ROAR 1/12 weight limit
#76
Moderator
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Outside doing things in places... Denver, CO
Posts: 4,609
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
And the additional speeds seen arent just from electronics improvements. The chassis engineering has improved dramaticly in the last 4 or 5 years in pan cars. They now carry more speed through corners, and are more stable on straights.
I dont think making everyone run heavier will change any of this. This is just a discussion about how people who are resisting LiPo in 1/12th wont be left behind with their heavy old cells. Why should rules change to help those who choose to not help advance the hobby/sport? Keep the weight where it is... and that will help push the classes forward to lighter and more current technologies instead of stalling out.
I think the reason everyone is ready to jump in head on in this, is many people are waiting in the wings to get back into 1/12th, but have no intention of dealing with NiMH. (I know of a handful myself.)
#77
Tech Champion
iTrader: (261)
This isn't about the folks who MIGHT get involved (read: say things like "if they'd only XXX I'd be doing that", etc). This should be about folks who ARE involved and invested in the scale. Remember all of the TC racers who were going come back in droves once LiPo was allowed? Well, it's been a year now and all indications are that TC continues on it's downward trajectory. AFAIK 1/12 has been in a comparative "boom" cycle for a couple years now...and has done so with BRUSHED MOTORS (until comparatively recently) AND NIMH BATTERIES.
IMO, the folks who wait on the sidelines because they want new tech are the same folks who won't be "in" the game once the new tech is incorporated. Their excuse then will probably be along the lines of "when they get rid of straight axles", etc.
NOW, I think the creation of a NEW class (WGT) without LiPo batteries was premature and VERY short-sighted. The obvious choice there was 2S 21.5 (or now 1S 17.5)...
IMO, the folks who wait on the sidelines because they want new tech are the same folks who won't be "in" the game once the new tech is incorporated. Their excuse then will probably be along the lines of "when they get rid of straight axles", etc.
NOW, I think the creation of a NEW class (WGT) without LiPo batteries was premature and VERY short-sighted. The obvious choice there was 2S 21.5 (or now 1S 17.5)...
#78
Tech Elite
iTrader: (16)
So instead of thinking "OMG this is a new class... you can’t play in the same sandbox as us!!" and worrying that this will thin classes out - why doesn’t everyone realize this IS the future and work is being done by many people to make the class have parity with existing 17.5/4cell and 27T/4cell cars.
Instead of segmenting due to all the typical R/C paranoia that happens when any technology change comes along, maybe you endure a small period of "mixed class racing" to keep numbers high and help the sport.
Instead of segmenting due to all the typical R/C paranoia that happens when any technology change comes along, maybe you endure a small period of "mixed class racing" to keep numbers high and help the sport.
and on the topic of weight... if everything is just a bit portly right now with the 4 cell/brushless setups... but is going to fall back to the weight we had years ago of around 800gm with LiPo and BL... why is everyone worrying or debating. By next year this will be a dead topic as we will have cars that are lighter than the spec weight anyway and have to start adding ballast again.
Last edited by Trips; 12-27-2008 at 04:39 PM.
#80
Tech Elite
iTrader: (16)
This isn't about the folks who MIGHT get involved (read: say things like "if they'd only XXX I'd be doing that", etc). This should be about folks who ARE involved and invested in the scale. Remember all of the TC racers who were going come back in droves once LiPo was allowed? Well, it's been a year now and all indications are that TC continues on it's downward trajectory. AFAIK 1/12 has been in a comparative "boom" cycle for a couple years now...and has done so with BRUSHED MOTORS (until comparatively recently) AND NIMH BATTERIES.
#81
Really? The folks at my track are talking going up to 4cell/13.5BL next season for a little more speed. I dont think we need more, I think 4 cell 17.5 is pretty reasonable, and keeps parts costs low. Keep in mind 1/12th is not normally considered an entry level class. I dont think the cars in a 17.5/4cell are that much faster than when I ran 1/12th 3 years ago with everyone laboring in between heats to keep their 27T in top shape. Its just easier to go that fast now.
If 1/12 is not for entry level then why so many wanting to make this HOBBY class easier, hell sitting on the couch is pretty easy, maybe fantasy RC next!
Easier to go fast now is half the problem in all classes...any new guy can buy and maintain speed without any knowledge or ability and all he needs to learn is how to replace parts until he/she eventually stays home. Remember when you had to LEARN how to make a car/motor/battery run fast.
I dont think making everyone run heavier will change any of this. This is just a discussion about how people who are resisting LiPo in 1/12th wont be left behind with their heavy old cells. Why should rules change to help those who choose to not help advance the hobby/sport? Keep the weight where it is... and that will help push the classes forward to lighter and more current technologies instead of stalling out.
This isn't about the folks who MIGHT get involved (read: say things like "if they'd only XXX I'd be doing that", etc). This should be about folks who ARE involved and invested in the scale. Remember all of the TC racers who were going come back in droves once LiPo was allowed? Well, it's been a year now and all indications are that TC continues on it's downward trajectory. AFAIK 1/12 has been in a comparative "boom" cycle for a couple years now...and has done so with BRUSHED MOTORS (until comparatively recently) AND NIMH BATTERIES.
IMO, the folks who wait on the sidelines because they want new tech are the same folks who won't be "in" the game once the new tech is incorporated. Their excuse then will probably be along the lines of "when they get rid of straight axles", etc....
IMO, the folks who wait on the sidelines because they want new tech are the same folks who won't be "in" the game once the new tech is incorporated. Their excuse then will probably be along the lines of "when they get rid of straight axles", etc....
If you WERE pushing LiPO for business reasons, I could understand. If you're not an active 1/12 scale racer, then I can't figure out why you ARE pushing this... and while you're at it, you make all these proclamations about "just slowing the cars down" and "no need for saddle packs, t-bar cars aren't popular" etc. Why not leave it to guys who actually race 1/12? Your "screw everyone who can't easily adapt to a single brick 3.7 cell" attitude would seem to be ALL about profit, and not about anything else. I don't see how pushing a technology that takes roughly half the existing 1/12 cars out of the picture can be something positive for the class.
AMEN!! The way things seem to be going, I expect more people will be LEAVING 1/12 than will come in.
AMEN!! The way things seem to be going, I expect more people will be LEAVING 1/12 than will come in.
#82
Weight penalty
Does anyone have any facts related to (a) vs (b) comparison between 17.5/Nimh and 13.5/Lipo. One of the local racers (and longtime 1/12th racer) ran 13.5/Lipo in his car the last time I attended a race at their track. His fastest lipo lap was over 2 tenths quicker than his fastest lap the previous week when he ran Nimh. Add to this the fact that his "final" lap (at 8 minutes) with lipo was a 12.2, which is still faster than his quickest "overall" lap the week prior when he ran Nimh. Maybe it was just old Nimh before, compared to fresh Lipo... But, does anyone else have any numbers?? Where is the justification for any type of weight penalty? I would prefer to see the weight rule left at 794 for all, and allow all of the traditional 1/12th cars the opportunity to trim down to that weight (BL-Nimh, Lipo, and/or 27t stock).
Last edited by jpeck; 12-27-2008 at 07:19 PM.
#83
Tech Elite
iTrader: (16)
But, does anyone else have any numbers?? Where is the justification for any type of weight penalty? I would prefer to see the weight rule left at 794 for all, and allow all of the traditional 1/12th cars the opportunity to trim down to that weight (BL-Nimh, Lipo, and/or 27t stock).
The NIMH/27T guys are typically weighing in at 800-815, the NIMH/17.5s anywhere from 855 to 900, and the LiPO well down into the mid 700's.
I'm not advocating a weight penalty for any of the types, but as it stands now, the NIMH/17.5 IS operating under a weight penalty, as much as 100 grams.
If the LiPO/13.5 had to make a reasonable weight, I['d have no issues, but as it stands, there's a 100 gram or more weight advantage to the LiPO/13.5
Given that it's not likely to be possible to get a NIMH/17.5 to 795 grams, it'll still be a weight advantage to the LiPO 13.5 to run at that weight, but I'd be able to live with it. I'm pretty sure I can get a NIMH/17.5 car down to 825 to 830, and I could live with the one ounce penalty until someone decides that t-bar guys aren't the scum of the earth and comes out with a 3.7 saddle pack. Hell, maybe I'll look into sourcing and reselling one myself for that matter.
I suppose my earlier proposal of 835 was a bit utopian in nature... but certainly making the LiPO/13.5 meet the current 795 weight rule can't be all that far off an idea... at least until the 1/12 class goes all LiPO... and I don't doubt that it IS headed that way.
#84
Moderator
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Outside doing things in places... Denver, CO
Posts: 4,609
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
This isn't about the folks who MIGHT get involved (read: say things like "if they'd only XXX I'd be doing that", etc). This should be about folks who ARE involved and invested in the scale. Remember all of the TC racers who were going come back in droves once LiPo was allowed? Well, it's been a year now and all indications are that TC continues on it's downward trajectory.
Are you kidding me?! You are saying that because the most unreasonably over priced class of R/C racing is declining even with Lipo that it means that LiPo hasnt brought more people back into the sport?... TC racing has many issues well beyond types of batteries run. Look at how VTA has boomed - the people came back, but they just chose not quite as deep of a money pit... Dont look at the batteries when a competitive chassis still costs you $500 in the worst economic downturn in over 30 years.
#85
Moderator
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Outside doing things in places... Denver, CO
Posts: 4,609
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
To be honest... even though I dont agree with weight penalities for advancing technology, if a weight formula was worked out to bring parity between LiPo and NiMH I would be all for it to help maintain current numbers and encourage more to join who fear NiMH. But with that you lose many of the benifits of LiPo such as reduced wear and tear on parts, and you would also have a large deal of work any time you wanted to change the car from 4 cell to LiPo and back.
As Miller Tyme mentioned above this was about Brushed vs Brushless for weight. Just this LiPo dynamic has a larger weight delta now than either of those did so it needs to be discussed when any discussion of ROAR weight comes into play.
If as was stated above that a 13.5 LiPo setup (with no added weight) was only .2 faster on laps, it wouldnt take much weight to ballance that. THen again, if you have a hot cut on a 27T, and some stupid expensive NiMH cells, you could probably offset that difference easily.
As Miller Tyme mentioned above this was about Brushed vs Brushless for weight. Just this LiPo dynamic has a larger weight delta now than either of those did so it needs to be discussed when any discussion of ROAR weight comes into play.
If as was stated above that a 13.5 LiPo setup (with no added weight) was only .2 faster on laps, it wouldnt take much weight to ballance that. THen again, if you have a hot cut on a 27T, and some stupid expensive NiMH cells, you could probably offset that difference easily.
#86
I'm ok with 800 grams because that's what my heavy 12R5 weighs in at with brushless and a lipo battery! Otherwise it is 6 ounces too heavy
#87
Just FYI trips. I run a speed merchant. And replacing all the steel screws with aluminium and running assoc ti turnbuckles and only running ti screws for the front end mount and the center pivot, also running lightened alum bulkheads, sphere, ko 2.4 rx, ko949, castle 16guage wire, sp 17.5 motor, SiNi balls, lightened diff rings, and 1 color lightweight speed 12, my cars still weighed at 860. I have not proof, but I have read a few guys in the high 660-670 with 1cell lipo.
#88
Tech Elite
iTrader: (16)
Just FYI trips. I run a speed merchant. And replacing all the steel screws with aluminium and running assoc ti turnbuckles and only running ti screws for the front end mount and the center pivot, also running lightened alum bulkheads, sphere, ko 2.4 rx, ko949, castle 16guage wire, sp 17.5 motor, SiNi balls, lightened diff rings, and 1 color lightweight speed 12, my cars still weighed at 860. I have not proof, but I have read a few guys in the high 660-670 with 1cell lipo.
#89
Tech Lord
iTrader: (3)
This isn't about the folks who MIGHT get involved (read: say things like "if they'd only XXX I'd be doing that", etc). This should be about folks who ARE involved and invested in the scale. Remember all of the TC racers who were going come back in droves once LiPo was allowed? Well, it's been a year now and all indications are that TC continues on it's downward trajectory. AFAIK 1/12 has been in a comparative "boom" cycle for a couple years now...and has done so with BRUSHED MOTORS (until comparatively recently) AND NIMH BATTERIES.
The problem is right now we're in the middle of a huge transition, and there are no easy answers.