R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-02-2008, 09:55 PM   #91
Tech Champion
 
Scottrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 6,212
Trader Rating: 245 (100%+)
Default

Unfortunately Ike, as much as I agree with you, reducing cell count is going to be a developmental dead-end if LiPo is embraced. There just isn't the fine-adjustment capability when you're dealing with 3.7v cells vs. the 1.2v cells we've known and loved.
__________________
Congressmen should wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers so we can identify their corporate sponsors.

THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED -Gil Scott-Heron (1949-2011)
Scottrik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 09:56 PM   #92
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn Sanchez View Post
in all seriousness.. you guys aren't helping.

17.5 is ONE MFG... that's the problem I have with completely sanctioning a motor that says this...

whatever happened to the days of new = stock and a few weeks later when you conquered your first novice A main you moved to modified? LOL
I am absolutely thrilled to see a ROAR official saying this! (Even if there is a bit of sarcasm in it.)

I've been in this hobby for 18 years now. The speeds in every class have increased dramatically. I recently watched a video of a late 1980's modified 12th A Main from Cleveland and the stock motored cars today would have put a minimum of 5 laps on these professional drivers.

The interesting thing about all of this is that our hobby was absolutely THRIVING back then! Cars were slower and new drivers were able to get a basic handle on them in just a few weeks and some felt they were able to run modified. No matter how we stack the classes, the best drivers will be at the top.


What I see here is the ultimate opportunity for ROAR to bring the classes back to where they need to be for the health of our hobby. With the introduction of Brushless and LiPo, everything is changing. It's time we quit worrying about upsetting the existing racers because there aren't enough of them to keep many local tracks and hobby shops open. We need new racers, and slowing the cars down is one step we can take to bring them in.

By slowing the Stock class down, several things will be accomplished. New drivers will have a reasonable place to begin their racing careersand they will have cars running at a speed that supports a viable learning curve. It will also encourage long-time Stock racers to move up to a class more representative of their driving abilities. We can't force people out of Stock, but we can make it less appealing for them.

For 6-cell classes, I think the Stock class should be something slower than the current 17.5 motor. All of the stories I've heard state that 17.5 is extremely close to the average 27t brushed motor, which is too fast for about 50% of the drivers at many tracks.

This leaves the Intermediate Mod and Open Mod classes. The 10.5 or equivalent for Intermediate seems to be a very popular choice. There are several current brushless options for the Open Mod class.

As for LiPo... My only concern is for the 4-cell classes. The current cell designs don't allow for the flexibility for 4-cell voltage. If we need to move all cars to 7.4 volts, then another (slower) motor option will need to be available to allow the higher voltage in 12th scale (my favorite) and oval classes.


The real problem is going to be how ROAR handles approvals of future technology. How can we be assured that we don't go down the same path we did with brushed? Rules for approval must include some way to determine if a new motor (or battery) will drive the speeds of our cars too high and make our hobby nothing more than a faded memory.


I would like to thank everybody involved with ROAR. This is an extremely big task and one where you will undoubtedly upset a significant number of racers now matter what you decide.
__________________
______________________________
Jeff Gilligan
gotpez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 09:58 PM   #93
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chandler, Arizona
Posts: 3,273
Send a message via AIM to Dawn Sanchez
Default

well, obviously, lipo in 1/12th just isn't gonna work then..... Doesn't seem possible to me a one cell lipo being used in 1/12th scale...weight, balance and 3.7v?

Although, in all honesty, I'm not a 12th racer and I'm going on what I'm told with the above comment.

(Jeff, your post slipped in while I was typing.. this was not in response to yours above. )
Dawn Sanchez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:02 PM   #94
Tech Elite
 
SWTour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Central Coast...CALIF.
Posts: 2,873
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn Sanchez
Do we kill off stock by bringing in the 17.5 as the equivalent...
I think that is THE Big Question.

I know at our local on-road track last year...EVERY race we were asked "When can we switch to Brushless in STOCK"

The On-Road crowd seemed to really want to push the Brushless deal faster than ALL the other forms of racing.

Our OVAL guys were perfectly happy running BRUSHED motors - until a few of the cross over guys started wanting to play with brushless too. (That and a couple guys with TIES to MFGS wanting to push them)...oh and some ILLEGAL 13t 19t motors didn't help either...

We tried to stay away from BRUSHLESS until we had enough time to actually LEARN about them - instead of just JUMPING IN with the first thing we could get our hands on.

We only planned to offer (1) brushless class, but after running IT for a year - the guys running in the other classes started asking WHEN DO WE GET TO HAVE BRUSHLESS TOO? All it takes is seeing how much nicer LIFE IS not having to deal with Brushed Motors...and people WANT IN.

IF there is NOT a mass push by the ROAR STOCK racers to go BRUSHLESS - then the ROAR STOCK class should stay with BRUSHED MOTORS.

That being said doesn't mean a set of structured rules can't still be laid out for a handful of possible BRUSHLESS classes. Leave these classes as "Option" classes for the benefit of the HOST track for a National Event or Regional Event to have at his disposal.
__________________
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 01-02-2008, 10:03 PM   #95
Tech Champion
 
Scottrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 6,212
Trader Rating: 245 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn Sanchez View Post
Is what is best for ROAR really what the racers are asking for? What is best for the long term health of our hobby? Do we kill off stock by bringing in the 17.5 as the equivalent... do we combine the classes... do we make more classes... what about 1/12th.. these guys are gonna be unhappy whatever we do... Lipo is involved.. how will that effect this BL discussion....
You've got a couple very different issues there.

First, I really don't think this change is going to have ANY effect on the long-term health of the hobby. I still believe we're bowing to a vocal minority (brushless or nothing) who have others who really don't care either way rolling along with them at the local level. The momentum continues to build, though, so I've taken the attitude that like it or not the change is coming.

Second, I think EVERYONE is at cross-purposes trying to create "equivalencies". They aren't, they won't. Folks who I respect feel that 10.5 and 19T work well together. I've not tried it so I can't say. Maybe your idea (leave Stock alone) is the best way. I'd say, as you suggest, mix 10.5 plus 19T but afaik ROAR doesn't officially recognize 19T as a class. Leave Mod/Open class as open to racer choice, brushed or brushless.
__________________
Congressmen should wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers so we can identify their corporate sponsors.

THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED -Gil Scott-Heron (1949-2011)
Scottrik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:04 PM   #96
Tech Elite
 
wallyedmonds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brampton ont canada
Posts: 3,662
Default

3.7V and 10.5 would be boring and would not fly where i race.
wallyedmonds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:08 PM   #97
Tech Elite
 
corallyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Edmonds, Wash
Posts: 4,564
Trader Rating: 99 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn Sanchez View Post
well, obviously, lipo in 1/12th just isn't gonna work then..... Doesn't seem possible to me a one cell lipo being used in 1/12th scale...weight, balance and 3.7v?
Actually it could be done, but the cars need to be re-done. I truely believe that most people have just started to think serious about this. I know that I have spent practically zero time thinking about it but here's a few ideas. Battery placement accross the chassis in a straight line...like a CRC or SpeedMerchant car. This would allow the 3.7 battery or even a 7.4 battery. Then the motor area gets redesigned for a smaller motor. A fast small motor if 3.7 is used, a slower small motor if 7.4 is used.

A t-bar car still (I think) be designed and that would be a raised battery and a sunkin t-bar....like the old delta's had.

Steve
corallyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:08 PM   #98
Ike
Tech Master
 
Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,131
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn Sanchez View Post
what about 1/12th.. these guys are gonna be unhappy whatever we do...

good thing we have a team of 7 other people to help with this decision plus all these threads I'm saving and emailing to the excom for them to read....
Hopefully some of the team members feel more strongly about keeping 1/12th alive than you do Seems like 1/12th has slowly been gaining steam around the country for the last few years and I'd hate to see it crushed because of some new battery and motor rules. I know 1/12th has been the blacksheep of onroad for a while but it can actually be the answer to all the racers that are clamoring for a cheaper form of racing. The cars are cheaper by about half, cars that are several years old can still be very competitive, and batteries are cheaper. The one thing that's probably holding it back more than anything is the foam tires.

I really think that the push for Lipos being legalized is a very loud minority, but perhaps I'm wrong.
Ike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:12 PM   #99
Tech Elite
 
wallyedmonds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brampton ont canada
Posts: 3,662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike View Post
Hopefully some of the team members feel more strongly about keeping 1/12th alive than you do Seems like 1/12th has slowly been gaining steam around the country for the last few years and I'd hate to see it crushed because of some new battery and motor rules. I know 1/12th has been the blacksheep of onroad for a while but it can actually be the answer to all the racers that are clamoring for a cheaper form of racing. The cars are cheaper by about half, cars that are several years old can still be very competitive, and batteries are cheaper. The one thing that's probably holding it back more than anything is the foam tires.

I really think that the push for Lipos being legalized is a very loud minority, but perhaps I'm wrong.
i like to keep c cells in 1/12
lipos are for offroad imo and or TC maybe.
wallyedmonds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:14 PM   #100
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chandler, Arizona
Posts: 3,273
Send a message via AIM to Dawn Sanchez
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
ROAR doesn't officially recognize 19T as a class.

Hmm... yes it is.. or maybe I am misunderstanding your comment.

Ok, so we are at a point that we 1. need to slow motors down to not only attract NEW racers but keep them so their skill level has time to grow and 2. stop trying to make equivalencies as thats never going to happen.

Years ago, you remember, when ROAR brought in brushless at the last minute to be combined with brushed at the carpet nats less than 3 weeks from the announcement... the uproar and the fury it caused... remember the boards that few months? Everybody hated Brushless was combined with brushed.. .it was new and it was scary. Was that a wrong decision? At the time it seemed to be right for the hobby and going back I wish I had gone the other direction to stay out of the mud slinging... but now... several years later... maybe it was the wisest decision made.....

Well, we are there again.... its time to make some changes and maybe good and maybe not... but we gotta find out and we need to ensure the electric racing hobby, (my personal first love in RC racing but don't tell the nitro heads that.. LOL) gets back to where it was when I first started this crazy hobby.

I think Lipo and Bl is part of the answer.. not all of it.

A point was made above.. we gotta realize there aren't enough racers out there now to sustain a hobby shop and track.. so we need to work on getting new. That is true. Very true.

I plan on discussing in our meeting the new BL rules the committee came up with.. (comittee of MFG's made the rules you guys will see in a few weeks) and I honestly do not feel we need to mess with stock one bit. We are going to include lipo, probably, in stock... but I seriously am having issues with BL in the stock classes. Make the BL's available in 19T and Mod... heck, 19T is a mod motor....
Dawn Sanchez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:16 PM   #101
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chandler, Arizona
Posts: 3,273
Send a message via AIM to Dawn Sanchez
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corallyman View Post
Actually it could be done, but the cars need to be re-done. I truely believe that most people have just started to think serious about this. I know that I have spent practically zero time thinking about it but here's a few ideas. Battery placement accross the chassis in a straight line...like a CRC or SpeedMerchant car. This would allow the 3.7 battery or even a 7.4 battery. Then the motor area gets redesigned for a smaller motor. A fast small motor if 3.7 is used, a slower small motor if 7.4 is used.

A t-bar car still (I think) be designed and that would be a raised battery and a sunkin t-bar....like the old delta's had.

Steve
then, something for 2009 consideration? I don't see a way with what we have NOW that 1/12th would find an advantage with Lipo inclusion in their rules. Or, am I incorrect?
Dawn Sanchez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:21 PM   #102
Tech Elite
 
corallyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Edmonds, Wash
Posts: 4,564
Trader Rating: 99 (100%+)
Default

Dawn,

What about the idea of at the Carpet Nat's of having a added class for BL 17.5 spec Novak's. Say you allow 40 racers max. in it. Keep the other classes the way you were already leaning. Let the race happen and get feedback from the participants and see how it goes. It seems many people are scared of what they don't understand, but once the see it work then it seems agreeable to them. I am not trying to insult anyone but this does seem to be what goes on in these forums.

From what I understand the Lipo experiment class at the off road race went of well. Having a test class at some of these races might be your best solution.


Steve
corallyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:21 PM   #103
Tech Fanatic
 
RobS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chatham, Ontario
Posts: 876
Default

Just because Lipo is legalized in the Touring Class does not mean it has to be for 1/12th scale... As for classes add 10.5 to the 19T class. We are still just at the tip of the iceberg with all this new technology we have now and things will continue to develop over the coming years. Best way to do it is phase things in and make tweaks where necessary to keep things on a level playing field.
__________________
Rob Say
Action Hobbies Kingsville
"In racing you never really lose. You either win, or learn."
RobS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:23 PM   #104
Tech Elite
 
corallyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Edmonds, Wash
Posts: 4,564
Trader Rating: 99 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawn Sanchez View Post
then, something for 2009 consideration? I don't see a way with what we have NOW that 1/12th would find an advantage with Lipo inclusion in their rules. Or, am I incorrect?
Dawn,

Please read my reply to Scottrik in post 84. Then adjust timeline the way it works for ROAR and the racers.

Steve
corallyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2008, 10:25 PM   #105
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chandler, Arizona
Posts: 3,273
Send a message via AIM to Dawn Sanchez
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike View Post
Hopefully some of the team members feel more strongly about keeping 1/12th alive than you do Seems like 1/12th has slowly been gaining steam around the country for the last few years and I'd hate to see it crushed because of some new battery and motor rules. I know 1/12th has been the blacksheep of onroad for a while but it can actually be the answer to all the racers that are clamoring for a cheaper form of racing. The cars are cheaper by about half, cars that are several years old can still be very competitive, and batteries are cheaper. The one thing that's probably holding it back more than anything is the foam tires.

I really think that the push for Lipos being legalized is a very loud minority, but perhaps I'm wrong.


First, let me be clear.. if anybody is against ROAR killing a class its me....and I figured the entire day of reading my thoughts here you would understand that. 1/12th is a class that has its ups and downs. All I can do is look at the statistics from nationals in years past and watch its decline. If foams were the issue, I'm sure we would have heard from the class committee's by now to do something... if it were cost control measures... well, again, why haven't we heard this? 1/12th scale is going through the same growing pains as all electric racing. It got stagnent there for awhile while fuel racing took off.. now the time is electric and time to think OUTSIDE OF THE BOX....

Lipo will not be the death of 1/12th....... 1/12th will need to modify to stay current... just like everyone else.

Second, Lipo is being approved because its technology that racers want. Yes, a LARGE MAJORITY of hobbyists have stated they want to use this technology. ROAR will be a leader in this case and allow the technology in its events.

Another thing I figured you would have learned the last few weeks.. I am all about what is best for the hobby, the racer and ROAR's overall growth...

so, while you seem to be quite charming and have interesting ideas.. please, limit your judgements of me and what direction I would like to lead ROAR out of this healthy and extremely productive conversation.

I believe in ROAR and every single racer in ROAR.
Dawn Sanchez is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Roar Brushless motor debate thread. *Chrominator* Electric Off-Road 173 01-18-2008 10:52 AM
New ROAR rules Rfury Georgia Racing 9 01-16-2008 12:58 PM
Roar Rules rollagen Nitro On-Road 1 08-06-2007 06:04 PM
? on ROAR rules gator Electric On-Road 2 11-23-2002 12:13 AM
ROAR rules LooseCannon Nitro On-Road 18 09-08-2002 11:03 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 12:43 PM.


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