1/12 forum
Tech Regular
iTrader: (24)
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 495
From: Bondurant, IA
Correct, so now we're down to limiting winds, or boost/turbo. Granted this only really applies for mod, but if everyone goes 2S are we going to a 35.5 brushless motor for the "new" stock class? 2S 25.5 is more like 1S 13.5 right now.
I haven't heard about any rule changes, but I do know that there has been a bunch of discussion about it. I find it amazing, and a bit disconcerting, that many people don't seem to understand the physics of the situation. If we are talking about open motors, then changing to 2s will have absolutely no effect on performance. But it is a way for manufacturers to sell new products to replace our "outdated" 1s equipment!
Straight from the man himself, posted on the other thread I mentioned:
I wonder what possible reason IFMAR has for doing this...
This is an IFMAR decision only. ROAR has made no changes ***REPEAT*** Roar has made no changes. 2s open modified 1/12 for IFMAR only.
They are also adding a 13.5 class to the 1/12 worlds, which I assume will be 2s as well. Not sure how much different this will be to modified...
They are also adding a 13.5 class to the 1/12 worlds, which I assume will be 2s as well. Not sure how much different this will be to modified...
Just heard in the interview with Hagberg from IIC that IFMAR just approved a rule change to 2S for 1/12? Can't seem to find ANYTHING online about it?
Only thing I've been able to find is THIS INTERVIEW WITH HAGBERG 2S part starts around 1:30...
Only thing I've been able to find is THIS INTERVIEW WITH HAGBERG 2S part starts around 1:30...
Tech Regular
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 341
From: NoVa
Anyone near the Wash D.C. Baltimore area check this out
http://www.rctech.net/forum/mid-atla...timore-md.html
http://www.rctech.net/forum/mid-atla...timore-md.html
So in the next 1/12 WC, 2S and in south africa. Will we see 10 drivers attending?
I'm wondering how fast 2S will go with open mod motor, what about tire wear? Or the skill level needed. 1S with boosted 3.5 is more than plenty. Even thought I like it, I can do 6.5 1S blinky because of more drivers.
Hope that efra really doesn't follow this IFMAR 2S rule!
I'm wondering how fast 2S will go with open mod motor, what about tire wear? Or the skill level needed. 1S with boosted 3.5 is more than plenty. Even thought I like it, I can do 6.5 1S blinky because of more drivers.
Hope that efra really doesn't follow this IFMAR 2S rule!
There will be no change in performance. If the battery is still the same dimensions and weight as a 1s, it will still contain the same total energy as a 1s, and the drivers will still select motors and gearing to use almost all of the energy during a run.
We still have no idea what this change was supposed to accomplish.
We still have no idea what this change was supposed to accomplish.
Last edited by howardcano; 10-06-2016 at 12:55 AM.
Tech Adept
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 153
I am going to be the devil on this.
on the EFRA proposals LRP is the one saying to go to 2s on 12th cars.
LRP has no 1s speedo, LRP motors are not good on 1s set ups...
So i can assume that LRP has not been able to develop a 1s speedo as the Flow is not and they have not announced anything related this year. So, I am want to understand that they have take the decision of trying to go to 2s on 12th only because they are not able or they do not want to develop a 1s speedo.
EFRA AGM proposal for electric classes, http://news.efra.ws/fileadmin/news/2...ectionsrev.pdf LRP proposal is between pages 2 and 4.
Cheers
Javier
on the EFRA proposals LRP is the one saying to go to 2s on 12th cars.
LRP has no 1s speedo, LRP motors are not good on 1s set ups...
So i can assume that LRP has not been able to develop a 1s speedo as the Flow is not and they have not announced anything related this year. So, I am want to understand that they have take the decision of trying to go to 2s on 12th only because they are not able or they do not want to develop a 1s speedo.
EFRA AGM proposal for electric classes, http://news.efra.ws/fileadmin/news/2...ectionsrev.pdf LRP proposal is between pages 2 and 4.
Cheers
Javier
Thanks for the link, Javier.
I noticed the following comment in the proposal:
"Consensus was achieved between all federations and the manufacturers that this would be desirable."
But we now know that ROAR voted against it.
Here is the reasoning given for the change:
"Higher voltage is much easier to ensure trouble-free operation of the receiver and servo, as there is a big voltage difference between the supply voltage and the minimum required voltage of the receiver and servo. With 1s there is only a small voltage difference causing possible issues."
This "problem" was solved many years ago, by many manufacturers. It is only a problem for those manufacturers who can't or won't design their equipment properly.
I did not notice any provision for permitting both 1s and 2s to be used in modified, which would have made sense, as nobody would be forced to buy new equipment.
I noticed the following comment in the proposal:
"Consensus was achieved between all federations and the manufacturers that this would be desirable."
But we now know that ROAR voted against it.
Here is the reasoning given for the change:
"Higher voltage is much easier to ensure trouble-free operation of the receiver and servo, as there is a big voltage difference between the supply voltage and the minimum required voltage of the receiver and servo. With 1s there is only a small voltage difference causing possible issues."
This "problem" was solved many years ago, by many manufacturers. It is only a problem for those manufacturers who can't or won't design their equipment properly.
I did not notice any provision for permitting both 1s and 2s to be used in modified, which would have made sense, as nobody would be forced to buy new equipment.
Thanks for the link, Javier.
I noticed the following comment in the proposal:
"Consensus was achieved between all federations and the manufacturers that this would be desirable."
But we now know that ROAR voted against it.
Here is the reasoning given for the change:
"Higher voltage is much easier to ensure trouble-free operation of the receiver and servo, as there is a big voltage difference between the supply voltage and the minimum required voltage of the receiver and servo. With 1s there is only a small voltage difference causing possible issues."
This "problem" was solved many years ago, by many manufacturers. It is only a problem for those manufacturers who can't or won't design their equipment properly.
I did not notice any provision for permitting both 1s and 2s to be used in modified, which would have made sense, as nobody would be forced to buy new equipment.
I noticed the following comment in the proposal:
"Consensus was achieved between all federations and the manufacturers that this would be desirable."
But we now know that ROAR voted against it.
Here is the reasoning given for the change:
"Higher voltage is much easier to ensure trouble-free operation of the receiver and servo, as there is a big voltage difference between the supply voltage and the minimum required voltage of the receiver and servo. With 1s there is only a small voltage difference causing possible issues."
This "problem" was solved many years ago, by many manufacturers. It is only a problem for those manufacturers who can't or won't design their equipment properly.
I did not notice any provision for permitting both 1s and 2s to be used in modified, which would have made sense, as nobody would be forced to buy new equipment.
Seems every time a stupid rule shows up it because one of the established manufacturers can't or won't make products to compete with the ones that can.
Fortunately the rule doesn't apply to us. The USA, Canada, and other countries will likely continue with 1s, since there is no good reason to change.
on the EFRA proposals LRP is the one saying to go to 2s on 12th cars.
LRP has no 1s speedo, LRP motors are not good on 1s set ups...
So i can assume that LRP has not been able to develop a 1s speedo as the Flow is not and they have not announced anything related this year. So, I am want to understand that they have take the decision of trying to go to 2s on 12th only because they are not able or they do not want to develop a 1s speedo.
The 2s 1/12th scale rule change does sound like a manufactures money grab.

Specifications
Integrated heatsink + fan yes
Sensored Brushless System yes
Voltage input 3.7 - 7.4V
Rated current 400A/phase
Typical voltage drop @20A 0.011V/phase
Forward/Brake yes
B.E.C. 6.0V/3.0A Linear
Dimensions 32 x 34 x 21mm
Weight (without wires) 40g
Multi mode profile adjustment yes
Power wires 3.3mm˛
Recommended motor limit (at 7.4V) over 3.0T
Plugged fan yes
Tech Master
iTrader: (52)
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,455
From: Spokane, WA
True you can use a Flow with 1s. You just won't see any more voltage to the receiver and servo than what the battery is supplying because there is no built-in booster for the BEC. I used a SXX Stock Spec with Flow board (booster removed) and no outboard booster or rx pack for a year in 1/12th scale. Worked flawlessly for me. Servo could have been a bit faster, but otherwise perfect operation.
Tech Master
iTrader: (10)
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,799
From: New Bern, N.C.
perhaps it's a dumb question, but what happens if one connects a one cell specific speedo to a two cell pack? Does the one cell speedo simply send too much voltage to the receiver......or does the whole thing melt down?
Tech Regular
iTrader: (24)
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 495
From: Bondurant, IA
You will have found the right combination to release the magic white smoke!



2991Likes