R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-11-2008, 09:20 AM   #16
Tech Champion
 
MikeXray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 5,749
Trader Rating: 73 (100%+)
Default

Isn't the idea of these types of restrictions to just limit the "perceived" advantage? Fast guys will always be fast, but slower guys always look for something they don't have that they might to close the gap.
__________________
Mike L. Awesomatixusa.com | TQWire.com | Islandraceway.com |JacksonRCracing.com | Horsham RC | Sweepracingusa.com
MikeXray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2008, 09:51 AM   #17
Tech Addict
 
Tubaboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Riverton, WY
Posts: 582
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

I think it could be a good thing, but I also agree with Eric. It needs to be evaluated to make sure that the resellers aren't being to adversely affected.

The rule for motors is that they have to have X amount out for sale, via a distributor. Nothing about having them in stores. Just how many they have sold to a distributor.

Overall, my opinion is that a price point could work out. But I think ROAR needs to implement the same price for both types of cells, instead of how they did it with one price for brushed and another price for brushless.

Cya,
Paul
__________________
www.wyomingrc.com | www.wyomingmodelerspark.com
Tubaboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2008, 09:56 AM   #18
The Evicerator
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 4,142
Default

Not to try to hijack the thread in another direction... but I wanted to touch on the point that EA made here regarding motor cost.

Raw materials cost on copper wire, steel, and aluminum have all increased SUBSTANTIALLY from the time that we first introduced our first brushles motors in 2003.

I did a very rough cost study anaylsis to show you what I'm talking about. Using average prices I found online for raw materials from 2003 to buy one pound of copper, one pound of aluminum, and one pound of steel cost $1.65.

Using the same average prices for today, to buy the same one pound each of aluminum, copper, and steel costs over $6.10!

All this with a retail price limit that was imposed that was arguably too low in the first place way back then

IF you want to have ROAR impose cost ceilings on products... I STRONGLY suggest to you the customers to urge ROAR to let the manufacturers who deal with these products help decide on what those limits should be... not just let a few laymen who made a few phone calls decide for you.



Quote:
Originally Posted by EAMotorsports View Post
...
I dont think the motor $$ should be removed but with the rising cost of building supples (along with every freaking other thing) I do think it needs to re-evaluated at some point in time soon.

EA
__________________
Steve Weiss
TEAM ASSOCIATED -- REEDY -- SANWA -- PROTOFORM -- 1UP Racing -- ActivRC -- P1 BRAND -- TEAM KINWALD -- TEAM STEVE INTERNATIONAL
Steve Weiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2008, 10:54 AM   #19
Tech Master
 
timmay70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,701
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Sorry, I mistook this for another bitch thread, those suck.

ROAR said you can have 7.4v lipo in place of Nimh 6-cell packs. They said that the limits are HxWxL, and the battery needs to pass the torture test. There is only x amount of area to build capacity/performance.

This is essentially the same scenario that the Nimh mfgs had to contend with. They are still figuring out how to advance the technology for Nimh, even though it is dying an expedited death in RC. This tells me that there are other applications for that tech that is demanding more performance.

As long as battery companies are in competition with each other, not only in this market, they will continue to push the envelope to continuously make their stuff better. I am sure that as the tech becomes viable, they will package it for the other markets that can bare the price level they are going to demand for that particular tech, one of the markets will be RC. It is usually the engineering and tooling costs that keep certian technology out of the reach of different markets. As Rick noted, they could have released a much better performing pack, but at a major cost. How long until the tech that Rick was talking about gets introduced to our market.

Better yet, who's to say that the current crop of OEMs aren't purchasing these cells and stuffing them into their hard cases for their team drivers? Who would be able to tech and catch these companies at their games? What wins Sunday, sells Monday. Putting a $ limit on lipos will only help the club racers to keep their costs under control, and it won't do anything to help create a 'spec' feel to the classes being raced today. It says nothing about what these factories are using with their top performing drivers.

1. is there a viable construction difference between the batteries that the consumer purchases v.s. the construction method of these 'super cells' that Rick said they 'could' put on the market, so that IF tech at a big race grew a set big enough to crack open a case, could tell the difference and make the call?

2. would tech at any race have the nut to actually crack open the case to verify the pack, or would they just say "big sponsor win, they help pay for race, congratulate big sponsor, pat sponsor on back."
__________________
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 09-11-2008, 11:43 AM   #20
Tech Champion
 
MikeXray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 5,749
Trader Rating: 73 (100%+)
Default

For the "hobby" to survive the rules need to protect the day to day club racer, not the top guys. Why don't they take the cap off the motor rule then, maybe the top guys are running titanium cases and pure gold windings with space shuttle bearings, you'd never know.
__________________
Mike L. Awesomatixusa.com | TQWire.com | Islandraceway.com |JacksonRCracing.com | Horsham RC | Sweepracingusa.com
MikeXray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2008, 12:25 PM   #21
Tech Champion
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 5,360
Trader Rating: 38 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dodgeguy View Post
No dollar limit is needed. A more expensive battery will not necessarily make someone a better driver.


In nitro you can get a $100 to $700 engine. But you still have to drive it.
Nitro is like open mod to electric though. Most people can't handle the power they have. With a stock motor though there are tracks you never even lift the trigger finger and you are getting as fast as you are going to get then every little bit helps.

Of course this assume a stock motor could even get more out of a better lipo battery. That seems to be debatable.
or8ital is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2008, 12:28 PM   #22
Tech Master
 
timmay70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,701
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeXray View Post
For the "hobby" to survive the rules need to protect the day to day club racer, not the top guys. Why don't they take the cap off the motor rule then, maybe the top guys are running titanium cases and pure gold windings with space shuttle bearings, you'd never know.
I agree with your post except for one POV... The local club racer that decides to go to big events. If that club racer is actually an excellent driver but cannot afford to make it to all the events, and is largely unknown, these un-obtainable parts will contribute to taking the win away from this driver. This is also a rare scenario, and is largely not a problem with mod (mostly factory drivers only). But in stock and super-stock racing, it can make all the difference.

Again, with the hard cases and tech that really doesn't tech, there is no way to catch the people that are winning at all costs - regardless of cost control within the regs.

Just so you know where I am coming from, I was talking to a known motor builder/engineer/racer (nameless)... 'There are ways around ALL the counter-measures that the current methods of tech-ing check for'. I am not privy to them, however I do have some ideas how people can/will circumvent the rules.

Cost cap will not prevent people from using stuff that is un-obtainable to the masses, especially at large scale events. It will only help local racing. If you are not concerned with national level racing, then this is a moot point. I am.
__________________
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 09-11-2008, 01:00 PM   #23
Tech Champion
 
MikeXray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 5,749
Trader Rating: 73 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timmay70 View Post
I agree with your post except for one POV... The local club racer that decides to go to big events. If that club racer is actually an excellent driver but cannot afford to make it to all the events, and is largely unknown, these un-obtainable parts will contribute to taking the win away from this driver. This is also a rare scenario, and is largely not a problem with mod (mostly factory drivers only). But in stock and super-stock racing, it can make all the difference.

Again, with the hard cases and tech that really doesn't tech, there is no way to catch the people that are winning at all costs - regardless of cost control within the regs.

Just so you know where I am coming from, I was talking to a known motor builder/engineer/racer (nameless)... 'There are ways around ALL the counter-measures that the current methods of tech-ing check for'. I am not privy to them, however I do have some ideas how people can/will circumvent the rules.

Cost cap will not prevent people from using stuff that is un-obtainable to the masses, especially at large scale events. It will only help local racing. If you are not concerned with national level racing, then this is a moot point. I am.
Yes I am much more concerned with the track that's 30 min from my house, both tracks that are local to me take roar's guidelines. In the perfect world the local track would make their own rules that fit their local racers needs, but since everyone has such a loud voice these days it's easier to offload the rules onto ROAR.


The rules have had this issue for years, how hard was it to change the shrink wrap on an Nimh cell? do you think there was never a case of someone using an "unapproved" cell?

Here's a happy medium, enstate an offical "amatuer 17.5" style class and have the rules apply to that class only.
__________________
Mike L. Awesomatixusa.com | TQWire.com | Islandraceway.com |JacksonRCracing.com | Horsham RC | Sweepracingusa.com
MikeXray is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Electric 1/8th Scale conversion kits. DJ1978 Electric Off-Road 19923 06-12-2017 06:16 AM
General Discussion Modena AL MSRA (Memphis, TN) 7895 05-05-2014 05:50 AM
MUSIC CITY R/C RACEWAY 56DIRT Oval, Larger Scales and More 75 02-27-2010 06:50 PM
SMC 28C 4000/5000 Hardcase Lipo part 2 Danny/SMC Electric On-Road 1598 02-17-2009 08:20 PM
Eddie for ROAR PRESIDENT EddieO Electric On-Road 508 10-07-2008 06:13 PM
ROAR B/L motor Rules debate thread C_O_jones Electric On-Road 1080 01-21-2008 08:00 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 07:25 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