Well, race fans, it looks as if the new ROAR President and Exec are making shifts in the market. Here is what she just posted on RCTech tonight after the 2008 meeting:
QuoteYes, 27T and 17.5 is the stock class of racing in ROAR competition and ... This will slow down the stock class of racing as it needs to be and maintain the stock brushed motor use at most events, especially off road, we are assuming.
19T and 10.5 is the Super Stock class. (formerly called 19T class) We recommend local programs stick with what they are doing that is working for their integration of brushed and brushless motor racing. In 2009, 13.5 will be the Super Stock class.
I'm sure there are criticisms, questions and probably even a little disappointment out there. We took the future of ROAR racing, our membership and our affliates into consideration. I'm sure you all can understand the position the Excom was placed in and the decisions were not made hastily. This thread was extremely insightful and educational for me and I thank each of you.
LIPO 7.4V BATTERIES ARE APPROVED IN ALL 6 CELL SUB-C 7.2V CLASSES
Phil
really lipo's are approved for 6 cells.Maybe i will run eletric this summer.
brushless it is! im sure glad both my esc's are brushed or brushless,does it say weather the lipos have to be hard cased?
Well, Dawn Sanchez (ROAR Prez) says that there are 9 pages of specifications and rule updates to follow! My guess is that yes, it will be hard cased based on the various threads and input from all over. Of course, IROCC's Exec decisions may be different for motors and batteries, but who knows. It will be interesting to see what happens with 1/12, too! I couldn't find anything on that one.
P.
New ROAR Lipo rules http://www.rctech.net/forum/showthread.php?p=4081220#post4081220
BTW, very interesting teching considerations for the LiPo and the madatory use of a LiPo Sack for charging. Nice that they have that one down. The other side of the nightmare, though, is teching BL motors at club level racing. I wonder how they will deal with this - interesting times ahead. There are too many variables such as on board programming of the Exc let alone the variables associated with the motor. Wow.
P.
Yep, very interesting stuff. As Phil says, these are ROAR rules, and although we do usually stay somewhat "in-line" with ROAR, we do not follow their rules to a tee.
We'll be meeting sooner than later to determine our summer (and beyond) rules, and we'll get you this information as soon as we can. Our rule set will be based on what we think is best for the IROCC club racer.
Personally, I'd be interested to hear from everyone in the club about what they think about these new ROAR rulings. Everyone looks at things differently, owns different equipment, has a different budget, etc... so it would be interesting to get feedback from everyone.
Blake
Does anyone have "actual" experience running a 17.5 brushless system against a 27T brushed system?
How about actual experience running a 10.5 brushless system against a 19T brushed system?
Blake
I have a few days of experience seeing both 27t brushed and 17.5t brushless race together.
Although they were similar at the small track I was at racing at the, 17.5t had more "rip". Every straightaway if there was a 17.5t anywhere near you they could catch you and pass. This was a small "bull-ring" race track in New York.
I think on a big outdoor track a 17.5 would completely destroy a 27t brushed to the point where they couldnt really race together. That is just speculation based on what I have actually witnessed.
I am not saying I am against brushless. I am in fact pro-brushless.
J
I vote lipo because of all the problems that we have had with other batteries. In my opinion, battery is a yearly thing that you would have to buy and i don't mind buying lipo for this year.
What I am NOT in for is brushless, as I would have to upgrade my ESCs. That is not in anyone's racing budget. Not in my budget anyways. From what I have read there is a clear advantage of brushless over brushed. If racing together, us, brushed guys would get destroyed and there is no fun in racing no more.
Ken
I'm not sure about a vote, but your point is fairly narrow.
You don't want to go to brushless because you don't want to have to buy a speed controller, but you don't mind going to LiPo since you already have a charger.
What about the people who would need a new charger for the new battery chemistry?
Changing the motor or battery technology to the ones proposed are equally significant. Both technologies are superior to what we currently use in many ways, and we'll need to change at some point in time.
However, how proven are the lithium chemistry batteries? I for one have heard many more lithium related horror stories over the years than nickel chemistry horror stories. Yes, the current crop of lithium batteries are far superior in many ways over the flaming laptop and flaming cellphone era, however so were the NiMH we used just a couple years ago reliability wise. Once the current R/C trends in battery production shifts into the new chemistry, will we be in the era of flaming carpet knives?
I think that brushless/lipo should be kept in their own class. you cant compare the two its like apples to oranges.
Here is how I see this year's outdoor program to deal with the new rules and the future.
Class 1 - Flagship electric touring class - stock 27T brushed - up to 7.4 V battery (this will be the last year of stock brushed)(and start battery transition to new technology now as well)
Class 2 - 17.5T Brushless Touring - Next year's flagship class- up to 7.4 Volt batteries.
Class 3 - Pro10 Brushed 19T or real/true brushless equivalent, up to 7.4 volt battery. (Yes mix the motor technology in this class).
Class 4 - Nitro
Next year we would be back to 3 classes, 1 electric touring, 1 electric pan car and 1 nitro. A class to suit each person's RC appetite and deals with upcoming technology we can't ignore.
Hey phil or anyone else
Do you have a link to anywhere that shows this anouncement is official?
It isnt on the ROAR site.
TY
Jody
Here's where I found it:
http://www.rctech.net/forum/showthread.php?t=201097
Quote from: "haddow"Here is how I see this year's outdoor program to deal with the new rules and the future.
Class 1 - Flagship electric touring class - stock 27T brushed - up to 7.4 V battery (this will be the last year of stock brushed)(and start battery transition to new technology now as well)
Class 2 - 17.5T Brushless Touring - Next year's flagship class- up to 7.4 Volt batteries.
Class 3 - Pro10 Brushed 19T or real/true brushless equivalent, up to 7.4 volt battery. (Yes mix the motor technology in this class).
Class 4 - Nitro
Next year we would be back to 3 classes, 1 electric touring, 1 electric pan car and 1 nitro. A class to suit each person's RC appetite and deals with upcoming technology we can't ignore.
Not to bad of and Idea. I would rather see a 19t equivilant for class 2.
I would also like to see bla bla bla bla bla. heck I'll be there regardless.
I for brushless as an option. Lipo Not yet for me.
better get a pan car andrew sounds like 19t touring is out.
Quote from: "Tom"I'm not sure about a vote, but your point is fairly narrow.
You don't want to go to brushless because you don't want to have to buy a speed controller, but you don't mind going to LiPo since you already have a charger.
What about the people who would need a new charger for the new battery chemistry?
Changing the motor or battery technology to the ones proposed are equally significant. Both technologies are superior to what we currently use in many ways, and we'll need to change at some point in time.
However, how proven are the lithium chemistry batteries? I for one have heard many more lithium related horror stories over the years than nickel chemistry horror stories. Yes, the current crop of lithium batteries are far superior in many ways over the flaming laptop and flaming cellphone era, however so were the NiMH we used just a couple years ago reliability wise. Once the current R/C trends in battery production shifts into the new chemistry, will we be in the era of flaming carpet knives?
LIPO chargers are cheaper compare to to what you have to spend for ESCs. You can buy an attachment that attaches to your current charger to make it work.
I would like to see 1/10 pan car, if we can decide on this so I can go ahead and get either a pan or touring car. BUT, I dont want to go up against brushless in pro10, I think 27t touring would be better for me.
2-300$ for a brushless setup, I dont think so.
i think saying its unfair to run a 17.5 with a 27 turn because the 17.5 is better technology and mabye a little faster is like sayin you cant run a tc3 with a t2
and i think saying lipo is ok cuz you can convert fairly cheap is like saying its ok as long as ken can afford it,or just like saying my car is too new and better than most in my heat so i cant run it because everyone else can not afford a car as good!
It could be a hectic year! I say:
Stock: 27T + 17.5, NiMh or LiPo
Super Stock: 13.5 (2009 Regs essentially), NiMh or LiPo
Pro10: 10.5 or 13.5 (or completely open it up), NiMh or LiPo
Nitro: Diesel
P.
there is a HUGE difference between $50 for lipo conversion and $300 for a brushless setup. do you really want to deal with the battery problem again this summer? I DON"T.
if we do both lipo and brushless.... you are just going to lose a lot of racers because it is too expensive to race. that is the last thing that you would want to do.
In regards to Pan Car, I very much like Jody's spec for it, you're not limited to one or the other technology. Anyone who has driven one outside knows that only under the most optimal of conditions is there going to be an advantage to those running a brushless setup. Most of the time we will not be able to put down the power.
The "Pro" in Pro10 is for "Prototype", not just in body style and chassis but in power technologies as well. Pro10 is going to be a class where we are hoping to do some experimenting with the technologies available and those of us that run it will know that going into this inaugural season.
you dont have to upgrade your stuff
if you dont want to
what about
stock-17.5 BL + 27t
19t- 10.5BL + 19t
pan- w/e
nitro - self explanitory
but just have somthing like say more weight to the car for brushless or less weight for brushed or a maximum FDR for brushless
or even say no brushless in 19t and stock and run MOD elec for open motors
IMHO
well ken from what i have experienced over the last few years a brushless set up is not all that more expensive , when i first bought my quantum it was 250 plus and then the motor. now i can get a brushed or brushless esc for less than the 250. the motor and sensor is not much more than a couple stock motors that go up in smoke instead of just shutting down when too hot! and the cost of chargers or lipo batteries are you kidding when i first started 12 scale 4 years ago a 4 cell 2400 was 55 now we get 4200s for that go to a hobby store and buy batts you aint gettin squat for that!
Quote from: "BigDawg"and i think saying lipo is ok cuz you can convert fairly cheap is like saying its ok as long as ken can afford it,or just like saying my car is too new and better than most in my heat so i cant run it because everyone else can not afford a car as good!
for you info bigdawg, i run x-ray '04 and most of my batteries were from last year. i don't have the latest and greatest.
if you think that has anything to do with this topic there isnt anything more i can say!
i thing is that everyone already has brushed ESC on their cars and to upgrade to brushless ESCs is expensive. if one is just starting out then yes, why not buy one with brushless.
what is the cheapest way to do this and not giving us any headache?
no lipo is cheap but don't forget about the problems from last summer
brushless is great but too expensive
brushed is not as great but cheap (no upgrade needed)
if brushed and brushless/NiMH and LIPO were running in different classes then i wouldn't careless what we run.
My Vote
Open the stock class to use NiMH and LIPO battery's
Start a Pro Stock stock Class -17.5 BL + 27t + NiMH and LIPO battery's (but must have 5 car to runs the class)
Change 19t to open mod brushed motors (but must have 5 car to runs the class)
Pan Car you guys decide (but must have 5 car to runs the class)
Nirto (but must have 5 car to runs the class)
5 classes is 1-2 too many IMHO.
J
If we run brushed and brushless in the same heats, the software can separate the results into separate classes if racers are concerned. So, let's say that hypothetically we run 17.5, 27T NiMh and LiPo in the same heat. For points/whatever, the software separates out the 17.5 from the 27T. But does this really matter? The change is inevitable and we're just delaying it.
Maybe we could simply test it for the month of April, let's say, or, heaven forbid, have a carpet "test-and-tune-your-TC/Pro10-choice-before-it's-outdoor-season" night and figure it out! Maybe even look at it on a spread sheet to see the standard deviations, whatever.
Phil
we should all just start going to the source to buy our cars they come already to run and really cheap and for the batteries, one word!!! alkaline
I forgot to mention one important thing: racers will need to be conscious of availability of service, support and parts for products that are being made redundant. For example, within less than one year of a new wind of motor coming on the market (hemi K and C2 19T) Trinity dropped the armatures from their inventory. Similarly, look what has happened with 4200 mAh batteries - 1 out of 4 domestic suppliers now carry them in the numbers an performance parameters we are after. And most of you don't like that particular brand! So what will you do if you toast a few armatures, trash an endbell etc, or burn through a handful of cells etc? I'm not trying to be alarmist - it's the reality of what we have been seeing with respect to supply and service. You can almost forget about warrantee for older product! Sad but true.
P.
Sorry, the arms I refer to are for the C2 and the P2K2.
P.
Oh this is a hot one....
I am pro brushless for sure but I strongly think that mixing 27T and 17.5T is not a good idea. Either one or the other. There is too much of an advantage with a 17.5 over the 27T and our racing is very close. People with 27T brushed would be frustrated regardless if the difference was speed or driving skill. The 18.5T is still an advantage over the 27T - they are not equal. The problem with the current 18.5T sensored motors from Novak for instance is that they don't have any motor thermal sensing whereas the other motors do. A great safety feature.
On the note of safety features I should also point out the LiMn technology which doesn't require a hard case and the 3800 mAh cells give as good a run time as a 4200 mAh NiMh with a lower cell profile (will fit in a T2 without modifying the bulkheads). They will not catch on fire like LiPo can regardless of over charge/discharge or puncturing. The most common cause of LiPo fire is from over discharging then attempting to recharge the cells. I have heard rummors of newer LiPo cells being over discharged and charging OK but like I said take this as a rummor for safety sake but note it as the technology is improving. I personally think the LiMn is the road we should go down. The cells have proven to be extremely robust over the last year and a bit that I've been abusing them for and the added safety factor is a major bonus. LiPo are safe to use as well as long as they are used properly. They don't typically fail unless they are abused.
And on to yet another delicate subject.... Pan Cars... as you know I'd race three wheeled Elmo dolls if that was an existing class so I'm all for pretty much any racing we can get in. The classes IROCC picks is always for the benifit of the club - not because the Exec likes or dislikes a class. There isn't a club in Canada that I've heard of or know of that holds a candle to IROCC. Its because of the simplicity of our stock class, etc. While I would love to race pan cars there is something to be said for having touring cars in the summer and pan cars in the winter. It helps to keep the interest up between the two seasons. If we run pan cars in the summer the people who are moderately interesed in them in the summer probably won't bother to come and race them in the winter. Granted its 10th scale on the pavement but its still and extremely agile pan car more akin to a 12th scale on the carpet than a 10th scale TC on the pavement.
I should also note with the LiMn cells that they are rated at 500 cycles compared to 100 cycles with LiPo. You can of course get more cycles than that out of both cells but we are interested in race worthy cycles for our applications.
Quote from: "Grinder"I should also note with the LiMn cells that they are rated at 500 cycles compared to 100 cycles with LiPo. You can of course get more cycles than that out of both cells but we are interested in race worthy cycles for our applications.
Yikes.
And NiCad are rated around 1000 cycles, and NiMH around 300 - 500 or so. But, remember, it's progress!
The ratings I'm talking about are 90% performance -- as far as racing goes, around 50 cycles will start to have a noticeable impact on NiMH,. How is the cycle life rating for lithium batteries determined?
Unfortunately, you'll have to trust my recollection on cycle life above, since my source for the numbers has vanished into the ether (there's a 404 Not Found for the URL).
Racing 27T and 17.5 together but separating the results through the software would keep the number of cars the same, but also put us into a situation where racers can race one motor but not the other even though they may be capable. It would also help address the time consumption issue.
At this point aren't there more racers interested in Pro10 cars compared to Nitro? Seems that the Nitro numbers dropped off last year somewhat.
P.
Quote from: "RC51"Racing 27T and 17.5 together but separating the results through the software would keep the number of cars the same, but also put us into a situation where racers can race one motor but not the other even though they may be capable. It would also help address the time consumption issue.
I like this idea, if it turns out to be necessary.
Quote from: "RC51"
At this point aren't there more racers interested in Pro10 cars compared to Nitro? Seems that the Nitro numbers dropped off last year somewhat.
Now that's a touchy subject.
In the past "whats best for the club" has been touring cars. I don't want this to turn into a class debate but one could definitely argue that touring car racing has become exceedingly expensive. A new touring car is not cheap and keeping it shod with competitive tires is downright exorbitant. Whereas a touring rubber tire has about 4 or 5 really good runs, 15 - 20 ok runs and then they're junk.
Pan Cars are significantly cheaper to get into, the tires are as good on their last run as they are on their first run. Tires are cheaper to begin with. Motors are less likely to burn out because the cars are lighter and the price/performance ratio is unparalleled. We're close to as fast as the Nitro cars at a fraction of the cost.
If you were new to racing, Pan Car is a cheaper and higher performance class than either TC Electric or TC Nitro.
Quote from: "Tom"Quote from: "Grinder"I should also note with the LiMn cells that they are rated at 500 cycles compared to 100 cycles with LiPo. You can of course get more cycles than that out of both cells but we are interested in race worthy cycles for our applications.
Yikes.
And NiCad are rated around 1000 cycles, and NiMH around 300 - 500 or so. But, remember, it's progress!
The ratings I'm talking about are 90% performance -- as far as racing goes, around 50 cycles will start to have a noticeable impact on NiMH,. How is the cycle life rating for lithium batteries determined?
Unfortunately, you'll have to trust my recollection on cycle life above, since my source for the numbers has vanished into the ether (there's a 404 Not Found for the URL).
NiMh fall off after ten or so cycles - even after the first three cycles they start to drop off especially in the last year or so. Same goes for your matched packs - they are unmatched in the first few cycles. If you make it half way through the season a new battery pack will easily outperform your old pack even from the same batch of cells. That's why the guys that can afford new packs every month or so always have the best pefroming packs. So sure you can get 500 cycles out of them but not competatively.
Nitro is expensive and frustrating but its also extremely fun and rewarding. Once you have your kit there is no need to buy a new car every year as seems to be the case for electric TC. One of the major reasons to keep Nitro is it is by far the number one draw for the club. People hear the cars and most people who inquire want to race nitro - not electric. Of course we always steer them to electric because of cost and maintainance. Nitro in the summer is a big part of what keeps our club healthy by generating interest. Almost every time I tell someone about the club they say something along the lines of "oh yea you are the guys that run the gas cars out by the Juan de Fuca Rec center right?"
As for the cost of tires you can run a whole season on a set of tires for your TC depending on how you drive and what compound you use. Most can get away with two sets a season. The problem being that whoever can afford to buy tires every week or other week has a distinct advantage in performance. An issue I'm not sure of how to address. TC tires are cheap now - $7.50 a pair whereas 10th pan cars are what - $15 a pair and you will definately go through those more quickly (although I do like the point that the tires don't change in performance as they wear - well not as drastically).
As for stock splitting the two classes in software is no different than having two different classes bringing us from three classes to four. Too many classes is the Club Killer. A possible comprimise is to have a "Stock Brushless Class" with an 18.5T motor and allow people who don't want to convert over to run their 27T motors if they want knowing that they are at a disadvantage just like we would allow someone to run 2400 NiCd cells in their car.
A brushless system is arguably cheaper than brushed. A brushless ESC/motor can be around $250. Most good brushed ESCs are around $175-200 and the motor is ~ $55. There are no brushes to buy and there is no need to buy a comm lathe so the new driver has a lower cost. Maintainance is next to nill and the system is more efficient letting you get more power to the ground using less power from your batteries. The sensor based brushless also monitors the heat in the motor to prevent you from burning up your arm in your motor.
The brushless also brings the issue of programable ESCs. If we do go to a brushless I think programable ESCs should not be allowed as it is possible to advance the timing in software with ESCs such as Castle Creations, etc. There is also a significant difference in motors of the same wind so a club motor would be required. Just be sure to have an ESC that does both brushed and brushless in case you want to go to an out of town race that only allows brushed motors, etc. Most brushless ESCs do support brushed/brushless.
pan is fun but if there was no nitro i wouldnt even bother showing up myself!
IMHO, using any motor other than 17.5 for stock is a move in the wrong direction. If racers choose to either come to our trophy race or go to other trophy races in different cities, or simply come join us, another motor would be required. Further, if specs are set for the 17.5 that may or may not apply to the 18.5, we're left with another problem. Supply, parts and availability may something to consider. Also, does anyone think that ROAR and other international bodies haven't thought about this and consulted? Reasoned arguments have been presented about this very issue.
I know nitro is a sacred cow and people will rightly argue to keep it. The same can be said of Pro10 except that it currently doesn't exist. The question in my opinion should be how many racers there are that are interested and how existing equipment and supporting electronics etc can be transferred over or can be used in the TC and/or Pro10.
Besides, it's innovation.
P.
OK. I've bit my lip long enough on this!
I've got one word for you guys:
THINK!
IROCC's success as a Club has been due to our ability to keep things simple, relatively inexpensive, extremely competitive, and most importantly, fun!
I see us on a VERY slippery slope with all this idle speculation of what we should or shouldn't do.
Sure, it's a great idea to get the process rolling, but you must remember, the Executive will do what we see fit for the betterment of the Club in general, not what will benefit the few.
If my Executive vote means anything, I'd propose we run only 3 classes outdoors this year.
Why? Well time constraints is one reason.
We have already seen last year that a few people seemed overly eager to end the race day early, so we certainly can't run another class or two. In my case, i've always shown up early(as have many others!) with the full intention of racing for as long as it takes to get the day in. Seeing as I really don't have any serious family commitments to uphold, my case is different from many other racers. When people show up late or leave early, it puts an unfair extra load on those people who end up doing 90% of the work week in and week out. Some people don't seem to mind, I for one do!
Secondly, we run into the issue of expense.
IROCC has been as successful as we are because we have in the past strived to keep a fairly expensive "Hobby" affordable. Switching classes, battery and speed control technology isn't going to be a cheap and easy thing to do for a good portion of our membership. I don't want to see this turn into a "battery or motor, or tire of the week" deal like last year! We have to make intelligent, well thought though decisions that are advantageous for everyone involved, not just the Club's elite racers. We can't go changing speed controls, or batteries, or motors mid-season. And as far as batteries go, we really need to think long and hard as to which technology is going to be the most durable and give us the most bang(not literally I hope! LOL) for our buck! While it's nice to see ROAR opening up to LiPo, we aren't a ROAR affiliated Club, and we have in the past only used them as a rough guide as to what standards we set out and maintain. If LiMn is a better battery technology, I hope we find out sooner, rather than later!
Personally, I don't want to see the IROCC's bread and butter class, Stock Touring Car, get beaten down. We need to keep the numbers of our most competitive racing class up. Stock racing is what has kept our Club growing and going! Some of us have been around this "Hobby" long enough to have seen first hand what happens when you start Fragmenting your racer base! It's not pretty!
If you need any further example, just look at the lower mainland. They have tens of thousands more people to draw from, but they're lucky to be able to pull 20+ guys together on any given day to race! And of those 20+ guys, they want to have 5, 6 or 7 classes with 4 or 5 guys in each, if they're lucky, STARTING the race! It's a recipe for disaster, plain and simple!
Here is what I think would be a good balance for a full day of racing.
- Stock 27T, LiPo or LiMn Touring Car.
We're at the point where we need to transition from NiMh, especially after last year's batter issues! I for one never want to go through that again!
Plus stock racing is nowhere near as hard on tires and other drive-line components.
- Pro10 Pan Car.
We seemed to have a great deal of interest in this "trial" class last year, both as far as Club participants went, as well as crowd interest.
Now then, whether or not LiPo/LiMn and brushless is the way to go will need to have some serious discussion. IF we do the brushless method, we better be damn sure we pick ONE system that works! Nothing kills competitive Club racing faster than people always "One Upping" the next guy with the so called latest and greatest!
I think Phil and some others have got the chassis and parts/body/tires sorting figured out pretty well, and we should be able to build a good field of reliable cars.
- Nitro Touring Car
Well this well established class has seen its' ebb and flow over the years, but there is a strong "Core" group that always provide some exciting and competitive racing. Plus, there is no question that Nitro Touring Car is what attracts the fans in to watch!
I don't think there is much that needs to be changed as far as Nitro goes, but I'm open to any sensible ideas.
So there you have it, 3 classes.
Not only does this (hopefully!) ensure we have tons of guys competing in each class, with multiple heats, it will also (hopefully!) ensure we have adequate Corner Marshalling!
These are just my thoughts guys, I'm not pointing fingers at anyone/ any class in particular.
As of yet, nothing is set in stone, but we need to seriously get things sorted out over the next 2 months before Spring comes.
Regards,
Nick
Nick,
well said. Your point come across great. I would personally still like to see Nimh stil be an option. last summer fiasco with the cell, I wasn't part off. as I was still using my cell's from the previous summer. which i used last winter and using this winter.
I wouuld like to see stock, with either lipo,LiMh, and also Nimh.
class Pro ten sure why not.
I would still like to see a 19turn or whatever. why not race both pro 10's and 19turn or what ever together.
Nitro, you need this as this is the crowd pleazer.
I would also like to see a club meeting with all member, that way the Exc can take our input and then they would have a good feel for the club's best intrerest. One would hope that this would happen before we head outdoor. like maybe a month or two before. not a couple of weeks before.
... Or run pro10 as an open class with the Nitro cars. Why not?
I'm with you Nick! that sounds like the best plan so far, 3 classes, stock, Pro 10 and Nitro, that supplies an entry class, fast electric class, and of course the crowd favorite Nitro. I would think a driver has a choice to use Nimh batteries if desired since they wouldn't give him/her any advantage over Lipo. It's not like 10th scale Pan is new to IROCC, you were racing those when I first started attending races.
Running Nitro and Pro 10 together .. ha ha ha, make me laugh! the carnage would sure be crowd pleasing! don't blame me though when my heavy Nitro car obliterates your paper thin Pro 10 car :-)
Dave Ox.
You'd have to catch me, first! LOL :P
I wouldn't dismiss the idea of running nitro and Pro10 at the same time so quickly, especially if the Scoring Pro software is in fact capable of breaking out the individual classes within the heat. This is common practice in LeMans style racing and in the ALMS in North America. It is the responsibilities of the individual drivers within the individual classes to try and maneuver and respect the others. It may sound difficult but we could try it and see how it works. That way we wouldn't be lengthening the race day and it may bolster the sagging Nitro numbers in the process. As far as the length of the main, we could certainly pull off after our time is up.
You could pull off, pit, install fresh batteries and continue racing :-)
Interesting concept, it would make more sense to me to run Pro-10 and 19T together, I think if would be safer for everyone because the Nitro cars are so unpredictable, especially with drivers like me behind the controls. I agree that the 1:1 sports car racing successfully runs more than one class at a time and that it may work for IROCC, would be an interesting experiment for sure.
Dave Ox.
If you think driving any class/type of car has any expense try driving a pan car on the same track as a nitro car. CARnage for sure. Getting hit by a nitro car would fling that light little pan car off the track like it was a sponge. Of course it would be cool to see two classes running together. I know I'll be running the Nitro though if we do that - if I can get it running that is ;P
Having a Pan car class means buying another car. Having a 19T class means swaping you motor out of your stock car. If we are all about keeping it affordable then keeping it TC for the summer is the way to go. A pan car may be inexpensive for the chasis but you still need an extra ESC, motor, servo, transponder, etc....
Don't get me wrong I'd love to run Pan car and I will if it is a class. I just think that its nice to have that change between the seasons and it will help with winter attendance in 12th scale by not having it as an option in the summer. Having 19T TC allows more people access to that class since they either have their stock car already or they have a second TC chasis for 19T. I know a few more people have bought or are looking for a second chasis for 19T so we should make a decision quickly to prevent those who haven't gotten a second chasis yet from wasting their money.
Running Pro10 with 19t is fine with me as well. As far as if there is a new class and you HAVING to buy another chassis, well thats just you Kurk, you HAVE to run in ALL the classes right? LOL
If I've tallied up correctly, there are more than enough Pro10 cars to run their own heat without the addition of any further cars.
what about the guys who run both nitro and pro 10?i do beleive there is a couple of us,who would be screwed out of one or the other?we always had room for tc 19 why would we not just share sundays between 19tc and 19pro 10?
there is a big difference between 12 scale and pro 10, even though they are similar chassis. a small indoor track with 4 cell and 27 turn motors are way different than a big wide open track with 6 cells and a 19turn/or brushless equal
Once again, I'm speaking only for myself here.
With all due respect, I think it would be a huge mistake to try and run two completely different cars on the track at the same time!
It "might" be OK for practice or hacking around, but under serious racing conditions people are going to get choked REAL fast!
First off, you've go the obvious speed differential!
Can you imagine trying to run a stock powered Touring Car at the same time as a Pro10, or a Pro10 against a screaming Nitro Car! You'd be running over each other every lap, especially as the three chassis types handle the track completely differently!
Secondly, you've got the obvious difference in body shape.
I'd be some pissed off to end up getting vaulted out of the track driving a Nitro Car after I inadvertently drove over the wedge shaped body of a Pro10 Car that had just spun out in front of me! Or the other way around! Not that it can't and doesn't happen already, as we all know it does happen, but why would you want to encourage the carnage? Racing would soon deteriorate into chaos!
Thirdly, the weight difference between the three classes of cars is a recipe for disaster if/when they ever come together! And they will!
Broken pieces all over the place. RC racing is expensive enough without adding insult to injury, just because we can.
Whether or not the software can sort out between the different classes is the least of our worries, in my opinion!
Like I was trying to partially suggest in my first post on this topic, the idea of having only 3 classes would help eliminate some of the issues we've had in previous years with trying to wrangle up enough corner marshals/pit guys.
Plus it would make Race Day more of a social event instead of something we end up rushing through with very little time to relax and actually enjoy ourselves.
Quote from: "DekelzMan"Running Pro10 with 19t is fine with me as well. As far as if there is a new class and you HAVING to buy another chassis, well thats just you Kurk, you HAVE to run in ALL the classes right? LOL
If I've tallied up correctly, there are more than enough Pro10 cars to run their own heat without the addition of any further cars.
Buying a Pan car is no skin off my teeth and I will joyfully run all available classes (or cease to exist!). I'm just trying to think outside of what I'd like. I've been know to argue the other side just to get some justification and banter going on..... it would be nice to get some other opinions here. This is your time to voice your thoughts guys!
OK I am willing to revise my scheme to make only 3 classes and accommodate the new technology that I feel we JUST CANT IGNORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! especially when it is now officially in our holy grail of rules...ROAR
A) 1x touring class- screw it mix 17.5 and 27T brushed and let what happens happen.
If sooner or later we all end up having brushless systems in our cars....well SO WHAT that WILL happen anyway, don't fight it. Maybe not quite fair at this very infinitesimal point in time but guess what ANY transition is not going to be easy and heaven forbid somebody might have to buy something. We always protect all these people "that never want to buy anything" Who are these people anyway?
B) 1x pan class - 19t brushless or ROAR approved "equivalent" brushless
C) 1x nitro class - 0.12 (any) also allow ANY Brushless conversion as long as it is a 200 mm nitro chassis.
Running Pro-10 and 19T together would be great. Maybe even open it up to run brushed and brushless equivalent with whatever battery one might have.
Leaving the stock brushed class alone with the possibility of introducing new battery technologies would be great.
Nitro is a a must if there are enough ppl.
Ken
The 27T class is the entry level class, we should keep it reasonably inexpensive.
Why not open up the old 19t class to brushless and mod brushed motors and keep 27t the same.
I really don't like the idea of trying to run different chassis simultaniously.
Touring cars (nitro and electric) handle very differently when it comes to acceleration, corner speed, and top speed. There is a similar difference with pan car vs. touring car, any flavor. This is just a recipie for disaster as far as sharing the track, passing, etc. Two similar cars (skill and race time wise, but different chassis types) would want to pass each other twice for every corner on the track each lap.
However, I am not opposed to the idea of scoring two different classes with the same chassis (especially if they're two flavors of the same class) simultaniously, since the gross chassis handling characteristics should be similar.
I like Nick's proposal as a baseline. I would suggest if we were to modify Nick's baseline proposal, it would use my above guidelines.
So, that leaves us with these possibilities:
Touring stock
Touring gas
Pro 10
Touring stock could have several flavors (it would probably be best to limit it to two sub-classes of traditional stock or lithium brushless stock)
Pro 10 could easily be a full-blown lithium brushless (let nickle brushed compete though, since it takes finesse to put down the horsepower with these cars)
Gas would be the same as always. I think mixing electric anything with gas would be a horrible mistake.
This gives us 4 classes scoring wise with 3 classes race wise.
Again, it's not decided yet, nor will it be decided in this forum. However, it's an idea.
yes please leave my gas heat alone[no electric please]
Sooooooo, are we recommending summarily dropping 19T? Weren't there more cars here than in Nitro on many occasions?
by looking back at race results from 2007 the answer is NO! mabye once or twice 19 had 1 more racer,although i only went through the first 2/3 of the season im sure the rest of the season would be close to the same
I don't think Nitro is going anywhere. The numbers aren't the only thing to take into account with Nitro as it is the major draw to our outdoor racing. Stock definately isn't going anywhere - that's our bread and butter. Wether we try and hold off the inevetable conversion to brushless or not remains to be decided but it will be very close to whatever we were originally runing. Same goes for the battery chemistry. I think playing too much with Stock is a mistake but if we decide to go mixed with brushed/brushless its only a matter of time before anyone really serious moves to brushless anyhow.
What the main change I think will be is if 19T TC gives way to Pan car of some flavor. 19T was an experimental class and it did very well. I guess one of the questions is if we want to throw out TC and bring Pan in its place. I don't think mixing chasis is a good idea like Tom said (esp in Nitro/Pan - Nitro would kill on the straight and Pan would kill on the infield and each would expect the other to give way only to be caught on the transistion) Other than the few of us that are posting on here what are the other club member's thoughts?
i dont know what the answer is to all this, but you gotta aleave the stock 27t class, as just that, a 27t brushed nimh class, other wise you will lose most, if not all your younger and new members..all of a sudden they lost most of the chance of moving up in the classes. because the A/B and some C guys will have brushless/lipo stuff.
my .02
Well all the new members would buy brushless - its cheaper. Anyone competative with 27T NiMH will be in the A or B - the difference isn't that big - it is there though. Its not like you are running against a 19T car - more like a 26T car. Besides even if it was a 19T car the difference is usually only a lap between 27T and 19T with the best drivers and most average drivers are actually slower with their 19T cars.
any racers we lost going to brushless wouldnt be around long anyway,the cost is not all that much cant be more than buying a few new motors and and what ever
My turn!!
I am in agreement with just running 3 classes on any given race day. I am assuming those who want to run Pro 10 would reduce the car count for the 19t TC, thus making it a class with likely only 4 or 5 cars on a good day and basically killing the class. This would be fine with me, because I could get away with only running one class, which means there will likely be a T2 on the market shortly.
As far as the stock class(27t brushed motors), I don't think we can touch it other than the battery issue. The battery issue is a dilema for us, I think we should be going to a lithium based cell rather than NiMH, but NiMH could still be used in this class. Yes, we have to accept the change that is coming but not necessarily right away.
When it comes to running brushed and brushless(as 2 classes) in the same heat, I am completely against that. I know how p---ed off I would be if I was taken out by somebody running in my main but competing in a different class, and there are others that would get a lot more upset than me. And when people get upset, quite often they say to heck with it and just don't bother coming out anymore.
Getting back to Pro10, what is the estimated car count expected. Is it worth us giving up a class with an average of 7-8 racers for a class that may only field 5-6 cars, or am I underestimating the number of cars.
Nitro? Everybody that has been around the club for a while knows my feelings(or lack of) for this class but I agree, it is an evil necessity for our audiences sake. It does draw the crowds, but what also keeps the crowds is the fast moving program which we are able to keep with the number of classes that we currently run.
After all this, I guess my vote for classes would be;
1- Stock 27t brushed class, lithium based or NiMH batteries.
2- Pro10 19t or comparable brushless, lithium based or NiMH batteries.
Replaced by Touring 19t or comparable brushless if the car count is not good enough(wait, maybe I won't sell my second T2 yet).
3- Nitro, these guys make there own rules.
what im confussed nitro makes their own rules.I remember trying to run a GTP body and Tom making a stink over it. I do agree 3 classes or we would have to start earlier and end later. What about those wanting to run 19t touring 1 week and the following week pro 10?
lets face it this has nothing to do with nitro!its all about brushed or brushless ,the last time i checked nitro used neither and batteries no one ever complained about any battery in any nitro car,lets dump 19t tc whats the difference between 19 and 27 one or two laps not much speed,if we are going to run a second electric class why wouldnt it be something different? like pro 10, as far as batteries are concerned is there a difference between the guy who couldnt afford new batts and has to run against the guy who has 12 packs new every season- and the guy who has to run against lipo or whatever with his old batts
I'm afraid I don't see what relevance there is in "drawing a crowd". What difference does it make how many spectators we have? Does IROCC make money from the fans? Do we get new-comers wanting to get into racing from the fans? Not many, maybe 1 per year. Does our using the parking lot stipulate we need to draw a crowd for us to stay there? Do we care during the winter how many people sit and casually watch the racing? I think hanging onto a class because it's a crowd pleaser is the most desperate of arguments I've ever heard.
Wow.
Lets debate the merits of the class based on the class itself, not the casual onlookers.
well i can say for one it was nitro that made me find this club!!!! yes i was at wendy's after taking my offroad truck to the bmx, i hear the nitro race and the rest is history. so drawing a crowd in other words very important we get a lot of people asking questions, hanging out and gettin the word out on what we got goin on, wich i know has brought new club members in who end up racing stock ect....so i think nitro benifits the whole club ,what is it again that 19t tc does or for that matter 19 t pan? for the club that is
When is come down to it. I bought a 2nd T2 just to run 19t or what ever it turns out to be. So I would run what ever TC class were decided on.
I have no interest in getting into any other class of car at this time
-=light=-
Quote from: "BigDawg"what is it again that 19t tc does or for that matter 19 t pan? for the club that is
ummm ... it allows its membership with the motivation to race those cars to do so.
hmmmm, doesnt sound very impressive
Quote from: "Grinder"Well all the new members would buy brushlessquote]
thats true the new memeber just starting to get stuff together would buy it.(asuming they know about the site, and read through the forums..) but i know of a 1 or 2 people that plan on joining us next summer and i think they already got their stuff together.
noody said we were cancelling anything !just trying to figure out how to try new stuff too-i think :?
It's actually quite impressive when compared to standing on the tarmac for 20 minutes in the late day sun inhaling nitro while 6 people marshall the 3 remaining cars on the track! LOL :lol:
Besides, the guys that could race those classes are card carrying members as well and IMHO, should have an equal opportunity to express a desire to participate in their epreferred lement of the hobby, too. :wink:
Well, IF we had 24 hours of daylight and perfect weather, along with 30 or 40 thousand more "enthusiasts" to draw from, IROCC could run every possible class under the sun and never have to worry about getting corner marshals out to the track BEFORE the race even starts, and everyone would be as happy as a clam. ;-) Yeah right! LOL
But seeing as how we're somewhat limited time wise, and don't live in a perfect world, we as a Club may have to make compromises in order to get a full day of racing action in. Especially if we plan on changing things up a bit.
I think we can all agree that we as R/C racers have to do something fairly soon to accommodate the new technology available to us for the upcoming Outdoor season. Whether or not we jump in with both feet right now is the question.
Either that, or we choose another option, we do absolutely nothing. Carry on just like last year.
NiMh only, of whatever brand and whatever capacity that is readily available, so long as they're not internally dead shorting themselves after just 2 charge cycles! Stock Touring Car, 19T Touring Car and Nitro Touring Car only. No brushless, no LiPo, no LiMn, no Pro10, except as the existing exhibition class at lunchtime, IF we even get a lunchtime... same old, same old.
We keep the Status Quo and hopefully we keep everyone as happy as humanly possible.
Personally, I hope we lean towards some sort of moderate change(s).
For example, I'd love to see Pro10 become a legitimate IROCC class. Forgetting entirely about any possible similarity to Indoor 12th scale racing! I didn't run Pro10 last year, but I do remember what an absolute hoot 10th scale Pan Cars used to be way back in the day!
I think everyone knows where I stand in regards to NiMh after last Summer's battery nonsense!. If there is an acceptable and reliable alternative, such as the LiPo or LiMn, then we need to seriously consider what is required to make the transition.
But having said that, so far, the EP 4200NiMh packs I bought from Phil for 12th scale racing seem to be working just fine according to my tests. Oh sorry, that's right, again, the battery we're used to running successfully is in short supply, or unavailable, and now we have to consider 4600 or 5000Mah NiMh if we want to stay with that battery technology for this Summer.
What I don't want to see is this "possible/likely" adoption of new technology(s) turning into a mad spending spree, just for the sake of spending because some of us can.
That in my opinion, is NOT what IROCC is all about. We need to weigh our options very carefully and decide what will work best and most importantly, be reasonably affordable for the masses.
Fragmentation is the enemy. We've seen it, and some of us should remember the results.
hey guy's I sent a message to Dwayne from Calgary to ask a couple of question on how the brushless class is holding up in the Wcics series.
I ask him how is it comparing to the stock class. there running the 13.5 brushless in a second class. to see how the new tech. is comparing this is what he had to say.
Andrew.......the 13.5 novak is definately faster than brushed stock....the lrp 13.5 is slower than the novak and is more comparable to brushed....I can run almost the same lap times as the novak with a super fast brushed motor for the first 3 minutes but then the brushed motor fades where the brushless pulls strong the whole run. The WCICS series runs the classes seperatley because we wanted to see what the difference would be.
With this I don't really see a problem running the the 17.5. I mean why not see how it goes. why try it. if we find that the top guys are winning with a brushless system, It might not be the brushless system. Now if it was I that was using a brushless and winning then we would have to look at it and make some changes. as if you give a driver like Blake or Craig a brushless system so what they know how to drive. .
I also so mind seeing a 19t mix with what ever (roar say it s the equivilant.)
(either of these 2 class must have a minimum of 6 to7 drivers to make a heat)
The Pro 10, why switch with 19tc every other week. I think that would be the most fair thing to do.
Nitro or gas, propane, natural gas, or desiel. power cars, let them live on.
The next think would be to have a general meeting set up for the whole club to place there input, then the club exc can properlly see what is wanted, but more what is needed for the club.
Then lets say after a month of outdoor racing, have another meeting to discuss to see what every one feel on the changes.Then see if we're actully heading in the right direction or see if we should take a step back.
hey guy's I sent a message to Dwayne from Calgary to ask a couple of question on how the brushless class is holding up in the Wcics series.
I ask him how is it comparing to the stock class. there running the 13.5 brushless in a second class. to see how the new tech. is comparing this is what he had to say.
Andrew.......the 13.5 novak is definately faster than brushed stock....the lrp 13.5 is slower than the novak and is more comparable to brushed....I can run almost the same lap times as the novak with a super fast brushed motor for the first 3 minutes but then the brushed motor fades where the brushless pulls strong the whole run. The WCICS series runs the classes seperatley because we wanted to see what the difference would be.
With this I don't really see a problem running the the 17.5. I mean why not see how it goes. why try it. if we find that the top guys are winning with a brushless system, It might not be the brushless system. Now if it was I that was using a brushless and winning then we would have to look at it and make some changes. as if you give a driver like Blake or Craig a brushless system so what they know how to drive. .
I also so mind seeing a 19t mix with what ever (roar say it s the equivilant.)
(either of these 2 class must have a minimum of 6 to7 drivers to make a heat)
The Pro 10, why switch with 19tc every other week. I think that would be the most fair thing to do.
Nitro or gas, propane, natural gas, or desiel. power cars, let them live on.
The next think would be to have a general meeting set up for the whole club to place there input, then the club exc can properlly see what is wanted, but more what is needed for the club.
Then lets say after a month of outdoor racing, have another meeting to discuss to see what every one feel on the changes.Then see if we're actully heading in the right direction or see if we should take a step back.
leave my 19T class alone! i have already dropped nitro and i want to be able to run more than 1 class in a day. what's wrong with mixing pro10 and 19t? most of pro10 and 19t are not beginners anyways (exept for me).
Hi, Guys.
As Darryl alluded to, there are 4 or 5 drivers from 19T that would be racing Pro10 so the numbers in 19T as a separate class would wane (Brian, me, Mick, possibly Daryl, possibly Kurk, Pat, Glenn).
BTW, there is roughly a 40watt difference in power bewtween a 27T brushed motor and a 13.5 which accounts for the need to separate those. However, 17.5 motors are approximately the same as the brushed motor at approx 130 watts. Brushed motors generally have more RPM than brushless yet brushless has more torque. We are working to gain more comparison data. Racer reports from the US say that on a tight track the brushless has more grunt but top end seems similar.
P.
What's wrong with mixing Pro 10 and 19 turn touring car?
Everything, that's what!
Pro 10 cars regularly turn several laps more in a race than 19 turn touring cars. Not only that, but they run very different lines and have very different corner entry and exit speeds since they are different chassis types.
A much more sensible idea would be to mix 19 turn and stock touring car. However, that's a stupid idea, due to the vastly different speed. There's a similar difference in speed between pan cars and touring cars with the same motor, with the additon of different handling characteristics.
Hey all,
Lots of good posts here. Impressive that IROCC can have a flame-free internet debate about such a controversial topic. That level of maturity seems tough to find online these days. Expressing your opinion is one thing, but actually "listening" to and hearing what others have to say is really key.
Blake
Question:
Does anyone have actual direct experience or scientific data to show the difference between running a 7.4 LiPo battery and a 7.2V NiMH battery with a 27T Stock motor in a touring car? Maintenance and reliability issues aside, does one offer a performance advantage over the other? What is the real truth here?
Blake
Good question, Blake. Trent may have something for you in terms of the math and comparsion data as may Kurk, Tom and others. There are some conflicting analyses out there from what we have uncovered, but generally from what I understand, the difference appears under high load situations most notable in 19T and upwards. LiPo has the ability to sustain 7 Volts at 100Amp whereas NiMh can only source approx 6 volts. I don't have anything on stock performance.
I'll ask the Big T to post here.
P.
Hi Blake,
This is a difficult one to measure as it seems that the difference between the technologies really exhibit under much higher amp loads than we normally measure during a discharge cycle.
NiMH seem to be good voltage-wise up to the 50A or so range for bursts and then they fall off. Good LiPo packs will hold 7.0v+ at up to 100A bursts (some even higher depending on the capacity of the pack).
In the past, my on-board telemetry devices record peak amp draw of 60-70A on stock motors, and 90A-100A on 19T during full acceleration.
Using this as a rough guideline, I would say that we would probably expect 27T stock motor performance to be fairly equivalent (maybe even a bit better with NiMH for smooth drivers) and then a spread will form for 19T and hotter motors because they will receive higher average volts during the peak draw during acceleration and accordingly will have a lot more "punch" on the track because more power can be delivered to the motor.
Qualitatively - the difference between running NiMH and LiPo on my brushless 3.5's last summer was night and day. However, when I used LiPo for stock practice, I didn't feel an immediate difference. I never raced stock with a LiPo in there because of the rules, but in practice it didn't seem any faster or slower.
Hopefully that helps - it's not an exact science, because we don't have anything resembling a discharger that will simulate 70A-90A spikes here in the shop, but from what I recorded on the cars and the posted specs of the cells, I think it's a fair guess.
I'm happy to put the logging data back on the cars and provide voltage versus amp draw numbers for a 27T on LiPo/NiMH if that is helpful for your upcoming decisions. Just let me know.
T
Thanks for the info Trent.
My first concern was to determine if allowing LiPo would give an advantage to those racers with higher budgets. As you said, this is a hard one to measure. So, I looked at it from a different angle. And this is an angle lots of you guys have pitched before. I'm just formalizing it here:
Last summer we had 48 people run in Touring Stock. Out of those 48, 40 of them raced four times or more. Out of those 40, 22 of them saw the "B" or "A" mains. Out of those 22, 4 of them are racers that do NOT usually buy at least two new 6-cell battery packs at the start of the summer (roughly equivalent to buying one LiPo pack).
Summary: IF it is found that LiPo does infact offer a performance advantage, only 10% of the club will be compromised by having to spend $120 on a battery they otherwise wouldn't need. Note: If you regularly run in the "D" or "C", then an extra volt at 70+ Amps should not be your top concern. Yes, there are sometimes close battles in the "C" but they are not won and lost with batteries.
Harsh? Maybe. But those are the numbers, and based on last summer, they are accurate.
So, I guess I have an opinion on the LiPo debate... still unsure on the motor and class stuff though!
Blake
I'd love to play with any data you coul come up with in Matlab. One can NEVER have too much data!
I have some graphs with the IB4200, 3800 LiMn and 4900LiPo cells. I don't have the data on hand but I can tell you based on the graph the LiMn outperforms the NiMh at 30A for the first half and starts to taper off towards the end - I'd take a LiMn over an IB based on that graph. The LiPo smokes both of them and its definately mAh that is a factor. IF we decide to go with a LiPo or LiMn we have to have a mAh rating because as you go up in mAh you increase the average voltage under load.
Tom if you want to play I have a 1K Watt system we can discharge 7.4V packs at 135A continuous if you want ;)
Oh and Phil isn't a stock motor around 85W as opposed to the brushless "stock" of 130W?
Hi Kurk,
We can regularly get stock motors to draw 120 watts+ at 7.0 volts. add another half volt and we're getting up ther. I saw one of Frank B's motors pull 127 watts at 7 volts a couple of years back.
R? avg volotage, doesn't that only become a factor if you are into pulling 3500 mAh+ in a heat since it is calculated for the entire discharge curve? What is the % drop from 2500-3500 mAh (19T range)?
P.
Well, I for one would like to see lithium cells being used in all the electric classes at Irocc. The prices of the LiPo cells have really come down, and you can now buy them ranged from $85 US (Trinity) to $120US (TrakPower). You should only need 2 packs per car. Thats a pretty good price if the durability of the Lithium battery can stand up to the abuse of RC car racing.
As for brushless systems, let the 13.5 and 27T motors race each other. If a big difference is noticed between the two, we could always handy-cap the brushless cars. (maybe add alittle extra weight ? ) I definately have no intention of going to brushless this year.
Shawn.
BTW. Where are we going to add the extra weight to the car? Its close to 9 Oz of lead need to be added!!
Quote from: "Shawn68z"Well, I for one would like to see lithium cells being used in all the electric classes at Irocc. The prices of the LiPo cells have really come down, and you can now buy them ranged from $85 US (Trinity) to $120US (TrakPower). You should only need 2 packs per car. Thats a pretty good price if the durability of the Lithium battery can stand up to the abuse of RC car racing.
As for brushless systems, let the 13.5 and 27T motors race each other. If a big difference is noticed between the two, we could always handy-cap the brushless cars. (maybe add alittle extra weight ? ) I definately have no intention of going to brushless this year.
Shawn.
BTW. Where are we going to add the extra weight to the car? Its close to 9 Oz of lead need to be added!!
running 13.5 brushless with 27T? huh? it's would be like hit and pass.
Quote from: "SgRddY"
running 13.5 brushless with 27T? huh? it's would be like hit and pass.
I run in the C and D, its pretty much hit to pass anyways. :wink:
Your right, I should have put " let the 27T and the 17.5's run together. "
There still will be big speed difference between them, but its only a major problem when a fast car ends up in the C & D mains. No matter what happens someone else is going to have a faster car by spending more money. Thats part of racing.
What could help is having a spec brushless. Only allowing Novak 17.5's with GTB's, and _any_ 27T 24 deg ROAR motor grandfathered in Eventually everyone will upgrade to the Novak 17.5. This might help with keeping costs undercontrol by preventing 'exotic' speed controlers and motors.
Shawn.
the GTB is programable
im runnin KO if we go brushless
I thought this was a HOBBY ,not F1. You clowns with all the money to spend should start your own class and run it on monday as its clear you have money to burn ,you dont need to work all week. As for you Haddow, there are alot of guys that can barely afford it now,how could you possibly be so narrow minded as to have the "run it or quit".attitude.I am one of those guys struggling to stay competitive because of always being one up'ed by some guy with deep pockets.ROAR is not and will not be the HOLY GRAIL as you said ,in fact I wouldn"t be suprised if ROAR isn"t owned by TRINITY.This just makes me sick to think I and many others are being forced out of a hobby I"ve done for 20 years because of all of this "progress" ,and I know I"m not alone.
As I recall none of the people pushing for too much too fast,were out in the parking lot when there was only 6 or 7 guys.History has a way of repeating itself.
Quote from: "Arch"I thought this was a HOBBY ,not F1. You clowns with all the money to spend should start your own class and run it on monday as its clear you have money to burn ,you dont need to work all week. As for you Haddow, there are alot of guys that can barely afford it now,how could you possibly be so narrow minded as to have the "run it or quit".attitude.I am one of those guys struggling to stay competitive because of always being one up'ed by some guy with deep pockets.ROAR is not and will not be the HOLY GRAIL as you said ,in fact I wouldn"t be suprised if ROAR isn"t owned by TRINITY.This just makes me sick to think I and many others are being forced out of a hobby I"ve done for 20 years because of all of this "progress" ,and I know I"m not alone.
As I recall none of the people pushing for too much too fast,were out in the parking lot when there was only 6 or 7 guys.History has a way of repeating itself.
I dont think I said run it or quit. How long do you plan on staying in the dark ages. The personal attacks are bull frack. Your 20 year old frack cant last forever.
furthermore, I have proposed a number of scenarios to deal with this and have even attempted to include everything and everyone. So re-read the posts. Also here is an idea for you to try out for once, why not provide a scenario or idea rather than a whiny and agressive complaint. Calling people clowns and narrow-minded is lame on your part.
I for one will not be racing Touring electric regardless of what happens so I am thinking about the club, not myself. As far as Pro10 goes I will run brushed even if brushless is allowed beacuse you dont need the extra power in PanCar class. Someday when I have a couple hundred bucks to blow I will get a brushless for it to reap all the benefits of the new technology.
Our "flagship class" can not continue on with old and outdate technology. The executive does its best to protect and limit the amount we have to spend. It can not howver be expected to protect people from major shifts in the face of the industry. Subtle changes are managable but big changes have to be dealt with.
Quote from: "mastahracahtc3"the GTB is programable
im runnin KO if we go brushless
When you say "Programmable" what do you mean? Like changing the drive freq, and braking? or hook up a JTAG and uploading some microcontroller firmware?
Shawn
Quote from: "RC51"Hi Kurk,
We can regularly get stock motors to draw 120 watts+ at 7.0 volts. add another half volt and we're getting up ther. I saw one of Frank B's motors pull 127 watts at 7 volts a couple of years back.
R? avg volotage, doesn't that only become a factor if you are into pulling 3500 mAh+ in a heat since it is calculated for the entire discharge curve? What is the % drop from 2500-3500 mAh (19T range)?
P.
Yea - and I can/have gotten a stock motor to draw 90A+ at 6V... thats over 500W.... until the smoke starts to come out. The specs on most of the motors I've seen have been around 85W IIRC. Is this at a lower voltage? There has to be some standard for loading otherwise you can pull pretty much any numbers. I'm assuming your comparision is 120W with a stock brushed motor and 130W with the brushless on the same system?
Quote from: "Shawn68z"Quote from: "mastahracahtc3"the GTB is programable
im runnin KO if we go brushless
When you say "Programmable" what do you mean? Like changing the drive freq, and braking? or hook up a JTAG and uploading some microcontroller firmware?
Shawn
I'm assuming he's talking about the "programable" feature built into the ESC by pressing buttons, etc. This is not an issue. What is an issue is the very flexible programing through a computer, etc that allows the user to program the speed controller and advance the timing through software which is not allowed in normal stock racing. You can advance the timing so much that a stock motor will melt the wires off. I don't believe the GTX is capable of this kind of programing unless there is some sort of "hack" for it.
Quote from: "Arch"I thought this was a HOBBY ,not F1. You clowns with all the money to spend should start your own class and run it on monday as its clear you have money to burn ,you dont need to work all week. As for you Haddow, there are alot of guys that can barely afford it now,how could you possibly be so narrow minded as to have the "run it or quit".attitude.I am one of those guys struggling to stay competitive because of always being one up'ed by some guy with deep pockets.ROAR is not and will not be the HOLY GRAIL as you said ,in fact I wouldn"t be suprised if ROAR isn"t owned by TRINITY.This just makes me sick to think I and many others are being forced out of a hobby I"ve done for 20 years because of all of this "progress" ,and I know I"m not alone.
As I recall none of the people pushing for too much too fast,were out in the parking lot when there was only 6 or 7 guys.History has a way of repeating itself.
Re-read the thread. There are a lot of reasons why brushless and LiPo/LiMn is cheaper. A new racer will save money on the brushless system not to mention no additional cost for a comm lathe, brushes, motor oil, motor shims, battery trays, etc. If anyone is still using an antique charger you can upgrade it with an adapter from Losi for $35 USD - kind of like a DVD adapter for your 20 year old VCR. LiPo/LiMn requires ONE battery that will give 100 race worthy cycles as opposed to NiMh that falls off after 10 cycles. You want to run batteries all season when someone can buy a new pack after 10 cycles and be more competative than you?
Brushless is going to happen wether any of us want it to or not. Brushed motors will eventually disappear. Brushless has been in the wings of competative racing for at least four years and it will take over. Would it be any less painful for you if we moved to brushless next year? Doubtfull. Many clubs are alreay racing with brushless motors in their stock class and there is some urgency to be on the same level as the clubs we compete with. Besides you can always go backwards and throw a brushed motor if an away race is brushed only for some reason.
We do have to progress even though it is painful for some otherwise we would still be running 1700 mAh NiCd, mechanical speed controllers and Mabuchi motors - kinda hard to get replacements....
Re-read the thread. There are a lot of reasons why brushless and LiPo/LiMn is cheaper. A new racer will save money on the brushless system not to mention no additional cost for a comm lathe, brushes, motor oil, motor shims, battery trays, etc. If anyone is still using an antique charger you can upgrade it with an adapter from Losi for $35 USD - kind of like a DVD adapter for your 20 year old VCR. LiPo/LiMn requires ONE battery that will give 100 race worthy cycles as opposed to NiMh that falls off after 10 cycles. You want to run batteries all season when someone can buy a new pack after 10 cycles and be more competative than you? Going LiPo/LiMn is still cheaper than multiple battery packs even if you need the adapter.
Brushless is going to happen wether any of us want it to or not. Brushed motors will eventually disappear. Brushless has been in the wings of competative racing for at least four years and it will take over. Would it be any less painful for you if we moved to brushless next year? Doubtfull. Many clubs are alreay racing with brushless motors in their stock class and there is some urgency to be on the same level as the clubs we compete with. Besides you can always go backwards and throw a brushed motor if an away race is brushed only for some reason.
We do have to progress even though it is painful for some otherwise we would still be running 1700 mAh NiCd, mechanical speed controllers and Mabuchi motors - kinda hard to get replacements....
now...why the hell would you say that twice kurk? lol.......
.... weird.... oh well you get the point. I mean this really is nothing more that thoughts on the subject - what happens is really in the hands of the exec - they've done us proud and their well thought out decisions have brought the club to the place it is now. Not everyone is thrilled by what happens and usually the discontent is the greatest before any decision is actually made. I think the changes I've seen in the last two years have been fairly sensitive to what the club members want - the new 19T TC class, open motors for 12th scale, etc.
This is a good place to discuss so they have as much info and your concerns as possible to make their decision.
Quote from: "Grinder"I think the changes I've seen in the last two years have been fairly sensitive to what the club members want - the new 19T TC class, open motors for 12th scale, etc.
Although this isn't the place to discuss 1/12 scale, I for one (and I'm not the only one) have always supported handout motors in particular, and I've liked the handout batteries too. Compare how close racing is this season in 1/12 scale to how things were last season.
The wide-open equipment is, in my opinion, a significant contributor to low turn-outs, since it is always frustrating for most racers to compete with others pocketbooks rather than skill.
I will always advocate for hand-out equipment. I've been there, done that (like a few other members) and have seen what happens with wide-open racing and hand-out racing.
im with tom on the handout stuff, then it all come down to your driving/ and/or your maintenence..
IMO this would be the way to do the brushless/lipo thing, get it wherever you want, but you have to have this battery, and this motor/esc..
If we said that we must go with a spec setup, then those club members (there ar 6-8 that I know of) who already have units wouldn't be able to use them. Limit the motor wind (ie 10.5 for super stock - what used to be 19T touring) but let people have choices in their hobby. Besides, in that class skill SHOULD be up. I think there is more variance in the tuning options than there is across the brands anyway although we are just compiling that data now. Keep the spec or single motor brand for stock if that is a problem for racers.
P.
well there doesnt seem to to be a way to please everybody, there have been numerour suggestions, and ways to deal with this and everyone gets shot down by somebody..
tc is just gettin to complicated and spendy for me.
how about spec motors for BL and open ESCs
Personally speaking, I am not for spec anything outside of stock. It would be akin to saying that a racer can use a K19 but not the Hemi and certainly not a Checkpoint or C2. Even in stock TC we'd need to ask ourselves why. Leveling the playing field is a bit fallacious even in this class since there are no spec versions, the endbell can't be locked and any esc can be programmed if you have the capacity. Similarly, the tuning options are varied if you know what to look for.
P.
Quote from: "Grinder"Yea - and I can/have gotten a stock motor to draw 90A+ at 6V... thats over 500W.... until the smoke starts to come out. The specs on most of the motors I've seen have been around 85W IIRC. Is this at a lower voltage? There has to be some standard for loading otherwise you can pull pretty much any numbers. I'm assuming your comparision is 120W with a stock brushed motor and 130W with the brushless on the same system?
85W @ 5.0v is common. We dyno @ 7.0v where 120W is a common baseline.
I'll run a 17.5 on the same equipment as soon as I can get my hands on one.
Quote from: "RC51"If we said that we must go with a spec setup, then those club members (there ar 6-8 that I know of) who already have units wouldn't be able to use them. Limit the motor wind (ie 10.5 for super stock - what used to be 19T touring) but let people have choices in their hobby. Besides, in that class skill SHOULD be up. I think there is more variance in the tuning options than there is across the brands anyway although we are just compiling that data now. Keep the spec or single motor brand for stock if that is a problem for racers.
P.
I'm suggesting we run a stock brushless motor - most people I know of that have brushless systems are modified brushless - not stock. There is far to much variance between one stock brushless and another. By having a handout motor it keeps the racing balanced. This is crucial for stock especially when we are throwing new variables in. Most ESCs people have can be used - just not those that give an advantage by allowing the timing to be changed in software. That way people that already have brushless systems can still use them and we keep racing competative with hand out motors instead of letting people buy the next higher performing "stock" motor.
Some ESCs are easily programable and others are very difficult to hack. I'm sure almost any ESC can be hacked but if you are going that far to cheat....
If we are going to open pan from 19T to whatever ESC (eg advancing the timing) then we may as well go modified and run whatever. I think there needs to be restrictions somehow to keep it competative and keep interest in the class.
I don't know about this line of logic, personally speaking. I mean, look at the variance in current brushed stock motors. There is significant data to suggest vast differences that can currently be validated. I believe BigDaddyT has 1000s of dyno runs logged to show this. Even Brian and I saw fair power, RPM and torque differences with roughly 30 runs of different stock motors on the Robi.
The same cannot be said just yet about the brushless variance as the data does not exist. If it can, please post the data to back up the claims. A number of people have raised this (me included) but the data just isn't out there yet. Several manufacturers still do not even have the 17.5 in their hands so I don't know how this can be proven beyond speculation as the plural of anecdote isn't data!
BTW, what do you mean by cheat? Several sensorless motors have pc interfaces to affect timing legitimately through USB and several pins on the harnesses for the others have serial interfaces. Consider Tekin and Castle Creations to name two.
After reading the posts again, (all 8 pages), I think this discussion must be broken up into 2 threads.
-Allowing Lithium based batteries (LiPo, LiMn, and Li-Poly)
-Allowing brushless systems in TC.
The way I see it is they are two completely seperate topics.
Shawn.
Quote from: "Shawn68z"-Allowing Lithium based batteries (LiPo, LiMn, and Li-Poly)
What's the difference between LiPo and Li-Poly?
Tom...Tom....Tom...... ok, he messed up....again.....lol
Quote from: "Tom"Quote from: "Shawn68z"-Allowing Lithium based batteries (LiPo, LiMn, and Li-Poly)
What's the difference between LiPo and Li-Poly?
Trademarks.
Correction: Li-Po, LiMn, and Li-Ion.
See sometimes an edit function would be nice in the forums.
except if you edited it after thomas said something, then his post wouldnt make sense anymore.
Quote from: "haddow"except if you edited it after thomas said something, then his post wouldnt make sense anymore.
Strangely I am okay with that. :wink:
Shawn.
Quote from: "RC51"I don't know about this line of logic, personally speaking. I mean, look at the variance in current brushed stock motors. There is significant data to suggest vast differences that can currently be validated. I believe BigDaddyT has 1000s of dyno runs logged to show this. Even Brian and I saw fair power, RPM and torque differences with roughly 30 runs of different stock motors on the Robi.
The same cannot be said just yet about the brushless variance as the data does not exist. If it can, please post the data to back up the claims. A number of people have raised this (me included) but the data just isn't out there yet. Several manufacturers still do not even have the 17.5 in their hands so I don't know how this can be proven beyond speculation as the plural of anecdote isn't data!
Ask Big T - he stated himself that the difference between the old 13.5 (IIRC it was the 13.5T) and the new 13.5 was quite significant according to his tests - around 40W or so(??). The issue in that case I suspect is the difference between sintured and non-sintured magnets. Who knows what the next technology change that comes along will have what effect on performance. My concern is to keep racing level. Besides even if that wasn't a concern over performance who cares if we have a hand out motor - why wouldn't we? No one I know of has a 17.5T (other than myself) so they would need to buy a second motor and if we get them in bulk its cheaper for everyone anyhow. What is the advantage to not having a hand out motor? The only thing I can think of is getting a better performing motor than someone else when the latest and greatest comes out bringing it back to a battle of the $$$.
Quote from: "RC51"BTW, what do you mean by cheat? Several sensorless motors have pc interfaces to affect timing legitimately through USB and several pins on the harnesses for the others have serial interfaces. Consider Tekin and Castle Creations to name two.
Cheat as in going out of your way to break the rules - eg twisting the armature, running bearings in a stock motor, etc. The GTB, Quark, Sphere, etc do not allow programing of the ESC whereas Tekin and Castle Creations do. I'm saying being able to play with the timing on a stock brushed or brushless motor shouldn't be allowed and therefore ESCs such as Tekin and CC should not be allowed. There may be hardware "hacks" to program the GTB, etc (not that I'm aware of but it is possible) although it is not set up to be programable. If someone chooses to use these hacks (again not that they exist but they do have the potential to exist) it would be cheating plain and simple.
Hi, Kurk.
We haven't tested those yet. You are referring to the spread between the 13.5 and a 27T brushed motor.
P.
All I know is that since we opened up the motor rule ,the "close racing "has all but disappeared.Last season in 12th scale , when we had a hand out motor,the racing was so close that if you made one mistake you would go from first to last.It was that close. This year everyone seems to be on there own lap.............BORING.Now were pushing to make any close battles nonexistant.A key element for entertaining racing is a level playing feild.It works,plain and simple.
Shane
A hand out motor for either indoor or outdoor is fine by me.
hand out's get's my Vote.
Quote from: "Arch"All I know is that since we opened up the motor rule ,the "close racing "has all but disappeared.Last season in 12th scale , when we had a hand out motor,the racing was so close that if you made one mistake you would go from first to last.It was that close. This year everyone seems to be on there own lap.............BORING
Both Tom and Shane mentioned this. Have other people noticed this? I haven't myself, but maybe there is some truth to it. Does one Trinity motor actually offer an advantage over another? And please don't answer "Yes, my motor sucks, and everyone else's is better, and that's why I'm not winning".
FYI: I've been running last year's pink handout (with the IROCC sticker) all season and my car seems to have just as much horsepower as any other car.
I totally agree that handout (or at least Spec) equipment is ideal. We moved away from this in the last year because it became almost impossible to manage. With last summer's battery fiasco, and the ever changing stock motor availability, it's hard for a club to offer these products with any consistency. Further, every single year IROCC loses money to the "left over" stock of batteries and motors. It was especially bad this summer obviously. So anyway, I'm not arguing against a handout system; I'm simply justifying why we're currently not using one.
Blake
Quote from: "RC51"Hi, Kurk.
We haven't tested those yet. You are referring to the spread between the 13.5 and a 27T brushed motor.
P.
Double check with Trent. I believe he was refering to the difference between the old Novak brushless 13.5 and the new sintured brushless 13.5. May have been a different wind than 13.5 but the point is there was a big difference between the two motors of the same wind. Sintured is a more powerful motor than non-sintured and who knows what changes are to come. There are helical winds, outrunners, etc that we haven't even seen on the car side yet.
Hey, Kurk.
Not even sure I was part of that conversation. I know that the 40 watt difference was raised in a number of settings, specifically when the 13.5 was being considered for stock. The spread was too much. The problem is that this is all "claimed" by the factories under a set of unknown testing conditions. Current dynos don't allow for this type of benchmarking but we're looking at ways to compare. Just takes time!
Yes, the bonded versus sintered rotors are one fair issue to consider. A racer can replace the rotor as a tuning option just as you can change an arm or brushes on a brushed motor. This is reasonable yet we really need data to inquire what the winds on the can show for variance from manufacturer to manufacturer. In the outdoor season the same variance can be found going from the likes of a monster horsepower to a P2K2 just as an example. The same racer choices, in my opinion, should be allowed in the brushless realm since we're not adding any new factors in that regard. We left it to "any ROAR approved motor." Why don't we leave it the same with the introduction of new technology?" Homolgation standards are set and racers can choose just like we have had outdoors. Some like torquey motors, others like RPM, so the choice of options we've seen in the past would simply be replicated with brushless. What are we concerned about, really, that wasn't a concern with touring cars in years past?
P.
I think it's also important to acknowledge that, as Trent's experience can show, there can be huge variance in handout brushed motors. We can dyno two motors from the same batch and see 10 to 15% variance in RPM or power while tested under similar conditions with similar variables. We can also show that no amount of tuning and tweaking can make up this gap. The spread was created during manufacturing of both motors. So, what the hand out rule addresses is the probability that you will be "handed" either of these motors. The handout rule thereby simultaneously removes the individual racer's ability to make up that 15% gap by exercising other choices through using other motors etc.. It's a fallacy to assume that handouts create equality - it guarantees some degree of inequality directly related to manufacturing variance over which the racer has zero control. The argument therefore, must be based on whether a standard is applied against which we can exercise personal choice such that each person has the same opportunity to make choices within a given set of parameters. This is just my opinion ...
P.
i dont mean this as derogatory towards anyones insight or opinion..but..just an observation..
maybe its just me, but does it not seem like the people against the handout/spec motor rule are the ones with their foot in r/c buisness??.
Hi, Jarrod.
That would be me that your are speaking about. No offence taken.
Honestly, there is no business reason at all for my rationale since we are not beholden to any one brand and currently are awaiting stock. Quite frankly, if I want a different motor I'll get it (as do many others who are not in the industry) and race it where ever it is permitted. The point is to have choice as a racer. It's simply my opinion ...
My propositions are based on data or the absence thereof. There are a lot of faulty assumptions in the industry and the assumption of equality via handout is one of them. It assumes that all things are equal and they're verifiably not.
P.
Hey, guys.
Kurk's question was a good one for all of us. I checked with Trent to get the details on the wattage difference as a measure of power on the 13.5. The variance Kurk was asking about was on the Novak 13.5 motor. Specifically, the 13.5 bonded rotor produced approximately 35 watts LESS power than the 13.5 sintered rotor. There was also a problem with the bonded rotors in that they tended to fly apart when overgeared or subject to heat (produced by overgearing) and I have unfortunately experienced this first hand. Novak apparently subsequently switched to the sintered rotor only. Something to consider when looking for brushless motors!
P.
what ever is decided I would like to know before the end of February As it would give us enough time to set aside some play money before out door starts up.
Quote from: "light"what ever is decided I would like to know before the end of February As it would give us enough time to set aside some play money before out door starts up.
I think we can all agree with that! Personally, I'd like to see the decision made mid-February so as to allow two full months before the summer season gets up and running. I'll be doing everything I can to make that happen.
Blake
At to nights racing acouple of us were talking about lipo use for the summer. Here is acouple of the newer links I could find
The dimensions are:
5000
L-135MM W-47.8MM H 25.5MM
4000
L-135MM W 46.8MM H 20.1MM
From what I can tell the 4000 should work in the T2 without modification. The 5000 will not fit with out some serious grinding.
http://www.redrc.net/2008/01/smc-4000-5000-hard-case-lipos/
And these saddle packs should work for anyone with a T1'04
http://www.redrc.net/2008/01/maxamps-74v-lipo-saddle-packs/
Thought this would be of interest too. Should help add some weight back to the car, and would help protect the battery from side impact.
http://www.redrc.net/2008/01/ppd-ez-lipo-battery-mounting-system/
Shawn.
here the price list for the saddle packs,
http://www.maxamps.com/products.php?cat=54
Quote from: "jarrodH"here the price list for the saddle packs,
http://www.maxamps.com/products.php?cat=54
I found this on the above web page.
Quote*** We are no longer carrying EP4600's because of too many dead cells from the factory. If you are looking for a great alternative check out our NEW MaxAmps 4700mah SC cell
Gorden
Quote from: "light"Quote from: "jarrodH"here the price list for the saddle packs,
http://www.maxamps.com/products.php?cat=54
I found this on the above web page.
Quote*** We are no longer carrying EP4600's because of too many dead cells from the factory. If you are looking for a great alternative check out our NEW MaxAmps 4700mah SC cell
Gorden
Very interesting Gorden. It would also be interesting to see if there is more information on failed EP4600 cells from someone without and vested interest in selling an alternative cell or if this is another nail in the NiMh coffin....
We carry 4 different brands, one of which is this cell but we have not had the difficulties reported here. We currently don't have them in stock to check this, though. The nice thing is that Trinity warrantees them if they are zero v'd prior to soldering so if this was an issue of new cells being dead, they're covered. The trick is not to keep them on the shelf so long that this happens! The rest is a maintenance chore. Oh the perils of NiMh ... The banter on RCTech about Ep vs Ener-G vs IB is brutal! Seems like a lose-lose proposition.
P.
Mick and I will be doing a little of our own testing up in Kamloops - NiMh, LiPo, LiMn, brushed and brushless in the Pro10 cars. It will be interesting to see the on-track difference(s) first hand as opposed to reading or speculating about it!
P.
Quote from: "Grinder"Quote from: "light"Quote from: "jarrodH"here the price list for the saddle packs,
http://www.maxamps.com/products.php?cat=54
I found this on the above web page.
Quote*** We are no longer carrying EP4600's because of too many dead cells from the factory. If you are looking for a great alternative check out our NEW MaxAmps 4700mah SC cell
Gorden
Very interesting Gorden. It would also be interesting to see if there is more information on failed EP4600 cells from someone without and vested interest in selling an alternative cell or if this is another nail in the NiMh coffin....
To be totally upfront/honest with everyone (despite the fact that we do try to make a profit selling batteries) - I see about 10% DOA's on pretty much every type of NiMH cell coming through the shop (I'm the front-line battery b%tch that goes through the packs before we send them on to anyone else).
I pull those ones and handle the warranty and/or losses from here, so the end user doesn't have as much hassle as they might have if we didn't do a second check. This has happened on EP4200 MKII, EP4200 MKIII, IB4200 (Newest Gen), EnerG 4200, and GREPOW.
Cells we haven't seen yet (and are crossing our fingers for): IB4600, EnerG 4600. However if history serves, we will probably see similar failure rates - I'd love to be wrong though, because losing 10% of cells and/or doing shipping for warranty on 10% of your cells as a retailer pretty much wipes the better part of your profit. Battery pack pricing is driven uncompetitively low by the large on-line stores that don't do any sort of QA and just pass along the headaches to the end user.
I'd love to see LiPo take over in the sense that we have had very good luck with the quality of the LiPo packs that we've sold, and we've actually turned a profit there (I don't mind admitting that!). People just need to remember to be careful with not over charging and over discharging the packs. They last a long time if you take care of them, but if you over discharge, you can hoop them quite easily as well. I worry that might be the downside there until everyone gets used to caring for them.
Anyhow - it's neither here nor there, but I just wanted to chime in my 2 cents with what I've actually seen on the front lines. As Phil said, we've carried almost every type of NiMH cell so far at one point or another, and we work to reduce the burden on the end user, but we're still looking for one that won't have as significant of a DOA rate.
T