R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-22-2008, 08:25 PM   #31
Tech Elite
 
theisgroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 3,191
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Cochran View Post
If ROAR is contemplating bring in 1 cell lipo it needs to be it's own class with it's own weight limit. No more throwing everything together and then later trying to sort out how to make it comparable speed wise. I have seen the 1 cell in action and they are "similar" to a 17.5T 4 cell but they are not the same, especially if they are going to have a 65 gram weight break. The big difference I saw was the extra torque of the 13.5t along with the lighter mass of the car accelerating out of the corners, the straight speeds are comparable.

Just my 2cents.

bravo.

+1
__________________
yang lai

Team Tamale | Team Tekin | RCAmerica | Speedmerchant | Speedzone RC | EA Motorsports | Ko Propo USA | eXpress Motorsports | Parma/PSE
theisgroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2008, 08:32 PM   #32
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 649
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

I agree that LiPo should be in a different class whenever it makes sense. The only time they should mix 17.5 4 cell and 13.5 LiPo is at club races where there aren't enough racers.
Fred_B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2008, 08:37 PM   #33
Company Representative
 
Danny/SMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Elkton, VA
Posts: 3,097
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

A seperate class would be great and I hope the weight minimum would be done so all cars and reasonable electronics will be able to make the weight.
Danny/SMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2008, 08:40 PM   #34
Tech Fanatic
 
tpczx6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Fremont CA
Posts: 846
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theisgroup View Post
bravo.

+1


+2
__________________
RcAmerica--Xray---Hudy----KO PROPO USA---ORCA---GRAVITY RC
Motiv------Apexrc----- AVID
SWEEP Racing USA
Mike's Hobbyshop in Dallas (RIP)
Nor-Cal Hobbies [The Race Place]
tpczx6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2008, 09:24 PM   #35
Tech Master
 
CarlosG.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Falls City,TX
Posts: 1,145
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Send a message via Yahoo to CarlosG.
Default

+3
CarlosG. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2008, 09:29 PM   #36
Tech Elite
 
a_main_attendee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Colorado, USA, The land of the free and the home of the brave!
Posts: 2,880
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Really, guys? more classes at big races?
__________________
Support your local tracks!--|--e-teamhobbyplex.com--|--corrc.org--|

NNFaN Paints - Add some pride to YOUR ride.
a_main_attendee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 04:49 AM   #37
Company Representative
 
ammdrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,591
Trader Rating: 25 (100%+)
Default

A note here ROAR is looking at single cells for oval and to provide approved cells for testing and experimenting we are a long way from repowering 1/12th cars. The reality is the voltage is just different so it is not just a simple drop in. While on club level many things will work they do not always transpire at the national level.

Amazing a wt typo became a lipo discussion.
__________________
Team Tekin, Team Scream, Paint By Mike, Team Mölzer Mowery Racing, EA Motorsports, Speedmerchant, TQ Wire

MMR Direct Minneapolis World Class Indoor Race Facility.
On Road and Off Road racing year round.

www.molzermoweryracing.com
http://www.facebook.com/pages/MMR/160679913944205?__req=9

Check out You Tube mmrswracing. Every qualifier and every main uploaded at the end of every race day.
ammdrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 06:24 AM   #38
Tech Champion
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 7,211
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

I think once we come up with a single cell 1/12 class you will see the 4 cell class go away.
jiml is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 12:08 PM   #39
Tech Addict
 
Tubaboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Riverton, WY
Posts: 582
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

Can we get single cell to replace an existing 1/12th class? Perhaps... offer the following:

Mod - Single Cell or 4 Cell Nimh. Keep weight limit at 794.
Super Stock - Nimh 13.5 (Weight to 865)
Stock - Lipo 13.5 (Weight at 794)

Advantage goes to only having one motor for both Super Stock and Stock, reducing the costs overall. Want to run both? Throw a nimh in, and you can run in both SS and Stock classes.

Just my thought for the day.

Paul
__________________
www.wyomingrc.com | www.wyomingmodelerspark.com
Tubaboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 09:23 AM   #40
Tech Master
 
~McSmooth~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,082
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Cochran View Post
I have tried for the last 2 years to bring up my concerns with weight in 12th scale. This was a problem even before brushless came along. The big problem I see with a weight limit being set too low is it causes racers to spend unnecessary money to make their car lighter. Usually as a consequence of the lighter car something will probably break easier, aluminum screws. Raising the weight limit to a reasonable level costs the racer almost nothing. Seriously, how much is a couple squares of lead?

If ROAR is contemplating bring in 1 cell lipo it needs to be it's own class with it's own weight limit. No more throwing everything together and then later trying to sort out how to make it comparable speed wise. I have seen the 1 cell in action and they are "similar" to a 17.5T 4 cell but they are not the same, especially if they are going to have a 65 gram weight break. The big difference I saw was the extra torque of the 13.5t along with the lighter mass of the car accelerating out of the corners, the straight speeds are comparable.

Just my 2cents.
Perzactly!

1. The brushless supporters want the weight limit to be up at 865 grams for everyone. Then in a year, these same people are going to want the weight limit put back at 795 when the LiPos come out.

2. I don't care how "even" everyone says a Lipo/13.5 will be compared to a NiMH/17.5. One of them is GOING to be faster. It just will. Is a 17.5 brushless the same EXACT speed as a 27T brushed? Nope. Was a 10.5 BL the same EXACT speed as a 19T brushed?

Whoever is on the "losing" end of the arguement isn't going to be happy. If the BL/Lipo combo is faster, then we'll hear 'get with the times/it's taking over" etc. If BL/Lipo is slower, then those people are going to demand a change in the motor spec.
__________________
DeSoto Racing * Franchise * Pro-One * Team Scream * Power Push * Team Ass

Badly influencing a new generation of racers!
~McSmooth~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 09:41 AM   #41
Company Representative
 
Danny/SMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Elkton, VA
Posts: 3,097
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

I know of some tracks who have very poor turnouts in 12th scale as racers who have used Lipos in Sedan or other classes simply don't want to buy and deal with sub-c cells anymore.

I think for this year tracks should allow 13.5/single cell to run against 17.5/4 cell and starting next season do seperate classes and I'm sure the Lipo class will be way more popular than the 4 cell class.
Danny/SMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 12:24 PM   #42
AE-Reedy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 780
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny/SMC View Post
I know of some tracks who have very poor turnouts in 12th scale as racers who have used Lipos in Sedan or other classes simply don't want to buy and deal with sub-c cells anymore.

I think for this year tracks should allow 13.5/single cell to run against 17.5/4 cell and starting next season do seperate classes and I'm sure the Lipo class will be way more popular than the 4 cell class.
The only way possibly running them together will even be close to fair is if both types run at a fair weight limit for both types of cells. 794 grams is not fair for the Nimh. As I stated before giving the lipo cars a 65-70 gram weight break isn't right. I understand that a lot of people want to run lipos but at a race to determine a National Champion you can't just throw another variable in this class that is currently one of the most popular in the US. Club races can do what they feel is best but lets leave the Nationals alone for this year and them try to implement the lipos in next season. If ROAR wants to allow single cell lipo to run in Mod I'm ok with that, with a fair weight limit, but not in stock.
Sean Cochran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 12:49 PM   #43
Tech Fanatic
 
tpczx6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Fremont CA
Posts: 846
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a_main_attendee View Post
Really, guys? more classes at big races?
Why don't you read the WHOLE post not just the ONE line about more classes
__________________
RcAmerica--Xray---Hudy----KO PROPO USA---ORCA---GRAVITY RC
Motiv------Apexrc----- AVID
SWEEP Racing USA
Mike's Hobbyshop in Dallas (RIP)
Nor-Cal Hobbies [The Race Place]
tpczx6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 12:56 PM   #44
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Iowa
Posts: 516
Trader Rating: 15 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny/SMC View Post
I know of some tracks who have very poor turnouts in 12th scale as racers who have used Lipos in Sedan or other classes simply don't want to buy and deal with sub-c cells anymore.
I wonder how many racers got turned off on sub-c's because of the IB fiasco of dead cells in packs, cells blowing up, etc. I'll consider running lipo's once SMC has competition in this marketspace. Hopefully, a workable solution can also be found for those wanting to stick with T-bar cars as well.
jpeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 01:08 PM   #45
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 900
Default

I'm with Sean on this one - make a class for LiPo and then run it. If that takes over from NiMh, then one class lives and one dies - that's life. Nonetheless, remember that by far the vast majority of 12th drivers use NiMh, and to keep pushing something that means they all have to invest money in something new may mean 12th loses more drivers than it gains.

Seems to me that most people over there in ROAR are liking 3.7v/13.5, so why don't you push for that class, and get on board with it? If you did that, and were able to give advice and support to people who want to run it, you'd get more drivers in to it. All the arguing about equivalence is a waste of time, there isn't any.

I hope Sean's views prevail, it seems to me that if there was a 3.7v/13.5 BL class, there would be more 12th drivers...
SlowerOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
‘FWR Racing Season’ FWR Northwest Racers 11302 08-23-2015 07:38 PM
2009 Blue Diamond/G Force on road scene "ALL OUT"!! spurcheck Racing Forum 1993 01-25-2010 03:25 PM
Backwards Lipo use: Time to evolve Peoples. oXYnary Electric On-Road 50 07-27-2008 01:28 PM
2007 Battle @ The Bowl - Mushroombowl Speedway - Kennett Square, PA A. Rhodes Racing Forum 383 06-09-2008 08:04 PM
Deal of the year..... DLM2005 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 10 06-30-2006 10:57 AM
2005 Mid-Winter Touring Car Challenge FIVE 7 Canadian R/C Scene 79 02-28-2005 11:50 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 05:59 PM.


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