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, 07:01 AM   #121
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,769
Trader Rating: 1 (67%+)
Default

I like the idea of a spec speedo but i'm not sure it will make much of a difference one way or the other. Blinky seems to have most of the shenanigans under control.

A spec motor with locked timing and no rotors or sensor boards or anything else that can be swapped out for more speed is something that should be implemented as soon as possible.

You're in charge EA.............make it happen.
Josh Hohnstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 07:27 AM   #122
Tech Champion
 
MikeXray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 5,749
Trader Rating: 73 (100%+)
Default

I didn't read this whole thread, so sorry if this was brought up, but wouldn't there also be an issue with the sponsorship funding FOR the race? MFGs pay a lot to sponsor the big races in the US, if there products weren't in play for the win, they maybe less likely to spend on that, which in turn may end up costing the racers more to attend, or make the events not profitable, and hence not worth the effort. This is more a problem in the US where the average racer isn't running mod.
__________________
Mike L. Awesomatixusa.com | TQWire.com | Islandraceway.com |JacksonRCracing.com | Horsham RC | Sweepracingusa.com
MikeXray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 07:42 AM   #123
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 Josh Hohnstein View Post
I like the idea of a spec speedo but i'm not sure it will make much of a difference one way or the other. Blinky seems to have most of the shenanigans under control.

A spec motor with locked timing and no rotors or sensor boards or anything else that can be swapped out for more speed is something that should be implemented as soon as possible.

You're in charge EA.............make it happen.
Me in charge? Nope...Just trying to get some feedback for future potential and consideration. Ive sent this thread to several of the Prominent race organizers out there to read and see peoples feedback and so far everyone but one has been constructive which is what I was looking for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeXray View Post
I didn't read this whole thread, so sorry if this was brought up, but wouldn't there also be an issue with the sponsorship funding FOR the race? MFGs pay a lot to sponsor the big races in the US, if there products weren't in play for the win, they maybe less likely to spend on that, which in turn may end up costing the racers more to attend, or make the events not profitable, and hence not worth the effort. This is more a problem in the US where the average racer isn't running mod.
If you look at the manufactures that sponsor big races only a couple of true speedo companies sponsor the race. If they choose to not any more I am sure the possible addition of entries would offset it. It would be ashame though if a company decided not to just because they were out bid and but hurt about it even though their products could still be used in the Modified classes. So there should be no reason to pull out if their products are still allowed in other offered classes and they got out bid or didnt want to work with the race official. Everyone I am sure would have the same opportunity to contribute. It would just be up to them to make their product affordable and work with the organization to keep cost down.

As far as sponsored drivers....Europe has just as many sponsored stock guys as the US if not more. None of them seem to have a problem racing the Stock class and a lot were sponsored by LRP...Lrp is the majority of batteries in the pits there as well. Im sure they sell more batteries and such than Speedo's in Europe. So really it does not matter it appears.

Other thing I noticed.....Guys over there could care less if they were racing sponsored guys or not. Everyone went about their business and raced their race. They werent running around whining about sponsored guys racing stock like everyone in the US does. If they didnt want to race sponsored guys they run the Hobby class (F1 in the ETS).

To me the US drivers just need to get over the "Sponsored guy" syndrome. Just because a guy has stickers on his car and gets the same equipment as you at a discount does that make him faster? Beat him and you'll be the next sponsored guy.

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, 08:16 AM   #124
Tech Fanatic
 
oldrcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
Trader Rating: 44 (100%+)
Default

Hi,

I have had an idea that I have floated occasionally that might have some merit, not that the handout motor with the spec'ed speedo won't work to some degree, this just attains it and allows racers to use what the already have. I am all for this type of thing in the stock class. My idea would also lessen the battery war part of it as well. What if the manufacturers were able to have a rev limiter mode in the speedo and you combined that with a fixed max FDR. This might have to vary depending on track size. This would set a maximum RPM that any motor would produce, and with the fixed FDR you would have a maximum top speed any car could attain. When I say any motor, that means you could run any wind, but all the cars would hit the same top speed. Yes, you could run some wind that gave you more punch, which when driven properly with a proper set-up would improve lap times, but at a non ballistic top speed that a mod would have. Also, variable timing in ESC's could be used and learned by drivers as well. This would train drivers that set-up and driving, with an emphasis on throttle control, is what wins. Guess what, the drivers that master this, are now ready for what it takes to drive a mod car. It is training ground for the next level, without the carnage and cost associated that too much top speed brings.

Another method that might be able to be implemented to limit the RPM would be a devise that can be put inline between the ESC sensor wires and the motor, that does the regulating. It could then be manufactured to limit to whatever any governing body would like to have as the fixed RPM. A standard should be established.

A side benefit of this would be that extra battery voltage would not play a role in RPM anymore, so playing games to get a bit more voltage out of batteries would also be a non factor.

Thanks EA for bringing this to the table, whether my idea or just the idea of a handout happens, I think this will be good. Close racing is always more enjoyable.

-Alex
__________________
Alxd - Seattle RC Racers - AWESOMATIX - Having Fun :-)

Last edited by oldrcr; 04-17-2012 at 08:42 AM.
oldrcr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 08:58 AM   #125
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 oldrcr View Post
Hi,

I have had an idea that I have floated occasionally that might have some merit, not that the handout motor with the spec'ed speedo won't work to some degree, this just attains it and allows racers to use what the already have. I am all for this type of thing in the stock class. My idea would also lessen the battery war part of it as well. What if the manufacturers were able to have a rev limiter mode in the speedo and you combined that with a fixed max FDR. This might have to vary depending on track size. This would set a maximum RPM that any motor would produce, and with the fixed FDR you would have a maximum top speed any car could attain. When I say any motor, that means you could run any wind, but all the cars would hit the same top speed. Yes, you could run some wind that gave you more punch, which when driven properly with a proper set-up would improve lap times, but at a non ballistic top speed that a mod would have. Also, variable timing in ESC's could be used and learned by drivers as well. This would train drivers that set-up and driving, with an emphasis on throttle control, is what wins. Guess what, the drivers that master this, are now ready for what it takes to drive a mod car. It is training ground for the next level, without the carnage and cost associated that too much top speed brings.

Another method that might be able to be implemented to limit the RPM would be a devise that can be put inline between the ESC sensor wires and the motor, that does the regulating. It could then be manufactured to limit to whatever any governing body would like to have as the fixed RPM. A standard should be established.

A side benefit of this would be that extra battery voltage would not play a role in RPM anymore, so playing games to get a bit more voltage out of batteries would also be a non factor.

Thanks EA for bringing this to the table, whether my idea or just the idea of a handout happens, I think this will be good. Close racing is always more enjoyable.

-Alex
The RPM limit of the motor through the speedo is something that has been mentioned before. The problem is that you can control the top speed but you will not be able to control how fast you can get to top speed. This would still give advantage to better batteries as lower IR will reach top speed quicker. Also better discharge curves would still allow better batteries to maintain higher RPM longer thus being faster at the end of a run.

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, 09:06 AM   #126
Tech Champion
 
MikeXray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 5,749
Trader Rating: 73 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EAMotorsports View Post
The RPM limit of the motor through the speedo is something that has been mentioned before. The problem is that you can control the top speed but you will not be able to control how fast you can get to top speed. This would still give advantage to better batteries as lower IR will reach top speed quicker. Also better discharge curves would still allow better batteries to maintain higher RPM longer thus being faster at the end of a run.

EA
Plus its trivial for an EE type to offset the output of a basic hall sensor..
__________________
Mike L. Awesomatixusa.com | TQWire.com | Islandraceway.com |JacksonRCracing.com | Horsham RC | Sweepracingusa.com
MikeXray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 09:47 AM   #127
Tech Elite
 
Bishop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,223
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

I often wonder if maybe we would at least reduce some motor of the month games, if someone would at least spec a maximum/fixed amount of timing allowed to be built into a motor?.

Though even saying that I realize it's an ask to do, but just maybe it would close down one variable a little, or enough to count.
__________________
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, 09:56 AM   #128
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 Bishop View Post
I often wonder if maybe we would at least reduce some motor of the month games, if someone would at least spec a maximum/fixed amount of timing allowed to be built into a motor?.

Though even saying that I realize it's an ask to do, but just maybe it would close down one variable a little, or enough to count.
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!

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, 09:57 AM   #129
Tech Elite
 
sosidge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 3,865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
I often wonder if maybe we would at least reduce some motor of the month games, if someone would at least spec a maximum/fixed amount of timing allowed to be built into a motor?.

Though even saying that I realize it's an ask to do, but just maybe it would close down one variable a little, or enough to count.
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.

With the ESCs you could just about get away with a big change like the "blinky" rules since 90% of ESCs have updateable firmware, or had fixed timing anyway.

I think tighter motor rules would be a good thing (the old brushed stock motors never had adjustable timing or alternative strength magnets), but it is one of those "tough decisions".

Of course, a "spec" class bypasses these issues altogether - and if "spec" powertrains become the norm, nobody will be buying the adjustable-everything motors and ESCs anyway.
sosidge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 10:16 AM   #130
Tech Fanatic
 
oldrcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
Trader Rating: 44 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EAMotorsports View Post
The RPM limit of the motor through the speedo is something that has been mentioned before. The problem is that you can control the top speed but you will not be able to control how fast you can get to top speed. This would still give advantage to better batteries as lower IR will reach top speed quicker. Also better discharge curves would still allow better batteries to maintain higher RPM longer thus being faster at the end of a run.

EA
You don't want to control that part, punch, since that is what teaches throttle control, and so the battery IR will still not play a major role, nor will the voltage, at least until you get way down towards the low end, which is hard to do without killing your battery. The max RPM would be something that a battery at even 7.0 volts would attain, so higher would not matter, and below would be at a point where your battery is dead anyway.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeXray View Post
Plus its trivial for an EE type to offset the output of a basic hall sensor..
I know, as I know how to do that. That would be cheating, would be obvious as that car would go down the straight faster than any other car, and you would be DQ'd for doing it. For club racing it would just have to be the honor system, but for big events a simple RPM check, a box you set your car into, has rollers that the wheels contact, pull full on the throttle, max RPM shows at set limit, lights on most ESC's blink a certain way to tell if at max trigger, so trying to set the EPA low for tech won't work as a cheat, you pass RPM test, you pass tech, go racing. Tech would be easy, no tear downs, no battery voltage checks, just drop in the box before your run, done. I would think that making a devise to tech that way would not be that expensive, maybe $200. give or take, so it could be available at the club level as well.
__________________
Alxd - Seattle RC Racers - AWESOMATIX - Having Fun :-)
oldrcr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 10:24 AM   #131
Regional Moderator
 
CarbonJoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,661
Default

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.
Sure, the manufacturers will like it. Every racer will have to buy a new motor.

I know it's wishful thinking, but it would be nice to see a standard sensor board design across vendors, so if one goes bad you could pull one from any other motor and put it in. Since the sensor connector and general can size is standard, why not make the sensor board itself standard. Nothing I hate more than having to scrap a motor because the sensor board got damaged, and a replacement isn't available.
__________________
*** The Gate - Celebrating 8 years at the same location ***
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. - Albert Einstein
Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car and oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car
CarbonJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 10:28 AM   #132
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 oldrcr View Post
You don't want to control that part, punch, since that is what teaches throttle control, and so the battery IR will still not play a major role, nor will the voltage, at least until you get way down towards the low end, which is hard to do without killing your battery. The max RPM would be something that a battery at even 7.0 volts would attain, so higher would not matter, and below would be at a point where your battery is dead anyway.



Your missing the point. A better battery with higher votlage and especially lower IR will be faster EVEN if you limit the RPM. If car A reaches 30mph in 1 second and car B reaches it in 2 seconds then car A is going to travel a further distance for example. You dont need throttle control when your racing stock class. Its wide open anyway and full punch. No rolling the throttle like in modified.

RPM limit would put more focus on battery in my opinion than not having an RPM limit would.


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, 10:31 AM   #133
Tech Fanatic
 
oldrcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
Trader Rating: 44 (100%+)
Default

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.

With the ESCs you could just about get away with a big change like the "blinky" rules since 90% of ESCs have updateable firmware, or had fixed timing anyway.

I think tighter motor rules would be a good thing (the old brushed stock motors never had adjustable timing or alternative strength magnets), but it is one of those "tough decisions".

Of course, a "spec" class bypasses these issues altogether - and if "spec" powertrains become the norm, nobody will be buying the adjustable-everything motors and ESCs anyway.
Which is why a fixed RPM is good. No motor is obsolete. ESC's either get programmed or the devise that is put between the motor and ESC's is used. Its a win/win for all. Tighter racing, "less" cheating, and manufacturers still can all participate. They can just work on making motors, that are lighter, ESC's that have smoother control, or are built better, or even just in more colors, if that is what you like. Same with batteries, no more hand picking, since that won't matter. I think most racers would like to know they beat an opponent with skill, both in set-up and driving.
__________________
Alxd - Seattle RC Racers - AWESOMATIX - Having Fun :-)
oldrcr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 10:39 AM   #134
Tech Elite
 
sosidge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 3,865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldrcr View Post
Which is why a fixed RPM is good. No motor is obsolete. ESC's either get programmed or the devise that is put between the motor and ESC's is used. Its a win/win for all. Tighter racing, "less" cheating, and manufacturers still can all participate. They can just work on making motors, that are lighter, ESC's that have smoother control, or are built better, or even just in more colors, if that is what you like. Same with batteries, no more hand picking, since that won't matter. I think most racers would like to know they beat an opponent with skill, both in set-up and driving.
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.
sosidge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2012, 10:41 AM   #135
Tech Fanatic
 
oldrcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
Trader Rating: 44 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EAMotorsports View Post
Your missing the point. A better battery with higher votlage and especially lower IR will be faster EVEN if you limit the RPM. If car A reaches 30mph in 1 second and car B reaches it in 2 seconds then car A is going to travel a further distance for example. You dont need throttle control when your racing stock class. Its wide open anyway and full punch. No rolling the throttle like in modified.

RPM limit would put more focus on battery in my opinion than not having an RPM limit would.


EA
Which is why I stated that the motor would be open. I don't want a spec motor with RPM limit. With a RPM limit, any motor could be used that gave you as much punch as you could handle. Would a certain wind find its way as the main one used by many, sure. But, there will always be someone pushing that limit, and that is what will keep drivers improving. That is the learning to use the throttle part that should be part of all driving, even in stock. If you don't learn that, how will you graduate to a faster class where that is needed?

The RPM limit keeps the overall speed down. Tire wear goes down some, if you are not smooth on the throttle that can still be an issue. Breakage from hitting walls at a higher terminal speed goes down. For those that are not up to the mod speed with hand eye coordination, or whatever, still can compete. Cost goes down, for those non sponsored, important. Racing enjoyment goes up. Big +. Those watching see the grins, want to get into to the sport. More racers, good for the sport, us and manufacturers.
__________________
Alxd - Seattle RC Racers - AWESOMATIX - Having Fun :-)
oldrcr 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 04:24 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