M-Technic

iTrader: (15)

It is only for RCGT, and even then it is only for our RCGT series which was started last year before any of the mega-timing speedos were around. In the interest of RCGT being cheap and fair, v203 was outlawed for RCGT until the series is over. Most people are running GTBs or Speed Passion speedos that can't even keep up with the SPX's in the series, let along the SPX's trying to keep up with v203 Tekin's.

They were told "anything except v203". I put v200 (the next best option) on Technique550's Tekin, so I don't know what the issue is.

rmdhawaii

iTrader: (4)

This question is for the Tekin guys and I'm not even sure you would be willing to answer these questions, but…

Based on the current trend of other manufacturer's ESCs and ESC technology in general, is the RS engineered well enough to last another 12-18 months before requiring a hardware upgrade? Is the current firmware architecture robust enough to take advantage of any operational parameters that needs to be changed? What are some of the current hardware limitations that are preventing the RS from becoming even faster?

What you've done with the firmware is just amazing – and I realize that you'll have to upgrade the hardware some time down the road. Later would be better than sooner!

Thanks!

Marcos.J

iTrader: (239)

i had the same issues this past weekend , i did my radio again and switch to barry baker's settings and it was fine

theisgroup

iTrader: (10)

I don't know the specifics, but I can tell you that the tekin rs/pro is 18-24month already.

Jon Carlson

iTrader: (48)

Well I guess the question prior to all of these is... Which "speed control" is beating the Tekin and how are they doing it?

The current stuff is being tested all the time and keeps getting faster. It is currently the fastest so where are you basing your concern? Tekin is always looking to improve, just because they are on top doesn't mean they've stopped pushing the envelope.

SlowerOne

The downside is that you have to lower the gearing to take advantage of the motor timing ay low revs, and so you'll lose out on top speed - that's what I found.

Having said that, I have had a lot of success on tight corners (12th scale) with 5º motor timing and 50 timing boost, instead of the full 55 timing boost. When I used 10º motor and 45 timing boost, the motor got hotter for no return on acceleration or speed. HTH

tc3team

Look at the ESC from an engineering point of view. Plenty of strong FET's, coupled with a very low on resistance, and now we have v203 - this update was crucial to wipe out the advantage the BD ESC had on some tracks.

So now we are back on top....

I don't see any major features happening with the hotwire adjustablilty (IMO) now that issue got addressed.

Even if for example the on resistance could be lowered, you wouldnt notice the difference, or get any benefit from it!

The Pro doesnt need any more FETs, it can control any motor out there.

tc3team

I never said there was an issue if they had been told (exactly why I said ignore my post if they had been told)...

rmdhawaii

iTrader: (4)

Agree.

As I posted in another thread, Tekin has essentially released four different ESCs over the past two years - 180, 189, 200, 203 (Did I miss one? I've only read up to page 525). It's not like they put out 203 and they've been improving 203. The difference between 180 and 203 is night and day. Are there any more configurable parameters coming out or is this it? Is this the most we can expect out of this piece of hardware or is there more to come?

What's interesting, is that Tekin implemented what some people were asking for early on. What I haven't been able to figure out, is if Tekin already planned for these parameters to be available in some future release or if they were able to make these paramters available based on the architecture they developed.

But this turbo cutting out thing and having to recalibrate the throttle suggests that there are certain limitations as to what Tekin can reprogram within the RS. Is this a problem from 200 that just hasn't been fixed yet or can it only be fixed replaced by replacing the hardware? I don't know.

So are we at midpoint in the RS' lifecycle or closer to the endpoint? Because as soon as it's replacement comes out, you know what's going to happen.

You know how this goes. As soon as you buy something that's been out on the market for a while, some time in the next week or next month, the manufacturer anounces it's replacement.

wingracer

iTrader: (24)

That's not really a problem with the hardware or software, it's a radio problem. I can assure you that this has turned up on other speedos at other times but no one ever noticed before because it had almost no effect on performance. Now that you have a timing function that is dependent on full throttle position, it's become more noticeable.

All you have to do is up the epa a bit over what it was calibrated for and problem solved. To me, it's a complete non-issue.

theisgroup

iTrader: (10)

look at the last 2 post. these were radio problems. get a sentry data logger and you will see just how much your endpoints on your radio floats.

rmdhawaii

iTrader: (4)

I hear ya!

But if you know that there is a floating endpoint problem, in theory, it can be addressed by adding an adjustable range value for full throttle positioning within the firmware to account for the float! But that may sound much simpler than it is to implement.

wingracer

iTrader: (24)

How? The only way the speedo can know that you have hit full throttle is from the signal. If it sees a WOT signal, it goes wide open. If the signal it sees is only 98%, it is not seeing WOT. If you don't like it, get a better radio. I have not seen this problem with either my M8 or M11.

Don't blame the speedo for radio problems.

And again, what is wrong with just bumping up the endpoint a bit? This is a much easier fix then changing the speedos calibration routine around, which will only make it work better with radios with poor accuracy, but give less precision to those with accurate radios. I don't want them to put a bandaid on it that is going to hurt the performance with MY radio.

theisgroup

iTrader: (10)

but which radio would you want to set that adjustment for? I mean they all float different and then based on the temp you are running at an how long or old the radio is, the float changes. and you would still have this problem and users have said, it works and then quits, so you would have to -readjust your range value in the speedo again. i think the speedo calibration is much simpler and really speaking is the same as what you are suggesting.

I will give you an example. Robert at KO says to re-calibrate your radio every 6month, since the KO has a way to calibrate all its endpoint. even at that the radio from my sentry data loger varies teh endpoint by plus or minus 2. but I have seen other recordings that the radio varies by plus or minus 7. i like my ko, and really for me to calibrate the radio to the tekin, I set it at 145 and then bump to 150. that means I loose about 4% of my throttle throw or you have not just created a deadband around full throttle at 4%. that is a lot. just pull the trigger slow and see where full throttle engages and when turbo kicks in. I can do this and not have the triggle mashed to the floor.

rmdhawaii

iTrader: (4)

There is nothing wrong with bumping up the endpoint.

If they were to implement something like that, since you don't have any problems with your radio, your full throttle float adjustment value would be zero and as a result, the precision of your radio would not be affected.