RCGT....Where is it at now?
06-09-2010, 09:58 AM
#46
And that is what I am supporting! 
Instead of spending big money on the best battery around, choose a 30C or 25C battery that is affordable and keeps the playing field equal with everyone.
Either that or set a FDR like VTA used to do. The way the hobby and class is to succeed is by showing that with little money spent and more on practice, you can keep up and possibly defeat others in your class.
Once everyone starts improving then slowly start bumping them up to the next class. It's all I am saying.
Look at how SCCA and NASA do their spec racing. They have spec chassis, spec tires, spec engines, etc. Keeps the field level so that the person with the best setup and driving skills is the winner. I think there in lies the secret to creating a sanctioning body that governs RCGT. If we run realistic bodies, wheels, and tires, let's try adopting similar rules to the Spec Racer Ford community, the Mazda Speed Cup community, or what have you.
Instead of spending big money on the best battery around, choose a 30C or 25C battery that is affordable and keeps the playing field equal with everyone.
Either that or set a FDR like VTA used to do. The way the hobby and class is to succeed is by showing that with little money spent and more on practice, you can keep up and possibly defeat others in your class.
Once everyone starts improving then slowly start bumping them up to the next class. It's all I am saying.
Look at how SCCA and NASA do their spec racing. They have spec chassis, spec tires, spec engines, etc. Keeps the field level so that the person with the best setup and driving skills is the winner. I think there in lies the secret to creating a sanctioning body that governs RCGT. If we run realistic bodies, wheels, and tires, let's try adopting similar rules to the Spec Racer Ford community, the Mazda Speed Cup community, or what have you.
I think with the ever increasing performance of batteries and other electronics, maybe a reasonable limit should be placed in order to show some "cost consciousness". So whats your suggestion ?? Maybe 5000mah at 30c?
06-09-2010, 10:28 AM
#48
TimPotter will vouch for me. I helped start the RCGT Showdown here in SoCal..and contacted him about starting it up in Florida (which he did).
There was a website.. the first race drew 120 racers... blah blah blah.. then racers started to whine.. why this.. why that? So we brought in help. guys with industry knowledge and experience. These guys saw the headaches and whining I saw (i wont speak for the others that helped me)...it was actually quite funny.
RCGT even made it to the Reedy Race in 2009. Probably could have made Snowbirds or even the IIC if we really pushed it.
Then the economy started to suck. so ppl stopped buying stuff...of course, people didnt want to work together, or were greedy... then ESCs went ape shit and made everything 50x faster than they really were. Then people want this esc over that esc. Agendas were being pushed... blah blah blah.
If you want FULL details and disclosures.. email me or PM me. ill gladly share my side
i forgot to make a point.... set up the rules.. make it an "official" organization, etc. have 1 guy own the whole thing and rule with an iron fist. you'll get more done pleasing 99% of the racers and pissing off the 1% that love to post on here.
There was a website.. the first race drew 120 racers... blah blah blah.. then racers started to whine.. why this.. why that? So we brought in help. guys with industry knowledge and experience. These guys saw the headaches and whining I saw (i wont speak for the others that helped me)...it was actually quite funny.
RCGT even made it to the Reedy Race in 2009. Probably could have made Snowbirds or even the IIC if we really pushed it.
Then the economy started to suck. so ppl stopped buying stuff...of course, people didnt want to work together, or were greedy... then ESCs went ape shit and made everything 50x faster than they really were. Then people want this esc over that esc. Agendas were being pushed... blah blah blah.
If you want FULL details and disclosures.. email me or PM me. ill gladly share my side
i forgot to make a point....
set up the rules.. make it an "official" organization, etc. have 1 guy own the whole thing and rule with an iron fist. you'll get more done pleasing 99% of the racers and pissing off the 1% that love to post on here.
06-09-2010, 11:49 AM
#52
Yeah but it is a difference that counts bud. I have a 4200 pack that puts out 25C, a 4300 at 30C, and a 5200 at 40C. Guess what? between the 40C pack and the others, my lap times improve by an entire second.
I am no master at driving R/C cars, but an entire second improvement says a lot right there.
I am no master at driving R/C cars, but an entire second improvement says a lot right there.
Best way to test your theory is to maybe use the 4200 battery with some weights.
06-09-2010, 02:10 PM
#56
It's not just weight. You've also got to compare apples to apples. For example, compare three 5000mAh batteries with different C ratings to get an accurate assesment. Otherwise the battery with the highest mAh rating will win because it will have the highest average volts under load during the first few minutes of discharge. I thought this topic had been beaten to death in threads around RCTECH. Or maybe I came to the wrong conclusion. But from my experience, the only real difference in batteries for stock spec classes is the mAh rating. If you have at least a 20C battery (100 amp draw on a 5000mAh pack) you'll have more than enough power available for any stock motor. I have three 5000mAh 20C lipo packs and one 5000mAh Thunder Power 40C pack. I only race stock classes and I've never seen any difference in the performance of these batteries.
06-09-2010, 02:54 PM
#57
Batteries do depend on the mAh more than anything else. As long as you can keep the voltage curve flat for the whole race, it doesn't matter. Sometimes, the higher C cells have better IR, so you have a better "punch" feeling, but the C doesn't come into play unless you run really hot motors.
*****
I think a lot of the problem with RCGT is that it splits people who like the 17.5 speed. Some will race pure sedan, and others like the realism. A slower motor would probably be the solution. It would also help with tire wear, as pro compound tends to be the fastest unless it's really hot out, and they wear fairly quickly. I just have a feeling that some people would be more comfortable with a slightly slower car. We were getting multi heats of RCGT last summer, and then the super timing stuff came out, and by the fall, nobody was bringing the cars out anymore. That may not have been 100% of the problem, but it really hasn't come back this summer either.
RCGT is copyrighted by HPI, but I also don't think they want to be in the business of running a sanctioning body. It can be a pain in the butt to deal with all of it's aspects (ask me how I know). Each club is going to have to make some decisions that work for them. If I had a suggestion, it would be 21.5 motors with the timing. That is pretty close to what 17.5 used to be, and it also separates things from VTA, which most tracks are calling for limited or no timing, and will soon be 25.5. If every class is so close in terms of the racing experience, everyone will just gravitate to what is easiest-normal sedan classes. Cool factor has to go along with a differentiation in speed or handling.
*****
I think a lot of the problem with RCGT is that it splits people who like the 17.5 speed. Some will race pure sedan, and others like the realism. A slower motor would probably be the solution. It would also help with tire wear, as pro compound tends to be the fastest unless it's really hot out, and they wear fairly quickly. I just have a feeling that some people would be more comfortable with a slightly slower car. We were getting multi heats of RCGT last summer, and then the super timing stuff came out, and by the fall, nobody was bringing the cars out anymore. That may not have been 100% of the problem, but it really hasn't come back this summer either.
RCGT is copyrighted by HPI, but I also don't think they want to be in the business of running a sanctioning body. It can be a pain in the butt to deal with all of it's aspects (ask me how I know
). Each club is going to have to make some decisions that work for them. If I had a suggestion, it would be 21.5 motors with the timing. That is pretty close to what 17.5 used to be, and it also separates things from VTA, which most tracks are calling for limited or no timing, and will soon be 25.5. If every class is so close in terms of the racing experience, everyone will just gravitate to what is easiest-normal sedan classes. Cool factor has to go along with a differentiation in speed or handling.
06-09-2010, 07:44 PM
#58
Alot of good points and good reads....imo you dont need to split up RCGT or VTA for that matter....
VTA...is for ppl trying to get into on-road racing...adjust your local club rules around the national rules and have fun with it.....
RCGT...is for ppl looking to step up to a faster race-pace...the posted HPI rules are fine just take away the adv time esc crap or limit them to certain profiles like we did for the Scale Nats this year...
TC 17.5...is for ppl looking to push any and all limits of the 17.5 motor and esc...run it as fast as you can...
TC open/mod...knock yourself out
make an on-road learning curve ...and RCGT fits in to help with that curve...take it away and then you have a sportsman this and that.....take it out and you have guys running VTA, that want to go fast and 17.5 is just to much for the general racer....they end up in the way of the faster racers....
on-road needs a class like RCGT to help build faster racers...Its for the guys/gals that dont want to go as slow as VTA, but cant see the idea of 17.5 TC either.....ppl like me....and with the esc crap at every turn...RCGT w/ Scale Nats rules are great...
also yep, and well setup RCGT car with no adv time/turbo/boost (and luck) can and has beat full on 17.5 TC(incl Tekin 203 and BD) on the right track layout...Ive done it twice...Sunday will make 3x's...lol
and the main reason for RCGT......
VTA...is for ppl trying to get into on-road racing...adjust your local club rules around the national rules and have fun with it.....
RCGT...is for ppl looking to step up to a faster race-pace...the posted HPI rules are fine just take away the adv time esc crap or limit them to certain profiles like we did for the Scale Nats this year...
TC 17.5...is for ppl looking to push any and all limits of the 17.5 motor and esc...run it as fast as you can...
TC open/mod...knock yourself out
make an on-road learning curve ...and RCGT fits in to help with that curve...take it away and then you have a sportsman this and that.....take it out and you have guys running VTA, that want to go fast and 17.5 is just to much for the general racer....they end up in the way of the faster racers....
on-road needs a class like RCGT to help build faster racers...Its for the guys/gals that dont want to go as slow as VTA, but cant see the idea of 17.5 TC either.....ppl like me....and with the esc crap at every turn...RCGT w/ Scale Nats rules are great...
also yep, and well setup RCGT car with no adv time/turbo/boost (and luck) can and has beat full on 17.5 TC(incl Tekin 203 and BD) on the right track layout...Ive done it twice...Sunday will make 3x's...lol
and the main reason for RCGT......
06-10-2010, 02:24 AM
#59
Wow! This ended up being a good discussion.
Well, we just started our "GT" class this year with our first official race coming this sunday. After some discussion on our track's forum, we ended up with basic "RCGT" rules with some changes...
First, the name: 17.5 GT No Boost
ESC / Not Legal: Tekin v203, Black Diamond, LRP SXX-SS
ESC / Legal: LRP SPX, Tekin v200 andolder ESCs.
Tires/Wheels: Minimum 24mm rubber tires, spoked wheels only(No dish)
Weight Limit: 1450g
About the tires., Initially I wasn't too keen on the minimum width of 24mm but I realized we are pretty much guaranteed great traction and wear if we use the preferred tire at our track, the Sorex 36R. This ensures less handling and wear problems which of course leads to more enjoyment and less headache and guessing. Plus, we can use the same tires in other touring classes(less tires in the pit box!). Sure, it WILL lead to everybody using Sorex 36's but I don't think any of us will mind. Just gotta use 190mm bodies though. Your thoughts.
I do have a concern about "RCGT" type bodies. Are some people shying away from "RCGT" because of the usual pricey, intricate and highly detailed bodies? Some may not want to make the effort or take the time to do-up one of these bodies especially with the thought that they can and will eventually beat up their masterpiece during a race. Yes, the bodies is what "RCGT" is all about and I wouldn't want it any other way but after doing up my first fully decaled Tamiya body(Takata Dome NSX), the thought of just grazing a corner pipe makes me cringe. Not saying we should change it, it was just a thought.
Well, we just started our "GT" class this year with our first official race coming this sunday. After some discussion on our track's forum, we ended up with basic "RCGT" rules with some changes...
First, the name: 17.5 GT No Boost
ESC / Not Legal: Tekin v203, Black Diamond, LRP SXX-SS
ESC / Legal: LRP SPX, Tekin v200 andolder ESCs.
Tires/Wheels: Minimum 24mm rubber tires, spoked wheels only(No dish)
Weight Limit: 1450g
About the tires., Initially I wasn't too keen on the minimum width of 24mm but I realized we are pretty much guaranteed great traction and wear if we use the preferred tire at our track, the Sorex 36R. This ensures less handling and wear problems which of course leads to more enjoyment and less headache and guessing. Plus, we can use the same tires in other touring classes(less tires in the pit box!). Sure, it WILL lead to everybody using Sorex 36's but I don't think any of us will mind. Just gotta use 190mm bodies though. Your thoughts.
I do have a concern about "RCGT" type bodies. Are some people shying away from "RCGT" because of the usual pricey, intricate and highly detailed bodies? Some may not want to make the effort or take the time to do-up one of these bodies especially with the thought that they can and will eventually beat up their masterpiece during a race. Yes, the bodies is what "RCGT" is all about and I wouldn't want it any other way but after doing up my first fully decaled Tamiya body(Takata Dome NSX), the thought of just grazing a corner pipe makes me cringe. Not saying we should change it, it was just a thought.
06-10-2010, 03:19 AM
#60
Most people like the concept of a spec class like this but rarely do they ever last long (VTA being one of the few exceptions). The problem is drawing the line between diversity an too much spec. Personally I'm not going to buy a new ESC just to run a spec class when I already have an ESC I like and can run in another class. Spec ESCs in my opinion are a mistake...however having a certain set of restrictions that multiple ESCs can comply to can work if done right. Another big issue with a class like this is spec tires. What works well in one part of the US may not work well in another and driving a car on spec tires that doesn't handle just is not fun for a lot of people. For newer drivers it starts out as fun but doesn't last long which is one of the reasons many spec classes do not last. If a spec tire is to be used it needs to be evaluated and decided upon on a local level.