R/C Tech Forums

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

Like Tree1Likes
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-23-2009, 05:50 AM   #7036
Tech Champion
 
Scottrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 6,212
Trader Rating: 245 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robk View Post
the 13.5 was coming in around 150-160 as well if i remember right. I was running timing in th ESC.
Rob,

Before you make any decisions, do a bit more testing with your 13.5 / 1s combo (and the 17.5 / 1s) finding a timing/gearing combo that keeps the temps down to 130-ish (no more than 140). You will find the car at least as fast and probably faster. There is some VERY valid theory behind this that I will be happy to explain in a pm, but it's something pan car racers are figuring out.

I'm pretty sure you'll find the 13.5 / 1s to be significantly closer to the existing formula (2s / 21.5) than you'd thought. Your test track was a little bigger than ours which is 40' X 65' but not tremendously so. There will also be a difference on a flowing vs. technical track with the advantage going to the gearing-restricted 2s car the tighter the track is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by robk View Post
I put my buddies car up to 1600 grams just for fun. He went faster
We did "Performance Ballast" weight penalties when we first started running VTA. More weight we added the faster the cars went. We were, essentially, replacing aerodynamic downforce with gravity downforce.
__________________
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)

Last edited by Scottrik; 12-23-2009 at 09:50 AM. Reason: Used wrong quote like the idiot I am...
Scottrik is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 06:25 AM   #7037
Tech Master
 
trerc's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,821
Trader Rating: 89 (100%+)
Default

I don't see 1s cell being an option. Yes they run them in pan car but you gotta remember that BRL states a 1 cell pan car to come in a 36oz (1020 grams) our TC's are much heavier and I'm not gonna get started on the efficiency issue, but I will sum it up by saying that it doesn't get anymore efficient than a straight axle.

I thought the issue was esc's all this testing and your not addressing the boost/turbo issues which according to some is the root of the problem. Replace the battery and motor and the esc problem still exist. Or will the majority of us who are running the newer ESC's be needing to replace batteries, motors, and ESC's?
__________________
If it smells burnt up.. it's more than likely hot.. you don't have to touch it..
trerc is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 06:43 AM   #7038
Tech Champion
 
Scottrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 6,212
Trader Rating: 245 (100%+)
Default

Those of us who have actually RUN a 1s in our touring/VTA cars, rather than trying to imagine reasons it can't possibly work, happen to know they work very well in there. Added bonus was that my TC4 never balanced out anywhere NEAR as nicely as it did with that 1s battery.

Why would you need a new esc? I sure didn't...hooked right up to the ESC, had the same number of wires and everything If you're running a Tekin or LRP/Nosram esc you'll need to add a $3 servo extension cable to take power from the battery tabs on your esc to the $10 booster and into your receiver. So easy a caveman can do it...takes 10 seconds to install once your soldering iron is hot.

And don't tell me you don't already have a 17.5 motor...they're the most common motor in RC racing.

IF such becomes a spec (and at this point that's all it is, an IF) MOST folks will buy a 1s battery and cheap booster (unless they are starting out in which case they'd be foolish not to buy a Havoc 1s / motor combo for $140 at Tower which has the booster circuitry built-in) and find themselves racing in the tightest pack they've ever seen.

AND, as Rob has been VERY clear about, any change announced will not take effect until next season starts up in the fall. What he's doing is providing a LONG lead time for folks to make whatever change happens to be chosen.
__________________
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  
Old 12-23-2009, 07:15 AM   #7039
Tech Master
 
trerc's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,821
Trader Rating: 89 (100%+)
Default

....
__________________
If it smells burnt up.. it's more than likely hot.. you don't have to touch it..
trerc is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 07:34 AM   #7040
Tech Master
 
billjacobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 1,264
Trader Rating: 55 (100%+)
Default 1s lipo

It seems to me that people are trying to find a problem after they have a solution. The easiest and cheapest solution to go back to the original speeds before the esc war is to simply take the esc's back by turning off the boost/turbo functions. What is the point of going to a different motor/battery, when the obvious solution is free.

The only benefit to going to a 1s lipo solution is to put the esc in line with the battery to lower the weight at balance, but if you keep the weight limit, there is no point at all.

This makes no sense and will force the vta guys to once again buy stuff they don't need to buy.

As for tire wear, I am sure that a lot of it has to do with the settings that must be run to allow the cars to turn at the end of the straight when running the boost esc, and the extra wear from the increased torque (due to higher fdr.) Again, ban boost and the problem is solved.

I have another question to the guys running the 1s lipo 17.5, after an 8 minute run, how much battery capacity is left?
billjacobs is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 07:43 AM   #7041
Tech Master
 
trerc's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,821
Trader Rating: 89 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
Those of us who have actually RUN a 1s in our touring/VTA cars, rather than trying to imagine reasons it can't possibly work, happen to know they work very well in there. Added bonus was that my TC4 never balanced out anywhere NEAR as nicely as it did with that 1s battery.
Oh my sincerest apologies, 1s TC hasn't taken off in the Midwest like it has where you are apparently And where did I say anything about the balance of the car? I can balance anything with scales and weight, that's not the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
Why would you need a new esc? I sure didn't...hooked right up to the ESC, had the same number of wires and everything If you're running a Tekin or LRP/Nosram esc you'll need to add a $3 servo extension cable to take power from the battery tabs on your esc to the $10 booster and into your receiver. So easy a caveman can do it...takes 10 seconds to install once your soldering iron is hot.
Please don't insult me, I've been in this hobby for about 20 years off and on I know how to hook up an ESC. I guess you missed the question so I'll ask it again.. What does changing the motor/battery combo have to do with the ESC software issues that you guys are crying about? Won't the problem still exist Or are you suggesting that just the guys running the RS/SPX/ Mamba's run the new combo? I guess I don't get it, help me out here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
And don't tell me you don't already have a 17.5 motor...they're the most common motor in RC racing.
Your right I do, it's in my RCGT car, but it's foolish to think that EVERYBODY does because I know a lot of VTA racers that don't own a 17.5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
IF such becomes a spec (and at this point that's all it is, an IF) MOST folks will buy a 1s battery and cheap booster (unless they are starting out in which case they'd be foolish not to buy a Havoc 1s / motor combo for $140 at Tower which has the booster circuitry built-in) and find themselves racing in the tightest pack they've ever seen.
We still race tight, usually the guys in the back aren't being held back by their equipment... We have guys that are consistently able to run up front with the older LRP's. They are good drivers with set up knowledge that can get the car around the track with quickly with few mistakes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
AND, as Rob has been VERY clear about, any change announced will not take effect until next season starts up in the fall. What he's doing is providing a LONG lead time for folks to make whatever change happens to be chosen.
Thats good, it sound like it may be expensive for some guys. You figure the motor at $80, 2 1s lipos at $130, and Voltage booster $10 That's $220

Or the Havoc combo you suggested at $140 plus $130 for the batteries and that's $270

Or you set limits on the boost, eliminate the turbo and regulate profiles on the LRP and that's FREE.
__________________
If it smells burnt up.. it's more than likely hot.. you don't have to touch it..
trerc is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 07:53 AM   #7042
Tech Legend
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Fargo, North Dakota
Posts: 29,555
Trader Rating: 240 (100%+)
Default

so Scottrik, what option are you leaning towards in your opinion? 1S 13.5 or 1S 17.5 ?
__________________
Member - Red River Radio/Control Car Club
< Tekno EB48SL / SCT410.3 | Tekno EB410 x 2 | Yokomo YZ-2 DTM x 2 | LC Racing EMB-1 Buggies and Truggies >
Cain is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 08:05 AM   #7043
Tech Champion
 
Scottrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 6,212
Trader Rating: 245 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
My apologies, 1s touring car classes aren't exactly taking off in the midwest like they must be where you are from.. Where did I say anything about the balance of the car, I can balance anything with scales and lead.
And who said anything about 1s TC anywhere? What is happening is that a few people are investing some time and money in actually TESTING concepts rather than endlessly bitching about what those concepts may or may not be.

I added the fact re: balancing as an aside, not in any way to impugn your obvious talents with lead and sticky tape.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
No shit Chet! Please don't insult me, I've been doing this for just a little while
now, (about 20 years off and on)
Did you or did you not ask:

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
Or will the majority of us who are running the newer ESC's be needing to replace batteries, motors, and ESC's?
My reply was SPECIFICALLY pointed to this question, regardless your decades of experience, etc. The fact is that suggesting a need to replace esc is a red herring. Period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
I said it still doesn't address the software issues with the ESC's which is what most of you are crying about anyway, Right? So I'll ask again, what does changing the motor battery combo have to do with the ESC issues?
As has been stated NUMEROUS times by folks who've been involved with VTA since the beginning (some of us since BEFORE the beginning)...the problem existed BEFORE "juiced" esc's were even available, much less becoming the norm as TC-wannabes flooded the VTA program. The "juiced" esc's have certainly exacerbated the problem, but the problem predates and goes deeper than that.

[quote=Scottrik;6755589]And don't tell me you don't already have a 17.5
motor...they're the most common motor in RC racing.[quote]

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
I do, it's in my RCGT car But that certainly doesn't mean EVERYBODY has one.
Here's a news flash for you...when the 2s / 21.5 combo was announced NO ONE had 21.5 motors, and a LOT of folks didn't have 2s packs. And there was nowhere NEARLY so much lead time as what Rob will be providing because the folks that dreamed up the 2s / 21.5 spec had this fantasy about that combo being "equal" to the existing formula which it very definitely did not...again, even before "juiced" esc's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
So when one wins the B and bumps to the A will they still be able to run both races on the same battery or will they need an additional pack?
No more (or less) so than with 2s packs. Why is this an issue? Does anyone even do "bump ups" on a regular basis? Maybe they do, we sure don't...the reason for A- and B- mains is so folks with similar speed cars and/or abilities are racing with like performing cars and abilities. Bump ups work great in things like World of Outlaws where you get ONE qualifying run and ONE heat race. I've never been to an RC race with fewer than 2 qualifying runs...and my own opinion (and this is just that, an opinion) is that if you manage to shank two (or more) qualies due to luck, break-down or pure lack of talent then "guess what, you're in the B-main tonight. I bet you make the A- next week Freddie!".

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
As I've said before we still run close races as most of us run the same hardware, from what I see the guys finishing in the back aren't being held back by their equipment...
This isn't about you. This isn't about your track. This isn't about me or my track or anyone else. This is about keeping VTA the DISTINCT driving experience it was intended to be and MUST be if it is to survive. It is about (and has ALWAYS been about) having a class that is SIGNIFICANTLY slower than "Stock" TC so that there is a place for new racers to learn car control, etc at speeds they have a prayer of doing so at and that minimizes car damage in the inevitable crashes WHILE at the same time providing the closest racing possible for "old hands" like yourself. It was ORIGINALLY about having a budget class, but that's pretty much been lost to time as the field was flooded with failed TC's and TC-wannabe racers who brought the latest and greatest equipment with them. Was it short-sighted to not ban "new" stuff outright? Perhaps, but not doing so was more because of faith that racers would, ultimately, recognize what was best for the class.

ALSO...every thing that gets added to "tech" to inspect, check, etc does absolutely nothing but add to the already pita workload of those who put on the races. Do you personally put on races or are you ever in charge? Let me tell you, as president of a fairly small club, there is already WAY too much to do rolling out carpet, setting up the track, getting racers signed up, getting heats run in an orderly fashion so we finish up at a reasonable time and can reverse the entire process to stow the gear. Heck, expecting race organizers at a permanent track ain't gonna win you any friends...you don't see many track operators jumping on the "lets make a huge tech list" bandwagon here, do you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
That's good it sounds like the new changes are gonna be pretty expensive.
Let me tell you the story about Chicken Little. You see, Chicken Little got bumped on the head with an acorn and spent the rest of the day telling his friends that the sky was falling.

The changes (whichever Rob chooses) will be FAR less expensive for most racers to implement than the ill-advised 2s / 21.5 was. And even with the change it should remain less expensive than racing at the "pointy end" of the TC field is.

AND the fact remains, any rule established by USVTA applies only to events sanctioned by USVTA, they are merely an "advisory" to clubs that "this is what the National spec is". Clubs, as always, are 100% free to do what they think best for their interests. Our own club, one of the co-creators of the class, held back from implementing brushless and lipo until this season because we knew the change the previous year would NOT be in our club's interest. Now we've changed and will examine what comes out of the headquarters at USVTA to see if we should change again for next season or hold pat for another year.
__________________
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  
Old 12-23-2009, 08:17 AM   #7044
Tech Champion
 
Scottrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 6,212
Trader Rating: 245 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
Thats good, it sound like it may be expensive for some guys. You figure the motor at $80, 2 1s lipos at $130, and Voltage booster $10 That's $220

Or the Havoc combo you suggested at $140 plus $130 for the batteries and that's $27
You're grasping at straws.

Any of the likely changes will involve (for MOST folks) either A motor or A battery (if they want to be REALLY prepared, two batteries). IF someone doesn't have a 17.5 motor already it would take a motor AND a battery (or two) IF that is the route chosen.

IF the change is to 2s / 25.5 the MOST anyone is doing is buying a motor. The lucky folks who have a Ballistic only need a stator.

IF the change is to 1s / 17.5 almost everybody I'm aware of has a 17.5 motor available to them, so they're buying a battery (or two...I never run more than one, but what the hey) and a booster.

The Havoc combo was proposed, had you read closely, for folks who are just starting out and aren't already invested in equipment. Everyone who's already in the game already has an esc. Right?
__________________
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)

Last edited by Scottrik; 12-23-2009 at 08:46 AM.
Scottrik is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 08:30 AM   #7045
Tech Champion
 
Scottrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 6,212
Trader Rating: 245 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
so Scottrik, what option are you leaning towards in your opinion? 1S 13.5 or 1S 17.5 ?
I haven't tried the 1s / 17.5 combo myself, but I really think that is likely to be the way I'd lean toward. Then again, I really THOUGHT 1s / 13.5 would be until we tested it and found out it was VERY close to the existing 2s / 21.5 spec. Close enough that my own opinion is the change is no where near enough to be worth the hassle to change.

We have a test day (few and far between for us, unfortunately) scheduled Jan 2 and I plan to try the 1s / 17.5 combo then. It sounds like Rob will already have announced a spec, but I'll try it anyway...if it's the "right" decision that may be the direction our club goes next fall.

I may also see if I can get a 25.5 stator in time to test that as well, but that makes for a pretty full day of testing.
__________________
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)

Last edited by Scottrik; 12-23-2009 at 08:47 AM.
Scottrik is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 08:36 AM   #7046
Tech Master
 
trerc's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,821
Trader Rating: 89 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
Did you or did you not ask:
Not really...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
My reply was SPECIFICALLY pointed to this question, regardless your decades of experience, etc. The fact is that suggesting a need to replace esc is a red herring. Period.
I was asking what the testing had to do with the current esc issue and the fact that it will still be present with a motor/battery change...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
As has been stated NUMEROUS times by folks who've been involved with VTA since the beginning (some of us since BEFORE the beginning)...the problem existed BEFORE "juiced" esc's were even available, much less becoming the norm as TC-wannabes flooded the VTA program. The "juiced" esc's have certainly exacerbated the problem, but the problem predates and goes deeper than that.
I'm not trying to step on your toes VTA Jesus, You are truly a pioneer and I appreciate your efforts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
Here's a news flash for you...when the 2s / 21.5 combo was announced NO ONE had 21.5 motors, and a LOT of folks didn't have 2s packs. And there was nowhere NEARLY so much lead time as what Rob will be providing because the folks that dreamed up the 2s / 21.5 spec had this fantasy about that combo being "equal" to the existing formula which it very definitely did not...again, even before "juiced" esc's.
Get real man, Who runs brushed motors and round cells anymore!?! NOBODY!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
No more (or less) so than with 2s packs. Why is this an issue? Does anyone even do "bump ups" on a regular basis? Maybe they do, we sure don't...the reason for A- and B- mains is so folks with similar speed cars and/or abilities are racing with like performing cars and abilities. Bump ups work great in things like World of Outlaws where you get ONE qualifying run and ONE heat race. I've never been to an RC race with fewer than 2 qualifying runs...and my own opinion (and this is just that, an opinion) is that if you manage to shank two (or more) qualies due to luck, break-down or pure lack of talent then "guess what, you're in the B-main tonight. I bet you make the A- next week Freddie!".
There's still tracks that bump up, Guess it would ultimately depend on your race director and number of entries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
Let me tell you the story about Chicken Little. You see, Chicken Little got bumped on the head with an acorn and spent the rest of the day telling his friends that the sky was falling.

The changes (whichever Rob chooses) will be FAR less expensive for most racers to implement than the ill-advised 2s / 21.5 was. And even with the change it should remain less expensive than racing at the "pointy end" of the TC field is.
Again, Do you really think this class would've had the success it's had without adding Brushless motors and lipo batteries. Brushed motors and round cells sucked, it cost an arm and a leg to compete in stock classes in those days (as I'm sure you aware of).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
AND the fact remains, any rule established by USVTA applies only to events sanctioned by USVTA, they are merely an "advisory" to clubs that "this is what the National spec is". Clubs, as always, are 100% free to do what they think best for their interests. Our own club, one of the co-creators of the class, held back from implementing brushless and lipo until this season because we knew the change the previous year would NOT be in our club's interest. Now we've changed and will examine what comes out of the headquarters at USVTA to see if we should change again for next season or hold pat for another year.

Thank God
__________________
If it smells burnt up.. it's more than likely hot.. you don't have to touch it..
trerc is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 09:11 AM   #7047
Tech Legend
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Fargo, North Dakota
Posts: 29,555
Trader Rating: 240 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik View Post
IF the change is to 2s / 25.5 the MOST anyone is doing is buying a motor. The lucky folks who have a Ballistic only need a stator.
That was part of the ultimate decision why I decided to buy a Ballistic motor over say a speed passion one I was looking at since we are allowed for the track to use any motor. There isn't anywhere else this motor would be useful if the class went away from 21.5, so I figure if it did go bye bye, I could just swap to a different stator.

I am one of those also who technically does not use a 17.5 motor in any racing classes since I come from an offroad background and out here, no one runs stock. But I do know that if I want to play, I have to pay.
__________________
Member - Red River Radio/Control Car Club
< Tekno EB48SL / SCT410.3 | Tekno EB410 x 2 | Yokomo YZ-2 DTM x 2 | LC Racing EMB-1 Buggies and Truggies >
Cain is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 09:13 AM   #7048
Tech Master
 
RC-ProSpeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,066
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

wow... there is a lot of activity here today...
I guess a lot of people got the day off

a couple things...

yes, a lot of people have already a 17.5 motor, but is becuase is been use in another kit to run a different class... so is not fair to assume that everyone has one spare to run it on VTA

If there is true intentions to make this class slow and leave it to driving skills, then spec the whole class... same esc, same motor, same gearing
Otherwise, there is something that people going to use as a excuse of why they are not fast or what ever comes after with technology

it will cost money to racers to buy the spec equipment, but reading to what you guys are posted, it will cost money anyway to buy a 17.5, or 13.5 or 1S lipo, etc...

The bad part about spec the class like that is that that company that gets choosen to use their electronics wont lower their prices since they know people need them to run.

For example... Novak 21.5 is in the rules to use, Novak did not lower their price in that specific motor ($89), but a Epic Duo2 21.5 is $20 cheaper ($69) and same performance. but I understand is businees

At the end for me, I hope rules stay the same as they are right now and just turn turbo off for any USVTA santiones events... will cost nothing
__________________
RCRNV (www.rcrnv.com) / *Keep On-Road alive!*
- Nitro Touring - Kyosho EVO 2 WC
- Electric - TC6 (Out of the Box! No upgrades needed)
- F1 - F103RM (Out of the Box! No upgrades needed)

Last edited by RC-ProSpeed; 12-23-2009 at 09:48 AM.
RC-ProSpeed is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 09:35 AM   #7049
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Great Falls, MT
Posts: 190
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billjacobs View Post
I have another question to the guys running the 1s lipo 17.5, after an 8 minute run, how much battery capacity is left?
On a small to medium sized track, most cars would use up 2200 - 2500mah.
VRacing is offline  
Old 12-23-2009, 09:37 AM   #7050
Tech Regular
 
xevias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, PRC
Posts: 348
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Logically speaking, the decision in what equipment to use in slowing the cars down is purely based on how many people you want to screw into spending more money, so it comes down to this:

Option #1
Change to 25.5 motors - mildly screw everyone based on Novak's ability to offer a trade in program.

Option #2
Use 0* timing - screw the LRP guys because they are the only ones who can't program their controllers for 0* timing.

Option #3
Go to 1S LiPo's - screw everyone about 2-3 times due to needing to buy more batteries, motors, booster packs, LiPo plates, weights, and pinions to make a reasonable FDR.

If you don't want to slow the cars down, but make for fair, spec racing there is this:

Option #4
Use the LRP profile #1 as the base ESC setting - screw all the GTB guys and others that don't have programable ESC's.

It's a simple logical decision with horrible political ramifications. What group do you piss off? One of these groups is going to feel a little short term pain. But it's necesary to right the ship.

I'm hoping Rob combines Option #1 and #2.
xevias is offline  
Closed Thread

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Georgia Vintage Trans Am Racing shadow102 Georgia Racing 725 02-24-2012 09:56 AM
Vintage Trans Am Scottrik Electric On-Road 47 02-24-2012 08:21 AM
Vintage Trans-Am TC hlpressley R/C Items: Wanted to Buy 5 10-23-2008 04:00 PM
Thursday Vintage Trans Am racing at Victory in Green Bay Brian F Wisconsin & Illinois Racing 13 05-10-2008 08:37 AM



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 09:52 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