechanically.

with the speeds and acceleration now avaliable most accidents resulted in something breaking - be it a wishbone, or hub or belt, and these were the best drivers in the world.

It is hard to beef the cars up any more as they need to make the weight limit, and with all the extra cooling appendages not many cars were carrying much lead.

Crashing = breaking. That's how it goes. IF your car breaks belts then it's too thin and needs to be thicker or better material, same with most other parts. But if you crash on this track the permanent walls break things easy.
__________________
Velocity RC Magazine
www.vrcmag.com
DerekB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 05:41 PM   #41
Tech Champion
 
AdrianM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,914
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Derekb - Every form of full scale unlimited racing has self destructed (GTP, Group C Rally,...). Every form of intelligently controlled racing has prospered (F-1, NASCAR,...). On the R/C side 1/10th pan cars selfdestructed. At the Worlds in Yatabe the best drivers in the world voted not to race 1/10th anymore because it was too fast to control and race cleanly. Without intervention sedans will end up the same.

Dan Hughes - You say things like "testing and "they". Who are they and what did they test? I know Mike Reedy did a lot testing, so have several hundred US oval racers and guess what "They" say....motors and batteries last WAY longer on 4 cells than 6 cells. There was tremendous resistance to the switch to 4 cell in the oval comunity. They said all the same stuff everyone here is saying. Today you can't find an oval guy that will say it was a bad idea. They are back to the speeds they were running with 6 cells in all classes (due to lower minimum weights and motor development) and everything last longer...motors, packs, tires, cars, etc.

In Japan the dominant class is 6 cell 23T stock. The only time anyone runs 4 cell Mod is at JRMCA Nats. Most of the guys that complain about it have never run it. The really fast guys are not running 4T and 5T motors. These motors are on the borderline of being so inefficient that they dont make good power. Most of the really fast guys are running 6T with more timing.
__________________
Adrian Martinez
What I run: Schumacher Mi5/Associated RC10R5.1/Associated RC12R5.2/Futaba/HobbyWing/Team EA Motorsports/BSR Racing
Where I run: Florida Indoor R/C Complex/Thunder Racing/Florida On Road State Series
AdrianM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 05:53 PM   #42
Tech Master
 
DerekB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianM
Derekb - Every form of full scale unlimited racing has self destructed (GTP, Group C Rally,...). Every form of intelligently controlled racing has prospered (F-1, NASCAR,...).
.
That is because they aren't consumer driven. If the products being raced were the same a consumer would buy it wouldn't be the same. They are spending 100s of million in racing with no return. In RC having better products means customers get better product.

F1 really is UNLIMITED, and they have to develope stuff that works and is safe for humans. Example, when they went to spec tire having one tire per race they had way more failure (dumb rule) and changed it back to no tire control. They are switching to one tire and Michellin declinded to be in the bid because they wanted competition in racing...not the same tire.

Advantages to win are in lots of products and not just tires.Like the Reedy race that limited winds to 10-turn you saw EVERY motor blow up..because they were pushed too hard. Stock racing you need the best batteries, mod you need the best motor.

It seems like complaining "it's too fast" means people are racing above their capability. Are the mod cars fast? Hell yes, but why we want to limit things at the top is counter productive in a consumer driven market. We're not racing drivers we are racings consumers can buy. And as a consumber I want an advantage that makes me win. People who say they want "racing to be closer" are kidding themselves. If I could buy a tire that made me faster, or a ESC I wouldn't care if I was winning every week and everybody else was slow. It's OPEN mod. Control racing is stock, or 19T where if they are limiting things what battery, motor, brush, or IROC totally??? Because we as competitors want to win and we look for that advantage.

People cried about brushed being used up after a run...but guess who did that? We did. Now we're going to fast in modified? People watching F1 or indy won't notice a 20mph reduction in speed, but in RC we are racing and going slower or trying to make a car go slower because one product, or one manufacture can't keep something from blowing up is the worst exuse I've heard. If you can sell "slow" let me know....I know lots of companies sell speed. I never hear anybody complaining that RTR being marketed to go 70mph broke too much for that kid who bought it for his first car.
__________________
Velocity RC Magazine
www.vrcmag.com
DerekB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 06:00 PM   #43
Tech Master
 
DerekB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,421
Default

Oddly enough at the Reedy race there wasn't talk of slowing the cars down from racers or breaking (even with many prototype brushless arms having issues).

Here's an idea of how fast they were at the Reedy...overhead Heli-cam

http://www.rc411.com/pages/xstream.php

Click on the Reedy Race footage.
__________________
Velocity RC Magazine
www.vrcmag.com
DerekB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 06:25 PM   #44
Tech Elite
 
Francis M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 4,719
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry_S
Francis M. I'm just stating a fact. I know what is possible with ESC designs and these days it's not easy to 'up the spec' of the MOSFETs on a speedo to make special ones for the A main drivers at the worlds. I know our current MX speedo is very good and that we can (and will shortly) have twice as many FETs in the same sized speedo case which is itself already a very small size. We have a ESC fan and heatsink due out but we're in no rush as we don't need either yet. What I'm saying is it is possible but it would add to the cost to manufacture a speedo with that many 'world best' FETs. As I said if it's what people want it can and will be done by MRT and other ESC manufacturers.

I'm in favour of anything that will encourage more people to race rc cars. If we all (manufacturers/racers/organisers) can come up with some good proposals and they are agreed I will support them. We need solutions that will be popular and encourage more newcomers to race.


Good to hear Terry S, thanks for the reply.
Francis M. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2006, 06:27 PM   #45
Tech Elite
 
dr_hfuhuhurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Westchester, NY
Posts: 4,503
Trader Rating: 75 (100%+)
Default

Derek B --

Agree 100%. Though, I think 70mph RTR's is a good idea. let evolution work

Please don't make the "unlimited" class in racing dumb enough for the dumbest kid in class.
__________________
"There is a fine line between hobby and mental illness. Which side are you on?"

“Life is hard; it's harder if you're stupid.” - John Wayne
dr_hfuhuhurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2006 Ifmar 1/12th & 1/10th Istc Electric On-road World Championships – Danny Teh Malaysian R/C Racers 1 02-16-2005 10:38 AM
2006 Ifmar 1/12th & 1/10th Istc Electric On-road World Championships phlim Singapore R/C Racers 3 02-16-2005 09:52 AM
2004 IFMAR ISTC & 1/12th On Road Worlds at Full Throttle Speedway AdrianM Electric On-Road 2162 12-29-2004 04:09 AM
2004 IFMAR 1/12th and 1/10th ISTC ELECTRIC TRACK WORLD CHAMPINSHIPS Marcos.J Electric On-Road 55 02-10-2004 09:05 AM
2003 Ifmar ISTC 1/10 on road???? Wilfred Electric On-Road 2 09-01-2003 05:39 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 11:45 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