Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road
U.S. Vintage Trans-Am Racing >

U.S. Vintage Trans-Am Racing

Like Tree1Likes

U.S. Vintage Trans-Am Racing

Old 01-10-2008, 02:20 PM
  #46  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (75)
 
squarehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aurora, Illinois
Posts: 4,210
Trader Rating: 75 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by bigemike
I will let you guys know what I think, I also have a 17.5, but I think that is too slow, plus a lot of people have the 13.5 already, so if you just couple it with 4 cell, it gives the guys who are killing thier cars in 1/12th scale something to jump into for minimal money.

The intent of this class is not speed. It's close, fun racing that everyone can identify with. There are plenty of other classes to "get speed" in, which most of us run anyway.

Frankly, the slower the better in this class.
squarehead is offline  
Old 01-10-2008, 04:11 PM
  #47  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (4)
 
Jsaves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montana
Posts: 519
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

So we here at MCRC use the weight minium and penalties to keep the TC3s, JRXSs and 007s equal.

So you guys at Trackside have close racing between old and new chassis with drivers that are equal with no weight restrictions?

The weight difference between the TC3 and 007 is not something to forget.

I watched the video and a couple of guys pulled away from the rest and only came back when mistakes happened.

I run a very good handling TC3 and as we add weight it seems that the cars are actually sticking to the track better. JP ( 007 ) is the heaviest, but he is coming back to the pack. The 1/6 race could have been the best for the lead so far, but racing luck happens.
Jsaves is offline  
Old 01-10-2008, 07:44 PM
  #48  
Tech Addict
 
trx1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Muncie, indiana
Posts: 520
Default

what about these, there GREAT cars!!
Attached Thumbnails U.S. Vintage Trans-Am Racing-pic013.jpg   U.S. Vintage Trans-Am Racing-pic014.jpg  
trx1 is offline  
Old 01-10-2008, 08:30 PM
  #49  
Tech Master
iTrader: (36)
 
bigemike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: hamilton, oh
Posts: 1,756
Trader Rating: 36 (100%+)
Default

associated needs to come out with a new version of that. My brother had the team kit brand new, and it was a blast.
bigemike is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 04:26 AM
  #50  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (75)
 
squarehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aurora, Illinois
Posts: 4,210
Trader Rating: 75 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by trx1
what about these, there GREAT cars!!
While neat RC10s, they are not legal for Trans Am racing. It's a 4wd touring car class.
squarehead is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 09:24 AM
  #51  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (8)
 
Hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 316
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Apex,
We've run a CS-27, 10.5/19T, GT bodied class at Summit in Fort Wayne for a few years now. We experimented with some HPI Advans in the early days, but they wore out in like 3 runs. So, what sort of wear are you getting from those HPI tires? I realize you're not going be as hard on them with 4 cell stock, but I'm curious about how long they last. thx

-Sean
Hustler is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 09:55 AM
  #52  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,096
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

This is a great idea, with the Tc class all but dead on our small indoor track surface this could revitalize the class. There are some who went brushless that may want the 17.5 option put in. 4-cell will keep the speeds down, and the bodies will definately get the painters active.

Nice work guys !!!
Mark O'Brien is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 10:02 AM
  #53  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (75)
 
squarehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aurora, Illinois
Posts: 4,210
Trader Rating: 75 (100%+)
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by Hustler
Apex,
We've run a CS-27, 10.5/19T, GT bodied class at Summit in Fort Wayne for a few years now. We experimented with some HPI Advans in the early days, but they wore out in like 3 runs. So, what sort of wear are you getting from those HPI tires? I realize you're not going be as hard on them with 4 cell stock, but I'm curious about how long they last. thx

-Sean
Honestly, I haven't heard of anyone needing to buy another set of the D-compound treaded HPI tires... other than putting together a second car. Zero wear on carpet so far. Hmmmm... remove power, remove traction, and the fun and competition increases—what a concept! It really works.



Originally Posted by Mark O'Brien
This is a great idea, with the Tc class all but dead on our small indoor track surface this could revitalize the class. There are some who went brushless that may want the 17.5 option put in. 4-cell will keep the speeds down, and the bodies will definately get the painters active.

Nice work guys !!!
Trust me when I say that most of us that have our hands on this want brushless. It's just a matter of making the right choice for the class structure. Patience is a virtue.


doug
squarehead is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 12:39 PM
  #54  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (8)
 
414MPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 989
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

The whole basis for this class is to bring back the fun to R/C racing.

Cool looking cars, close door to door racing and bring the old hardware out of hybernation. Most of the T-A racers at Trackside are either new to racing, returning racers, or run T-A as a second, no stress, fun class where you can actually watch the suspension working and run door to door rubbing without causing an expensive wreck.

I understand everyone wants to go faster. Anyone who has been around any form of R/C for more than a decade has seen how higher speed only leads to smaller fields. There are many reasons for this I won't discuss here, but suffice to say, SPEED KILLS R/C class size.

Doug and I have discussed the future at length. The common consenses is faster cars will be fun for a short bit, but will only make this like all other current sedan classes. We need to differentiate this class from the typical 6 cell stock (27turn/ 13,5B/L) format.

The NO maintence and same performance of Brushless is extreamely atractive, but the $200 plus for a B/L system does not seem to fit the format well today. We are trying to bring in new racers, not just convert current racers to this as their focus NEW CLASS.

Please visit the Trackside Presents Trans-AM forum in the Wisconsin section http://www.rctech.net/forum/showthread.php?t=188641 to see just how we managed to revive the fun factor.

Marty
414MPH is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 12:51 PM
  #55  
Tech Master
iTrader: (36)
 
bigemike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: hamilton, oh
Posts: 1,756
Trader Rating: 36 (100%+)
Default

we have seen extremely close performance from bushed 27 turn or brushless 17.5, so why not allow either, until the guys get tired of turning comms and decide to buy brushless.

It almost doesn't make sense to go out and buy brushed stuff anymore, that is like buying a new TV an not getting HD
bigemike is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 01:20 PM
  #56  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (31)
 
Racer X79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cocoa, FL
Posts: 416
Trader Rating: 31 (100%+)
Default

I've done some testing at Trackside over the last week with a 17.5 BL/6 cell vs. 27t/4 cell and had nearly idenical lap times. If any thing the 17.5 brushless was a tick slower, I belive mainly because of the lower power to weight ratio. Also, using 6 cell packs with a "sport" 17.5 system(the XBR w/17.5 motor is around $170 at Trackside) would keep the cost down for a newcomer ($25 Venom stick vs. $50 unassembled 4 cell) if they had to have a brushless. I really don't think there's a need to debate, both could run together right now. Just my 2 cents.
Racer X79 is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 01:34 PM
  #57  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,096
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Odd we run 17.5 and 27 brushed 4-cell together in oval with identical results.

I say stay with the 4-cell battery rule. It gets to convoluted if you start down the path of different number of cells, for different motors.
Mark O'Brien is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 03:41 PM
  #58  
Tech Master
iTrader: (36)
 
bigemike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: hamilton, oh
Posts: 1,756
Trader Rating: 36 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Racer X79
I've done some testing at Trackside over the last week with a 17.5 BL/6 cell vs. 27t/4 cell and had nearly idenical lap times. If any thing the 17.5 brushless was a tick slower, I belive mainly because of the lower power to weight ratio. Also, using 6 cell packs with a "sport" 17.5 system(the XBR w/17.5 motor is around $170 at Trackside) would keep the cost down for a newcomer ($25 Venom stick vs. $50 unassembled 4 cell) if they had to have a brushless. I really don't think there's a need to debate, both could run together right now. Just my 2 cents.
you are way out of the ball park on your gearing. 17.5 is as fast as 27turn stock. We have tested it thoroughly by multiple drivers here in cincinnati in touring and pan cars. You need a really tall rollout about 2.15-2.25 inches per rotation of the motor. Then you will feel the 17.5 come to life. these brushless motors have a very small window where they are the most powerful. It is all about torque with them.
bigemike is offline  
Old 01-12-2008, 07:53 AM
  #59  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (31)
 
Racer X79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cocoa, FL
Posts: 416
Trader Rating: 31 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Mark O'Brien
Odd we run 17.5 and 27 brushed 4-cell together in oval with identical results.

I say stay with the 4-cell battery rule. It gets to convoluted if you start down the path of different number of cells, for different motors.
Originally Posted by bigemike
you are way out of the ball park on your gearing. 17.5 is as fast as 27turn stock. We have tested it thoroughly by multiple drivers here in cincinnati in touring and pan cars. You need a really tall rollout about 2.15-2.25 inches per rotation of the motor. Then you will feel the 17.5 come to life. these brushless motors have a very small window where they are the most powerful. It is all about torque with them.
Your absoultly right, but I think your talking about oval, which is a completely different animal. You can gear the snot out of it because you don't have to worry about low end pull out of cornerers. We geared it to the point of thermal shut down within 4 minutes(190 deg. +) and the lap times got slower anyway because it was a slug on the infield. Don't forget, you've gotta make it last for 8 minutes in the main--with the current motors and speedo's if your geared on the edge your not going to make it. That is what makes the class so fun, it dosen't take the fastest all out car, it takes good driving and chassis set up--and you actually have to have a game plan for the 8 minute main. All I know is from what I've actually driven and then watched at the Novak race(sportsman ran 17.5 motors), I think the 17.5/6 cell can work(for road course anyway).
Racer X79 is offline  
Old 01-12-2008, 08:35 AM
  #60  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (24)
 
wallstreet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,020
Trader Rating: 24 (93%+)
Default

I hate to say it but the guys who think brushed motors should stay in this class are going to be the odd guys out when its all done, cause there is way more intrest in running trans am with brushless motors in them. Especially after today when about 4 to 6 guys will be trying all different motor and cell combinations to figure out which brushless and cell count will be equal or even dare i say a touch slower.

You guys up there are always about teaching the guys to learn about chassis setup and not motor setup. This is the ultimate in that thought process. You will never have to take out the motor..... EVER.
wallstreet is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.