R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-17-2012, 10:55 AM   #136
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Salem
Posts: 999
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Default

I didnt read all the pages but I think it would be a good idea.

each year there seems to be a newer faster motor. The start of the carpet season it was all about the D3, then the revtechs came out. Right there is a $180 in motors.
__________________
T.O.P Racing USA

"This T-bird will put a spell on you"
Mr.A Morris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 10:55 AM   #137
Tech Elite
 
Rick Hohwart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,935
Default

Race modified.
__________________
www.reedypower.com
Rick Hohwart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 10:57 AM   #138
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 719
Trader Rating: 30 (94%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Hohwart View Post
Race modified.
Rocky8333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:04 AM   #139
Tech Champion
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 7,588
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CypressMidWest View Post
Duo1's were pretty much the standard. The Novak Ballistics fared pretty well too. Most tuners oem'd the Trinity stuff, so it was more prevalent. Which "must haves" are you referring to? Hell at last year's Indoor Champs D1's were still VERY competitive in boosted classes.

But as I said, the point is moot because "blinky" is the new mandate. The only boosted class left is Mod.
You proved my point. What about Nemesis motors, or Tekins, or Orions? They all have a spec motor line. Duo, D3, Novak and LRP at times were considered good. There also seemed to be motors that were not sought after despite the help of boost. What happened to Hacker?
__________________
A mutually re-enforcing cascade of failure

"Failior [sic] crowns enterprise." Robert Goddard

I-Lap Scoring Systems http://www.rclapcounter.com/
robk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:05 AM   #140
Tech Elite
 
Bishop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,223
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EAMotorsports View Post
The motors used at ETS are the newer speed passion motors but have a custom endbell that is not adjustable. And it comes with the fixed 10 degree board built into it. It takes out one variable for sure!
Nice, I now remember seeing that endbell for sale somewhere, wondered where it was used.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sosidge View Post
The issue with deciding to specify a fixed motor timing (or tighter rotor rules) is that you render almost every motor on the market obsolete overnight. Manufacturers wouldn't like it and most racer's wouldn't like it either.
What EA said though may be a clue to a possible solution, motor brands release a fixed 10 degree replacement timing board, must be say bright red, easy to identify with a quick check?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarbonJoe View Post
Sure, the manufacturers will like it. Every racer will have to buy a new motor.
Good point, I gather from what I have personally seen, motors seem to fade after around a year of use anyway (well mine has), heck most guys seems keen to sell off motors after a couple of events regardless.
__________________
QRCCRA
www.qrccra.org.au
www.facebook.com/englandparkraceway
www.myrcm.ch/main?pLa=en&hId[1]=org&dId[O]=4331
Bishop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:12 AM   #141
Tech Fanatic
 
oldrcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
Trader Rating: 44 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sosidge View Post
I'll just echo what EAMotorsports has said.

Fixed RPM is meaningless. Because if you can make your car get up to that RPM faster, you will have an advantage. That means that batteries and motor tweaking within the RPM rules become even more critical.

The construction rules alone work. They are easy to scrutineer. The problem is that the construction rules for stock motors were too loose initially, and it may well be too late to tighten them up without causing major upheaval and dissatisfaction.
Fixed RPM with open motors/batteries/adj. timing ESC's, is whats needed. It will teach everyone how to tune and drive properly, with much less destruction due to terminal speed being too high, which is the goal. To create drivers that can drive/tune properly and learn what it takes to handle a modified.

The construction rules don't work. It is why there are some motors or batteries that are just enough faster that in the right hands are impossible to beat. Yes, I do understand that coming off a corner faster makes speed difference more apparent. I have been racing every different kind of car, scale to 1/1 for over 40 years now. This not a new debate.
__________________
Alxd - Seattle RC Racers - AWESOMATIX - Having Fun :-)
oldrcr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:18 AM   #142
Tech Lord
 
syndr0me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 5280 Raceway
Posts: 13,143
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Hohwart View Post
Race modified.
Looking better all the time.
syndr0me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:20 AM   #143
Tech Fanatic
 
oldrcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
Trader Rating: 44 (100%+)
Default

What EA said though may be a clue to a possible solution, motor brands release a fixed 10 degree replacement timing board, must be say bright red, easy to identify with a quick check?

Not that a fixed end bell won't get things a bit more even, but the battery wars will ensue. Its not as bad as with the round cells a few years back, but those that can find a battery that stays closer to max voltage longer, will have an advantage. There will always be the aura of the team drivers having those. Why not, it sells more product.
__________________
Alxd - Seattle RC Racers - AWESOMATIX - Having Fun :-)
oldrcr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:21 AM   #144
Tech Elite
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 4,045
Trader Rating: 23 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Hohwart View Post
Race modified.
I hope I misunderstood that comment.

I understand the intent of that idea. But in all practicality - as you know there are even more variations of how to go fast with mod. In theory - for the 17.5 classes you need a 17.5 stator and have a selection of 2-4 rotors.

Sure that someone can always pick what the fast guy is running but at the end of the day - a mod racer still has to have a good sample of different winds and rotors. Those costs are exponential. Well more expensive than the 17.5 option above. The half-life of everything else beyond the motors, ESC, kits, tires and parts is also the result of mod racing.

To cover every wind and half wind from 4T to 10.5T with X amount of rotor options. That doesn't sound like a sustainable program unless you have a van full of equipment or as the old school motor guys know silver cases of special 'unobtainium'. And yes, I am sure that there are times that the bigger teams run 'of-the-shelf' stuff - but if that was the case with Volkers performance several races ago where he couldn't keep an ESC alive for more than 6 minutes - I am not sure that is good marketing story for 'of-the-shelf' product with durability for mod.

To simply say 'run mod' and avoid the drama is an easy way out. There is a reason why the base of racers have moved to the classes away from mod. It wasn't so they wouldn't have to run against the Hohwarts, Haynes, Fairtraces, PL, Heberts; it is because they realized that to run at that level and performance requires a commitment beyond practice and knowledge - but one of $$$ and access. The later two things add the most expense.


Late add - if I were a motor manufacturer or esc company I would find it opportunistic to supply this type of race effort for the sole reason of disrupting the marketplace and becoming the default. Sure a lot of product sold never hits the track but sensibly - if you never heard of a brand again because their product line would never get a mention in the A main of a race. It wouldn't matter if it was spec or not. Guess what people are going to remember the next time they walk into their LHS.
__________________
TEAMORCA.SHOP
MDawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:24 AM   #145
Tech Champion
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago Illinois USA
Posts: 9,107
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Send a message via ICQ to Solara Send a message via AIM to Solara
Default

I would say....Brand A to be the spec ESC (1 brand 1 model), then brand B to be the spec motor with sealed/locked/alter-less endbell design motor (1 brand 1 model)....brand C to be the spec tires (1 brand and multiple models due to indoor and outdoor surface)...open chasiss.

Of course, it is a dream talk....but USVTA has been running rules like that for years, and it works out pretty darn good. I specificly like the NOVAK 25.5 (1 brand 1 model) rule...and the tires (1 brand 1 model) rule.
Solara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:28 AM   #146
Tech Fanatic
 
oldrcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
Trader Rating: 44 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Hohwart View Post
Race modified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by syndr0me View Post
Looking better all the time.
I agree, but wouldn't it be nice with drivers that were ready for that?

Would you want to be taken out in an early qual. or practice round because someone was way out of their element? If they had decent set-up and throttle control, they would be better equipped to be out there. Stock should not be a practically full throttle all the time class. It should be teaching more throttle control. If it can also keep more racers, lower costs and better learning curve, and help add new ones too, we all benefit that there will be more places to race. More racers means more need for support, tracks and manufacturers. Good for all of us.

Just my 2 cents.
__________________
Alxd - Seattle RC Racers - AWESOMATIX - Having Fun :-)
oldrcr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:35 AM   #147
Team Tekin
 
Randy_Pike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Norcal
Posts: 9,702
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Send a message via Yahoo to Randy_Pike
Default

You guys are looking to make all these rules and limits and all you're going to accomplish is head ache and pain.

The real question still isn't being asked. Are you simply trying to slow the cars down? Or are you trying to make everything equal and the same? Mind you the latter will NEVER occur in the real world. There are far too many tolerances between parts to make it work out in the production world.

If you're looking to make things even you should be looking at technology as help, not hindrance.

Racing is about finding a performance advantage ANYTIME there is one to be found. Look at any form of real racing. At any given time every nut, bolt, body panel, tire, wheel, engine,etc are all under scrutiny...

You put enough rules and regulations onto a class or form of racing and you will also eliminate the fun from it also.

This is a problem that should have been presented to ALL of the manufacturers in an open discussion by the sanctioning bodies. If there is/was a problem then it should have been brought up to all mfg's so a mutual "fix" could be found. Again, look to real racing for ideas... If it feels like we've been down this road before, it's because we have
__________________
"Things may come to those who wait, but only the things left by those who hustle." Abraham Lincoln

Tekin,Protek,A-Main Hobbies,JConcepts,Avid RC,Yokomo,MIP,SikLidz,FactoryRC, www.randypikerc.com
Randy_Pike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:45 AM   #148
Tech Elite
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 4,045
Trader Rating: 23 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy_Pike View Post
You guys are looking to make all these rules and limits and all you're going to accomplish is head ache and pain.

The real question still isn't being asked. Are you simply trying to slow the cars down? Or are you trying to make everything equal and the same? Mind you the latter will NEVER occur in the real world. There are far too many tolerances between parts to make it work out in the production world.

If you're looking to make things even you should be looking at technology as help, not hindrance.

Racing is about finding a performance advantage ANYTIME there is one to be found. Look at any form of real racing. At any given time every nut, bolt, body panel, tire, wheel, engine,etc are all under scrutiny...

You put enough rules and regulations onto a class or form of racing and you will also eliminate the fun from it also.
Perhaps the rules are too old and we have already found enough ways to get around them.

To answer your question - I *think* the advocacy is for leveling the field, reduce complexity of competition and perhaps cost reduction.

Full scale evolve much quicker - and obviously at a greater cost to the teams, manufacturers and partners that compete in those series.

I think the point of using the technology to help is a good point. Let the manufacturers continue to evolve, develop their product and price points and at the major races throw a 'blackbox' in between ESC and Motor that has enough intelligence throw away the special algorithms, modulations frequencies and govern power delivered to the motor. Our own version of a restrictor plate.
__________________
TEAMORCA.SHOP
MDawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 11:58 AM   #149
Team EAM
 
EAMotorsports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 9,158
Trader Rating: 79 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to EAMotorsports
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy_Pike View Post
You guys are looking to make all these rules and limits and all you're going to accomplish is head ache and pain.

The real question still isn't being asked. Are you simply trying to slow the cars down? Or are you trying to make everything equal and the same? Mind you the latter will NEVER occur in the real world. There are far too many tolerances between parts to make it work out in the production world.

If you're looking to make things even you should be looking at technology as help, not hindrance.

Racing is about finding a performance advantage ANYTIME there is one to be found. Look at any form of real racing. At any given time every nut, bolt, body panel, tire, wheel, engine,etc are all under scrutiny...

You put enough rules and regulations onto a class or form of racing and you will also eliminate the fun from it also.

This is a problem that should have been presented to ALL of the manufacturers in an open discussion by the sanctioning bodies. If there is/was a problem then it should have been brought up to all mfg's so a mutual "fix" could be found. Again, look to real racing for ideas... If it feels like we've been down this road before, it's because we have
I can tell you from last weeks experience that the European racers have more fun at races in Stock than ANY US race I have ever been to....Top of the class to bottom of the class. I seen absolutely no headache an pain by anyone over there including Tech, racers, etc. Tech was simple. Weigh cars, check battery voltage, tire and motor numbers and go. Easiest tech I have ever been through but thorough too.

SO its obvious that they are doing something right over there that we are not. Different mentality? Perhaps but it all adds up.

Ive never been to a race where everyone had the same speed down the straights in stock and racing came down to actual setup, driving and just plain luck in some instances. This is what it should be.

I dont mention anything here about slowing down the cars. Tolerances to far to make them equal? Maybe for some companies but the tolerances on the stuff used there seemed pretty damn close to me out of 96 cars!

Let the racers dictate what they want to run by setting the standard and put the rules in place....not the manufactures dictate what the racers must race with new electronics and or software every few months.

EA
__________________
Contact Us
Team EAM, Our Facebook
Team EAM | Xray | RCAmerica | Hudy | APEX Raceway and Hobbies | RC Mission | Killer Concepts | AVID | Hobbywing.
EAMotorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 12:00 PM   #150
Tech Elite
 
Rick Hohwart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawson View Post
I hope I misunderstood that comment.

I understand the intent of that idea. But in all practicality - as you know there are even more variations of how to go fast with mod. In theory - for the 17.5 classes you need a 17.5 stator and have a selection of 2-4 rotors.

Sure that someone can always pick what the fast guy is running but at the end of the day - a mod racer still has to have a good sample of different winds and rotors. Those costs are exponential. Well more expensive than the 17.5 option above. The half-life of everything else beyond the motors, ESC, kits, tires and parts is also the result of mod racing.

To cover every wind and half wind from 4T to 10.5T with X amount of rotor options. That doesn't sound like a sustainable program unless you have a van full of equipment or as the old school motor guys know silver cases of special 'unobtainium'. And yes, I am sure that there are times that the bigger teams run 'of-the-shelf' stuff - but if that was the case with Volkers performance several races ago where he couldn't keep an ESC alive for more than 6 minutes - I am not sure that is good marketing story for 'of-the-shelf' product with durability for mod.

To simply say 'run mod' and avoid the drama is an easy way out. There is a reason why the base of racers have moved to the classes away from mod. It wasn't so they wouldn't have to run against the Hohwarts, Haynes, Fairtraces, PL, Heberts; it is because they realized that to run at that level and performance requires a commitment beyond practice and knowledge - but one of $$$ and access. The later two things add the most expense.


Late add - if I were a motor manufacturer or esc company I would find it opportunistic to supply this type of race effort for the sole reason of disrupting the marketplace and becoming the default. Sure a lot of product sold never hits the track but sensibly - if you never heard of a brand again because their product line would never get a mention in the A main of a race. It wouldn't matter if it was spec or not. Guess what people are going to remember the next time they walk into their LHS.
I think you are exaggerating the amount of equipment that is needed. How many 17.5 motors does the average stock guy own? 2? 3? More?

Modified is not for everyone. But when you race it you remove a lot of the things that people are complaining about. You choose how fast you want to go, not stuck with how fast your equipment allows you to go. And what you don't have.

FYI I have used the exact same 5.0 motor/rotor since the Reedy motor was released a year ago.
__________________
www.reedypower.com
Rick Hohwart is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KARZ Calgary xrayroooahhhh Canadian R/C Scene 19114 12-01-2017 01:26 PM
Proposed R.O.A.R. rules change hairy Electric On-Road 741 05-31-2011 06:03 AM



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 02:51 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