New ROAR Rules

[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.

[haddow]

except if you edited it after thomas said something, then his post wouldnt make sense anymore.

[Shawn68z]

except if you edited it after thomas said something, then his post wouldnt make sense anymore.

Strangely I am okay with that.   :wink:


Shawn.

[Grinder]

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 $$$.

[Grinder]

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.

[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.

[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.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

[cyrrus]

A hand out motor for either indoor or outdoor is fine by me.  

hand out's get's my Vote.

[Blake]

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

[Grinder]

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.

[RC51]

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.

[RC51]

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.

[jarrodH]

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??.

[RC51]

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.

[RC51]

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.