R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-20-2005, 11:59 AM   #1
Tech Lord
 
syndr0me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 5280 Raceway
Posts: 13,140
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
Default Motors: Can we get along?

Okay, I'm a fan of brushless. I picked up a GTB, and in conjunction with a 4300, it feels very similar to a fast stock motor, without the headaches of tuning and maintenance. Basically, it's everything advertised for brushless in its current form. It's also great for practice.

I know that brushless is being allowed in mod racing, but what's the chance of getting it to be accepted in classes that are more popular at the club level, like 19T and stock. I've heard many cases where 4300's are allowed in stock class at clubs around the country, but it may provide a slight advantage, which people complain about if you win with it.

Is there something that can be done to equalize these two technologies so they may coexist and race together and be accepted? In mod, at least, I know there has been some concern over allowing magnets in brushless that aren't allowed for brushed motors. But since we're looking at classes with limited speed to begin with, equality seems to be more of a concern than how we get our speed. If a company worked hard at making a motor that performed consistently with those used in existing classes, would it be accepted?

Thoughts?
syndr0me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 12:20 PM   #2
Tech Elite
 
sosidge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 3,865
Default

I think that deliberately trying to compromise a brushless motor to match a brushed motor is a waste of time.

The two technologies have different characteristics that you will never be able to hide with software alone.

Clubs should just open up the stock class to stock brushless. Or they should let people run brushless in a second class.

Locally, we have been mixing brushless in with brushed modified and there have been no problems whatsoever at club level. The old 5800 system limited to "stock" mode wasn't even with the stock motors, but I have never seen anyone use the 4300 motor.
sosidge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 12:44 PM   #3
Super Moderator
 
Grizzbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sand Springs, OK
Posts: 3,063
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sosidge
I think that deliberately trying to compromise a brushless motor to match a brushed motor is a waste of time.

The two technologies have different characteristics that you will never be able to hide with software alone.

Clubs should just open up the stock class to stock brushless. Or they should let people run brushless in a second class.

Locally, we have been mixing brushless in with brushed modified and there have been no problems whatsoever at club level. The old 5800 system limited to "stock" mode wasn't even with the stock motors, but I have never seen anyone use the 4300 motor.
Well, I have seen people run the 4300(including trying to run it in a stock class) & frankly, there's NO way to equalize the two. It doesn't matter how much you limit revs on it, fact is, the 4300(& all other brushless motors out there in that size) those things will put out MUCH more torque & power than any stock motor. You can see it ontrack(& even in the serious tire wear those guys end up with because of all the wheelspin they have to deal with at my local track), honestly, they behave a LOT more like a decent machine-wound 19 turn(like the Reedy Quad-Mag) than any stock. The only way I could see them being equalized at all right now is if those running brushless ran with fewer cells in their car(maybe 5 cell packs instead of 6, that might get things a bit closer), but then again, they have a slight weight advantage, so they'd also need to add weight to their car to keep THAT equal. Really, I just don't see it happening in any stock class(but I really don't have any problem with them running the 4300 in 19 turn & the other brushless motors in mod), just produces too many headaches....
__________________
Bob Seay
Tamiya TRF417, TA05v.2, TRF211XM, M-05ver.2R, XRAY X12, Associated B5m Factory Lite

Go Pokes!!!
Grizzbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 01:21 PM   #4
Tech Lord
 
syndr0me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 5280 Raceway
Posts: 13,140
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
Default

Presumably, Novak (or whoever) could make a motor with a lower KVM, like 4000 or 3800 that's more in line with stock. Not sure why they would bother if there isn't any acceptance of it in that class, but it's a nice thought.
syndr0me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 01:36 PM   #5
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 316
Default

Right now brushless is accepted in mod class at every track that I have been to lately. At this time I think that is where it belongs as it is certainly more powerful than stock.

Why are you trying to put brushless in the stock brushed class? I think that it would just be easier to start a brushless class.

It seems as if Novak has gotten brushless right this time with the GTB. Reedy/LRP brushless is having some problems like the motor system stopping for a few seconds after a crash.
Charles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 01:39 PM   #6
Tech Master
 
XrayFK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,463
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by syndr0me
Presumably, Novak (or whoever) could make a motor with a lower KVM, like 4000 or 3800 that's more in line with stock. Not sure why they would bother if there isn't any acceptance of it in that class, but it's a nice thought.
Read the post above yours, it's not about limiting RPM, they can easily do that with the ESC, but the fact is a brushless motor has so much more torque than a brushed stock motor that there isn't much of a chance for the stock motor.

It's like saying I'll race you with my Porsche 911 against your Honda Civic (or whatever), but don't worry, I'll make it fair my not going any faster than your car's top speed...that would never work, right? I'd burn you off the line. Same thing with brushless against stock.
XrayFK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 05:45 PM   #7
Tech Master
 
burbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: wisconsin
Posts: 1,152
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to burbs Send a message via Yahoo to burbs
Default

I race oval... for stock class record is 65 laps. and brushless record is 70 laps.. thats a 5 lap difference.. The brushless is the 4300 system as well.. 5 laps is pretty hard to equalize if you ask me.. the brushless has so much more power out of the turns then a stock motor .. The brushless rev limiters are for RPM's only not power.. so i dont think it will ever be fare..
burbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 06:47 PM   #8
Super Moderator
 
Grizzbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sand Springs, OK
Posts: 3,063
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XrayFK
Read the post above yours, it's not about limiting RPM, they can easily do that with the ESC, but the fact is a brushless motor has so much more torque than a brushed stock motor that there isn't much of a chance for the stock motor.

It's like saying I'll race you with my Porsche 911 against your Honda Civic (or whatever), but don't worry, I'll make it fair my not going any faster than your car's top speed...that would never work, right? I'd burn you off the line. Same thing with brushless against stock.
Precisely, I'm just glad SOMEONE was paying attention...
__________________
Bob Seay
Tamiya TRF417, TA05v.2, TRF211XM, M-05ver.2R, XRAY X12, Associated B5m Factory Lite

Go Pokes!!!
Grizzbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 07:03 PM   #9
Tech Lord
 
syndr0me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 5280 Raceway
Posts: 13,140
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
Default

If there's truly no way to detune the motors so they're capable of performing similarly to stock, then I guess it's a moot point. Running mod isn't really an option at this point, and I don't want to try and split people into more classes than we have already, because most of them wouldn't be interested, and because there's enough of that going on with stock vs. 19T. I was hoping a compromise could be reached, somehow, perhaps through adjusting the technology, to allow both types of motors to coexist so the majority of club racers (stock) could enjoy the benefits without trying to create a whole new class, or sway people from one that exists already.

It seems like there are choices in stock motors between torque and RPM. Are the brushless so much more torquey that limiting the RPM's (through the motor, not ESC) will never offset the difference they gain through better torque and even the field? The whole point of this thread is to see if there's a way to allow these technologies to coexist peacefully in the place where they'd be used the most (clubs) without forcing people into making a change. Seems the answer is "no" with our current options, but I'm curious as to whether or not that could be changed by possibly creating a motor intended specifically for this reason.

Paging [email protected]! You guys need to make a "stock brushless" and push the issue! Help! :-)
syndr0me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2005, 07:54 PM   #10
Tech Master
 
burbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: wisconsin
Posts: 1,152
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to burbs Send a message via Yahoo to burbs
Default

open 4300 at our track is very very close to 19 turn.. 19 is a little faster, but the point being you would be better off having the brushless guys in 19 then stock..
burbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2005, 05:50 AM   #11
Tech Master
 
Team Duratrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NSW, Albury/Wodonga
Posts: 1,674
Send a message via MSN to Team Duratrax
Default

Even if Novak produced a 4000kv rated brushless motor (or whatever is equal to a stock), that still wouldn't solve all problems. I could just imagine a 4000kv motor winning and all the brushed fellows moaning and groaning and making up their own little assumptions like "That's unfair, his motor is faster"

Just because he won?

Do you understand at what i'm trying to get at here? No matter how close a BL motor can be immitated in motor behaviour towards a stock motor there would still be conflict between both sides. I say leave the Brushed classes and Brushless classes separate.
Team Duratrax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2005, 06:17 AM   #12
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Default Brushless...Which one?

I have a question..Does anyone have experience of all of the makes of Brushless motors out there?
Which is better...Novak, Reedy, LRP etc, and the technical reasons if poss'.
I notice that the Novak set-up uses several more connecting leads from Speedo to motor, is this relevant?
Our club (all nitro) is looking at running electric and several drivers have expressed and interest in brushless as they are much less 'albour intensive' allowing them to use both their nitros and electric at club meets.

Looking forward to the replies.
Hobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2005, 06:27 AM   #13
Tech Master
 
burbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: wisconsin
Posts: 1,152
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to burbs Send a message via Yahoo to burbs
Default

I thought they both had the same amount of wires.. for legality issues i thought they had to conform to the set rules.. You can run both motors with both speedo companies.. the hot setup here is the shphere and the novak motors.. Reason being is not performance wise, the LRP does not thermal as much as the novak.. ive seen alot of guys lose races because the speedo shut down mid run.. they went to the lrp and havent had an issue since..

I dont race brushless, but we do have the class here and i have looked at there stuff..
burbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2005, 02:35 AM   #14
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Default

Sure, you are right!! I've just noticed that the LRP Vector has a seperate lead...Whoops
Still need some opinions though..which do people prefer..LRP or Novak?
Hobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2005, 09:42 AM   #15
Tech Legend
 
Wild Cherry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: TRCR Modified Driver
Posts: 22,595
Default

Hobbit


Both the Novak & the Lrp are very good performing products....

Both out perform conventional brush motor`s....

While at the same time saving money from their low maintenance*



*tuning , as the brush guys say....
__________________
Any driver can copy a great set up, a Champion however will steal it .
If Jesus returned as a Rc car he be a Rc10 B5M
George W. Cherry
Wild Cherry is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trinity Co27 Monster Stock Pro Motors & Reedy Neo 2* BL Motors For Sale Leodis R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 17 05-11-2007 06:03 PM
GM Brusless ESC & Motors, LRP Charger, MM Motor Master, Yokomo Motors tones Australia For Sale/Trade 5 05-08-2007 07:22 PM
MOTORS MOTORS MOTORS EPIC C2,INTEGY BLUE ATLAS 19,AN MORE DENNIS STORTI R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 18 01-06-2007 09:44 AM
Mod Motors, Stock Motors, Rubber Tires and a Novak Syns. Module Team Speedy R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 1 07-13-2006 07:28 PM
stock motors . mod motors - feedback needed Babylou Electric Off-Road 4 05-07-2004 05:00 PM



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 09:29 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