R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-21-2008, 02:22 PM   #16
Tech Master
 
mkdut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: RC Retired
Posts: 1,961
Trader Rating: 19 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timmay70 View Post
Nobody is forcing you to use lead, that is your choice of ballast. There are many other things you can use to add ballast to your car; depleted uranium, tungsten, stainless steel, compressed cow chips and llama dung are just a few examples.
.
I do enjoy using the depleted uranium as ballast as it really makes the flourescent paint colors stand out.
mkdut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 02:46 PM   #17
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,570
Trader Rating: 26 (96%+)
Default

If you reduce the weights of the tcs then milder motors will be wicked fast & shaft drive cars will become relevant in mod because you won't need as much power to go fast.
party_wagon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 03:10 PM   #18
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Hertfordshire England
Posts: 46
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by timmay70 View Post
Nobody is forcing you to use lead, that is your choice of ballast. There are many other things you can use to add ballast to your car; depleted uranium, tungsten, stainless steel, compressed cow chips and llama dung are just a few examples.

Like I said, I use Lipo in sedan. I want to know that I am on equal footing with a driver racing Nimh. Why should I alienate someone that perhaps can't afford to run out an purchase all new equipment because some dilweed wants to force feed their feelings on his sorry poor ass? Selfish and inconsiderate jackasses are all over the place.
I really think your reply is funny
Cow chips and llama dung rotfl.

The lead thing was a bit tongue in cheek but racing is racing. it should be graded on ability not on how much you spend on your car or how fast the motor is!

Nearly every class of sport is split into ability not what trainers you wear or what swim suit you wear. we could learn a lot in TC from buggy racers.

I still think the whole thing has become a stupid mess of misplaced oldfashioned legislation that originally had good intentions.

The idea that everyone from world champs down to club racers can compete against drivers of a similar ability. but when a lot of the best drivers in the world are playing stock where does mr clubman fit in a novice against a world champion!!!

Why make cars then add weight to them it makes the cars brittle. total opposite of what the rule is intended to do. stop guys from making stupid light cars that break as soon as you look at them.

I think that many cars even running NIMH still come well under 1500g rule due to micro rx mini pt lightweight car components.

It is time for a change now.

Whats wrong with pan cars i think they are great and if the motor winds are not critical then thats great it makes things much easier.
brit_bulldog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 03:53 PM   #19
Tech Elite
 
seaball's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,303
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Send a message via Yahoo to seaball
Default justified rant

this is something that i've been waiting for all the internet jagoffs to screw up the perception of the situation on, and hence, my decision to offer a comment on these usually, brutal threads.

here's the deal: if you don't race competitively, don't comment on the rules that govern those who do. seriously. we know you're bored, but that's just dumb. offer some insight, and then go away. if you vote for "no rules" you have no business discussing organized racing. this doesn't pertain to you, and it's not likely to. ever.

the problem is that these forums are a lazy way for people (even governing bodies) to get answers/trends.. and they are (from what i can see) not very accurate to those who actually will be governed by them (roar racers do NOT make up much of the 8-billion rctech users). i know. surprise.

now...

it is too early to know how much (if any) to lower the weight. and there's no real harm in running a year with mixed sticks to see how it goes.

the lower coupla grams isn't going to save parts or tires. a big (easily acheivable limit) will allow mfr's to put material back into the suspension and other brittle areas that have given touring car a black eye. that will go much further than shaving 1-200g off a chassis. go ahead, argue the physics. your rdx arms are going to break at 5mph i don't care if you're running lipo.

additionally, we might not all be running carbon copies of the original 415 if we had more room to move balast around to use as a tuning aid. as it is, that's pretty much all we have to work with...

as the batteries pack more energy in them, they get (what?) heavier. it used to be somewhat easy to make weight (especially on foam tires). now? with 4500's, b/l esc's, RW bodies, it's almost not happening no matter what chassis you run. awesome. so, now that plays into what chassis you get for the season. do you logically expect that a change in battery technology will not be subject to the same type of improvements over time (and the corresponding side effects)? come on, guys. where there's a will.. (and a market)

you want to buy $100 titanium screws that strip out to make weight? then you're an idiot and your vote should be weighted as such. (you probably already have aluminum screws holding your bulkheads into the chassis). here's a dremel to get the studs back out, kid. and by the way, that's why you didn't finish a single qualifier at the roar nats last month.

look, it's going lipo and it has nothing to do with weight. they are at the beginning of their development in our application, and they will be the thing to race by the end of the season (is my guess). so, don't make it an alterior motive by using some other parameter to act as a catalyst in the process.

remember, the rules are for those who want to race. and the consensus is that racing needs to be cheaper to keep people into this. going low on the weight only encourages exotic materials ($), cnc designs ($), and brittle cars ($) to be used on the track. we got rid of the "brittle" bodies with the GBS rules, let's not do the opposite when it comes to the chassis.

consider this: this whole issue shouldn't expose anyone's personal agenda. it's about what will make the future of racing more able to be done at a higher level by more people. keep people on the track, with cheaper kits. leave the high $ parts to the concours guys or those who just like the attention.

let your club modify the rules for the backyard stuff. as for roar, treat your racers as what they are (paying members): focused guys that want a ruleset that will provide some room (stability) as the equipment itself sees constant changes.

man, don't screw this up because you're bored or you you have some personal hatred for soldering (take that out on intellect or their loyal supporters).

i see no need to jump in with both feet on this whole issue. so let's all repeat the same things over and over in hopes that someone is keeping a tally of which side you personally are on....

oh and let's also digress to whatever else you want to complain about.

- gerry ashford -
__________________
*** The Gate II - Home of Mike Wise ***
seaball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 04:31 PM   #20
Tech Elite
 
Rick Vessell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Mars
Posts: 2,302
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

Amen brother Seaball, Amen!
Rick Vessell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 04:34 PM   #21
Tech Elite
 
Rick Hohwart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seaball View Post
...the lower coupla grams isn't going to save parts or tires. a big (easily acheivable limit) will allow mfr's to put material back into the suspension and other brittle areas that have given touring car a black eye. that will go much further than shaving 1-200g off a chassis. go ahead, argue the physics. your rdx arms are going to break at 5mph i don't care if you're running lipo.
This is why the minimum weight will never be lowered.
Rick Hohwart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 05:31 PM   #22
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: santa monica / manchester
Posts: 1,273
Default

Personally I think the idea of reducing the weight limit stinks. It puts a bigger divide between teh haves and teh have nots and alienates newcomers to the sport.

You've got to set a limit which is realistic for a wide range of racers. I'm all for a group of like minded guys to race with no weight limit, but for official races I think the 1500g limit is fair.

RC racing is at its best a fun and enjoyable hobby, but I've seen it also at its worst as some clubs become ultra elitist. The fact is, if you want to get better improve your driving, that's the mark of real skill. If you have to add a few weights to your car then so be it, I'm sure you would be happier to know that you won due to your skill alone.
Qatmix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 05:34 PM   #23
Tech Champion
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 7,586
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

That was the sound of science getting dropped on your ass....
__________________
A mutually re-enforcing cascade of failure

"Failior [sic] crowns enterprise." Robert Goddard

I-Lap Scoring Systems http://www.rclapcounter.com/
robk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 05:35 PM   #24
Tech Elite
 
RBLove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,745
Trader Rating: 72 (100%+)
Default

Well said Mr. Seaball!!!!!!!!
RBLove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2008, 06:07 PM   #25
Tech Master
 
timmay70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,701
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Hohwart View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by seaball View Post
the lower coupla grams isn't going to save parts or tires. a big (easily acheivable limit) will allow mfr's to put material back into the suspension and other brittle areas that have given touring car a black eye. that will go much further than shaving 1-200g off a chassis. go ahead, argue the physics. your rdx arms are going to break at 5mph i don't care if you're running lipo.
This is why the minimum weight will never be lowered.
How come when I said this 2, 4, 6, and 8 months ago people didn't believe me? First excuse they came up with was: 'it's physics man'... At least they didn't call me dude, I wouldn't want to take that away from Mr. Fairtrace...

Rick, the only thing that concerns me is that the MFG's will never engineer the plastic back into the arms. I can think of 2 reasons... 1. unsprung weight, 2. profit - gotta sell parts. I'd love to see FK04 style arms that look as though they belong on my MBX5.
__________________
Speed Merchant Rev7, Tekin, TQ Racing (wire), Team Tamale
RC Excitement - Buy where you race, support your local tracks.
ROAR #105242
timmay70 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2008, 02:25 AM   #26
Tech Champion
 
tc3team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 6,151
Default

From my understanding, Lipo will carry a more even discharge voltage curve to it and is typically a higher capacity than nimh... Good for mod at least, maybe even 10.5 and 19t and gear more because you can... maybe you dont even need to because the voltage curve is better than nimh over race distance, and will only get things hotter?

Does anyone see this as an advantage? weighting these cars down even less and against nimh wouldn't seem fair. BUT.... we also don't need seperate classes, or lighter and/or fragile cars as already mentioned. What you save on the cost of lipo will be ploughed into lighter parts, then a double whammy with part breakage...

It seems to me that new technology is just another excuse to dilute the racing even more.

No one forced anyone to change from nimh to lipo, chances are you changed from nimh for the conveinience of nursing them less than your nimh and keeping less of them in your pit box...

so in that respect, you already have an advantage by spending more time on your car setup/gearing/whatever. Maybe you can even place the extra weight over the front under the steering linkage for more front end grip if you want to.... Or under a top deck near the back to keep the car planted.

Remember, in low grip situations a lighter car will be harder to rotate in the corners. In high grip situations you may want extra weight over the front or rear of the car. Theres usually no such thing as a free lunch....
__________________
Fusion Hobbies / www.horshamrc.org

The wife stops me being sane and the r/c stops me from going insane....

Last edited by tc3team; 07-22-2008 at 02:31 AM. Reason: extra paragrapgh
tc3team is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2008, 04:08 AM   #27
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 38
Red face Good article!

Good article!Thanks!MapleStory cheats-MapleStory v.57 Trainer 6.5WOW Cheats,MapleStory Cheats,Lineage CheatsMapleStory Cheats,MapleStory Hacks,Maplestory Bypass
loktw001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2008, 04:50 AM   #28
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: U.K. England.
Posts: 1
Default

Getting back to CCFM's point. I can understand his annoyance of having to put so many ugly weights on his car, but at the moment 1500 is the rules for all and that's the way it has to be, for now.

I know motors has nothing to do with this thread but please read on, it is relivant.

Faze 1. BL motors.

If we look at how BL motors have been introduced in the U.K. this year it's obvious that this is the way forwards motor wise and has been a huge success. There are still people using 27t and 19t brushed motors runing against BL which is there choice and this does not dilute the respective classes, but from what I can see and has happened is that less and less are using brushed motors and are converting over to BL gradually (cost is a big factor when changing over) because of the performance difference and it also free's up valuable time.
So as for motors and in conclusion the change from BR to BL over the past year or so was a sceptical time but the outcome was more than we all hoped for and is the future for motors.
So as far as the above goes that's faze 1 done and dusted.

Faze 2 Lipos.

Well with BR motors well on their way to being made obsolete for current racers we now have to look at lipos. This year saw the U.K. Nationals drop 27t brushed completly which left 2 classes remaining, 19t/10.5 and Mod. Mod still being 5 cell but 19t/10.5 had the option of Nimh or lipo with approx a 50/50 split.
So this year has seen more and more people making the change from Nimh to Lipo for the first time (my point above about motors now becomes relivant, I hope) so over the next 6+ months we will see more and more changing over to Lipos because as mentioned before this gives you more time to work on your car and you dont have to nurse them like nimh's. So the '09 season could be the time to make the 10.5 class at our Nationals having the only power source being lipo. Would this be to early? a good question.
With so many spending a lot of money this year changing over to BL would they be put off of entering meetings next year if they had to buy 1-2 Lipos and these were the only cells they could use? I think not beacause we all change cells at least once a year and you would only need 1 Lipo and a charger (if the one you already have can not charge lipos).

So CCFM you have hit on a very good idea which I 100% agree with as long as everyone is using lipos.
F.T.Q. MODELS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2008, 04:57 AM   #29
Tech Champion
 
tc3team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 6,151
Default

Excuse the pun, but does this conversation share an equal weight of it to the 5 cell story?...

(In the UK) We all wanted lighter weight limits then, but we still finished up at 1500gr...
__________________
Fusion Hobbies / www.horshamrc.org

The wife stops me being sane and the r/c stops me from going insane....
tc3team is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2008, 05:17 AM   #30
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Hertfordshire England
Posts: 46
Default

The whole point of this thread is that once again technology has moved on.

Why do some guys think running lipos is more expensive?

You add cost of 3-5 packs of nimhs with cost of charger plus discharger.

then add cost of charger plus 2-3 packs of lipo.

It is cheaper!!!!!!

That is the only reason i run them nothing else. so then why am punished by adding weight to my car that i dont need?

Are the guys who are complaining still holding on to their brushed motors and comm lathes because they are better and cheaper than brushless?

If we can get better performance for less money is that not a good thing?

I guess we could all run mardave mini - stock
brit_bulldog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
my light weight lipo touring car alainchan Electric On-Road 186 07-06-2016 11:17 PM
Lipo and NIMH Weight BuggyKing Radio and Electronics 4 05-02-2008 09:56 AM
Next Gen Touring Cars - Will they be designed for Lipo? CouldbeFaster Electric On-Road 39 04-03-2008 05:46 PM
5 cell touring car weight Dave Bowser Electric On-Road 2 08-28-2007 12:25 AM
Touring Class Weight Minimum jcrouse Electric On-Road 4 12-12-2003 10:23 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 12:02 AM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net