Who saw rctvlive about R.O.A.R. ?
12-06-2007, 10:06 AM
#181
The danger in getting the r/c suppliers and manufacturers to come with rules is that they will do what's in their best interest, not the racers. This has been shown time and time again. Also r/c suppliers and manufacturers are the ones that fight the hardest to maintain the status quo and not change things because change affects their bottom line. As examples:
1) bushings in stock motors for the last 15 years
2) ever more fragile sub-c cells that last less and less runs
3) how about continuously increasing the cost of each new generation of kit that comes out ($200->$300->$400->?) and increasing the cost of parts on a regular basis ($5 per arm is now normal)
4) how about working to undermine new technologies (bl,LIPO) every chance they get
5) etc
But we're just internet engineers, so what could we possibly contribute!
1) bushings in stock motors for the last 15 years
2) ever more fragile sub-c cells that last less and less runs
3) how about continuously increasing the cost of each new generation of kit that comes out ($200->$300->$400->?) and increasing the cost of parts on a regular basis ($5 per arm is now normal)
4) how about working to undermine new technologies (bl,LIPO) every chance they get
5) etc
But we're just internet engineers, so what could we possibly contribute!
12-06-2007, 10:17 AM
#182
12-06-2007, 10:39 AM
#183
Ok, I've been reading this for a while and a few things have me confused apparently. Current LiPo's are shaped just like and fit in the same area as a stick pack...not a saddle pack right? I know they fit in my Mini AND in my TC just like any stick pack or side x side pack I've ever used. I thought saddle packs were 3 cells per side on a TC like saddle bags on a horse or motorcycle. No current TC design uses that configuration now...do they (though it was popular in the past)? That leads to my next question...Why do the manufacturers need to change the design of TC's or anything else so that LiPo's will fit when they fit in the current configuration now? I know a 3200 fits in my TA05...AND that same battery fits in my M03M Mini. So I don't see any redesigning of the current TC's is needed. The only issue with LiPo that needs addressed is dimensions of the hard case and basic safety issues of which there are few and only need addressed due to quality control by some manufacturers. The rest of the issues are very minor, even minimum weight. Now I'm not saying it's an easy thing to implement since it's a pretty major change to the ROAR rules but very feasible. Brushless seems like the more difficult decision. I can't really offer anything on that since I haven't run brushless yet since I run silvercan and sport-tuned black can Tamiya motors (even in stock rubber) and I like the fact that I don't have to work on those motors so brushless seems like a good idea there...just figuring out how to move them into the current rules and not alienate the current crop of old-school brushed motor folks.
12-06-2007, 11:06 AM
#184
When people say "redesign the cars for lipo" it's in reference to the fact that
A.) sure there might be some small fitment issues with rectangualr hard cases...
BUT more importantly.
B.) What with brushless gaining popularity... and brushless motors/escs are heavier than their brushed counterparts... what you have is a heavier ESC/motor on one side of the car...and a lighter battery on the other.
The weight distribution of the cars is all messed up when you "just drop a lipo in" ... in order to take advantage of the weight savings of the lipo pack the rest of the car needs to be reconfigured so that the weight distribution is again correct.
Even with the weights as is with NiMH it can sometimes be a struggle to get your car to balance out and be close to weight... IE, you might need to add MORE weight than the minimum to get your car to work right.
With foam tire weights this can even be more of a struggle... the weight minimum is further reduced....and usually the chassis is beefed up...thicker grahite... aluminum stand offs... aluminum hubs sometimes...
So to really reap the benefits of a brushless/lipo setup I would think the layout needs to be changed... motor placement...electronics placement...battery placement...
A.) sure there might be some small fitment issues with rectangualr hard cases...
BUT more importantly.
B.) What with brushless gaining popularity... and brushless motors/escs are heavier than their brushed counterparts... what you have is a heavier ESC/motor on one side of the car...and a lighter battery on the other.
The weight distribution of the cars is all messed up when you "just drop a lipo in" ... in order to take advantage of the weight savings of the lipo pack the rest of the car needs to be reconfigured so that the weight distribution is again correct.
Even with the weights as is with NiMH it can sometimes be a struggle to get your car to balance out and be close to weight... IE, you might need to add MORE weight than the minimum to get your car to work right.
With foam tire weights this can even be more of a struggle... the weight minimum is further reduced....and usually the chassis is beefed up...thicker grahite... aluminum stand offs... aluminum hubs sometimes...
So to really reap the benefits of a brushless/lipo setup I would think the layout needs to be changed... motor placement...electronics placement...battery placement...
12-06-2007, 11:10 AM
#185
What about revising the standard size of LiPo packs and try to come up with something that's not as long, but maybe taller? If you could avoid taking up the entire right side of a car with the battery, you could move some electronics over there and have a better chance at keeping the car balanced and a reasonable weight.
Or... make the packs long but not tall, and come up with some way of putting electronics on top of the battery... though that sounds like a kludge to me.
A solution that doesn't require us to radically redesign cars, and doesn't completely obsolete old chassis would be great.
Or... make the packs long but not tall, and come up with some way of putting electronics on top of the battery... though that sounds like a kludge to me.
A solution that doesn't require us to radically redesign cars, and doesn't completely obsolete old chassis would be great.
12-06-2007, 11:14 AM
#186
There's an easy solution: Just make your brushless motor/speedo a whole lot lighter!!
I kid, I kid. I know, it's not that easy.So when is Novak going to get onto the LiPo bandwagon? You guys have already proven to the be one of the leaders in the brushless revolution. It's time to complete the loop.
12-06-2007, 11:45 AM
#187
Most of the engineers that design r/c cars also race them, so they would actually be a really good source for ROAR to goto for advice in making rules.
12-06-2007, 11:56 AM
#188
Since we are asking for a more bullet proof way of protecting the Lipo, why not make the case heavier? Say about the same weight and size of a 5 cell NiMh battery pack. Then you could have the best of all situations, and still have some weight to move around for the final weight distribution.
Rick, you say its "done" can you give a example of where a guy could see a Lipo thats configured with the same dimensions as a side by side 6 cell pack, or are you making reference to the Orion 3200 as well?
I think part of the misunderstanding with some of the guys here is that they don't understand that although a brick style battery will fit in most of the current cars, the idea of getting that pack 2-3mm lower in the chassis can make a world of difference in the way a TC car handels, and at present the only way that they do that right now is utilizing the battery slots.
Rick, you say its "done" can you give a example of where a guy could see a Lipo thats configured with the same dimensions as a side by side 6 cell pack, or are you making reference to the Orion 3200 as well?
I think part of the misunderstanding with some of the guys here is that they don't understand that although a brick style battery will fit in most of the current cars, the idea of getting that pack 2-3mm lower in the chassis can make a world of difference in the way a TC car handels, and at present the only way that they do that right now is utilizing the battery slots.
12-06-2007, 12:14 PM
#189
Since we are asking for a more bullet proof way of protecting the Lipo, why not make the case heavier? Say about the same weight and size of a 5 cell NiMh battery pack. Then you could have the best of all situations, and still have some weight to move around for the final weight distribution.
Rick, you say its "done" can you give a example of where a guy could see a Lipo thats configured with the same dimensions as a side by side 6 cell pack, or are you making reference to the Orion 3200 as well?
I think part of the misunderstanding with some of the guys here is that they don't understand that although a brick style battery will fit in most of the current cars, the idea of getting that pack 2-3mm lower in the chassis can make a world of difference in the way a TC car handels, and at present the only way that they do that right now is utilizing the battery slots.
Rick, you say its "done" can you give a example of where a guy could see a Lipo thats configured with the same dimensions as a side by side 6 cell pack, or are you making reference to the Orion 3200 as well?
I think part of the misunderstanding with some of the guys here is that they don't understand that although a brick style battery will fit in most of the current cars, the idea of getting that pack 2-3mm lower in the chassis can make a world of difference in the way a TC car handels, and at present the only way that they do that right now is utilizing the battery slots.
So they do fit then right? The brick shaped ones? Just don't fit as low as you want them. Well, I want all TC's to be front wheel drive and require a lawn gnome to be strapped to the hood for the entire race while monkeys throw poo at the drivers. It's not about catering to one but finding what works for the majority. I do believe the Shumacher Mi3 is specifically designed to work with the LiPo brick and some of the others are as well if I remember right....oh and they also work with NiMh...hmmmm...sounds like that should be a good start. What do you suggest? Just stay with NiMh?
12-06-2007, 12:20 PM
#190
lipo shape
An orion 3200 cased lipo weighs 6.6 ounces and the 3600 cased lipo weighs 7.6 ounces. A 6 cell 4600 packs weighs 15 ounces.
That is 7.5 ounces of weight you have to add, or double the lipo pack. The only way to add this weight into the pack is to use lead or tungsten and fill the empty parts of the case. But, you will mess up all of the classes that have lighter weight rules, and all of the cars that have the batteries down the middle. Personally I think the best solution is to:
1) design more cars with the battery close to the middle, or
2) encase shorter lipo packs to put the speed controller or servo on the battery side of the car.
The entire LIPO argument is based around the idea of being able to interchange LIPO and nimh. The reality is that this cannot be done easily in a way that equates both technologies and doesn't require new chassis designs.
This argument is similar to BL and brushed. You can introduce all of the 13.5, 14.5, 15.5, etc bl motors you want, but the end result is that BL is much more efficient and in most cases more powerful than a brushed motor in the same category.
Does it make sense to keep trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, and keep handicapping new technology to let it race with the old stuff, or is it better to embrace the new technology, stop trying to do the impossible, and let the chips fall where they may?
That is 7.5 ounces of weight you have to add, or double the lipo pack. The only way to add this weight into the pack is to use lead or tungsten and fill the empty parts of the case. But, you will mess up all of the classes that have lighter weight rules, and all of the cars that have the batteries down the middle. Personally I think the best solution is to:
1) design more cars with the battery close to the middle, or
2) encase shorter lipo packs to put the speed controller or servo on the battery side of the car.
The entire LIPO argument is based around the idea of being able to interchange LIPO and nimh. The reality is that this cannot be done easily in a way that equates both technologies and doesn't require new chassis designs.
This argument is similar to BL and brushed. You can introduce all of the 13.5, 14.5, 15.5, etc bl motors you want, but the end result is that BL is much more efficient and in most cases more powerful than a brushed motor in the same category.
Does it make sense to keep trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, and keep handicapping new technology to let it race with the old stuff, or is it better to embrace the new technology, stop trying to do the impossible, and let the chips fall where they may?
12-06-2007, 12:21 PM
#191
If a standard size is agreed upon, I'm sure manufacturers could mill down the chassis in the shape of the battery to not only make it sit lower in the chassis, but to make it harder for it to slide around. I'd be thrilled to find a chassis that had a milled down rectangle (for Orion Platium sized packs) rather than sub-c slots. Keeping those slippery batteries in one spot can be a hassle.
12-06-2007, 12:41 PM
#192
So they do fit then right? The brick shaped ones? Just don't fit as low as you want them. Well, I want all TC's to be front wheel drive and require a lawn gnome to be strapped to the hood for the entire race while monkeys throw poo at the drivers. It's not about catering to one but finding what works for the majority. I do believe the Shumacher Mi3 is specifically designed to work with the LiPo brick and some of the others are as well if I remember right....oh and they also work with NiMh...hmmmm...sounds like that should be a good start. What do you suggest? Just stay with NiMh?
Last edited by Johnny Wishbone; 12-06-2007 at 01:10 PM.
12-06-2007, 12:54 PM
#193
If a standard size is agreed upon, I'm sure manufacturers could mill down the chassis in the shape of the battery to not only make it sit lower in the chassis, but to make it harder for it to slide around. I'd be thrilled to find a chassis that had a milled down rectangle (for Orion Platium sized packs) rather than sub-c slots. Keeping those slippery batteries in one spot can be a hassle.
12-06-2007, 01:05 PM
#194
Since we are asking for a more bullet proof way of protecting the Lipo, why not make the case heavier? Say about the same weight and size of a 5 cell NiMh battery pack. Then you could have the best of all situations, and still have some weight to move around for the final weight distribution.
Rick, you say its "done" can you give a example of where a guy could see a Lipo thats configured with the same dimensions as a side by side 6 cell pack, or are you making reference to the Orion 3200 as well?
I think part of the misunderstanding with some of the guys here is that they don't understand that although a brick style battery will fit in most of the current cars, the idea of getting that pack 2-3mm lower in the chassis can make a world of difference in the way a TC car handels, and at present the only way that they do that right now is utilizing the battery slots.
Rick, you say its "done" can you give a example of where a guy could see a Lipo thats configured with the same dimensions as a side by side 6 cell pack, or are you making reference to the Orion 3200 as well?
I think part of the misunderstanding with some of the guys here is that they don't understand that although a brick style battery will fit in most of the current cars, the idea of getting that pack 2-3mm lower in the chassis can make a world of difference in the way a TC car handels, and at present the only way that they do that right now is utilizing the battery slots.
I'd love to share my "ultimate" LiPo battery ideas for future releases, but they are too revolutionary to discuss at this point :-)
12-06-2007, 01:06 PM
#195
An orion 3200 cased lipo weighs 6.6 ounces and the 3600 cased lipo weighs 7.6 ounces. A 6 cell 4600 packs weighs 15 ounces.
That is 7.5 ounces of weight you have to add, or double the lipo pack. The only way to add this weight into the pack is to use lead or tungsten and fill the empty parts of the case. But, you will mess up all of the classes that have lighter weight rules, and all of the cars that have the batteries down the middle. Personally I think the best solution is to:
1) design more cars with the battery close to the middle, or
2) encase shorter lipo packs to put the speed controller or servo on the battery side of the car.
The entire LIPO argument is based around the idea of being able to interchange LIPO and nimh. The reality is that this cannot be done easily in a way that equates both technologies and doesn't require new chassis designs.
This argument is similar to BL and brushed. You can introduce all of the 13.5, 14.5, 15.5, etc bl motors you want, but the end result is that BL is much more efficient and in most cases more powerful than a brushed motor in the same category.
Does it make sense to keep trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, and keep handicapping new technology to let it race with the old stuff, or is it better to embrace the new technology, stop trying to do the impossible, and let the chips fall where they may?
That is 7.5 ounces of weight you have to add, or double the lipo pack. The only way to add this weight into the pack is to use lead or tungsten and fill the empty parts of the case. But, you will mess up all of the classes that have lighter weight rules, and all of the cars that have the batteries down the middle. Personally I think the best solution is to:
1) design more cars with the battery close to the middle, or
2) encase shorter lipo packs to put the speed controller or servo on the battery side of the car.
The entire LIPO argument is based around the idea of being able to interchange LIPO and nimh. The reality is that this cannot be done easily in a way that equates both technologies and doesn't require new chassis designs.
This argument is similar to BL and brushed. You can introduce all of the 13.5, 14.5, 15.5, etc bl motors you want, but the end result is that BL is much more efficient and in most cases more powerful than a brushed motor in the same category.
Does it make sense to keep trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, and keep handicapping new technology to let it race with the old stuff, or is it better to embrace the new technology, stop trying to do the impossible, and let the chips fall where they may?
When your talking about the lighter weight limits for different classes, are these on a local basis or the ROAR recognized ones? Just asking.