Trinity SS DQ'd from JC Stock Nationals?
04-30-2015, 01:41 PM
#256
I seriously doubt Fantom actually builds the stack and winds the stator. That is all done in the same Chinese factory Trinity/Epic come from.
04-30-2015, 01:45 PM
#257
Tech Rookie
The motor that was DQ'd was a Fantom (which is Epic, which is Trinity). here is the quote from the DQ'd driver, he typed Trinity based, but in fact they are Epic based. But Fantom takes these Trinity/Epic motors and rebuilds them to a tighter tolerence.
Originally Posted by CHIZZLE
We talked about the motor in question (Trinity based Fantom IONv5 Short Stack), and he said it was like the 5th one he teched that day that was too short.
Originally Posted by CHIZZLE
We talked about the motor in question (Trinity based Fantom IONv5 Short Stack), and he said it was like the 5th one he teched that day that was too short.
04-30-2015, 01:54 PM
#258
I contacted ROAR on this issue about the DQ on minimum and here is their response:
I checked with the ROAR Electric Chairman and he notes the following:
This was not a roar sanctioned race. It's a series put on my JConcepts. The motor tech was being done by a competing manufacture (Murffdog motors) and he has a vendetta for trinity.......... It's the 2nd time he's done something like this.
They should learn their lesson using him last time but apparently not.
The ROAR Race Management crew uses common sense in measuring motors in the field knowing that without high end equipment you can't measure to the .01 accurately.
ROAR should not have problems like this.
Fred Hohwart
ROAR Administrator
[email protected]
I checked with the ROAR Electric Chairman and he notes the following:
This was not a roar sanctioned race. It's a series put on my JConcepts. The motor tech was being done by a competing manufacture (Murffdog motors) and he has a vendetta for trinity.......... It's the 2nd time he's done something like this.
They should learn their lesson using him last time but apparently not.
The ROAR Race Management crew uses common sense in measuring motors in the field knowing that without high end equipment you can't measure to the .01 accurately.
ROAR should not have problems like this.
Fred Hohwart
ROAR Administrator
[email protected]
04-30-2015, 02:51 PM
#260
04-30-2015, 03:00 PM
#261
Wouldn't the heat those motors come off the track at account for the .01mm.
This is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of in RC if true.
What would .01mm convert to in lap times..... .000001 second a lap?
This is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of in RC if true.
What would .01mm convert to in lap times..... .000001 second a lap?
04-30-2015, 03:22 PM
#262
Tech Rookie
04-30-2015, 03:24 PM
#263
Tech Rookie
04-30-2015, 03:41 PM
#264
Tech Regular
iTrader: (5)
End of the day if the rotor was too big it was too big.
Instead of post race inspection pre race inspection which is commonly used in on road is the best way to avoid these issues.
04-30-2015, 03:56 PM
#265
Expansion with heat is possible but by the time the race was finished motor was removed and pulled down for inspection it should have cooled down enough.
End of the day if the rotor was too big it was too big.
Instead of post race inspection pre race inspection which is commonly used in on road is the best way to avoid these issues.
End of the day if the rotor was too big it was too big.
Instead of post race inspection pre race inspection which is commonly used in on road is the best way to avoid these issues.
So the argument could be made that the motor was good but the calipers were to small.....or an ants ass hair got in the way.
04-30-2015, 04:14 PM
#266
Tech Regular
iTrader: (5)
For comparison reasons, the thinnest condom available is almost twice as thick as the .01mm........so yep.....pretty sure anything over room temp could sway the measurement.
So the argument could be made that the motor was good but the calipers were to small.....or an ants ass hair got in the way.
So the argument could be made that the motor was good but the calipers were to small.....or an ants ass hair got in the way.
So what do you suggest ignore the rules?
What if at the next race do you allow a rotor that is 0.02mm over or 0.03mm.
We need to hear directly from RD or Murf to find out exactly what was out of spec rather than second hand information.
04-30-2015, 04:19 PM
#267
Expansion with heat is possible but by the time the race was finished motor was removed and pulled down for inspection it should have cooled down enough.
End of the day if the rotor was too big it was too big.
Instead of post race inspection pre race inspection which is commonly used in on road is the best way to avoid these issues.
End of the day if the rotor was too big it was too big.
Instead of post race inspection pre race inspection which is commonly used in on road is the best way to avoid these issues.
I attended the race and had 2 of my 3 entries' motor torn down (placed 5th in both.) Personally, had no issue with the way this was conducted although agree that pre-race tech would have been ideal. The fact that top 5 would be teched was announced at the pre-race drivers meeting. There were no surprises.
Cars were removed from track (top 5) and taken to tech.
Cars sat for at least 10 mins typically, then owner was able to remove motor.
Motors were pulled by the owner, then allowed to sit for at least 15 mins to get to room temp.
Results were provided when you picked up your motor.
Last edited by HBRob; 04-30-2015 at 10:40 PM.
04-30-2015, 05:14 PM
#268
So if I read this correctly this was not a ROAR sanctioned event however they were using ROAR specs that were changed AFTER the motors were approved and the specs were given out but not put in the actual rule book? Also was it mentioned anywhere that they would be following ROAR rules? because if not and I got DQed because of a ROAR spec I would argue that those rules do not apply as ROAR was not sanctioning this event.
04-30-2015, 06:45 PM
#269
Which model do you have? The model I have is rated for an accuracy of ±0.001" or ±0.02mm. I can't seem to find a model with better specs. I'm not sure if they would even achieve that with a proper gage R&R capability study, I doubt it.
While I'm I big proponent of following the rules, if this really is about 0.01mm, especially if measured with calipers, I agree it's questionable at best. Which is why I suspect there is more to the story. But obviously I don't know, just my opinion.
While I'm I big proponent of following the rules, if this really is about 0.01mm, especially if measured with calipers, I agree it's questionable at best. Which is why I suspect there is more to the story. But obviously I don't know, just my opinion.
Last edited by Dave H; 05-01-2015 at 12:36 AM. Reason: Forgot ± on ratings
