avs

iTrader: (2)

how did motor temps compare? and how did battery usage compare? i would be willing to wager (a small gentlemanly amount) that that the 17.5 with optimized timing (which is all that this turbo and boost etc is accomplishing) ran cooler and was a lighter load on the battery.

i would also wager that the fixed timing motor was more sensitive to the battery voltage, compared to the dynamic timing motor.

i don't see how a more efficient use of a motor is really that bad in the long run. (just damaging to some mfg's short term sales) when dynamic timing finally shakes out it will become just another commodity item like anything else.

the method of making paper used to be a highly regarded secret, and solid state memory chips production used to be a very exclusive operation. there have always been 'tuners' that were trying laydown, serrated brushes and calibrating spring preloads. i don't see the difference. there will always some arena for tuners to focus.

nothing personal, but these people that are claiming that dynamic timing is like the second coming of beelzebub sound like 21st century Luddites.

avs

iTrader: (2)

i am willing to bet that the software will reach an optimum over time.

if you choose the zero-timing path, you will see a battery and motor war, and this will cost you more $$. (hardware is more expensive than software, when amortized over a large enough distribution network)

skypilot

iTrader: (14)

the point is, how would anyone know if its been done. unless its been done, eddie and had this discussion when brushless first started, I thought want a idiot, well, may i have a piece of bread and a glass of water to go with my crow.

if the manufactors can give us a hotwire or a novalink, you don't think billy bob in his basement full of 7th grade nerds couldn"t make one?

but back to question, you have to decide what is best for YOUR club and go with that, if you have 20 racers and 14 want no boost and 6 want boost, well....

HarryLeach

We're RACING.

Racing - The sport of engaging in contests of speed.

I've been racing vehicles of all sorts since I was 8 years old. If I ever mentioned to anyone that we needed to slow everyone down, I'd have been committed to a psych hospital.

Look around, even in the so called "spec" classes that are supposed to "save" racing as we know it, people are asking which motor/esc/battery is going to make them the fastest.

This push for non-adjustable ESCs puts us right back to where we were before USB customizable profiles: having to buy a new ESC every time you want to try something new, or every time you think one ESC has an advantage over another. Want to change classes? New ESC. Rule change? new ESC. Smaller, lighter ESC to help you shave some weight and open up room on the chassis? New ESC.

If you truly think speeds are too high at your local track for the group of racers you draw, spec a slower wind.

If that's not enough and you think adjustable timing ESCs are still to blame, spec a minimum and maximum FDR for the class. No special software, no magic blinking LEDs, you either slow down, or burn up motors.

It took brushless motors [which are truly lower maintenance than brushed ever was/is, even the silver can which some still see as a silver bullet to drive evil from electric racing], user updatable ESCs [which again, don't kid yourselves, is a real money saver unless you're a fan boy that just loved/loves to shell out cash to chase the latest and greatest class], and LiPo batteries [which took out the expense of the pack/matcher of the week of round cells] for me to come back to electric racing after a 16 year hiatus.

My current equipment will let me race any class I choose, without a case full of ESCs, except VTA, which has gone to a nearly one-manufacturer party. [which I also don't agree with]

In a world where a $100 cell phone will load web pages, email, twitter, facebook, play games, text, and make calls, why should I buy a $100+ ESC that I can't tune like any other part of my setup?

For those that complain about "needing" a laptop and not wanting to cart that extra gear to the track, how many of you only need to make one trip from your car to the pits to unload everything you bring, without the aid of a wheeled hauler? Very few of us travel THAT light anyway.

At my local track, we're offering some spec-mode ESC classes this year on carpet, so it remains to be seen how popular it might be, but from our relative newbies and new guys showing interest in running this year, most seem to want to end up running 17.5 Super Stock, and view the proposed Sportsman class as an out-of-the way place to learn how to tune a car and drive, but have full intention of learning how to tune an ESC and move up as well.

I still race nitro as well, won't find any of those guys trying to figure out how to go slower. There's a motor spec for displacement, number of ports, and carb throat size. If you can figure out a way to make it faster, more power to you. [pun intended]

If you break too many parts, learn to drive, or who to avoid on the track. If it's racing incidents causing broken parts, maybe some patience is needed along with a reminder that "discretion is the better part of valor". You don't have to shoot for EVERY gap that opens on EVERY lap. Another saying that comes to mind: "to finish first, you must first finish".

The final reality check, I ask that you guys that have dropped down to a "spec/zero" class to be honest with yourselves, how many of you were consistently in the top half of the A-main before you decided the current class was too fast?

skypilot

iTrader: (14)

then you also are aware that several things have been banned for being to fast for the class, I.E. they banned the yamaha 350 twin 2 stoke from racing against the larger 750 harleys, they banned kenny roberts 750 from the 750 class, they banned the Ford DOHC 427 and Boss 429 motors from Nascar, the banned (I don't remember which one) a chaperal from the class for creating to much down force, racing has always controlled speed in one way or another, with the winston cup cars started going over 200 they slowed them down, they made the 1/4 mile shorter for top fuel classes, I could go on and on and on about "real" racing putting controls on speed so don't even go there with the "in real racing bull"

and to answer your last question, me, top half 17.5 boosted and I think 17.5 boosted is stupid, and prefer non boosted as that returns the class to "stock" status. not that I run it, just saying.

Chaz955i

iTrader: (5)

F1, MotoGP, Nascar, AMA and a number of other racing bodies have taken steps to get speeds, cost or both under control. Most also have rules to keep the speeds somewhat equivalent within a class unless the class is an "open" class. A somewhat weak anology is running a normally aspirated 2.0 against a turbocharged 2.0 all else being equal. Most sanctioning bodies are smart enough to see this doesn't make for good racing, nor would forcing drivers who are not skilled enough into the turbo class be good for anyone on the track.

As to your final reality check, I was never in the top half of an A-main and still am not but I get where you are going. I can't speak to everyone's motivations but we aren't all idiots that though we would instantly become champs by getting rid of timing. Pretty much everyone at my track is running the no timing class so the finishing order has not really changed, just the racing is a bit cleaner and there are less cars getting broken. Since we are being honest perhaps the people railing the loudest against the spec class aren't too happy about the easy competition going elsewhere?

Randy_Pike

iTrader: (6)

All this for a "sportsmans" class....wow.

208 was never deemed illegal. Dawn from ROAR has already posted this on numerous forums. Tekin CHOSE to change to 212 to keep with the spirit of the rules.

Crying over spilt milk will accoplish nothing.

I do agree....if we build they will come. However who is "they" and where are they going?

All the software magic has been around for a few years now. It's NO different than the art of tuning a good stock motor, ask Eddie O!

On top of that many of "us" esc manufacturers are here to help the users get the adjustments they need to compete at the highest level THEY choose to.

Time to think outside the box guys....

EddieO

iTrader: (6)

I 100% agree Randy, tuning with the speedo is just another part of the game.

I personally enjoy tinkering with all aspects of my cars.......I am not the best chassis tuner, I usually just copied the fast guys setup......gave me time to do other things, like tune motors, mess with gearing(which I've never been good at, but it fascinates me), tires (love balancing them), etc....

While we all like to go fast, I think a majority of the people in this hobby are tinkerers.....we love to mess with stuff.....trying to shy away from that to DUMB down the hobby is retarded....

Slowing down stuff has always been part of most racing.......NHRA, F1, Indy, Nascar, etc have all done stuff over the years to slow down stuff, but that was mostly for safety issues, though costs did factor in on the NHRA and F1 stuff......I am personally not a fan of it in RC.....

I've been racing for 20+ years.......every effort to dumb stuff down or lower costs has really done NOTHING in my opinion to lure in new racers.....Joe Blow doesn't know a lipo from a NIMH the first day he walks in a hobby shop....he doesn't know about Dynos, setup stands or any of the other nifty toys we have to go faster.

Luring people in is all about promotiion.....if they enjoy the hobby, they will stay, if they don't, they will move on. I certainly never heard of someone quiting because they "could't tune a stock motor" or "can't program an ESC"....Chassis tuning is extremely difficult, yet we never hear people saying we need to make them non-adjustable....

PROMOTION PROMOTION PROMOTION........that's what it about.

Later EddieO

SlowerOne

Because there is no need for anyone to do it. Once a non-timing class is there, then people will have a reason to hack. Like all the best hackers, they don't do it for profit, they do it because they can. As it sits, we have a few classes and clubs demanding this, so it's not likely anyone would bother, but...

...and hack into whatever takes their fancy. Go ahead, build a non-timing stock class, but like Eddie O, I confidently predict that the hackers will come. How many times did we have to re-write the Stock class BR motor Rules before we had everything nailed down? 'Hackers' were not confined to the drivers in that case, were they **cough** Trininty?

In 2006 I watched a non-programmable speedo being updated until the car went fast enough to keep up with the top drivers. I spoke to the person doing this and said that this was going to be the beginning of the end if drivers at an IFMAR WC (which is where we were) couldn't get software. He agreed, he said his products wouldn't have this type of PC-based updating, and that this wouldn't affect the general customer. I said we would all end up with a PC on our pit tables, and he laughed.

Well, his products still don't need a PC on the pit table, and his customers are not affected by 'special' software at major meetings. However, the reason they are not affected is because everyone has access to products that can take full advantage of the PC programming, and can thus be tuned to the maximum a motor can physically take. However, if we had stuck to non-timing speedos...

Non-timing classes at a National level will just bring back motor and cells of the month, and bitter accusations of cheating that the National Associations cannot prove/disprove, and the manufacturers will suffer from in terms of reputation. Ican't believe that any manufacturer wants this - if someone hacked their speedo, it would be their reputation that suffered, as everyone would assume that 'hack' is out there and being used on every speedo of the same make. If it were me, I'd never, ever produce a special stock speedo for fear that a hacker would wreck my company reputation. I think those offering stock profiles on programmable speedos are pretty brave!!

Let's be clear, this is a Touring Car problem, it doesn't affect any other class. 12th can go down to 21.5 if it wants to slow down, as it only uses 3.7v. Off-Road is self-limiting because the tyres' grip on the track is their limit to power and torque. Touring Car gets better road-holding and handling every year, and can use the power. The answer isn't non-timing speedos, it's slow the cars down.

Why can't Stock be 3.7v? Why can't it switch to LiFe to reduce voltage and thus speed? Why can't it mandate hard control tyres to reduce grip and increase tyre life? Why can't it run for eight minute races?

Like Randy says, time to think outside the box. Timing speedos gives everyone access to the full range of tuning for BL motors, meaning there is no 'black art'. For 12th and 10th Off-Road they are fantastic, and there are no complaints. It is TC that is having this conversation, and it is only having this conversation because it lacks the wit and imagination to think outside its box on how it is going to slow its class down.

In 2006, when everyone was clamoring for BL I related my WC experience and was told that was rubbish, and not to fight against technology advance. In 2010, I am right. I'll be wrong about non-timing speedos in 2010 and their demand for motor and cells of the month driving costs up. Come back and ask me again in 2014 when you're fed up with the "Stock class is too expensive" threads...

This is TC problem - TC go fix it. Don't mess with my class just because your class can't be bothered to deal with its own problems.

robk

iTrader: (22)

Tekin ** CONTACT ROAR TT1152 Tekin RS ESC 208 ** ROAR review regarding zero timing. Awaiting new software profile to release hold on product. **
Tekin ** Contact ROAR TT1153 Tekin RS Pro 208 ** ROAR review regarding zero timing. Awaiting new software profile to release hold on product. **

So what does that mean? 208 is totally legal?

robk

iTrader: (22)

"Gentlemen: I have not logged into this site for almost a year simply because conversations get way out of hand.. and now, I refuse to allow MY NAME to be associated with hurting a good ROAR affiliate.

Tekin did nothing wrong. Tekin did their job and ROAR chose to review a software profile. We determined for the spirit of the rules, the 208 profile didn't match what we needed in a sportsman ESC and TEKIN offered to change things - but honestly, didn't have to.

I answered an email today that I thought was a private conversation and in no way did I give permission for my email to be publicized. I was asked if the 208 was legal and no, it is not as the list does not reflect 208 but now reflects 212. So, loaded question I guess and I was naive to see that and I answered a question and I should have been more sparing in my answer as I did not realize it would be used to hurt an affiliate publically.

Again, Tekin did nothing wrong. ROAR asked for a change and was granted this change for the sake of its members.

Move on already. Nobody did anything to deserve this kind of bashing.

Dawn Sanchez
ROAR President"


9* of spirit

Randy_Pike

iTrader: (6)

Rob you just don't get it do you. Where does our "9 degrees" come from? If you and your cronies think you've got this problem all figured out step forward and be heard! You're only repeating what someone told you I'm sure...

Listen to what the others around you are saying! This is a TC problem, not offroad, not many of the other classes problems.

This hobby is not suffering because of the evolution and technological improvements being made. It's suffering because of the lack of promotion and lack of relatability to the "sport." TC cars look little like their intended counterparts or real cars. Short course took off because people who weren't in RC walked into either a hobby shop or saw a magazine where they could get a real working scale replica of what they saw on TV!


Hacking software is very unlikely as I said before. There are very few that even would know what they're looking at let alone modify it for speed.

Eddie, thanks for actually "getting it." Onroad racing has gotten to be so intimidating for someone to get started into. I've been racing for over 10 years and I find myself even staying away from it most of the time because it can be overwhelming.

If all you want to do is slow the cars down you can do one of two things. Change the power going in, or change the power going out.

Again, think outside the box. Repeating the same failures while expecting a different result is insane.

JR007

It's funny how Turbo gets blamed for a lot of this. It only came around because ALL of the ESC manufacturers were adding timing in different ways to be faster, because US RACERS will always buy what we think (or are told) is the fastest gear.
Here's one for outside the box. If you don't like turbo/timing, go to a silver can like I am.
If the cars are too fast with all the timing, make them use a spec tire. A very hard spec tire. OR, make it 1 set of tire only for the day/night. If people start sneaking to the toilet with their car and a fresh set of wheels, they will be sought out and dissed soon enough i'm sure.
The last idea I can think of is no sensor wire. The problem with that is cogging with high wind motors.

robk

iTrader: (22)

Tell us exactly what you changed and why. Everyone has heard that there was 9* of timing added to your spec profile. Why else would you be asked to change your profile?

Ozzie

iTrader: (23)

You all want to talk about what is killing our touring classes? Just read this and / or any other thread on this board asking a straight forward question. By the end of the first page it goes from a rather simple question into a debate of who makes the better equipment and why you should buy it. I never asked what speed control we should run! I never asked why ROAR didn't approve of the 208 software! Hell, the debates on our own club forum don't get this far off topic.


I know one thing to never do again on this board, ask a simple, straight forward question.

Thanks to those that did answer the question with a rather informative post.