ROAR B/L motor Rules debate thread
01-08-2008, 09:20 PM
#691
I didn't say 4 turns was a "huge difference" I said significant...please look those 2 words up.
Now...lastly...13.5 and 10.5 times at SIR are significant...ask those that run both....IMO significant is .4 or more...you tell me what it is for you.
Fred...check Jon Sterlings times on the same layout on 13.5 and 10.5 BOTH RUBBER. He is the ROAR masters champion as you know...his times tell you the difference you need to see. Over .4 difference 3 weeks ago to 2 weeks ago on the same layout.
edit...
Here...let me help...he was running rubber in the foam class...ask him if you want.
http://www.seattleindoorraceway.com/...s_A-Main-3.pdf
http://www.seattleindoorraceway.com/...m_A-Main-3.pdf
Last edited by Verndog; 01-08-2008 at 09:45 PM.
01-08-2008, 09:21 PM
#692
Since everyone likes or thinks everything should be compared to each other...
How about the comparison of a 13 TURN Modified Motor to a 10 TURN modified motor.
HOW CLOSE are those? (Forget the fact they are both MODIFIED)
How much FASTER is a 10x1 MOD compared to a 13x1 MOD?
(Remember the days when people ran those winds instead of the 6x1's??)
On the brushless motors - if you look at the Kv ratings on motors like the 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, 6.5, 7.5, 8.5 and chart the difference for EVERY additional wind, you will see that from a 10.5 to a 13.5 isn't all that much difference in Kv or in WATT Output. Based on that info alone, it should be pretty obvious that speeds wouldn't be that far apart.
The difference from a 3.5 to a 4.5 I believe is greater than the difference in the 10.5 to the 13.5.
I wanted to post the numbers on the NOVAK site, because I know some people have never really seen anything that compares the different brushless motors.
WATTS 8.5 - 21.5 Motors
8.5 - 225 (#3408)
10.5 - 195 (#3410)
13.5 - 165 (#3413)
17.5 - 130 (#3417)
21.5 - 85 (#3421)
Kv (RPM per volt 'unloaded') 3.5 - 21.5 Motors
3.5 - 10,500 (#3403) +70,000 RPM's on a 7.2 volt pack (unloaded)
4.5 - 9,000 (#3404)
5.5 - 7,400 (#3405)
6.5 - 6,400 (#3406)
7.5 - 5,800 (#3407)
8.5 - 5,000 (#3408)
10.5 - 4,200 (#3410)
13.5 - 3,300 (#3413) approx 24,000 on a 7.2 volt pack(unloaded)
17.5 - 2,200 (#3417)
21.5 - 1,800 (#3421)
How about the comparison of a 13 TURN Modified Motor to a 10 TURN modified motor.
HOW CLOSE are those? (Forget the fact they are both MODIFIED)
How much FASTER is a 10x1 MOD compared to a 13x1 MOD?
(Remember the days when people ran those winds instead of the 6x1's??)
On the brushless motors - if you look at the Kv ratings on motors like the 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, 6.5, 7.5, 8.5 and chart the difference for EVERY additional wind, you will see that from a 10.5 to a 13.5 isn't all that much difference in Kv or in WATT Output. Based on that info alone, it should be pretty obvious that speeds wouldn't be that far apart.
The difference from a 3.5 to a 4.5 I believe is greater than the difference in the 10.5 to the 13.5.
I wanted to post the numbers on the NOVAK site, because I know some people have never really seen anything that compares the different brushless motors.
WATTS 8.5 - 21.5 Motors
8.5 - 225 (#3408)
10.5 - 195 (#3410)
13.5 - 165 (#3413)
17.5 - 130 (#3417)
21.5 - 85 (#3421)
Kv (RPM per volt 'unloaded') 3.5 - 21.5 Motors
3.5 - 10,500 (#3403) +70,000 RPM's on a 7.2 volt pack (unloaded)
4.5 - 9,000 (#3404)
5.5 - 7,400 (#3405)
6.5 - 6,400 (#3406)
7.5 - 5,800 (#3407)
8.5 - 5,000 (#3408)
10.5 - 4,200 (#3410)
13.5 - 3,300 (#3413) approx 24,000 on a 7.2 volt pack(unloaded)
17.5 - 2,200 (#3417)
21.5 - 1,800 (#3421)
01-08-2008, 09:58 PM
#694
What people forget is that if your local club is running a 13.5 class, and it's just more than you can hang onto, there's nothing stopping you from strapping in a 15.5 or a 17.5 and giving it a shot. You're only goal is to turn your fastest laps, not Mike Blackstock's... Nobody has ever complained that a competitor strapped in less horsepower.
01-08-2008, 10:23 PM
#696
I don't want to have to slow down just because some other guy can't drive his car a couple of inches from the dots with the motor he is running. I put in a lot of time to be able to hit my marks, and it may be wrong of me to say it, but maybe the other guys should just practice more.
Formula 1...very few guys even CAN do it, pack WAY strung out
A1-GP...more guys at this level, still pretty elite...pack closer together
Formula Mazda...LOTS of guys at this level, 2-3 wide (or at least trying to) in the turns, "pack" is just that...a PACK.
We found the same thing in motorcycles, slot cars and have seen it in RC. No one wants to "go slower", but the FACT is that the racing is much more competitive.
PLUS you create an opportunity to have a class that a novice can run in, seeded with the slower drivers in the class. Even at bigger permanent tracks I've been to novice drivers never show up en-masse with enough of 'em to have a dedicated Novice class. Now think about the small clubs (like, say, ours) which are the bread and butter of ROAR. We NEVER have more than 2 novice drivers. And they don't stick around either because they get tired of bashing their car back into kit form each and every heat they're out there. To Bob's point earlier there is NOTHING keeping them from bolting in less power, fewer cells, etc BUT THEY WON'T DO IT. Goodness knows we've tried. They'll do it for a heat, until they get passed by someone on the straight, at which point they're CONVINCED that the reason they got beat was not enough horsepower. Never mind that guy who lucked into passing them broke his car in half on the barrier at the next turn, that ain't what Mr. Newbie sees. Re-engineering the "lowest power" class to a truly "low" power class creates the rule framework needed to save the newbie driver from his worst enemy--himself.
AND, if you can't stand the added competition in a POSSIBLY slightly de-powered class there is always whatever the replacement for 19T ends up being.
01-09-2008, 03:28 AM
#697
Just to weigh in on some 4 cell 1/12th 21.5 testing. I tested one tonight (600 laps worth). started rolled out 58.5 on a small track with a 42mm tire. Needs more gear. ended up running a 48mm tire as we don't even stock spurs smaller than 88 (we're gonna have to stock 'em). I kinda like 21.5. Need to find some spurs a fair amount smaller than 88. Will have data later.
I'll start a thread for it, for those that are interested. Don't want to muddy this thread. It's cool information.
I've got a lot of mabuchi testing, and 8.5 testing to compare this 21.5 to.
Gimmee a day to get it sorted. it's gonna be an interesting read.
I'll start a thread for it, for those that are interested. Don't want to muddy this thread. It's cool information.
I've got a lot of mabuchi testing, and 8.5 testing to compare this 21.5 to.
Gimmee a day to get it sorted. it's gonna be an interesting read.
01-09-2008, 04:34 AM
#699
I am not sure if this was aimed at me, but I was not getting defensively postured over anything. All I was saying is some people can't afford the motor of the week. When I got my 13.5 that was the most used motor in my area. I will get whatever motor is the right one for my track based on rules. It just would be nice to have a guidlines set by the major sanctioning body of our hobby. When that happens I think everything will settle into place and everyone will be able to comfortably buy the right motor for their needs without feeling it will be obslolet a week later.
I think the Novak race is a great starting point of data being it is the first all Brushless Race in TC. Alot can be learned from the data and talking with the participants of that race.
I think the Novak race is a great starting point of data being it is the first all Brushless Race in TC. Alot can be learned from the data and talking with the participants of that race.
01-09-2008, 07:15 AM
#700
Originally Posted by ASM
Some (that reads "some" not all) racers seem to looking after your own personal situation based on expenses already spent before any "official" rules were adopted ROAR, which is about to happen. You guys that spent money on 13.5's did it on your own free will.......this certainly was not forced due to rules nor a mass influx of the motor on your local scene and now there is a possibility that it may not be legal in some or all forms of 1/10th racing. Certainly ROAR is not to blame for this and they shouldn't be to blame if the rules don't come out in favor of the 13.5 motor.
.
Originally Posted by ASM
I've ran stock for many, many years from club races (at times, 4 week-ends a month) to lots of state races to several nationals (1997, 2005 on-road nats, 1999 and 2000 carpet nats) and the number of green machines, monsters, silver cans, CO27's, handouts, e-brushes, f-brushes, 4499's, putnam brushes, drilled brushes, slotted brushes.....and sometimes all of those combos in the same year......thank God for brushless!!!
Unless I can swap beers for motor tuning equipment/work..
Originally Posted by ASM
You mean to tell me the cost of buying one 17.5 which could last you for 1 or 2 years is worth getting so defensively postured over? Can we please think down the road on this subject and the good of the hobby instead of what you already have in your car...please...no one ever promised you a 13.5 or even a 10.5 for that matter would be deemed ROAR legal.
Originally Posted by ASM
Once again, these are guidelines of the Nats and you should have a voice in your local club racing. You can run whatever best suits your club. That's why it's a "club". It is encouraged by ROAR and its been said over and over.
Originally Posted by f1larry
I wasn't going to post anything in this thread but just keep watching everything that is being said, but I couldn't resist on piping in on a couple of issues being talked about.
1. Slowing the cars down. I don't think it is really about slowing the cars down but creating a more controlable speed for newbies to learn on and for experienced drivers to have closer competition. I think 1 thing everyone has forgotten about is the reason we all started doing this in the begining was to have fun. At trackside a class was developed to bring the fun back into the hobby Vintage Trans Am using 4 cells and a 27t motor. Newbies and experts alike have been building cars for this class and every week there is a minimum of 15 cars every tuesday. the racing is close and everyone is having fun.
2. Whether everyone admits it or not the average racer is on a budget and does not race at major races. but it is major races and ROAR that set the guidelines that most tracks use. This being said a decision needs to be made on basic rules because when someone like me has to support myself and my son I can't keep changing motors because a manufacturer introduced a different turn motor and now the local track wants to run that. Indecision and consistancy of rules is what is now hurting the hobby. It is kind of a hard pill to swallow when I finally was able to get a B/L 13.5 and then find out that might not be the motor for the stock class. I need to get my son a B/L and now I don't know which motor to get.
1. Slowing the cars down. I don't think it is really about slowing the cars down but creating a more controlable speed for newbies to learn on and for experienced drivers to have closer competition. I think 1 thing everyone has forgotten about is the reason we all started doing this in the begining was to have fun. At trackside a class was developed to bring the fun back into the hobby Vintage Trans Am using 4 cells and a 27t motor. Newbies and experts alike have been building cars for this class and every week there is a minimum of 15 cars every tuesday. the racing is close and everyone is having fun.
2. Whether everyone admits it or not the average racer is on a budget and does not race at major races. but it is major races and ROAR that set the guidelines that most tracks use. This being said a decision needs to be made on basic rules because when someone like me has to support myself and my son I can't keep changing motors because a manufacturer introduced a different turn motor and now the local track wants to run that. Indecision and consistancy of rules is what is now hurting the hobby. It is kind of a hard pill to swallow when I finally was able to get a B/L 13.5 and then find out that might not be the motor for the stock class. I need to get my son a B/L and now I don't know which motor to get.
and this is what THE WHOLE ENTIRE INDUSTRY IS ABOUT. While the majority of r/c was racing back in the day (70s/80s), Racing is somethin we get to do on the side anymore because JoeBob Company is making enough in parts/hop-ups and other stuff from the 70% of the cars that don't hit a track, that they can keep putting money towards it in sponsorships(driver/classes/races/advertsing/giveaways/etc). The industry has shifted and the racing/rules have to as well.
01-09-2008, 07:53 AM
#701
Johnny do our cars really need the extra capacity? Right now I can run a 100lap Oval shoot out race and still have 2000mah left in my 4200's. When our club does 1hour enduros, I normally can run 12 mins before my pace drops two tenths. Dumping should be part of racing, it would be the same as running out of fuel in NASCAR.
Also Johnny have you been to the LHS or Towerhobbies LiPO sections? Just look at all the various styles, sizes, capacities, casings, balance taps that are found there. If some rules do not laid down soon our R/C racing will become the wild wild east(China) of LiPO's and this will be very hard on the car manufactures and the racers to keep up with the constant changes.
By enforcing a cell size form factor this limits the chaos. Right now the rules are 22mm x 44mm AKA Sub-C. Unfortunately this size form factor is not available for Lithium batteries unless custom ordered which means more cost to racers.
For the switch to Lithium batteries I urge the use of common sense and use a form factor that is already used. Buy using batteries that other industries besides RC are developing and mass producing it will insure a more stable supply, more reliable cell, and cheaper battery for our HOBBY.
For 1:10 scales that would be 26mm x 65mm or the 26650 cells. For 1:12 the solution is not clear. There are CR123 (18 x 32mm) , 18650 (18 x65mm) and the 26650 cells that all can fit into the car. For continuity with 1:10 classes i would prefer just using two 26650 cells, but using four 18650 cells would work just as well. The CR123 cells may provide a more modular cell configuration but will require more expensive chargers and battery packs since the cell count would have to be 6 or 8 total cells. 1:18 scale cars could also use the 18650 cells, since they are about the same diameter as 2/3A batteries.
Also Johnny have you been to the LHS or Towerhobbies LiPO sections? Just look at all the various styles, sizes, capacities, casings, balance taps that are found there. If some rules do not laid down soon our R/C racing will become the wild wild east(China) of LiPO's and this will be very hard on the car manufactures and the racers to keep up with the constant changes.
By enforcing a cell size form factor this limits the chaos. Right now the rules are 22mm x 44mm AKA Sub-C. Unfortunately this size form factor is not available for Lithium batteries unless custom ordered which means more cost to racers.
For the switch to Lithium batteries I urge the use of common sense and use a form factor that is already used. Buy using batteries that other industries besides RC are developing and mass producing it will insure a more stable supply, more reliable cell, and cheaper battery for our HOBBY.
For 1:10 scales that would be 26mm x 65mm or the 26650 cells. For 1:12 the solution is not clear. There are CR123 (18 x 32mm) , 18650 (18 x65mm) and the 26650 cells that all can fit into the car. For continuity with 1:10 classes i would prefer just using two 26650 cells, but using four 18650 cells would work just as well. The CR123 cells may provide a more modular cell configuration but will require more expensive chargers and battery packs since the cell count would have to be 6 or 8 total cells. 1:18 scale cars could also use the 18650 cells, since they are about the same diameter as 2/3A batteries.
That was in reference to the fact that those cells are now getting close to the same weight as the NiMh equivelent, which has been a big discussion in trying to get ROAR to drop the minimum weight, which I don't support.
Same as I really am not in favor of the LiPo push either, I completely understand where its coming from, I just don't support it. It just opens up a whole new can of worms, that from what I've gathered, isn't worth all the effort. It seems like the issues with the last crop of NiMh batteries has pretty much died, so the lynch party to totally eliminate them should subside as well.
Its like buying that fancy new LED flashlight and then complaining to the factory that your latest brick pack won't fit in it, give it a break. It just floors me how many posts are people asking if this "square will fit in this round hole" (feel free to insert whatever LiPo pack name into "square" and whatever chassis brand into "round hole") Some things should just not change, and my feelings are, this is one of them, future or not, but thats just me.
01-09-2008, 08:17 AM
#702
[QUOTE=convikt;4054090]Id take that bet any day.
QUOTE]
Challenge accepted....if you still got a T/C
QUOTE]Challenge accepted....if you still got a T/C
01-09-2008, 08:38 AM
#704
, but you'll see me soon and well get it on
01-09-2008, 08:45 AM
#705