How Should Brushless Be Introduced to Sanctioned Racing?

[TBone77]

Another topic is rapidly drifting from it's original point to the discussion of the actual fairness of ROAR's new brushless rules. I thought a discussion regarding how people think brushless should be introduced to sanctioned racing was appropriate and might be interesting.

Personally, I think for the time being, it's not necessary to run brushed and brushless in separate classes, at least not for off-road racing. I have absolutely zero experience with on-road racing, so I won't comment on that. I suspect that the situation is much different in on-road. Anyway, I came across a post on another forum that basically said that off-road modified racers are not limited by power or runtime at this point in time - they have all the usable power they need at their disposal. They're limited by traction and other elements that are unrelated to the power source. I tend to agree, and because of this, I don't see the harm in allowing brushless and brushed to race together in off-road modified racing. On-road might be a different story; I don't know.

Now, suppose the brushless camp begins pushing for longer mains - and this is a matter of when, not if - then it definitely makes sense to split classes for modified racing, since brushless has a tremendous runtime advantage over brushed. I also just read a post by Big Jim (http://www.rccars.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=28701#post28701), and I think it was very well-written and I think he makes some excellent points:

Allow brushed motors to be designed with no restrictions inside the motor. Allow brushed motors to use Neo magnets, 5 or more segment rotors, no size limitations inside the motor and anything else we can find that will work. As long as it meets the ROAR guidelines for ".05" outside dimensions. This measure would keep the entire brushed motor industry competitive longer and allow these motors the same potential for advancement as brushless. Well, it will help. Brushless motors will still take over someday regardless but at least ROAR won't be killing an entire industry in one fell swoop!

While I am very adamant in my feeling that it's not ROAR's responsibility (or any other sanctioning body in R/C or otherwise) to ensure the continued success of any given company, I do feel that they shouldn't take specific actions that would kill them overnight. Now, according to Ernie Provetti of Trinity, brushless isn't a viable technology for surface R/C, but as Big Jim states:

one would have to have his head totally in the sand to not realize that eventually ALL r/c car motors will be brushless

I don't agree with the totality and finality in that statement, but I do think brushless will eventually be the majority (I think brushed will always thrive in stock, that is unless a stock spec for brushless is developed, enforced, and introduced as a brushless stock class). Anyway, back to the business of brushed motors. It's not ROAR's responsibility to keep any given manufacturer afloat... and as far as brushless goes, I think people have had plenty of time to prepare. But, it's not fair for ROAR to create rules that obviously favor one over the other, and as a result, potentially threaten the livlihood of a company. Big Jim's thoughts above on removing certain restrictions seem like a fair alternative (though removing ALL internal restrictions seems a tad overboard)... and as soon as brushless offers an advantage over brushed, the classes absolutely must be separated, and ROAR should have contigency rules in the making to prepare for such a development.

Anyway, these are my thoughts on the matter and I'm interested in what others think, too.

[ducati777]

My only problem with brushless is the cost. Hopefully that will be coming down, but it always seems like the guy who wins the race has an uber expensive car. We can all talk about how its the driver, but I'm not much of a driver with a cheap setup. Thus I'm not particulary competitive.

I also agree with seperating the classes, but in the terms of an open class and maybe a restricted class of some sort. Open is open, run whatever you like. I'm sure there are comparisons that can be made on RPM's and wattage between brushed and brushless... For example maybe a 12 turn on 7.2 volts is like a 3000/volt brushless on 11.1 volts... Just throwing numbers, I have no clue if those are comparable or not.

But I could see something like that, 12 turn, or xyz brushless to compete in this class.

[TBone77]

My only problem with brushless is the cost.

Well, not to start a brushed vs. brushless debate, since this is really about how sanctioned bodies should outline new brushless rules, but since the cost of brushless has come down some, I don't think it's as bad as people think. The initial out of pocket really isn't any worse than a good brushed setup. But, I realize not everyone buys a lathe and the best speed control on the market when they buy a brushed setup, so in some instances, you have a point.

As far as classes go, I think separation should be done with extreme caution. If too many classes are created, the racers will be too far fractured for anything to really stick. I already see it at some tracks... you have stock, modified, and spec. If you only have 20 electric racers at the track, there's no way you're going to fill all 3 classes. So, I think we should be real careful about adding more. This is why I think we should run brushed and brushless together for as long as possible. It gives racers a chance to try brushless without abandoning their fellow racers, and it doesn't splinter the entries to the point where you have 4 cars in each class.

[ducati777]

I agree. I actually think RC should be run like the Le Mans sportscar series... Grr I forget the official name, but all classes run at once.

Anyway without creating additional classes, I think a good conversion should be made. That way classes can have somewhat equal power. Consider superbike racing, it used to be that your could run 1000cc and 2 cylinders, or 750cc and 4 cylinders. Course that changed, but it follows my line of thinking.

[Pro3/nmt105]

I didn't have time to read most of this thread, but I think its fine for brushless to be introduced into all classes to run with brushed motors, but they shouldnt continue to limit brushed motors in ways that brushless motors arent limited, like rare earth magnets etc.

[tallyrc]

simple. either only allow new products to be approved on some set number of dates each year. like 3 or 4 times per year at the same dates every year. quaterly would be fine.

[TBone77]

simple. either only allow new products to be approved on some set number of dates each year. like 3 or 4 times per year at the same dates every year. quaterly would be fine.

That's an interesting idea. That would really organize the introduction of new technology and minimize "surprises" at sanctioned events.

[Cain]

I would say that for right now, allow brushed motors the advantages of brushless systems, and for next year run them together in modified. This year, I still believe that they should be seperate in all fairness.

[Noff]

That's an interesting idea. That would really organize the introduction of new technology and minimize "surprises" at sanctioned events.

This is exactly what the ROAR rulebook says about how they handle new battery cells. They approve them once a year based upon submissions to the ROAR Technical staff.

http://www.roarracing.org/pdfs/2005rules3.21.05.pdf

Ruleset 8.3, page 33

[nicholcgn]

I am probably going to get smashed on this but oh well.


Even brushless has limiting factors. They can not do anything that they would like in the can. This is just about change. Most of the limitations I believe were placed in to help keep cost down. I guess it is strange that we allow anything in speed controllers from what I have seen and we do not limit servo's. Maybe we need to makes things simple as hell. Stock and modified.
Stock has these set limitations. It is about driving. You limit RPM and power on a motor and so on all the way down to the servo specs.(Sensored Motors could be used to limit this easily.) Then have Mod. Let rip whatever you can afford. Basic size\weight limitations and let it rip.

From the local tracks I have run at I can say that the brushless gives me no major advantage. I can tell you from the Novak I have. In sportsman mode, limited to 24000 RPM I believe it is, a well tuned monster stock can eat my lunch. So guys with money who can afford constant tuning of motors have an advantage over me and the ones with no funding to tune. (BTW I have a stock tuned motor that takes about .1 sec per lap off my time.)

In mod class - Well the problem in the offroad I have seen is people putting it down on the track. having 30% to much power or 45% does not matter. I think the argument is pointless. My novak does not give me a huge advantage. My driving is the problem there.

[TBone77]

<snip>

Man, I agree with you 100%. The only difference between my Novak brushless and my brushed motors is runtime. If we were talking about extending mains to 10 or 15 minutes, I would definitely understand... but as it is right now, you can't tell a brushed from a brushless when watching a race.

I don't know much about the restrictions currently placed on brushed motors, but it does seem to me like they need to be re-examined (such as what materials can be used for magnets, etc). But until one technology shows an advantage over the other, I don't see an immediate need for separation. In fact, I don't want to see separation just yet. As of right now, I just don't think there's a reason too, and I don't want to fracture the classes more than absolutely necessary.

Now, if a legal brushless motor/ESC pops up that has advantages over brushed (like traction control), then separation must be made. Some people say that brushless is "blackbox technology" and opens the door for cheating, but I think that's a little weak. I mean, what's to stop stuff like that from happening now. What's so magical about brushed technology that immunizes it from cheating? To me, this is a tech'ing issue... not something that should stand in the way of the introduction of new technology. I would certainly say the same if we were talking about brushed motors.

JMO

[Grandturk]

Big Jim's statement about opening up the sanctioned limitations on brushed motors is pretty interesting. Considering the majority of participants in this hobby are not racers, you would think that motor companies would cater to this crowd by creating "outlaw" brushed motors. The fact that there are no examples of this (to my knowledge anyway) leads me to believe that someone has already done the research and determined that the advances Big Jim notes are not viable, either competatively or economically.

[soreloser]

At a club level brushless and brushed motors run together is prolly best or let the tracks themselves decide fom what the local racers want. Maybe even at Regional level races as well.

But at a national level race I feel they should be run in seperate classes. Right now the most available system is the Novak system and most people agree when I say it just does not keep up with a good mod. But when a manufac6turer shows up with a totally different system(the motor can be changed anough to gain performance and the controller itself, since it is the heart of the system from what I can tell, can be totally different as well giving a severe advantage over most any mod. Expecially a sensored system, technology will eventually come along to be able to incorporate a traction control into the controller from these sensors to remove wheel spin all together.

This is how I feel brushless should be introduced or controlled.

[TBone77]

The fact that there are no examples of this (to my knowledge anyway) leads me to believe that someone has already done the research and determined that the advances Big Jim notes are not viable, either competatively or economically.

That's a VERY interesting point... does kind of make you wonder :confused: .

At a club level brushless and brushed motors run together is prolly best or let the tracks themselves decide fom what the local racers want. Maybe even at Regional level races as well.

But at a national level race I feel they should be run in seperate classes.

That's a pretty good way of doing it, IMO. That solves the problem of fracturing classes at the local tracks, but it ensures total fairness at the top-level.

Especially a sensored system, technology will eventually come along to be able to incorporate a traction control into the controller from these sensors to remove wheel spin all together.

True, but I think that any controller with this feature would probably allow it to be disabled just like reverse... so the rules could stipulate that TC must be disabled for sanctioned racing IF brushed and brushless are run together. If brushless is in it's own class, then I think it should be open season on what the controllers can do. I say this because I think it would promote some real interesting developments technology-wise.

But regardless, I really do think it's vital that ROAR revisit the restrictions placed on brushed motors. Ultimately, I'd like to see brushed and brushless run together everywhere, only because I want to see the technology compete in addition to the racers, but only if no one's hands are tied. I have to admit that I'd like to see the brush/brushless debate answered on the track, but it wouldn't be fair if one technology is allowed more freedom than the other.

[TMS]

I think that the current rules can stand, if ROAR can find some kind of equalizer to make it competitive. They do this in drag racing with the bracket system.

For example, at my local track. Nitro ruled the roost for awhile until electric racers started showing up. The problem was they were in such small numbers they had to run with the nitro's. So how do you make it competitive? Track configuration. They would set up the track with a technical infield, but also keep the long backstretch.

In the infield the lighter, quicker electrics had the advantage, but on the backstretch the more powerful nitro's would take that away. Suprisingly the lap times were similar.

Now that brushless appeared at the track (1/2 the Mod class is now brushless) it's a similar situation. The brushed motor has the advantage infield and the brushless has the advantage on the backstretch.

And no brushless didn't take over . Some still prefer the feel of a brushed motor, and some people like the no drag brake effect of the brushless.

Ultimately I would like to see brushless have it's own class. Not only to advance the motor and ESC technology, but also the battery technology.
These systems just aren't efficient with low voltage. You need to bring up the power source to see the maximum potential brushless has to offer.

B.T.W. I am not pro brushless, but pro R.C. Although I own brushless systems, I'm running the stock class with a Trinity motor and having a blast at it. :)

[highroller]

Right now the number of manufacturers producing brushless systems is starting to increase so you may see drops in prices or small changes that enhances overal performance. Plus as more systems are introduced you may see people who can find a way to tune them for better performance. It happened with brushed motors.

On a club level it gets hard trying to separate every vehicle and racer into individual class or based on equipment. Many are hard pressed to get individual to make up 1 or 2 classes so it may only come down to individual talent as to who wins and less on equipment or technology. But for santioned events rules should remain in affect and not change a day or two in order to make the company or racers happy. The way it seems right now in some instances brushed motors have a certain advantage and brushless have another advantage. I kinda lean towards the LRP way of thinking, develop a system that can be used with either a brushed or brushless motor and prices is comparable to their competition style escs.

The only thing I disliked at first was limited companies involved, price, personal tuning or device that allows the ability to tune and measure power output - like a dyno that is used with brushed motors (I like knowing the potiential power rather than relying on manufacturers' projected information). Even in the case of brushed motors tolerances change that even with 5 of the same motors everyone produces a different power output and neither may run exactly the same in actual use.

I wasn't exactly sold of limiting oval racing to 4 cells but gradually I find it better more enjoyable than 6cell was. I wasn't competely sold on brushless systems, my experience was only in High voltage use 14+ cells with the end result not always being what was expected. Heck it took Novak roughly 14 years to finally get a workable model they could sell.

[AE_racer38]

i think that the ROAR members should decide how,when,where,etc, not the few officials. i also disagree with the once a year thing regarding new products.
i own both brushless and brushed and the only advantage i can see is runtime and less maintenance with brushless. i don't see why anyone would want to limit any technology in this hobby. let the people decide what they want.it will eventually sort itself out, and manufacturers will have to follow suit or fall by the wayside.
i think that too many forget that the buyer controls the market,not the seller.

[TMS]

Sorry wrong thread. :o

[crazy1]

Brushless motor builders should have seperate rules to follow from brushed. What we should be looking for is not what they are made of but what the RPM, tourque, and spool up time. These are the results of the rules. IF and I say IF the RPM, tourque, and spool up time of a motor system is about the same during the whole time aloted for the race then they should race in the same class. I belive that was what ROARS intent was and is. The limits were placed on the materials used in the motors not to limit RPM or tourque but to limit cost. Over a year the cost of a good brushless system with expensive materials is equal to or less than the cost of a brushed racing setup with cost limiting materials. So I guess cost must also be looked at when making a rule change. I know I can not afford the expensive magnet motors that R/C drag racers use.

The idea of rules changes only four times a year is a good one. With one exception. If a rule change is found after the fact to give an unfair advantage then ROAR should be able to withdraw it at once.

Dose any one remember the fear and misinformation that came about when ROAR legalized rebuildable stock motors? Do you realy want to go back to locked endbell stock motors? Should we have to go back to 2400's or even Yellow's or Red's for batteries? Do we realy want to be like that big time full scale racing organization that is even now starting to make all car makes use a "Common" car just so they do not have to tweek the rules for each differnt make? ROAR is going to make mistakes. A lot of them. It is mainly a volenteer organization. They are trying to do there best to be fair and honest in a brave new world of brushless. We must let them know what we think and let them do their best. Do not get angry when they make mistakes but when they know they have made one and do not fix it.

Err just a foot note. I have a GM controler thant claims to have tracton control. And I have seen a {Tekin maybe** controler add that claims traction control with the use of two limiting pots? Brushed controlers have a lot of things like that right now. As far as I can recall there is not that many or any at all rules for brushed speed controls. This has been the way for many years. Should we limit what our brushed speed controls do now? No. That is why there is limits on the motors in electric class.

[TBone77]

What we should be looking for is not what they are made of but what the RPM, tourque, and spool up time. These are the results of the rules. IF and I say IF the RPM, tourque, and spool up time of a motor system is about the same during the whole time aloted for the race then they should race in the same class. I belive that was what ROARS intent was and is.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me. This actually opens the door to restricting materials in one and not the other... such as neo magnets. But, if the end result is a level playing field, then maybe the end justifies the means.

[electro21]

I think that brushed and brushless should go head to head in the modified class (off-road and on-road). My reasoning is the races are b/t 4-6 minutes and with the 3000+mah batteries that is not really hard for either system to obtain. Others factors like gearing, battery maintenance, gauge of wire, and driving skills play big factors in runtime/performance in addition to motor preference. I've seen both in action and each one has been destroyed by the other. I remember someone mentioned if they increase runtime to 10+ minutes then the two should be separated, but take a brushed motor and put a 3800mah or LiPos in it and it will make the runtime. IMO, neither one has an advantage over the other.

[soreloser]

Here is something to think about, even though they are the same but still different. Take stock, 19 turn, and mod. 19 turns did not fit in the stock class and people wanted a class for them cause they are faster than stock but not as fast as mod(even though it is a MOD MOTOR). Roar did not place rules in for 19 turn until enough RACERS(note RACERS and not MANUFACTURERS) wanted the class to give justification for creating rules and a class. ROAR is suppose to be for the RACERS, so why did they allow a MANFACTURER to push forth rules for the product. Classes have always been created once there was sufficent following for the class, MT great example since it has been growing for years and ROAR just now ismaking a class for them. Once the following is big enough for brushless, then ROAR should have created a class for it, but until then they should not allowed to run with the brushed motors(see 19 turn example above).ROAR says they had a demo class and it went over big at the off-road nats last year, but how many of those people actually OWNED the brushless sytem? I could understand if everyone in the entire brushless demo class owned thier system, but when the majority of the racers in that class used borrowed systems from NOVAK, it doesn't show that there is a need for a class to be created. On-road may be different, but from what I pick up, the current systems are just not fast enough to keep up on-road so only the proto types the factory drivers run can compete in open mod, which falls back onto being available to the public.

[soreloser]

Here is something very on topic of two different motors, even though they are the same but still different. Take stock, 19 turn, and mod. 19 turns did not fit in the stock class and people wanted a class for them cause they are faster than stock but not as fast as mod(even though it is a MOD MOTOR). Roar did not place rules in for 19 turn until enough RACERS(note RACERS and not MANUFACTURERS) wanted the class to give justification for creating rules and a class. ROAR is suppose to be for the RACERS, so why did they allow a MANFACTURER to push forth rules for the product. Classes have always been created once there was sufficent following for the class, MT great example since it has been growing for years and ROAR just now ismaking a class for them. Once the following is big enough for brushless, then ROAR should have created a class for it, but until then they should not allowed to run with the brushed motors(see 19 turn example above).ROAR says they had a demo class and it went over big at the off-road nats last year, but how many of those people actually OWNED the brushless sytem? I could understand if everyone in the entire brushless demo class owned thier system, but when the majority of the racers in that class used borrowed systems from NOVAK, it doesn't show that there is a need for a class to be created. On-road may be different, but from what I pick up, the current systems are just not fast enough to keep up on-road so only the proto types the factory drivers run can compete in open mod, which falls back onto being available to the public.