Ramping ESC's
06-25-2010, 01:16 PM
#61
Well I managed to read most oft this without falling asleep.
There will be no code breaking of our software, not going to happen. While "possible" to some extent there is far to much going on for the average user to deal with.
On top of all of this you guys are blaming an esc for a human created issue. The esc is NOT the only factor in spec'ing out any class.
ROAR has asked everyone of us for no timing spec software. We've given it to them, which for the record we'd offered in the past.
The main goal was to slow down the class(s) not to prevent cheating. Cheating will always be a factor and a part of racing, period.
Do you guys all honestly think that a manufacturer is going to worry this much about a "spec" class?
This is why I personally run Mod offroad, we don't have to deal with this "stuff."
There will be no code breaking of our software, not going to happen. While "possible" to some extent there is far to much going on for the average user to deal with.
On top of all of this you guys are blaming an esc for a human created issue. The esc is NOT the only factor in spec'ing out any class.
ROAR has asked everyone of us for no timing spec software. We've given it to them, which for the record we'd offered in the past.
The main goal was to slow down the class(s) not to prevent cheating. Cheating will always be a factor and a part of racing, period.
Do you guys all honestly think that a manufacturer is going to worry this much about a "spec" class?
This is why I personally run Mod offroad, we don't have to deal with this "stuff."
06-25-2010, 01:46 PM
#62
+1 --
The real issue here goes back to why I was fighting ROAR on the original brushless rules years ago. They specced a badly designed motor for stock, which allows for a lot of possible ways of extracting LOTS of extra power from the motor. A well designed motor doesn't benefit much from timing changes (if at all.) A poorly designed motor will greatly benefit from timing changes.
If you get the specs right in the first place, there usually won't be an issue later down the road.
In MOD, we convinced ROAR that the way to limit power is to limit the size of the motor. Then the limiting factor for power becomes the heat that the motor generates. We also fought to make fans on motors illegal, add-on heat sinks, etc. The best way to make a motor class would be to allow only smooth cans, no heat sinks, no forced air cooling, etc. Then everyone would be limited in the power they could get from a motor.
We were trying to get ROAR to do the same for stock -- but make a much smaller motor standard. It doesn't do much good to have a "stock" class that uses a HUGE 540 size motor.
There really isn't any limit to the amount of power that can be extracted from a motor other than a heat limit. And when the motor is big (physically) you can get big power from it (cause you can dissipate a lot of heat.) I told ROAR that in the long run, stock and MOD will end up being approx. the same speed -- because they use the same size motor. And guess what? Stock and Mod are now nearly the same speed.
So what can we, as manufacturers, do for the racing community? Would you like to see a "new" stock class using a much smaller motor (which would slow everything down?) Or, as ROAR has done (to try to combat the increases in speeds in stock) by creating a "stock timing" only ESC (which, BTW, doesn't keep anyone from clocking the sensors on a motor...)
Or would people just like us to give them options, and allow each track to decide what to do?
Or, should we just keep making more and more "tweaks" to give more and more speed? (And believe me, there are a lot more "tweaks" still to be done...)
I'd like to hear some opinions!!
Thanx!
Patrick
06-25-2010, 02:30 PM
#63
Well I managed to read most oft this without falling asleep.
There will be no code breaking of our software, not going to happen. While "possible" to some extent there is far to much going on for the average user to deal with.
On top of all of this you guys are blaming an esc for a human created issue. The esc is NOT the only factor in spec'ing out any class.
ROAR has asked everyone of us for no timing spec software. We've given it to them, which for the record we'd offered in the past.
The main goal was to slow down the class(s) not to prevent cheating. Cheating will always be a factor and a part of racing, period.
Do you guys all honestly think that a manufacturer is going to worry this much about a "spec" class?
This is why I personally run Mod offroad, we don't have to deal with this "stuff."
There will be no code breaking of our software, not going to happen. While "possible" to some extent there is far to much going on for the average user to deal with.
On top of all of this you guys are blaming an esc for a human created issue. The esc is NOT the only factor in spec'ing out any class.
ROAR has asked everyone of us for no timing spec software. We've given it to them, which for the record we'd offered in the past.
The main goal was to slow down the class(s) not to prevent cheating. Cheating will always be a factor and a part of racing, period.
Do you guys all honestly think that a manufacturer is going to worry this much about a "spec" class?
This is why I personally run Mod offroad, we don't have to deal with this "stuff."
+1 --
The real issue here goes back to why I was fighting ROAR on the original brushless rules years ago. They specced a badly designed motor for stock, which allows for a lot of possible ways of extracting LOTS of extra power from the motor. A well designed motor doesn't benefit much from timing changes (if at all.) A poorly designed motor will greatly benefit from timing changes.
If you get the specs right in the first place, there usually won't be an issue later down the road.
In MOD, we convinced ROAR that the way to limit power is to limit the size of the motor. Then the limiting factor for power becomes the heat that the motor generates. We also fought to make fans on motors illegal, add-on heat sinks, etc. The best way to make a motor class would be to allow only smooth cans, no heat sinks, no forced air cooling, etc. Then everyone would be limited in the power they could get from a motor.
We were trying to get ROAR to do the same for stock -- but make a much smaller motor standard. It doesn't do much good to have a "stock" class that uses a HUGE 540 size motor.
There really isn't any limit to the amount of power that can be extracted from a motor other than a heat limit. And when the motor is big (physically) you can get big power from it (cause you can dissipate a lot of heat.) I told ROAR that in the long run, stock and MOD will end up being approx. the same speed -- because they use the same size motor. And guess what? Stock and Mod are now nearly the same speed.
So what can we, as manufacturers, do for the racing community? Would you like to see a "new" stock class using a much smaller motor (which would slow everything down?) Or, as ROAR has done (to try to combat the increases in speeds in stock) by creating a "stock timing" only ESC (which, BTW, doesn't keep anyone from clocking the sensors on a motor...)
Or would people just like us to give them options, and allow each track to decide what to do?
Or, should we just keep making more and more "tweaks" to give more and more speed? (And believe me, there are a lot more "tweaks" still to be done...)
I'd like to hear some opinions!!
Thanx!
Patrick
The real issue here goes back to why I was fighting ROAR on the original brushless rules years ago. They specced a badly designed motor for stock, which allows for a lot of possible ways of extracting LOTS of extra power from the motor. A well designed motor doesn't benefit much from timing changes (if at all.) A poorly designed motor will greatly benefit from timing changes.
If you get the specs right in the first place, there usually won't be an issue later down the road.
In MOD, we convinced ROAR that the way to limit power is to limit the size of the motor. Then the limiting factor for power becomes the heat that the motor generates. We also fought to make fans on motors illegal, add-on heat sinks, etc. The best way to make a motor class would be to allow only smooth cans, no heat sinks, no forced air cooling, etc. Then everyone would be limited in the power they could get from a motor.
We were trying to get ROAR to do the same for stock -- but make a much smaller motor standard. It doesn't do much good to have a "stock" class that uses a HUGE 540 size motor.
There really isn't any limit to the amount of power that can be extracted from a motor other than a heat limit. And when the motor is big (physically) you can get big power from it (cause you can dissipate a lot of heat.) I told ROAR that in the long run, stock and MOD will end up being approx. the same speed -- because they use the same size motor. And guess what? Stock and Mod are now nearly the same speed.
So what can we, as manufacturers, do for the racing community? Would you like to see a "new" stock class using a much smaller motor (which would slow everything down?) Or, as ROAR has done (to try to combat the increases in speeds in stock) by creating a "stock timing" only ESC (which, BTW, doesn't keep anyone from clocking the sensors on a motor...)
Or would people just like us to give them options, and allow each track to decide what to do?
Or, should we just keep making more and more "tweaks" to give more and more speed? (And believe me, there are a lot more "tweaks" still to be done...)
I'd like to hear some opinions!!
Thanx!
Patrick
(I said I wasn't going to post anymore in this thread but
)Basically what you are both saying is have a stock and mod...right? I mean we, stock racers, wanted to go faster...BAM...we got it what we asked for! So now it's too fast? So now we have spec software and ESCs...umm ok...well now we have threads like this debating if people are going to cheat to go faster...or if it slow enough.
I guess as a Tekin V203 user, I ask myself how much more speed do we need before we just need to run mod? As Patrick said there are more tweaks that can be done. But the question is are they needed?
I mean how sharp do you have to make a spoon before you just go grab a knife???
The idea of a different type of motor for stock is interesting but not sure if that will cause more issues. But I'd be interested in seeing what that would look like.
And I agree Randy, people are going to cheat regardless of the software.
06-25-2010, 04:10 PM
#64
"Stock" now is what modified was 5 years ago prior to brushless.
Do we need a slower class, yes. Can we get the slower class we need right now with the exsisting equipment, yes.
Personally I'm against forcing anyone(especially the "new" racer) who's supposed to be in this type of class: sportsman, beginner,etc to buy new equipment to compete. This is THE reason why stock slash took off HUGE! Pull it out of the box, run, win.
However brushless is here to stay. Technology will continue to move forward both because of demand and the natural cost/performance,etc.
Anyone who's purchases a Tekin RS has had their ORIGINAL Tekin RS has been given each and every software update/improvement at NO CHARGE!
The 208 spec software will allow any Tekin user to run the spec profile and place it on par with all of the other Esc's that either have a spec software or were the older models ala TC Sphere, Novak non Kinetic etc.
When it comes to specing any class all factors must be accounted for. Battery's, Motor, Esc's. etc . With this software it should be as easy as saying 2s Lipo, ROAR legal motors, Any esc that fits the spec software guidline, done.
I personally feel that if we make a motor of a certain size that is on a "limit" so to speak we'll go right back to 27T Brushed days where guys push 'em to the limit of failure, then one pinion back on the next motor. I've been racing since the early 90's and know this is the fact when you race at the stock level. So because brushless is falsly thought as being indestructible this SHOULD not be the next step.
Do we need a slower class, yes. Can we get the slower class we need right now with the exsisting equipment, yes.
Personally I'm against forcing anyone(especially the "new" racer) who's supposed to be in this type of class: sportsman, beginner,etc to buy new equipment to compete. This is THE reason why stock slash took off HUGE! Pull it out of the box, run, win.
However brushless is here to stay. Technology will continue to move forward both because of demand and the natural cost/performance,etc.
Anyone who's purchases a Tekin RS has had their ORIGINAL Tekin RS has been given each and every software update/improvement at NO CHARGE!
The 208 spec software will allow any Tekin user to run the spec profile and place it on par with all of the other Esc's that either have a spec software or were the older models ala TC Sphere, Novak non Kinetic etc.
When it comes to specing any class all factors must be accounted for. Battery's, Motor, Esc's. etc . With this software it should be as easy as saying 2s Lipo, ROAR legal motors, Any esc that fits the spec software guidline, done.
I personally feel that if we make a motor of a certain size that is on a "limit" so to speak we'll go right back to 27T Brushed days where guys push 'em to the limit of failure, then one pinion back on the next motor. I've been racing since the early 90's and know this is the fact when you race at the stock level. So because brushless is falsly thought as being indestructible this SHOULD not be the next step.
06-25-2010, 04:16 PM
#65
thank u randy for the offroad plug. them aussies as well have a good thing goin with their continuing love for 540 racing. u can push, but too far and a DNF is worse than gettin pulled down straight
R
R
06-25-2010, 04:34 PM
#66
excerpt :
I personally feel that if we make a motor of a certain size that is on a "limit" so to speak we'll go right back to 27T Brushed days where guys push 'em to the limit of failure, then one pinion back on the next motor. I've been racing since the early 90's and know this is the fact when you race at the stock level. So because brushless is falsly thought as being indestructible this SHOULD not be the next step.
.
I personally feel that if we make a motor of a certain size that is on a "limit" so to speak we'll go right back to 27T Brushed days where guys push 'em to the limit of failure, then one pinion back on the next motor. I've been racing since the early 90's and know this is the fact when you race at the stock level. So because brushless is falsly thought as being indestructible this SHOULD not be the next step.
.
06-25-2010, 04:45 PM
#67
First, thread ISN'T about cheating, how to cheat or how people will figure out how to cheat, however I do find that info interesting,
The question was.. well you know the question if were able to stay awake long enough to get thru the first post.
Around these parts, 'some' want to slow the 'stock' class down because its to big a jump for the newbies and novices and some will just never be able to handle it no matter how long they race. They wish to spilt the class, timing and no timing, to ME, this is wrong, if YOU want to go slower, then put in a slower motor. if that means a new smaller motor so be it, but for now we only have 21.5 and 25.5. whats funny about the whole darn thing is, the same people that are freating about which motor to run in the 1/12 and wgt CHASSIS CLASS and "we don't want to split the class cause a deep field makes for better racing" are the very same people willing to split a "MOTOR" CLASS. We have only heard from one true 'newbie' on this thread, he doesn't seem to mind running 'stock' just the way it is. HE understands the learning curve, and is fine with it.
personally, I find all the posts interesting and entertaining, I enjoy hearing others peoples thoughts, whether or not I agree with them is a different matter. And yes, WE the racers having always wanted to go faster, when I started racing, it went something like this, midnight, midnight2, paradox, p2k, 2pk2, core, yok, red spring, green spring, purple spring bent at 15* to the north, both springs on the same side of the can, tribo drops, power steering drops, wd-40 drops, grandmas eye drops, turbo 30, turbo 35, GFX, cyclone, cyclone with purple label, cyclone with green label, cyclone with green label and a TC on it, G9, G10, GM, drill press with a cotton swap and mothers and yea, I went though all of those and that stuff, on and on and on, we could never go fast enough or spend enough money. but now, and thank you before I forget, one motor, one esc, free downloads, and drive like hell, woa there cowboy, now we are going to fast, gotta do something, can't make the guy that can't handle it spend money on a new 74.99 motor that will last darn near forever, lets change the rules and classes, lets dilute the racing. really? oh well.
Thanks Randy and Patrick for sharing your points of view,
BTW, the day that Traxxas comes out with a on road slash touring car that works, I'm sure it will take off to, funny thing is, I actually suggested a Slash class to help pull in new racers to our outdoor parking lot program, it went no where.
The question was.. well you know the question if were able to stay awake long enough to get thru the first post.
Around these parts, 'some' want to slow the 'stock' class down because its to big a jump for the newbies and novices and some will just never be able to handle it no matter how long they race. They wish to spilt the class, timing and no timing, to ME, this is wrong, if YOU want to go slower, then put in a slower motor. if that means a new smaller motor so be it, but for now we only have 21.5 and 25.5. whats funny about the whole darn thing is, the same people that are freating about which motor to run in the 1/12 and wgt CHASSIS CLASS and "we don't want to split the class cause a deep field makes for better racing" are the very same people willing to split a "MOTOR" CLASS. We have only heard from one true 'newbie' on this thread, he doesn't seem to mind running 'stock' just the way it is. HE understands the learning curve, and is fine with it.
personally, I find all the posts interesting and entertaining, I enjoy hearing others peoples thoughts, whether or not I agree with them is a different matter. And yes, WE the racers having always wanted to go faster, when I started racing, it went something like this, midnight, midnight2, paradox, p2k, 2pk2, core, yok, red spring, green spring, purple spring bent at 15* to the north, both springs on the same side of the can, tribo drops, power steering drops, wd-40 drops, grandmas eye drops, turbo 30, turbo 35, GFX, cyclone, cyclone with purple label, cyclone with green label, cyclone with green label and a TC on it, G9, G10, GM, drill press with a cotton swap and mothers and yea, I went though all of those and that stuff, on and on and on, we could never go fast enough or spend enough money. but now, and thank you before I forget, one motor, one esc, free downloads, and drive like hell, woa there cowboy, now we are going to fast, gotta do something, can't make the guy that can't handle it spend money on a new 74.99 motor that will last darn near forever, lets change the rules and classes, lets dilute the racing. really? oh well.
Thanks Randy and Patrick for sharing your points of view,
BTW, the day that Traxxas comes out with a on road slash touring car that works, I'm sure it will take off to, funny thing is, I actually suggested a Slash class to help pull in new racers to our outdoor parking lot program, it went no where.
06-25-2010, 05:08 PM
#68
"stock" Lap records got quicker but I dont see them as something a racer has achieved, all they did was change their 27t motor and use 13.5 with the right formula of settings to make it even faster.
Im not saying brushless is a bad thing, or its progress in development, (hardware or software related) but it's the complexity of trhe situation that's being discussed.
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
