As per our discussion last night at the AGM I was wondering if those of us that currently have cars, be they old school or new generation, could start posting their car weights race ready. This means, with whatever battery you're planning to run, what motors, speed controls and bodies and tires installed.
My Darkside iForce with everything installed (LiPo and Brushed 19T) was about 85 gms light. I added 6 tungsten plates into the battery slots by sandwiching them between my Dekelz chassis skin and a LiPo tray I made for the battery to slip into. The car is now sitting at 1208 gms.
Please post your personal results here when you get a moment.
BTW, the conversion from ounces to grams is 1 oz = 28.35 gm.
Mick
Hey, Mick.
My cement truck of a Pan Car came in at 1342 Grams using NiMh, an Futaba 9550s servo, Brushless motor, Novak GTB (pig), Spektrum mini receiver and a body.
P.
My CRC Chassis, with GTB 10.5, Sprektrum 3000 RX, Trakpower 4900, with GRP wheels. 980 grams.
With the body, and transponder, I need to add about 50-60 grams.
Shawn.
Just weighed my machine un-changed from last year, with 3300's.
1270 grams -- all it needs is a pinion gear.
CRC Gen-X 10
235mm widening kit installed
19T brushed motor
Trackpower 4900 LiPo battery
Brand new, un-trued Jaco tires front and rear
Mid/small sized electronics
Fairly heavy wiring with Deans plugs and lots of 13awg wire
Completely ready to run with body and personal transponder
1120g
I had to bolt on 6 of Phil's tungsten plates (about 14g each) to bring the weight up over 1200g.
Blake
So from walking around the pits on the 1st race day, it seems as though the cars running nickel batteries tended to be around 1300 grams, and the lithium powered cars tended to be around 1200 grams (with exceptions, obviously). We had 20 pan cars racing this past weekend, which is far more data than the few posts above.
This sounds to me like the cars with the power advantage (7.4 volts nominal or 3% power advantage) also have the weight advantage (100 grams less, or 8% weight advantage).
Earlier on we were discussing methods of trying to even out the different technologies by giving the lithium cars a weight penalty if need be to even out the performance. I don't think we intended to give the lithium cars both a power and weight advantage over the nickel cars.
Should we be re-thinking the Pro 10 class weight limit after seeing some real-world car weights? I know several cars had a definite performance advantage over mine, and I don't want to have to buy new equipment to be competitive -- our motivation in the Pro 10 class was to ensure both technologies could compete together.
I know it's early in the season, but it might be nice to try to get on an even footing early on so we can do fine-scale tweaking mid-season, rather than having a big disparity in weight among the cars for a big chunk of time.
What do you all think?
Quote from: "Tom"So from walking around the pits on the 1st race day, it seems as though the cars running nickel batteries tended to be around 1300 grams, and the lithium powered cars tended to be around 1200 grams (with exceptions, obviously). We had 20 pan cars racing this past weekend, which is far more data than the few posts above.
This sounds to me like the cars with the power advantage (7.4 volts nominal or 3% power advantage) also have the weight advantage (100 grams less, or 8% weight advantage).
Earlier on we were discussing methods of trying to even out the different technologies by giving the lithium cars a weight penalty if need be to even out the performance. I don't think we intended to give the lithium cars both a power and weight advantage over the nickel cars.
Should we be re-thinking the Pro 10 class weight limit after seeing some real-world car weights? I know several cars had a definite performance advantage over mine, and I don't want to have to buy new equipment to be competitive -- our motivation in the Pro 10 class was to ensure both technologies could compete together.
I know it's early in the season, but it might be nice to try to get on an even footing early on so we can do fine-scale tweaking mid-season, rather than having a big disparity in weight among the cars for a big chunk of time.
What do you all think?
I think you should drill out your chassis to make it lighter. :wink:
You are definately right Tom. Maybe an increase in minimum weight should be consdered. 1350?
The only other question I would bring to this is were all the fast cars running 10.5? or were some of the fast cars also running 19T ? The Lipo might not be the only performance advantage in the faster cars.
Shawn.
Hey Tom, maybe you should have actually worked on your car before bringing it out to race, instead of just blowing the dirt and dust off of it and throwing a pinion gear at it! ;-)
Maybe, just maybe, your NiMh are junk! Hmmmm?
How did the lap times look, comparatively speaking?
IE: Brushed versus brushless, NiMh versus LiPo, and any of the various combinations of the two technologies? What about the different tire combos?
Before you go and get ideas about changing the weight rules because you were slow, don't you think it would be a good idea to look a little deeper into the situation?
Do we have the race results/lap times somewhere? Do we have information as to who ran what?
I think it's waaay too early to be thinking about changing things up. The point of having two separate points seasons was for this early one to be the test bed where we as a group learn all there is to know about the new technologies as well as the new PanCar drivers getting some much needed track time and learn how to tune their cars.
You can't possibly expect years old 3300's to be competitive against any new battery, regardless of their chemistry. I'm more than happy to even the playing field but we need to be very careful when formulating this penalty system because come Speed Weekend we will not be penalizing out-of-towners just because locally some are too thrifty to modernize.
So how are we going to decide who needs to add weight anyway? Based on what criteria? If someone happens to nail the right tire combo and have a more aerodynamic body that suits a particular track layout two weeks in a row, will that constitute a weight penalty? How far down the grid do we decide to take this restriction system? Will it be based on your main standings only?How often do we revisit the restrictions, every week?
A worthy discussion can now commence. Enlighten me :)
Mick
FYI, Mick and I have been testing a fair bit between Vancouver, Kamloops and Victoria and both he and I agree that battery chemistry will be the major variable over everything else. I can guarantee you that a 10.5 BL can out perform a brushed 19T motor using the same battery chemistry (assuming constant performance factors). However, a brushed 19T with a LiPo will stomp a brushless with NiMh from what we have been able to determine. Anecdote be damned - the math just proves it clearly and you can see it on the track. So, the ultimate combo should be a BL and LiPo assuming you can keep the motor cool. Getting the power to the ground, however, trumps everything.
So, if as Mick suggests, a dog of a 19T running 2400 NiCds but is dialed on a particular week or the next, should that car be penalized by adding weight for the next week? Waaaaaay too many variables for that. Our track layout is different week to week as well so it is really a canundrum. The spec should be the equalizing factor and not over-performance/under-performance of any given car assuming the power and body specs are equally agreed to from the outset.
Tom, I can lend you a more modern NiMH battery this weekend. It's gotta be better than those 3300s you're running. I used it last summer and it worked great. Also, as Nick suggests, it might help to give your motor a touch up. Then hopefully you'll be more in the ballpark.
I agree that a LiPo and/or brushless weight penalty will *likely* be needed, but as all others have said here, it's probably a little early to be making any decisions yet.
Also, let's swap cars for a few laps this weekend, for curiousity's sake.
Blake
Quote from: "Blake"I agree that a LiPo and/or brushless weight penalty will *likely* be needed, but as all others have said here, it's probably a little early to be making any decisions yet.Blake
But to Mick's point, what would you be penalizing and is it fair or equal to all others in the same situation? If all 19T NiMh beat (how many??) LiPo BL on a given day, would you still penalize BL/LiPo for losing? Or would you penalize NiMh/19T for winning? What's the point? From what I see, the risk is one of penalizing someone for driving well and not for the performance of their power plant. Don't get me wrong, I see the aim here, and it's virtuous. But is a penalty in order given we're all over the map with respect to skill, performance, cars, setup and electronics?
I say we set a reasonable (median?) minimum weight and go for it. 1200 Grams was set but we could simply throw all of the cars on the scale during practice and figure it out, set the standard for the following week and see how it goes.
Thoughts?
Hey Phil,
I agree. There are so many factors on any given race day that it would be foolish to start assigning penalties after one race. I think we need to race a couple more times to see if we can find some "trends". It will be tough analysis given the different skill levels of all the drivers and the different equipment employed by each.
That's why I'd like to try swapping cars with Tom for a half race or so. We've done this in the past with 12th Scale and it can be quite telling. Of course, I'd really only be willing to try this experiment after we freshen up his motor and install a modern-ish battery!
Blake
Tom, stick some new spacers behind those worn out brushes already! LOL
One Race Day under only slightly better than Marginal Conditions with various battery/motor/chassis/tire set-ups shouldn't be used as a baseline for changing anything, IMHO.
I've only skimmed over these posts, but it seems as though my point was missed. I'll hopefully post the race results soon.
A LiPo/19 turn car came 1st, and a NiMH/19 turn car (3300's to boot) came 2nd, so I'm not looking for excuses for my lack of speed. You'll be able to see that my fastest lap time was something like 6th fastest in the main even though I finished 2nd.
My point was that, in general, only the LiPo cars are near the class minimum weight, and the NiMH cars tend to be over by 8% or so. I was thinking maybe we could start the season on a more even keel with a realistic minimum that doesn't penalize NiMH drivers, rather than giving one class a weight penalty (which we effectively have right now, in the opposite direction that intuition suggests we would have if we were to mandate one).
From my understanding, someone pulled the proposed minimum of 1200 grams out of the air, and I'm just suggesting that we might consider making it 1300 grams instead. This way, most cars would be near the minimum, rather than the current situation where only the LiPo cars are near the minimum.
Right now, I'm suggesting ALL NiMH cars are around 100 grams over, and MOST LiPo cars are around the minimum. If we go to 1300 grams, then MOST NiMH cars will be around the minimum, and MOST LiPo cars would be around the minimum. That sounds like a fair starting point to the season to me.
If you LiPo guys think you need a 100 gram advantage to run against a 3300 equipped 19 turn car, then bring it on, but I don't think everyone running NiMH needs the challenge.
I've got better batteries that I can use too, so I'm suggesting this change based on real-wrold observed weights, rather than because I think I'm too slow.
Ah, gotcha.
Well yes, if it is infact impossible to get a NiMH car anywhere near the weight limit then then yes, we should increase the weight limit for this transitional year.
I picked the 1200g limit based on the ROAR rules for the "10th Scale Electric On-road" class. Maybe 1275g or 1300g would be a better rule. I know that my Gen-X10 would have come in at about 1275g with a NiMH battery.
Blake
Yeah, I don't know what I could have done to reduce the weight on the chassis any further either. Mind you, my weight was with a body as opposed to a bare chassis. I weighed in at bare bones equimpent etc. Even with a light amount of paint on the body it was still 1340+ grams. Maybe I could have run the smaller profile servo, shortened wires etc, but the chassis is drilled as it is ....
P.
Ok, I understand where you are coming from now Thomas.
My old school wide 10L with a 19T and a LiPo, turned down front and rear tires, a body, electronics and added lead weighed in at 1220gr.
Phil, just out of interest, did you have your water cooling system on board your Pro 10 car?
Could we get everyone to post if they are currently running NiMh in their Pan Cars? I want to know if this is a reasonable percentage of the cars or just a couple. Also if they plan to switch at any time during this season.
Mick
Not everyone reads the forums, so let's be careful when collecting statistics.
I saw at least 4 cars with NiMH batteries, out of around 8 I looked at, and we had 20 cars the first week.
We should do a survey next week at the track if we really need numbers, but I'd expect it's a significant percentage. Pan cars are supposed to be way cheaper than touring cars, which means for many of us using what we've already got lying around.
You could just start a new topic and add a poll to it.
I've got NiMH in right now, and I'll get Lithium if I have to. I was hoping more of the fast guys would stick to using NiMH to even up the field, but that was being a bit wishfull I think.
Quote from: "WhoDoYouThink"Phil, just out of interest, did you have your water cooling system on board your Pro 10 car?
Hey, Nick.
No, I didn't run the cooling system in the car and this was the weight before I added a small 200mAh LiPo and twin fans for the motor. The Novak GTB is a heavy ESC and since it's BL, there is a third wire to run to the motor, plus the plugs if you use them. So, those components alone can add a fair extra weight. I'll try a smaller profile servo to see if that helps.
Yes, Mick, I plan to switch to LiPo as soon as the saddle packs hit the ground.
BTW, if you are wondering about BL speed, I suspect I could gear up 2-3 teeth since motor temp for the only heat I finished was 110 degrees. Mick was the only car that pulled me on the straight during that heat.
P.
I was running a SMC 4000 & 13.5 BL for the 3 heats I ran before changing to a 4 cell pack. but I forgot to reset the ESC from lipo so it shut down almost right away due to low voltage.
My son Mike was running 6 cell 3300's & a 19t next time he will be using 4200s and a Stock motor as we had them all made into 4 cell packs
My car weighed 1316 without transponder ,I would be comfortable with a 1275-1300g weight limit.
i just looked at the roar rules 42.3ounces is the weight.42.3ozx28.35g=1199.2 g .so the minimum weight we use is bang on .one thing i have noticed is that brushless cars no matter what battery have more power .it may or may not show in the race results .the driving of these missiles some times leaves a bit to be desired .but we are all still learning how .lol.i have been using up alot of motor stuff with 19 turn brushed to stay competetive with 10.5 brushless.maybe the 13.5 motor that was originally decided on should be reconsidered.also the 10.5 is not the brushless equivalent to 19 turn i was under the impression that the 13.5 was the choice.so i beleive we have more than a weight problem.so all we have to do is have alot of fun racing while we learn all the pros and cons of all the different technologies(antique to current)another question is should a narrow car be allowed to be lighter there is an aerodynamic disadvantage because smaller wing area?it might be faster in a straight line but our track is to short .lots of worms in this can who wants to open it ?lol see you all sunday funday
Quote from: "serpent"i just looked at the roar rules 42.3ounces is the weight.42.3ozx28.35g=1199.2 g .so the minimum weight we use is bang on .one thing i have noticed is that brushless cars no matter what battery have more power .it may or may not show in the race results .the driving of these missiles some times leaves a bit to be desired .but we are all still learning how .lol.i have been using up alot of motor stuff with 19 turn brushed to stay competetive with 10.5 brushless.maybe the 13.5 motor that was originally decided on should be reconsidered.also the 10.5 is not the brushless equivalent to 19 turn i was under the impression that the 13.5 was the choice.so i beleive we have more than a weight problem.so all we have to do is have alot of fun racing while we learn all the pros and cons of all the different technologies(antique to current)another question is should a narrow car be allowed to be lighter there is an aerodynamic disadvantage because smaller wing area?it might be faster in a straight line but our track is to short .lots of worms in this can who wants to open it ?lol see you all sunday funday
Maybe on Sunday run only the 13.5's & 19t for the day and see how things panout
-=light=-
Think about it, Guys.
We tested this indoors and 100% cooked a 13.5 trying to keep up to a 19T and it still wasn't fast enough which is also borne out on the dyno and widely published. The exec then made an announcement to go with 10.5. No less than 10 IROCC guys bought 10.5 motors at that point although not all are racing them at present. What are the implications for switching?
Well, I don't know about any of the other 19 turn Pan Car drivers, but I cooked one arm and badly discoloured another(along with frying two sets of brushes) trying to obtain parity in power with the 10.5 brushless motors. I just re-weighed my car, race ready it weighs 1243g including a motor heat sink.
I know the faster 10.5 brushless motored cars out there weigh considerably more than that.
So I don't think weight is the issue we should be going after just yet.
I'm curious as to what the winning motor setups have been for the A main winning cars since the season began...
Mick
May 4th
1. Bell, Blake: Lipo/19T
2. Younger, Tom: NiMH/19T
3. Szirmay, Mick: Lipo/19T
May 11th
1. Roberts, Craig: Lipo/19T
2. Archer, Shane: Batt?/19T
3. Bell, Blake: Lipo/19T
May 18th
1. Bernard, Gerry: NiMH/19T
2. Armstrong, Glenn: Batt?/10.5
3. Bell, Blake: Lipo/19T
May 25th
1. Ashmore, Brian: Lipo/19T
2. Younger, Tom: NiMH/19T
3. Bell, Blake: Lipo/19T
I am pretty sure this information is correct. Maybe someone can help me fill in the blanks for Shane, Gerry, and Glenn's batteries - not sure what they were running.
Blake
I know there are many factors as to why someone wins or loses and the theory is that Brushless SHOULD be doing better as they are more efficient but so far the stats are not showing that Brushless has been dominating.
I know Glenn and I have had some pretty good battles the few times that I've run and I did not feel he had a horsepower advantage.
Mick
From a non horsepower/weight standpoint, this is what I've found so far:
The Pro10 class is competitive. Very competitive! With 16-22 racers in this class each week, we're seeing A-Mains where at least half the cars are finishing on the same lap. It's totally awesome! I'm so impressed that everyone has been able to get their cars working so well on the asphalt!
The tightness of the racing has definitely brought out some of our darker sides though. Each position can make a big difference so you see racers rubbing a little more than usual. I am one of the biggest culprits of this as I have "ended" the leader's race a couple of times so far this season. Throughout the field though you can hear the bumping and grinding quite a bit more than in 12th Scale or in Touring Car.
From a horsepower standpoint, I too have struggled with my 19T. I keep burning them up, so I will be gearing down a little this weekend! From what I can tell, with a fresh 19T I don't think I'm giving up anything to anyone from a power perspective. My car weighs 1250g.
Blake
Blake i have a brand new armature in a dc can.3800 batterys from indoors and weight was about 1309 after the a main
Thanks Gerry - I'll update my summary above. Any idea what Shane and Glenn are running for batteries?
Blake
i think the same
I would assume at best they are running 4200 NiMh as they are both running 10Ls right? As far as I know no one has the mythical LiPo saddle packs as of yet.
Mick
oops right you are mick i meant 4200 blake .corally for me glen 10L and shane i dont know
Hi, Guys.
I just picked up the saddle pack shipment!!!!!
We knew that people would take time to figure things out and from my perspective we're far from it yet. Guys are over gearing to go faster but haven't settled on a final ratio yet that protects motors and batts that also performs highly. Personally I knew this would happen from the get-go. What we didn't really discuss is that the 19T guys would follow suit. So, I suspect both class of motors are over gearing by 5-10%. 19T guys also should consider running some of the more heat tolerant brushes which would help out both with performace and budget over the course of the season.
P.
Hey Guys,
Just caught up on this thread - interesting to see the table of the winning power combo's and drivers up there. Doesn't look like anyone has it completely nailed yet, which is actually cool (aside from burned brushes) because it means there's learning and experiments going on.
For the brushed guys - I would highly recommend backing off a tooth or two from where you are absolutely scorching your brushes over the course of a run. It might seem like gearing to keep up is the only course of action, but you will probably end up faster if you don't overheat and end up running on melted brushes for the last minute or two of your run.
Also - regardless of your chosen brush, try venting it out by putting a hole or slot in the face of the brush (ask Phil to show you a T-brush if you haven't seen it). On 4499's in TC this was the difference between having a one-run, melt-the-serrations-off brush versus a 3 run still-looks-ok brush in my cars.
I'll definitely stay tuned to this one.... it will be interesting to see if the saddle packs affect the balance of power.
Actually Trent, the last set of brushes I turned purple/golden were a set of your T brush with the hole in the middle of the brush face, venting out the holes in the side.
Gearing down dramatically seems like the only course of action. No 50+ roll-outs here like I heard the brushless guys were running! I cooked at a 44 and still again at a 41ish!
Nick!
You were trying to rollout like a Brushless? I'm rolling out my Komodo around 38!
Mick
No, not trying to roll out like a brushless, just stating what those guys were saying they were rolling out at.
I've been as low as a 36.07 with new tires on.
Go lower than that, Nick, if you are using a Hemi K. It likes 34-ish and should come off the track less than 170 degrees. The Hemi-C or C-2 based motors are fine in and around 35-37 but they get quite hot as well. 50+ roll-out is definately brushless territory and you will 100% fry your brushes if not an arm in a brushed motor. Doug, Glenn and I are all rolling out aroun 50-53 and we're overheating 10.5 BL motors around the 53 mark - somewhere around 170-210 degrees between the three of us.
P.
i was running in the 35 roll out area with the t-bang brushes and i used them all day.the serrations are gone but there is no dicoloration, was going to try one more heat with them.
Quote from: "Blake"May 4th
1. Bell, Blake: Lipo/19T
2. Younger, Tom: NiMH/19T
3. Szirmay, Mick: Lipo/19T
May 11th
1. Roberts, Craig: Lipo/19T
2. Archer, Shane: Batt?/19T
3. Bell, Blake: Lipo/19T
May 18th
1. Bernard, Gerry: NiMH/19T
2. Armstrong, Glenn: Batt?/10.5
3. Bell, Blake: Lipo/19T
May 25th
1. Ashmore, Brian: Lipo/19T
2. Younger, Tom: NiMH/19T
3. Bell, Blake: Lipo/19T
I am pretty sure this information is correct. Maybe someone can help me fill in the blanks for Shane, Gerry, and Glenn's batteries - not sure what they were running.
Blake
Shane, Gerry both are using NiMH I'm sure of it
But looking at the results Blake has posted. I think the 10.5 should be here to stay.
-=light=-
Quote from: "WhoDoYouThink"I've been as low as a 36.07 with new tires on.
I tried 37mm but it did not take long to fry the brushes. I had better luck with 35mm last weekend. I may even try a tooth lower this weekend.
Blake
Another thought: We had so much traction last weekend that it was actually possible to put down all the power of the 19T. This might have accounted for some hot motors.
Blake
The 10.5's those guys are running have approximately 40% more torque than a K19. (They also run 40%+ less RPM - before anyone has a heart attack, they're not as different as one might think in terms of wattage).
If they're pushing it at 50mm, then the K19 guys are probably pushing it at 35.7mm or so (ignoring the other differences between the motor tech).
I'm guessing the safe spot is probably 34-35'ish mm rollout looking at nothing but the numbers and knowing the differences between how those motors dyno out.
i ran a rollout of 34 but was out powered by glenn and his brushless combo .by out powered i mean i was faster in the corner but slower down the straights .so i geared up 1 tooth and burned up.the traction this last week was awsome so the torque of the brushless was more drivable.this week i will try to keep up the traction=same suger content .i am not saying we shoukd change any thing just being observant . we have been basing our rules on roar in 12 th scale for ever and very rarly have i seen a 12th scale car even close to minimum weight .part of this is due to the weight of the old cell compared to new cell ido beleive this is alot of the weight isue
Thanks for the roll out tips gents, I'll have to try something in or around 34-36ish again.
Looking at the results and the history/skill levels of the drivers, etc it looks like the serious competition has gone from TC to Pan car. This is shaping up to be a very exciting season of racing particularly with the Pan cars. This is our "Experimental Class" so this is the class we will be playing with the Brushless which is really a large part of the market for R/C - its just the racers that adapt the changes last it seems. I know when it comes time to decide what we are running next season one of the big questions will be brushless stock so this is the time to experiment and find out what's what.
Quote from: "Grinder"so this is the time to experiment and find out what's what.
I see that Associated (for one) is making brushless motors in 10.5, 13.5, 15.5 and 17.5 now. I don't evy the exec on making the call for next year.
yep i think every weekend should be a speed weekend, 2 days of racing.
Quote from: "gotnitro"yep i think every weekend should be a speed weekend, 2 days of racing.
Sounds like you need VRC. Then you can race 24/7.
He just missed last weekend, and has got an itch to scratch, I think gotnitro is just upset that it wasnt his corally that won this past weekend it was brians...no more speed info for brian he is fast enough now....lol :lol: