R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-25-2006, 06:11 PM   #376
Tech Elite
 
HarshGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Roseville, CA
Posts: 3,379
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B
HarshGuy

It seem you have prooved what a lot of people are saying.
4 cell is slower and takes a lot more out of cells.

The thing is people want to go fast and will do what they can to achieve this. Thats why we get motors and speedos packing up. Using less cells will only help for a short time until racers are pushing things to the limits and beyond with 4 cell. So I think reducung the cells will only put the problem on hold so such a major change is just daft.
Correct, it is what I *assumed* as well, however I had people pm'ing and saying that it is almost as fast ...so I wanted to prove it for myself. One thing I did discover is that it will take equipment changes for sure e.g. the discharge bulb setup, spintech, depending on which motor you run you may not be able to gear low enough e.g. if I was to use my redline 19T's (Orion Top based) I would have to gear at 4.05 , which would require a 57 tooth pinion with my existing 102 tooth spur ...or somehing like a 80 tooth spur with a 45 tooth pinion ...both of which I don't know if my MRE is physically cabaple of doing?
__________________
http://www.arroyoc.com
http://www.gearchart.com
http://www.weracemountainbikes.com
HarshGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 06:17 PM   #377
Tech Elite
 
trackdesigner71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lynchburg/Portsmouth, VA
Posts: 4,979
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to trackdesigner71 Send a message via Yahoo to trackdesigner71
Default

I was actually just about to reup my ROAR membership after letting it lapse for 3 years, but if this rule goes into effect I may change my mind
trackdesigner71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 06:23 PM   #378
Tech Champion
 
C_O_jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Wa.
Posts: 9,055
Trader Rating: 11 (100%+)
Default

Thanks for the test Harsh,
That would bring stock right in line with the Tamiya 540 silver can class, whoohooooo!

Lets see now, you can run a 540 silver can motor that costs $18. needs no com lathe or new brushes and can now compete with a 6 cell batt pac that will last you a lot of races, in stock. Now theres a cost cutter!!!!!!!! Unless of course you want to run a roar stock motor with 4 cells that will get used up in a few runs.

What a great solution.
__________________
Bacon is Meat Candy
C_O_jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 06:26 PM   #379
Super Moderator
 
Marcos.J's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Semper Fi
Posts: 27,200
Trader Rating: 182 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HarshGuy
OK guys, after a day of testing at the track ...here's the "best times":

6 cell stock - 6.77 FDR - Fast Heat 18 5:08 - Fast Lap 16.1
4 cell stock - 5.29 FDR - Fast Heat 17 5:14 - Fast Lap 17.8

6 cell 19T - 6.56 FDR - Fast Heat 19 5:13 - Fast Lap 15.7
4 cell 19T - 4.99 FDR - Fast Heat 18 5:17 - Fast Lap 16.2

6 cell Brushless (Novak 4300) - 5.46 FDR - Fast Heat 19 5:05 - Fast Lap 15.4

...didn't have a big enough pinion/small enough spur to get the FDR I needed for a 4 cell.

Quite literally 4 cell 19T felt like 6 cell stock, 6 cell stock was just painfully slow *if* this rule was to go into place, I know I personally would not want to run 4 cell stock period. Another thing to add, I realized as we were running this excersise, that my lightbulb discharge jig would not work with the 4 cell pack as it has a 5.4 cutoff box on it, and my spintech would not work on it either.
thats not bad at all for the first time, I bet within a week or so you will be turning the same if not faster laps. Im testing 19t and stock but for 19 im in the 4.5 fdr range and its pretty close tp 6 cells

in mod with 4 cells i got the 3.5 geared at a 7.8 fdr, and Adrian ran it last night he can tell you how fast that car was.
Marcos.J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 06:36 PM   #380
Tech Elite
 
HarshGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Roseville, CA
Posts: 3,379
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C_O_jones
Thanks for the test Harsh,
That would bring stock right in line with the Tamiya 540 silver can class, whoohooooo!

Lets see now, you can run a 540 silver can motor that costs $18. needs no com lathe or new brushes and can now compete with a 6 cell batt pac that will last you a lot of races, in stock. Now theres a cost cutter!!!!!!!! Unless of course you want to run a roar stock motor with 4 cells that will get used up in a few runs.

What a great solution.
Yep, actually that is a good comparison, my son, who is starting to get into the hobby has a TA05 with one of those mabuchi cans and that is what the 4 cell stock felt like.
__________________
http://www.arroyoc.com
http://www.gearchart.com
http://www.weracemountainbikes.com
HarshGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 06:38 PM   #381
Tech Elite
 
HarshGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Roseville, CA
Posts: 3,379
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcos.J
thats not bad at all for the first time, I bet within a week or so you will be turning the same if not faster laps. Im testing 19t and stock but for 19 im in the 4.5 fdr range and its pretty close tp 6 cells

in mod with 4 cells i got the 3.5 geared at a 7.8 fdr, and Adrian ran it last night he can tell you how fast that car was.
Same can be argued with the 6 cell times as I did NO TUNNING to the car at all between the 2 in order to try and do a "fair comparison" ...the track was only blown off no traction sauce layed (as it's to cold and it would not have dried in any kind of reasonable time). I don't thing you can draw parallels with mod, all you really need to do with mod is throw a lower wind in there, we can't do that in stock and 19T.
__________________
http://www.arroyoc.com
http://www.gearchart.com
http://www.weracemountainbikes.com
HarshGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 06:40 PM   #382
Super Moderator
 
Marcos.J's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Semper Fi
Posts: 27,200
Trader Rating: 182 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HarshGuy
Same can be argued with the 6 cell times as I did NO TUNNING to the car at all between the 2 in order to try and do a "fair comparison" ...the track was only blown off no traction sauce layed (as it's to cold and it would not have dried in any kind of reasonable time). I don't thing you can draw parallels with mod, all you really need to do with mod is throw a lower wind in there, we can't do that in stock and 19T.
did you change your set up? balanced the car? I changed the set up and electronics layout and the times are fast! Just got to make a few changes to the car.
Marcos.J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 07:10 PM   #383
Tech Elite
 
vtl1180ny's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Wrong Island
Posts: 4,963
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jiml
First of all, there hasn't been any vote on this yet.

Second, I doubt the ExComm is doing this on blind speculation. Someone somewhere said something to someone that this might be worth considering.

And it's not being forced down anyone's throat. A ROAR decision will only affect ROAR races. As everyone keeps pointing out most electric racers don't belong to ROAR. If your track wants to run 6 cell, they most certainly can.

And finally, as the recent ROAR election proves, the majority of ROAR members DON'T read rctech.
When the rule changes (and it will since we know there's at least 1 vote for it on the Excom) and the manufactures only make cars with slots for 4 cells it certainly will be rammed down our throats...

Sorry you didn't get your spot in ROAR...
__________________
I still lurk....
vtl1180ny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 07:29 PM   #384
Tech Elite
 
SWTour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Central Coast...CALIF.
Posts: 2,873
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

Harsh,

Great test results, and I encourage you to do a few more. Using notes as a starting point to see how much better you can make both on a given day.

Looking at your numbers I see you only geared the stock ratio up about 20% vs. the 33 % RPM drop you'd have dropping 2 cells.

In testing I've been involved w/ a common mistake people make is being afraid to gear UP taller. (Usually 10 - 12 teeth over 6 cell)

The biggest downside I've felt w/ 4 cell is the lack of RIP off the corners. It forces you to become a better and smoother driver because you don't have the ballistic speeds on the straights to make up time.

I've seen Lap Times get really close w/ 4 cell stock, but the car did feel like (Yawn) I'll go for a beer while the car is going down the straight away...but the lack of WASTED momentum cause the lap times to be a lot closer than people thought.

I guess one of the questions that needs to be asked...(The SPEEDFREAKS won't like) is Does a car under better control make better racing?

In this hobby, you have guys who LIKE TO RACE and guys who LIKE TO GO FAST. The guys who like to go fast want to BEAT YOU with SPEED and usually could care less about RACING YOU door to door, or side by side...where the guys who LIKE TO RACE want to edge you out with a smoother pass in a corner and out drive you.
__________________
Joe Myers
R/C Racing since 1985 ~ Santa Maria, CA (Central Coast)
2001-2012 - South-West Tour R/C Oval Series...will the SWT be revived?
Things are headed towards a return of the SWT Series, but for
2017 the focus will be on the Encino Velodrome (and dirt oval racing)
SWTour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 07:39 PM   #385
Tech Elite
 
Bob-Stormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glasgow, Montana USA
Posts: 3,518
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

For the sake of targeting this conversation / debate.

What we DO NOT know is what might be ROAR's thinking on this. What is the rationale? And are there more ways to solve what is considered to be the problem. AND, as yet, we don't actually "REALLY" know what they feel the problem is.
__________________
www.stormerhobbies.com "Where the world shops for radio control."
www.facebook.com/stormerhobbies
www.twitter.com/stormerhobbies

looking for....vintage 1/10-1/12 pan, need Schumacher 1/12th cars and parts.
Bob-Stormer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 07:54 PM   #386
Tech Elite
 
Bob-Stormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glasgow, Montana USA
Posts: 3,518
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Want to have some fun, and this is for the sake of debate.

I feel that most people that race are interested in maximizing their track time, and eventually run more than one class. Before we had 19t, if you simply wanted to run touring, you HAD to run stock and mod.

Now with 19t, fast guys wanting to run two touring cars can run mod and 19t. The guys that are not as interested in the additional speed and work (but still want to run 2 classes) can run stock and 19t, and get the chance to play with some of the 19t guys and mix it up a bit.

That's been a good compromise.

BUT, now average Joe racers are noticing that they can run VERY competetively in mod with the 19t motor. It's because the average guy, really can't use the extra power to it's potential, and the gap was so small, that even a pro is only gonna see a 2 lap difference between 19t and mod.

I think it's fair to say that, FOR THE MOST PART. Given a reasonable driver, MOd is fastest, 19t ends up 2 laps back, and stock ends up 2 laps behind 19t. That's a pretty fair generalization for the sake of debate.

What we really need to find is how to let mod be a balls out class, (IT'S MOD FOR PETE SAKE), let 19t fill the intermediate, and stock be the place for the newer guys or the guys that don't have big wallets or all the spare time required. So, how do we do that? I'm thinking we need to open the gap up. 2 laps is to close.

What if mod were the fastest, 19t was 3 laps back, and stock was 3 more back of 19t? Meaning that likely, you could not win mod with your 19t at a club race, and that seems like a good thing. And NO WAY could you put your stock car in the 19t show. etc... etc..

As is now, the spread is close enough, that you can run a class up. And stock is fast enough that people don't want to leave stock.

Possible solution, Leave mod, and slow down 19 and stock, just a shade. Just like when mod was 7 cells back in the day for offroad and stock was 6 cells. Perhaps Mod touring should be the balls out class on 6 cells. 19t and stock could drop to 5 cell. This would slow stock to what needs to occur, and allow for growth to 19t, and we still have mod to help develop new and more powerful stuff, and give the more money than brains racers a place to play.

<---President of the more money than brains racers club.

My son, knows he can turn faster laps by dropping a few pinion teeth or motoring down in mod. He's just not interested, and does not care if his laps might be slower. He simply wants to haul BUTT!!! And I'm kind of there with him.

If the eventual gap between stock and 19t was 3 laps (instead of 2), and the gap between 19t and mod was 3 laps (instead of 2), I think you might find the answers some of us are looking for. As is, 2 laps, is simply, to close.

Others are suggesting limiting mod, I am suggesting limiting everything BUT mod. We need a place for that kind of power and development, and by the same token, we need to slow down the entry level class, just a tick. This is s surprisingly good solution if you let it sit on you for a while.

Mind you, we still do not know what ROAR is thinking... And it's been duly noted that at least one member of the ROAR excomm is in favor of a cell reduction, so don't assume something major won't happen. If you have an opinion, speak up, and write some people. AND MORE IMPORTANTLY THAN FINGER POINTING, consider some solutions and participate in some conversations.
__________________
www.stormerhobbies.com "Where the world shops for radio control."
www.facebook.com/stormerhobbies
www.twitter.com/stormerhobbies

looking for....vintage 1/10-1/12 pan, need Schumacher 1/12th cars and parts.

Last edited by Bob-Stormer; 11-25-2006 at 08:04 PM.
Bob-Stormer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 08:06 PM   #387
Tech Elite
 
Bob-Stormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glasgow, Montana USA
Posts: 3,518
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Thousands of people are likely to come up with a better more agreeable solution than say 4 or 5.

What is an effective way to slow down the new guys but not hurt racing as a whole?

Not sure that is the question, but it seems reasonable to start there.


<---My indian name is "types like the wind"...
__________________
www.stormerhobbies.com "Where the world shops for radio control."
www.facebook.com/stormerhobbies
www.twitter.com/stormerhobbies

looking for....vintage 1/10-1/12 pan, need Schumacher 1/12th cars and parts.
Bob-Stormer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 08:07 PM   #388
Tech Elite
 
ottoman's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: wisconsin
Posts: 2,761
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

I quit oval after the 4 cell fiasco... tried to make it fun but it was just too darn slow and this was a direct drive pan car!! not a heavy inefficient touring car.. I dont even want to think how much fun will be lost in stock and 19t with a 4 cell
Well at least (indoor) off road is getting bigger around here... and will get real big if ROAR follows through.
ottoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 08:07 PM   #389
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 223
Default

Sounds like the test results are pretty close to what I would have hoped. Stock slowed down to where people capable of running 19t or Mod won't want to run it!

In watching newer drivers (including my son) attempt to pilot these little missiles, less punch off the corners is a great benefit to a reduced number of cells. Too many racers can blow a corner and then accelerate like they were launched from an aircraft carrier... usually right into a board or another car that ran the correct line through the turn.


I don't believe all of these doom and gloom beliefs that new equipment will be required and costs will go up. Sure, those of us who have existing equipment would need to replace a few items, but that's just part of the cost of racing. Chargers, speed controls and radio equipment WON'T be affected. Dischargers and possibly chassis might require updates. Many of us already upgrade items like this anyway, so I don't think this will be a huge obstacle.

The one problem we will run into will be during the changeover process. There will be a time when racers show up with old 6-cell packs. The RTR guys already have a problem because the kits often come with a funky motor that isn't legal in stock. It's just part of the pain we will have to endure. But, it will pass.


Whatever the change is, something needs to be done. I want to see our on-road racing grow instead of shrink.
gotpez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 08:08 PM   #390
Tech Regular
 
T. Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 380
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob-Stormer
For the sake of targeting this conversation / debate.

What we DO NOT know is what might be ROAR's thinking on this. What is the rationale? And are there more ways to solve what is considered to be the problem. AND, as yet, we don't actually "REALLY" know what they feel the problem is.
Actually I would bet most of the problem with electronics is AMP DRAW and with wear is the speeds at which we are reaching due to the more powerful higher amp pulling motors. Back in 89-90 when I started we had stock motors with full stack armatures using standard sized STAND UP brushes with 24-44 degrees of timing(different timings to choose from for club racing) and they lasted for a long time compared to todays stock motors which allow you to tear down and cut the comms(which these did not have) and they were WAY slower than todays motors. I would bet that if someone had one of these motors, they would not be anywhere near as fast on the track as todays stock motors, not to mention you would not even be coming close to putting a dent on the battery capacity(could probably use the same battery charge for all 3 quals and the mains). Then look at mod motors, back in the early 90s the popular wind for local factory drivers were 10 quads in 2wd offroad, today they would not even consider that wind for it is way too much power, for a 13 turn would be just as fast and easier to control with the tracks having more traction and the tire compounds of today being far superior. People say the motor tech is old, but it has been pushed beyond their ability and perfected beyond their design, don't get me wrong, they are basically held back from major changes for improvement but they are nothing like when they were when the rules were written and are performing beyond their design. These greater AMPS they pull and the power that comes from this greater ability to use the amps more efficiently, is in my opinion, what is the leading cause of all the electronic failures, equipment wear, and most peoples cause form motor failures in outdoor asphalt racing(due to being used beyond their design). But until a manufacturer puts out the money to take a chance at giving some true data that shows how changing the motors design will help, motor and electronic failure will almost always be a problem unless you remove the motor issues(which some people feel reducing voltage will cure this until a better solution can be found by the motor companies or electronics companies). Only thing that is a true bonus to reducing voltage really is the reduce in wear of the chassis parts due to less weight from the loss of two cells(the reduction in motor wear will be a bonus unless people move from a 9 turn to a 6 turn and gear to the moon, but wont be that much of an improvement).

Again, this is my view on this and only my opinion.
T. Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
5 cell Stock for the ROAR Onroad Nat's? C_O_jones Electric On-Road 75 06-21-2007 07:38 PM
F/S: Glow plug igniter, gel cell charger, gel cell, camber guage and car stand PD2 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 18 05-21-2007 04:07 PM
Opinions on ROAR 4-Cell Rule ShaunMac Georgia Racing 12 11-29-2006 06:54 AM
ROAR - 4 cell for all touring HarshGuy Electric On-Road 17 11-23-2006 10:59 AM
non-roar bodies faster than roar? imjonah Electric On-Road 5 05-13-2005 07:40 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 01:31 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