Is it too early to tell which 1 cell pack will be the hot ticket for the upcoming winter season? Assuming that all the currently (or soon to be) available 1 cell packs (SMC 40c&50c, TP40c, Reedy, Epic etc) gain ROAR approval come Oct 1st. Has anybody had a chance to do any real life testing using either cycle numbers or even better track testing to compare any of these packs? I hope this doesn't turn into a "My sponsor's pack is better than your sponsors pack" conversation for the sake of us low budget racers that are waiting for the dust to settle before deciding what to purchase for the upcoming winter season. Bob

Hey Bob, I agree with you it would suck if it did turn into "my sponsors pack is better than your sponsor pack", heck it is already going on with chassis "my sponsors chassis is better than yours". Thanks Scott

I can only speak for the SMC single cells but I have tested the 40C and 50C back to back to back to back on the track in 12th scale onroad. I dould tell ZERO difference in them on the track. Cycle numbers were all so close that by looking at the numbers you couldnt tell which was 40C and which was 50C.

I think a lot of guys get to caught up in the C Rating game. Also on that note I could tell a big difference in an older SMC Single cell pack (24C 4000) and the newer 40-50C packs. About .3 a lap average faster with the newer stuff.

I was talking to Sean C the other day and he had just gotten the Reed Single cell pack and we talked cycle numbers and they were pretty much identical as the SMC's. But that is on different machines on different coast.
EA

"But, my Sponsor's brushless motor is way better than your Sponsor's......":wave:

...because I say so.

Hey Bob, I agree with you it would suck if it did turn into "my sponsors pack is better than your sponsor pack", heck it is already going on with chassis "my sponsors chassis is better than yours". Thanks Scott

I can only speak for the SMC single cells but I have tested the 40C and 50C back to back to back to back on the track in 12th scale onroad. I dould tell ZERO difference in them on the track. Cycle numbers were all so close that by looking at the numbers you couldnt tell which was 40C and which was 50C.

I think a lot of guys get to caught up in the C Rating game. Also on that note I could tell a big difference in an older SMC Single cell pack (24C 4000) and the newer 40-50C packs. About .3 a lap average faster with the newer stuff.

I was talking to Sean C the other day and he had just gotten the Reed Single cell pack and we talked cycle numbers and they were pretty much identical as the SMC's. But that is on different machines on different coast.
EA

Thanks EA. Good info. We need more real life data like this instead of arguing about what is printed on the label of the pack. :thumbsup:

now didnt do these tests but i do trust the result
the test was done by frank mertz and posted on a different page

and this is what he said
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Today I got my 50C pack in the mail. I bought one because I wanted to see how it differed from the other packs. I cycled it today and below are the numbers from the SMC 50C pack, the SMC 40C pack and the Thunder Power 40C pack. These are all of the numbers I got for the first cycle.

Thunder Power 40C
Weight - 5.25 oz
A.I.R. - 3.8
Discharge - 525
Avg. V. - 3.70
Volt. @ 60 - 3.89
Volt. @ 120 - 3.82
Volt. @ 180 - 3.75
Volt. @ 240 - 3.68

SMC 40C #1
Weight - 5.16 oz
A.I.R. - 4.3
Discharge - 532
Avg. V. - 3.67
Volt. @ 60 - 3.89
Volt. @ 120 - 3.79
Volt. @ 180 - 3.72
Volt. @ 240 - 3.65

SMC 40C #2
Weight - 5.16 oz
A.I.R. - 4.2
Discharge - 517
Avg. V. - 3.67
Volt. @ 60 - 3.83
Volt. @ 120 - 3.78
Volt. @ 180 - 3.71
Volt. @ 240 - 3.65

SMC 50C
Weight - 5.15 oz
A.I.R. - 3.9
Discharge - 511
Avg. V. - 3.68
Volt. @ 60 - 3.91
Volt. @ 120 - 3.80
Volt. @ 180 - 3.72
Volt. @ 240 - 3.65

now i dont have a battery sponsor but i am glad i own the thunder power batteries:thumbsup:

but it's the labels that make them fast!

but it's the labels that make them fast!

way to waste post space!!!lol
i hope this puts some guys at ease about the new 50c and i like what the TOUR is doing also
good job Frank

is it true that the 40c and the 50c smc are the same baterys just different lables thats just what i heard

In head to head comparisions that i have done there thunder power kills the smc in the first minute. The TP pack holds 4+volts at 35 amps for over 60 seconds and the smc 4900 40c on 35 seconds.

how do you charge your packs on thunder charger?

Based on Frank's numbers, the SMC 40c and 50c look pretty darn close to me. Certainly close enough to tone down the uproar of a new 50c coming out right after a 40c pack.

I think for those that bought the 40c packs, you shouldn't worry too much about the guy beside you running the 50c pack.

but the problem is if u let them run the 50c and thunder power decides to make a real 50c then what do u do i know i would buy the true 50c u

we are having this problem at are track right know some poeple have bought 40c already some have not and we dont know what to do to make everyone happy (battery of the month )here we go again

Tour already addressed this for us. they will be in contact with the battery companies to get part numbers on the batteries that will be legal.

trinity and reedy will have a 40c battery. but i would guess all 4 or 5 batteries will be very close.:thumbsup:

now i dont have a battery sponsor but i am glad i own the thunder power batteries:thumbsup:

Alan,
Thanks. This info is exactly what I was looking for.

Not according to Franks test! :rolleyes:


In head to head comparisions that i have done there thunder power kills the smc in the first minute. The TP pack holds 4+volts at 35 amps for over 60 seconds and the smc 4900 40c on 35 seconds.

I want to see some true numbers posted by the Epic spokesman to see how great their batteries are.

I've had the oppertunity to cycle 5 TP packs and only one SMC but I assure you that ALL 5 TP packs hold 4+ volts for between 62 and 72 seconds. Granted I have only had the chance to cycle 1 smc but it didnt hold 4 volts for more than 35 seconds.

i didn't know we raced GFX's. Billy from Team Epic will tell yah those numbers mean nothing!!

I realize we dont race GFX's but if you were trying to compare a battery to another would you prefer a battery that held voltage for the first minute or held 3.3 volts 30 seconds longer. As and evaluation tool I'd rather see the voltage for the first minute not the last.

the soon to be released epic 1 cell pack will be very nice.

I realize we dont race GFX's but if you were trying to compare a battery to another would you prefer a battery that held voltage for the first minute or held 3.3 volts 30 seconds longer. As and evaluation tool I'd rather see the voltage for the first minute not the last.


I'm taking the one that runs the best on the track.

And the one that runs better on the track in head to head runs is the pack that holds more voltage up front.......

I've seen someone go back and forth in successive runs with the SMC 40C and TP packs and have the SMC run faster multiple times. I'm not suggesting that proves anything about the SMC being faster, just that they probably run close. Also, both packs cycled similar to what others have posted.

I think with LiPOs the GFX has value for comparing two packs of the same brand and type, but I question how useful it is for comparing different brands.

Personally, I like to see average voltage over the first 4 minutes. I don't care about C rating as there appears to be no real standard that manufacturers follow. I don't care about runtime as most will go longer than we need. What would seem to be most important is how strong the battery is for 4 minutes. That is what we race.

Personally, I like to see average voltage over the first 4 minutes. I don't care about C rating as there appears to be no real standard that manufacturers follow. I don't care about runtime as most will go longer than we need. What would seem to be most important is how strong the battery is for 4 minutes. That is what we race.

OMG... Someone who actually gets it :thumbsup:

Seems Thunderpower is top dog in the air mabey on the ground allso :tongue:

Jake

...I think with LiPOs the GFX has value for comparing two packs of the same brand and type, but I question how useful it is for comparing different brands.

:thumbsup:

Steve.

I'm taking the one that runs the best on the track.

Agreed!:thumbsup:

What is the new TP 50c 1 cell going to do to the battery war.
Butch

What is the new TP 50c 1 cell going to do to the battery war.
Butch

Same thing the SMC 50c did.....make people get all in a tizzy over nothing.

And the one that runs better on the track in head to head runs is the pack that holds more voltage up front.......

i have never ever cycled a lipo pack. no need to. "Yesterdays" technology in the GFX is not capable of properly telling yah how powerful "Todays" lipo packs really are, i use Billy from Team Epic as a example. the Pack he let me run cycled like crap compaired to a TP or SMC. Well guess what that Epic pack was a beast. nearly 2 laps faster .

Blah Blah Blah, your forget to tell them the sun went down and everyone picked up 2 laps, you took off the chunked tires and put new brushes in your brushless motor after zapping the can. I guess everyone assumes they are the perfect racer and their cars are perfectly set-up and it's going to come down to the one millionth of a volt to give them a win. Either way pick a battery mfg. and run the damn things.

well said.

LMAO Walter.

put new brushes in your brushless motor after zapping the can

WTH!!?? When did this happen?? Maybe thats why I'm so slow!! What kind of brushes should I use? Standup?? Laydown?? Serrated?? Timed?? How about springs??


(My sarcasm meter is off the charts! :wave:)

WTH!!?? When did this happen?? Maybe thats why I'm so slow!! What kind of brushes should I use? Standup?? Laydown?? Serrated?? Timed?? How about springs??


(My sarcasm meter is off the charts! :wave:)

Race Prep H cut brush are the best for that purpose!:thumbsup:

i've been using putnam brushes Todd released the new Purple compound specifically formulated for high rev motors.

My dyno says that they are really good lmao

You guys should try the turbine rotors. It's like having a turbo. The power really kicks in around 10,000 RPM. At least that's what Dave's dyno told me on Facebook.

Race Prep H cut brush are the best for that purpose!:thumbsup:

yeah, but what if i sold my allan parsons brush cutter back in the 80's????:confused::(

yeah, but what if i sold my allan parsons brush cutter back in the 80's????:confused::(

Maybe you can try with a grinder:tongue:

I have done track and Gfx test on the 40c stuff and the TP pack. The TP won on both charts for two weeks same amount of runs and cycles. the Tp pack is 3 months old and the smc is 2 weeks old.I just find it odd that the SMC 40c and the 50c are the same in weight.But like someone said dont go buy a battery untill there on the list.But the cream always rises to the top.

Something was posted here I don't quite understand.

If a GFX is creating a 35amp (or whatever amperage you choose) load on a pack and measures the voltage over the discharge curve. This should be a good test of how a pack will perform. So how is it that brand "X" shows poorly on a peice of test equipment but runs "better" on the track.

Is it because the brand "X" pack would cycle better on a non linear discharge, more like what is being run in the car with the amperage not being constand but varying?

Just wondering.

Interesting thought Scott. I wonder if anyone has tried cycling each pack on the oval or offroad cycle that the GFX has? Kinda curious to know how it would turn out.

Something was posted here I don't quite understand.

If a GFX is creating a 35amp (or whatever amperage you choose) load on a pack and measures the voltage over the discharge curve. This should be a good test of how a pack will perform. So how is it that brand "X" shows poorly on a peice of test equipment but runs "better" on the track.

Is it because the brand "X" pack would cycle better on a non linear discharge, more like what is being run in the car with the amperage not being constand but varying?

Just wondering.

I think it depends on the track and the class. At a local carpet track, we are averaging almost 40amps average over a 4 minute run with 1s/10.5. In 1s/7.5, it's around 60amps! If this is the average, I can only imagine what a spike in amps under load might be. I think depending on how quality the cells are will be the ultimate test of how they perform. They might act the same under a linear 35amp load, but how they handle a 70amp spike might set them apart. I think that's why you'll see a bigger difference in battery in the faster classes over the slower classes due to the increased amp draw. As Stan Brackett would say....1s will "separate the men batteries from the boy batteries" LOL

That brings some light on it, sort of.

Say "X" battery shows better on the GFX than "Y". But "Y" battery runs better on the track, under the more "spiked" condidtions. One would think that if it did better being "spiked" it would also show better on the GFX.

Scott good observations. I'm convinced that the GFX is a very very very over priced charger. the cycle function provides absolutely no usable data. save your $449 and go buy a Lipo charger with built in balancer.

Another anecdotal example of amp load - ran the TP back to back with the SMC SPEC pack - no discernable difference in 13.5.
Specifics - Ran 58 4:03 with the SMC pack, came off the track at 134 degrees. Put the TP pack in, not sure the motor cooled all the way down though, ran a 58 4:03. Motor came off at 141 degrees. The TP gave me a .03 second faster fast lap.