Hobbyist Forums banner

1 - 20 of 66 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,343 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Scot Petitclerc (2006 SWTour Modified Champion and current record holder at the Encino Velodrome) came up to run with us at our local club race Saturday to help me do some testing w/ the NOVAK (Lipo/Stock Replacement) test motor.

After Saturadys test...we found a legitimate replacement motor...for 4300/4 cell and/or 19t 4cell.

We put Scot in our stock class and let him play through the 4 qualifiers and he just kept getting faster and faster.

In the mains we moved him into our mixed 19t/4300 4cell class. Scot was running the UNMARKED TEST MOTOR w/ his Peak / Orion LIPO and YES, it WAS Faster than the 4 cell 4300...AND the 4 cell 19t (ARCOR Legal Mt. Fuji based motor) ALL 3 were SOOO close on Top Speed and the mains DID yield the quickest lap times

NOVAK TEST MOTOR - Fastest Lap 6.235 (Scot Petitclerc)
4cell 19t - Fastest Lap 6.253 (Jamison Bartlett)
4cell - 4300 - Fastest Lap 6.305 (John Miles)

Scots car just kept getting faster and faster every lap, and his quickest lap was turned on lap 44 of 46 laps. Where both the 4 cell cars turned their fastest laps in the first 15 laps.

Good stock lap times were in the 6.56 - 6.71 range today. Track is about 300 ft. (Give or take...I didn't run the wheel on it today) and a little loose.

(Post note: Scot was on a good 47 lap pace, but collected a back marker 2 laps from the end causing him to drop from 6.2 on the 44th lap to 8.21 and 7.16 on the last 2 laps.)

Joe Myers
South-West Tour "R/C Oval Series"
Official 'TOUR' Sponsors
FINISHLINE R/C Products
Jake's Performance Hobbies
Maverick Oval Chassis
McAllister Racing Bodies
STICK E.T. Tire Sauces
T.M. Racing Tires

WWW.SOUTHWESTTOUR.COM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
776 Posts
swtour said:
NOVAK TEST MOTOR - Fastest Lap 6.235 (Scot Petitclerc)
4cell 19t - Fastest Lap 6.253 (Jamison Bartlett)
4cell - 4300 - Fastest Lap 6.305 (John Miles)
Joe 19t ran a faster lap than 4300? 4300 car must not have been even close to being good setup wise. we have been running 56 4:00 week in and out. 19t Jeff ran a 56 4:03 once @ the Pancar Shootout last year when bite was way up.

I think the 10.5/lypo is a good mod class, 13.5/lypo would be a good 19t/4300 replacement bit faster but very easy to drive. Now all we need is a 20.5+ to replace stock and we all can just work on our cars and not motor/batteries... JMO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,343 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Raymond,

The guy running the 4300 was running the Pro3, but had a little push entering the corner. He had the rip over the 19t on the straights, but the 19t was dialed just a bit better in the corner.

NOTE: These guys are the AVERAGE JOE type racers who are the top level in their local game, Scot did bring in a little more experience which is why I wanted HIM testing this motor.

Charlie from NOVAK is going to get me a couple other winds to test ASAP, and I'm hoping to bring them to PHOENIX for the PCSO..and maybe you will get a chance to do some testing too.. : )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,343 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
...another note: The track we ran this on is a TEMP layout with very square corners (INDIANAPOLIS STYLE) with very brutal infield walls and 15-17 ft wide lanes.

A lot of times we'll see a difference of .3 per lap if you are willing to just tick the infield walls coming off the corner...but 1/2 to low...and you STOP in the wall. All three of these guys put on a great race...but were a little more conservative than I normally run...(Which is why my body has the CRAP knocked out of it...LOL)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
776 Posts
Joe, that's cool I really think a 20.5 or maybe 21.5 would be ok for stock replacement. Motor tested was a 17.5 right? We had a guy Joe Wilson that ran a 18.5 and was running 4.4 to 4.5's 4-cell 4300 we run 4.1-4.3's so I would think a 17.5 would be very close.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,343 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Raymond,

The motor we had was a 17.5 and I suggested to NOVAK we try a 21.5

It sounds like they may send a couple different combos to try.

I also think a 21.5 will be a KILLER on-road touring ENTRY level motor and hope we get to do some testing there too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,707 Posts
Thanks

SW, thanks for your efforts and sharing the info, I think we are about to have some major changes in RC racing.

Your efforts lead the pack, good stuff.

I wonder what will happen with new folks entering the sport when we don't need dyno and all the motor magic or the battery mojo. Just learn to drive and setup.

Imagine a pit table with no row of batteries, no T30, no dyno, no lathe.

Will we see 5 post setup chassis rigs? who knows!

Again thanks for your efforts, the future looks promising!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,343 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
98Ron,

Funny you talk about the PIT TABLE.

Scot, our driver doing the test this week had a CHARGER on the table..and a pit towel I believe. It was one of the emptiest pit tables I've EVER seen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,927 Posts
Now if we could get it going up north!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,343 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Kevin,

Once we find the combo we're looking for, I'll be sending Ruben, Jake and anyone else I can think of some of the results, benefits and reasons behind the plans.

I think nearly everyone running electric this year can agree the batteries have not been a fun issue...where does it end?

Will this LIPO deal fix it? NOT as long as we have people who will do anything they can to ruin it...but, HOPEFULLY it's a move in the right direction to help...we know that once these things become THE product of choice..people will try to manipulate these batteries to find an advantage, they'll do the same with the motors...that IS what racers and mfg's do. Hopefully we can overcome that though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,557 Posts
If we can some how figure how to keep matchers and motor guy's out of this, it will be a good deal for everybody.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,790 Posts
The lipo thing is fine and dandy for laid back racing, but before I'll get excited or even interested in it as a cure all for battteries I'd like to see the discharge curves for 10 or preferable a 100 randonly selected packs. I hear these batteries are "pretty much" or "virtually" the same. What constitues pretty much the same? If I didn't know better I'd say a 1.25V NiMH pack is pretty much the same as a 1.21V NiMH pack. Well we all know those two packs are not pretty much the same on the track. Is there any hard data anywhere showing how consistent these lipo packs are?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
691 Posts
I had a great time testing the motor for Joe. I had my ice charger to top off the packs in-between rounds and a few tools to make some adjustments to the car on the table and that was it!

Running the lipo/bl combo was everything I thought it would be. Fast/Easy/Repeatable performance with no motor or battery pre or post race work. I had lots of time to talk and hang out with the other racers. At the end of the day (I already had everything packed up before the main. No need to repeak or discharge at the end), I just unplugged the lipo and turned off the radio and was done. Simply awesome!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,343 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
pmsimkins,

I agree I'd like more discharge info..because as a realist, I know GUYS will still buy 10-15 packs looking for an advantage...it's what racers and/or mfg's do.

If we had the budget...my suggestion would be HAND OUT RACE Packs on race day....but we all know that would never work either.

I do believe this can be a good thing, I also believe given the chance....racers themselves will try to ruin it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
753 Posts
Joe: Our testing with the NOVAK test motor was no where near yours? As a matter of fact, our tests showed that the test motor with the 3200 Lipo’s was as close to Stock as we’d want to go. We tried 5 different rollouts starting with a 1.64 to a 3.0

1.64: Average lap times were in the 4.9’s motor temp was 80 degrees

1.90: Average lap times 4.8’s, motor temp was in the mid 80’s

2.12: Average lap times 4.6’s. motor temp was in the mid 90’s

2.80: Average lap times 4.4’s, motor temp was in the 120’s

3.0: Average lap times 4.2’s, we weren’t watching the time close enough and ran 5 minutes, so the motor came off at 159 degrees. Had we run the 4 minutes it should have been in the 130 degree range. Fast single lap was 4.1

For cross reference against lap times of brushed Stock and 4200 niMh, laps times for the Stock class were in the 4.4’s with a weekend 4.1 “hot lap”. Brushed UB19T and 4200 niMh, laps times were in the 3.8’s


4300 Brushless with 4C Trinity 1600 Spec packs had lap times averaging in the 4.3’s

4300 PRO Stock with 4200 niMh had laps times in the 3.8 ranges.



These tests were run on a 190’ carpet track, with some banking. Maybe 12 degrees. Not certain about the banking?? I would also like to note that most of the runs were single car runs, so the testers had no traffic to contend with. Times should average out slower with traffic.



The guys that tested the motor liked it just the way it was. They said, don’t change anything, the 17.5/3200 lipo combo was perfect for what we are trying to achieve with the new COF class.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,790 Posts
swtour said:
pmsimkins,

I agree I'd like more discharge info..because as a realist, I know GUYS will still buy 10-15 packs looking for an advantage...it's what racers and/or mfg's do.

If we had the budget...my suggestion would be HAND OUT RACE Packs on race day....but we all know that would never work either.

I do believe this can be a good thing, I also believe given the chance....racers themselves will try to ruin it.
I agree we as a group have a tendency to ruin things for ourselves. I think the problem would not so much be an actual advantage in buying 10 packs, but if guys perceive there to be an advantge it can kill things in a heartbeat.

The other killer would be if there was a tweak or something to the manufacturing process and suddenly all the new packs would be better or worse then what was already out. Not that we don't already have the problem with NiMH!

Anyway good luck with all the testing. Even if LiPOs never catch on it will still be good to have a motor slower than the 13.5. They are pretty stout for a beginner to get started with, even regular 4 cell. If you do ever run across discharge data for a bunch of packs please pass it along.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
691 Posts
JB said:

The guys that tested the motor liked it just the way it was. They said, don’t change anything, the 17.5/3200 lipo combo was perfect for what we are trying to achieve with the new COF class.


I missed something somewhere. I thought the purpose of the lipo/Novak BL Spec motor was to find a cheap and reliable entry class setup that was comparable to stock 4 cell speeds. The motor I ran with the lipo was a lot of fun, but it was really stout with 7.4 volts. When I ran 19T with this group on another track (Same layout) that was very similar to the one in Nipomo, I ran 49 laps. The difference being that track was very hooked up and fast. The track in Nipomo was very dusty and loose. It was extremely hard to get hooked up. In fact my car skated around most of the day. I would have still turned a 47 lap run on the loose track. Clean and a lot of traction, I would have no doubt been able to turn 49/50 and get the lap times into the 5's.

For a lipo/BL class, this combo would work fine. But for entry level racers, I think it has a bit too much rip and would make setups a lot harder to get dialed in. My $.02
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,343 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 · (Edited)
JB,

I hope you WILL test the new motor NOVAK is planning to supply. I don't know how things will differ on the short carpet to a good size asphalt track, but I hope to get what ever new deal they come up with (I've suggested the 21.5) and get some test data at the PHOENIX track the end of the month. Ray McCoy and a couple Stock drivers would like to give it a shot.

As far as testing with only one car on the track, we choose not to do that...because we know competition breeds competition and you'll push harder than in a single car run. That's why we stuck Scott in our STOCK class (since that is where we want to class to equal) When it was too fast there, it was decided to see just how fast it would run in the 19t class.

If we error with this motor, I'm hoping we error to the SLOW side. We'll have plenty of FASTER motors, but a slower motor should be good for NOVICE racers, SPEC racers and us OLD racers...(Plus, I feel if this motor things works out...it will also make an AWESOME NOVICE/ROOKIE motor for TOURING which has been crying about slowing those cars down for quite some time.)

Joe Myers
South-West Tour "R/C Oval Series"
Official 'TOUR' Sponsors
FINISHLINE R/C Products
Jake's Performance Hobbies
Maverick Oval Chassis
McAllister Racing Bodies
STICK E.T. Tire Sauces
T.M. Racing Tires
WWW.SOUTHWESTTOUR.COM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
JB said:
Joe: Our testing with the NOVAK test motor was no where near yours? As a matter of fact, our tests showed that the test motor with the 3200 Lipo’s was as close to Stock as we’d want to go. We tried 5 different rollouts starting with a 1.64 to a 3.0

1.64: Average lap times were in the 4.9’s motor temp was 80 degrees

1.90: Average lap times 4.8’s, motor temp was in the mid 80’s

2.12: Average lap times 4.6’s. motor temp was in the mid 90’s

2.80: Average lap times 4.4’s, motor temp was in the 120’s

3.0: Average lap times 4.2’s, we weren’t watching the time close enough and ran 5 minutes, so the motor came off at 159 degrees. Had we run the 4 minutes it should have been in the 130 degree range. Fast single lap was 4.1

For cross reference against lap times of brushed Stock and 4200 niMh, laps times for the Stock class were in the 4.4’s with a weekend 4.1 “hot lap”. Brushed UB19T and 4200 niMh, laps times were in the 3.8’s


4300 Brushless with 4C Trinity 1600 Spec packs had lap times averaging in the 4.3’s

4300 PRO Stock with 4200 niMh had laps times in the 3.8 ranges.



These tests were run on a 190’ carpet track, with some banking. Maybe 12 degrees. Not certain about the banking?? I would also like to note that most of the runs were single car runs, so the testers had no traffic to contend with. Times should average out slower with traffic.


The guys that tested the motor liked it just the way it was. They said, don’t change anything, the 17.5/3200 lipo combo was perfect for what we are trying to achieve with the new COF class.

2.80: Average lap times 4.4’s, motor temp was in the 120’s

3.0: Average lap times 4.2’s

If you are testing the motor for speed comparison, you have not put enough gear on it yet! So far in your results the more gear you put on it the faster you have gone. Need to do more testing by continuing to go up in rollout.20 at a time till you don't run any faster. You are going to find that will be in the 3.6 to 3.9 range on rollout and about 160 degree's.
 
1 - 20 of 66 Posts
Top