PDA

View Full Version : * Sneek Peek * MR-02LM 2.4ghz system


Tim Johnson
2008.02.04, 11:45 AM
Hello Racers!

It is now time to tease you some. I am sure I will leave something out, so If you have questions please feel free to ask.

The first picture ending with 243 is just an over all picture. That neat little stand that we saw in the trade show pics does in fact come with the Transmitter. It will slide and snap into place, so that it may not fall out.

The FETs used are 3010. The second and third pictures (015, 018) show the PCB board and the FET location. This new PCB board has the KO I.C.S plug, so you will be able to adjust your car by pluging it into your laptop or home PC. The software and cable are sold seperatly.

Picture 019 shows how much lower the LM is compaired to a standard MR-02 chassis.



KT-18 2.4ghz Transmitter instruction manual (http://www.kyosho.com/jpn/support/instructionmanual/digital_prcs/pdf/82001-perfex-kt18-m.pdf)

MR-02LM Parts List (http://www.kyosho.com/jpn/support/instructionmanual/mini-z/pdf/miniz-mr02-lm-chassis-p.pdf)

MR-02LM Exploded View (http://www.kyosho.com/jpn/support/instructionmanual/mini-z/pdf/miniz-mr02-lm-chassis-t.pdf)

MR-02LM Instruction Manual (http://www.kyosho.com/jpn/support/instructionmanual/mini-z/pdf/miniz-mr02-lm-chassis-m.pdf)
more pic..............

Tim Johnson
2008.02.04, 12:12 PM
Also the bodies are two piece for the LM. This is unique to the LM bodies. Also they seem stiffer than a standard Autoscale body.

Now to link the TX with the car.

HaCo
2008.02.04, 12:41 PM
Tim,
I see two FETs on top of the board, as well at the bottom. Are these both for ESC function, or is one pair for steering?
Thank you for those images!

arch2b
2008.02.04, 01:10 PM
thank you very much for sharing the pictures and info:)

byebye
2008.02.04, 01:54 PM
Great pics Tim!!! You lucky dog ;)!!!

Kyosho lowered the car significantly huh? Very impressive.

Kris

Tim Johnson
2008.02.04, 02:03 PM
yep, the car has been lowered, and the motor is more center, and lower.


I have NOT got confirmation yet, but I believe the 3010 FETs are "stacked". I am still waiting for confirmation of this from our designer.

ruf
2008.02.04, 03:08 PM
Show me closeups of the board, and I can tell you. Or just send the car to me... :D

wcrotty
2008.02.04, 03:17 PM
Ah nice. i did read the manual and the radio does have endpoint adjustments.

Maybe i will pick one up to play with. But i still want an M11 module.

mferrini
2008.02.04, 03:46 PM
I have NOT got confirmation yet, but I believe the 3010 FETs are "stacked". I am still waiting for confirmation of this from our designer.

looking those pics, I bet they are

Hammer
2008.02.04, 03:57 PM
Very nice pics, thanks Tim, can't wait! The chassis definitely has a lower CG. The two piece bodies are going to be very cool as well. I'll probably wait for the 2.4GHz module for EX-10 Helios though it might not be a bad idea to pick up the KT-18 radio as a collectors item. ;)

Felix2010
2008.02.04, 04:37 PM
If the 2 FETs on top + 2 FETs on the bottom of the PCB that we see do indeed make a 2x2 stack for the motor then what drives the steering servo motor?

CristianTabush
2008.02.04, 04:50 PM
The new PCB has a digital servo, like the AD cars. Hence, the missing Steering FETs.

Felix2010
2008.02.04, 09:49 PM
Thanks for the reply. I trust your answer is correct. Just curious, but why then does the AD-Band PCB have two 3004 steering servo motor FETs that the servo motor wires attach to like the regular AM cars do?
I am not familiar with Analog/Digital servos and what components they use. Thanks again:D

CristianTabush
2008.02.04, 10:07 PM
Notice the two smaller FETs underneath the 5 servo wires on the PCB. They seem to be using a smaller FET to drive the servo, but that is obviously speculation on my part. I thought I saw the servo wires all go to a different pad next to each other in the pictures.

herman
2008.02.04, 10:29 PM
hmm... just went through the radio manual... functionwise... it's pretty programmable... wasn't expecting that... wish they could've done better in the looks department though... :D

thanks for the pics and write up... :D

hmmm..... did someone say digital servo??? :D smoooooth....
i suppose and hope that will solve the glitching and steering not going to center problems... :D

Tim Johnson
2008.02.04, 10:41 PM
The Steering is smoother, and the same as the throttle.


The FETs are in fact "double stacked" :)

rharris
2008.02.05, 01:09 AM
All good stuff, Thanks Tim.

It sure looks like the transmitter has a throttle and steering EPA in addition to the centering features.

Another thing that the manual mentions is that the pairing may not work if there is another device attempting to pair at the same time.

I wonder how that will play out at the track? Think you'll have to walk outside to get it to work?

Also, looking at the photo's, the chassis is sitting a lot lower then the MR-02, but it looks like a regular MR-02. I can see how the rear is dropped with the motor pod, but how is the front lower? Are the knuckles different? or is that just an illusion?

leonen
2008.02.05, 05:56 AM
The Steering is smoother, and the same as the throttle.


The FETs are in fact "double stacked" :)

Fantastic Intro Tim! Thanks. No doubt these cars will be a new way to go in Mini-Z Racing.

Tim, you have prvt msg.

Thanks!

Hammer
2008.02.05, 07:19 AM
Also, looking at the photo's, the chassis is sitting a lot lower then the MR-02, but it looks like a regular MR-02. I can see how the rear is dropped with the motor pod, but how is the front lower? Are the knuckles different? or is that just an illusion?Yes, the front knuckles are different. I think this has been discussed in the 2.4GHz forums. ;)

rharris
2008.02.05, 12:32 PM
Yes, the front knuckles are different. I think this has been discussed in the 2.4GHz forums. ;)

Cool, thanks.

Now the question is, will PN and Atomic make new knuckles or will they stick to the same ones. I've been lowering the front for years using shims and different springs.

arch2b
2008.02.05, 12:48 PM
thats a question i think you can answer for yourself. ofcourse they will. it's yet another opportunity to profit off the chassis, just as kyohso does with thier proprietary lm parts.

stuZ
2008.02.05, 01:13 PM
I wonder why a 2-piece body?
I love that it comes with a damper and is already lowered.
I notice on the ride height difference picture that the car isn't
wearing it's stock wheels/tires.
Is that because this car comes with beautiful wheels and tires that are too
hard for rcp (like the 512BB, Countach, Cobra, etc.), or can you race this thing out of the box like the awd?
either way I'm getting one...:D

rharris
2008.02.05, 02:18 PM
thats a question i think you can answer for yourself. ofcourse they will. it's yet another opportunity to profit off the chassis, just as kyohso does with thier proprietary lm parts.

Yea, but you only profit off of what you sell.

For example, PN had a cool LCG mount for the Nascar, but no one got into Nascar.

But, perhaps that mount will work here. I read in another thread (about the belt drive system) that running the motor in reverse produces better power. The claim had to do with how the brushes are timed. The PN Nascar mount is a 102 mount designed to run the diff on the left. So you have to run the motor in reverse.

May be worth looking into.

rharris
2008.02.05, 02:21 PM
I wonder why a 2-piece body?


Yea, that's a little odd. I'll bet it has to do with manufacturing.

ruf
2008.02.05, 03:10 PM
Yea, that's a little odd. I'll bet it has to do with manufacturing.Very complicated body. The GT40 is also multi-piece.

And as I understand it, the NASCAR-Z's do pretty darned good in terms of sales. The question is the aftermarket part attachment, which I would guess is low.

minittrackmann
2008.02.05, 03:33 PM
Can someone please give me a quote of how much the rtr might be? Thanks


Cody

Tim Johnson
2008.02.05, 04:38 PM
The car in the Ride highth pictures is a pre production, all I had was a chassis to play with because the bodies were not ready at that time......


Rod I should be showing up to Kenons track Tonight and Friday. It will be later tonight (7:30 is) though, because I need to stop after work and vote.......

arch2b
2008.02.05, 07:08 PM
Can someone please give me a quote of how much the rtr might be? Thanks


Cody

check the shop here.... it's been listed here and on other domestic shops for weeks.

piper1944
2008.02.05, 10:34 PM
awesome....will it be avail the end of the month?

EMU
2008.02.05, 10:46 PM
I wonder why a 2-piece body?
I love that it comes with a damper and is already lowered.
I notice on the ride height difference picture that the car isn't
wearing it's stock wheels/tires.
Is that because this car comes with beautiful wheels and tires that are too
hard for rcp (like the 512BB, Countach, Cobra, etc.), or can you race this thing out of the box like the awd?
either way I'm getting one...:D

Kyosho will have different hardnesses for the LM tires (20/30d wide rear tires 20/30/40d narrow fronts). I beleive that they come with 30d rear/40d front...

I am thinking that with the LM wheels, the chassis will have a similar ride height to the standard MR02, since the LM wheels are larger.

My track probably wont adopt the 2.4ghz any time soon, so I am planning to get just an Autoscale and tires to start. When the opportunity becomes available to actually race the 2.4ghz, I will get the chassis set.

Tim Johnson
2008.02.06, 12:02 AM
What is the hold up at your local track?

EMU
2008.02.06, 12:21 AM
What is the hold up at your local track?
We already run 5 classes (MR02 stock, F1, MR015 Kyosho stock motor, AWD Open, and Nascar). So there is no place for this to fit in. We run from about 5:30pm - past midnight already (practice starts at 3pm). So we cannot add another class. I would like to have an open 2wd class, where these cars could shine. And run against Sinisters, GSRs, and Pro-Zs with aftermarket electronics. I have a pro-z and Sinister, never used. I got the Pro-Z right before our modified class was canceled to create an AWD class.

My main headaches with Mini-Z's are the electronics. Mainly the glitches or steering issues. The 2.4 ASF should solve both, with a digital servo, and supposed glitch free transmission.

The biggest issue, is that these cars do not fit well within current rules. They have double the fets, so they cannot be run in stock class. I want to take advantage of the steering and glitch free transmission... I am sure that there are many other clubs that will be going through the same dilemma. Should this car be able to run in the stock class... or should it be in the modified class... or should it have its own class. I love that Kyosho is coming out with new and exciting things, and I wish that there were more open classes, or multi class races (stock/modified running on same track, scored seperately and overall like LeMans).

Life would be easier if there were open classes. Especailly since there cant be any cheating in an open class, if there are no restrictions. You run what you want, if you arent comfortable with a modified car, run a stock one. Newer drivers often make the mistake of increasing the speed well above their ability to control the car. More experienced drivers know how to control the throttle.

rharris
2008.02.06, 12:34 AM
We run different out here. We run 2wd stock, F1, and open.

In 2wd stock you can run any motor that won't fry your fets. You can run a 4wd stock if you want, but few do.

F1 is stock or mod, it's up to you, but slower is usually faster.

Open is Dominated by Pan cars with AD boards, but you can run anything you want, AWD, Sinister, etc...

But the rumor is... when the new 2.4 boards come out all the rules will change.

Keep the same set of classes (2wd stock, 4wd stock, 2wd mod, 4wd mod, and pan) but you can run any board you want (kyosho AM, AD, or 2.4) with the only limitation being the winds in the motor.

It's a cool idea that I hope takes off at other tracks too.

EMU
2008.02.06, 12:53 AM
I have allways been a fan of limiting just the cells, not the car. The stock class cars are plenty fast. If they get faster, grip becomes the main issue, and the faster the car, the better the setup must be. Everybody has their own driving style and setup taste. The new drivers, may need to learn the hard way. I know that I did. That slow is fast, and consistancy is key.

Our track layouts are high speed layouts. I have allways been a fan of slower more technical layouts. Which is another way to limit the speed, and take away some of the advantage of a modified car. My Mr015 with Kyosho stock motor pulls almost the same amount of laps as my stock Mr02. I have less errors, and lose less speed in the corners since the motor rolls more. I ran an AWD II on my stock car when I ran at a different track that runs open class. I was able to keep up better with the Ad-Band cars and the modified cars running Stock-R's. I wasnt as fast, but I wasnt as slow as with the Speedy 07. That track is an accelerating/braking track, compared to the coasting track that I race at regularly. I have been running Speedy 05's lately. Which I prefer to the 07. I feel it has more torque. I am going to try a new 07 soon, without the bearings, and see if I like it better than my 05's. My 07bbs feel like they have more top, but not as much bottom. I would run X-Speeds if they had a drilled can :p I am already fighting for grip, so I dont need any more power than that.

arch2b
2008.02.06, 07:58 AM
our club as a few classes but the main ones are:
f1: any motor, any board/fet
body stock: preselected body any motor, any board/fet
regular: any board/fet

we just got tired of dealing with evolution of boards/fets so we stopped worrying about it and i have to say, we all enjoy ourselves much better now.

we have already added a lemans class in anticipation of these: lemans body only, any board/fet.

i would move all my cars to 2.4 if it were not for hfay but rest assured, things will have to change though and i'ts already been brought up by it's leadership.

Tim Johnson
2008.02.06, 08:15 AM
What I see in a rules change that I think Everyone will goto, and will solve this worry: The club adopts a motor limit. Which is what Pro 1/10th scale racers have. So basicly you can have F-1 Stock, and F-1 Mod, MR-02 Stock and MR-02 mod..... you can even break it down even further, by having say Sedan Stock or Mod, Then GTP Stock or Mod. That way if someone want to run a MR015 with MR02s they can.

Now as for the motor, that will need to be defined. I would consider a stock motor to be a Kyosho Xspeed or a Kenon Speedy 05~07....

This is a problem I see with alot of Z clubs, Not really knowing which direction to change the rules. I think this is due to the Myth that many beleive that the FET will make your car faster, when in fact the Motor and Batteries are what make your car fast.

soulstice
2008.02.06, 09:58 AM
This is a problem I see with alot of Z clubs, Not really knowing which direction to change the rules. I think this is due to the Myth that many beleive that the FET will make your car faster, when in fact the Motor and Batteries are what make your car fast.

I actually don't think that's a myth and I'm surprised you think it has no effect. You can take two identical spec cars and put 3004's in one, and let's say 4562 in the other and you will notice a marked difference in performance.

arch2b
2008.02.06, 10:16 AM
...This is a problem I see with alot of Z clubs, Not really knowing which direction to change the rules. I think this is due to the Myth that many beleive that the FET will make your car faster, when in fact the Motor and Batteries are what make your car fast.

i too am almsot shocked at this statement. effect of fet upgrades has been fact since 2001-2002 when the first fet upgrades were being done and posted here on this forum and i'm sure others. there is a noticeable difference between 3004 and 3010 stock boards. switch to 4562's for example and that difference becomes even more noticeable.

wcrotty
2008.02.06, 10:52 AM
There defiantly is a huge difference when you put a 4562 fet in a stock mini-z. I'm for opening up the rule to allow any fet in stock. I'm sick of the 3010 fets and how fragile they are when trying to put them on a board. I never had a problem with the 4562s.

Our race club would have adopted the open fet rule already but PN still had the limit on the rule. Now once PN opens the rule up to just limiting stock to motor and batteries our club will change.

HaCo
2008.02.06, 10:52 AM
Yep, those FETs cause a lot of probems in rules and it is not for nothing. The difference is big between a FET-ed and a not-FET-ed car...

Davey G
2008.02.06, 11:33 AM
Sorry if this has already been asked but, will my Airtronics transmitter DSM module work with the KYOSHO mini z LM stuff? Feel free to yell and scream at me if this has already been asked.. :eek: ;)

soulstice
2008.02.06, 11:51 AM
Sorry if this has already been asked but, will my Airtronics transmitter DSM module work with the KYOSHO mini z LM stuff? Feel free to yell and scream at me if this has already been asked.. :eek: ;)

I"m no authority on your specific radio, but from what I've read there's something proprietary about the mini-z 2.4 so you will not be able to use old 2.4 stuff. I know . . . it's stupid.

Tim Johnson
2008.02.06, 12:04 PM
call me crazy, But I did not notice a difference in top speed between 3004 and 3010. As far as punch I did, But you will notice the same difference if you were to go from say a Novak speed control to say a Tekin speed control.

The Module from KO will only work with KO radios. But I do remember seeing on some other forum, a way to mod one manufactures module to work on a different manufactures radio system

In the end of the all the FET debate, Honestly to end the whole FET deal, would be for the Clubs to change the rules to allow any FET, and set rule for motor and batteries.

ruf
2008.02.06, 12:27 PM
I've talked to Tim extensively about this, and it's not that FETs make no difference, but they are just one link in the chain. The thing is that by making FETs the limit, you are stressing the hardest-to-fix, most expensive component in the powertrain. Motor manufacturers will always try to push the envelope of the FET limit, and there are very few people who can do a trackside FET job when things go wrong. From an engineering standpoint, that just makes no sense. If there was a more conservative motor turn limit, then the motor builders could really let loose without having to worry about damaging the stock FETs. Then we might actually get a motor thats timed right... :rolleyes:

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to sell FET jobs all day long, but it's no bueno for someone to go home and be out $30+ from blowing up FETs. It can be really discouraging for anyone, especially new racers who have spent a lot of their budget preparing for their first big race.

Let's also not forget that MOST new racers don't buy old Mini-Z's with 3004 FETs, they buy a new car off the shelf with 3010's. How crazy is it when they can't race because their FETs are against the rules? The FET rule really only protects the old timers that have 3004 cars laying around (like me...), and for some reason want to be competitive with them. It's time for the old guard to bite the bullet for the sake of the new blood that keeps this hobby growing.

RCPMini-z
2008.02.06, 12:30 PM
call me crazy, But I did not notice a difference in top speed between 3004 and 3010. As far as punch I did, But you will notice the same difference if you were to go from say a Novak speed control to say a Tekin speed control.

The Module from KO will only work with KO radios. But I do remember seeing on some other forum, a way to mod one manufactures module to work on a different manufactures radio system

In the end of the all the FET debate, Honestly to end the whole FET deal, would be for the Clubs to change the rules to allow any FET, and set rule for motor and batteries.

We already know your crazy. No need to point it out. :D

John

wes
2008.02.06, 12:37 PM
Double stacked means 4 FETs, the equivelant of an AD band board, correct? This would make it heaps faster than current 3010 boards... So we'll end up running the 2.4ghz chassis in the mod class.

arch2b
2008.02.06, 12:41 PM
tim,
most of us, i think agree with you regarding fet rules. our club did and ditched them awhile back.

as mentioned earlier, it's what the established series will do that will make or break the issue. imagine how many more 2.4 cars would be bought for example if hfay allowed them this season...or knowing the pn/atomic series would allow them. the fet rule worked when there was one board back in the kyo mini-z cup days but it's become more of a hinderance to scale growth with the advent of soo many options now available as rtr's or arr's.

CristianTabush
2008.02.06, 03:26 PM
Yes, just go away from FET rules. Not accepting the newer technology is retarded (excuse my verbage). It is time to change this situation and we are very close to convincing Phil to do it. The bar must now be set at which wind do you select for stock. It has to be something bigger (in number of winds) than an XSpeed, which would still be too fast. A Speedy 07/05 with FETs would be more the equivalent of a 1/10th scale 19 turn class. Hopefully they decide on a motor that is slow enough for begginers/ intermediates to be able to control.

In all honesty, there should be absolutely no limitations in electronics, across any of the classes, except for the motors in stock. If you want to run a Spektum AWD or MR-02, you should be able to, but that is a whole other can of worms...

rharris
2008.02.06, 03:32 PM
Cristian, I remember a conversation with you about how stock was too fast. I remember you called it Super-Stock.

Seems like there could be a stock (hi wind like stock mini-z motor) and a super stock (speedy-07) and then an open class (anything goes, or low wind hand out). Then, you let AWD and 2wd compete together. Limit the bodies to autoscale types etc...

Is this what you are promoting?

lfisminiz
2008.02.06, 08:15 PM
I agree with Cristian on this. To simplify the classes just limit the motor. With the adband or 2.4 system....you could probably run a stock Kyosho motor and be quick.

EMU
2008.02.06, 10:18 PM
I completely agree the fets or electronics should not be limited. If you want to race competetively, you should have the newest fastest stuff. And most of us have it anyway, even we cant race it in a specific class.

I think a motor about the same power as the stock motor should be sufficient for a stock class. PN and Atomic stock class motors arent really what they are supposed to be compared to the stock motor. They are a stock fet modified motor, much like 19t stock. The motors were designed by the fet limit. Which means a bad batch, will end up with fried fets. When they came out with the 3010 fets, there were less fried fets, since the power on the motors havent really gone up, besides the AWD motors. The Speedy 07 can run on the old 3004 fets without a problem (I run it in Nascar).

I hope that my track can come to terms to allow the 2.4 ASF and Ad-Band to be run in the stock class, possibly restricting that to the Kyosho Stock motor, and the other cars to run the X-Speed/PN Speedy motors. I would be perfectly happy with that. After a little break in, those stock motors arent that slow.

leonen
2008.02.07, 07:32 AM
It's really a surprise to read that experienced drivers choose to ignore FETs..... or it isn't? mmmmm

We all like to be the fastest and sickest drivers around. So a lot a people wants to have the FASTEST car on earth.... even though they haven't ever driven a mini-z ... or any other RC Car.

It's more natural that experienced drivers want to have the fastest car around, because their background is asking for speed, and also because they "have" to be fast.

But for newcomers and everyday hobbyists, to be quick, they don't really need the Fastest car on the planet. They just need something they can drive.

Differences between FETs are undeniable. Put a 3004, a 3010, and an AdBand car in the same track, and you can clearly see the differences in speed between them. Like racing F1's against DTM's and street cars all together!!! It's crazy!!!

And that difference gets more relevant with motors that can use more power as happens with Atomic motors. Using the same Atomic "Stock" motor on the 3 PCB boards mentioned above shows totally different performances. Anyone can see that.

At our club we went one step down from everybody else in the world, and choose a motor for the Stock class that's slow, with small torque (making it easier for newcomers) and that can get up to speed once you start racing it. It's sick but it's the old XMods Stage 1 motors. It's a 26/27k RPM motor, and really shows little difference with different boards. Obviously nobody uses and adBand board with this.

The classic Stock motors as the Atm Stock, the Speedy's etc, are used in the Pro-Stock class, and you can notice easily the Fet Stacked cars, from the 3010's or the AdBand cars.

The higher motors that require FET's upgrade, and PCB boards with 2+2 and higher, are for the Open/Modified Class. That's where the 2.4 boards will go in our club....

We love 2.4. But allowing them to race against 3010 cars is just a commercial thing. Racers will have to upgrade their old High Performance Mini-Z cars to be able to be competitive. This means... sell all the old mini-z (or archive them in your shelves) and go buy a new 2.4 Ghz board.

I have no doubt this will happen. and maybe for next year this discussion is completely old stuff and we'll all be racing 2.4ghz mini-z.-

But is it necessary to do so many changes to our classes today? Even when no 2.4Ghz has been tested anywhere???

ruf
2008.02.07, 12:47 PM
It's really a surprise to read that experienced drivers choose to ignore FETs..... or it isn't? mmmmm

We all like to be the fastest and sickest drivers around. So a lot a people wants to have the FASTEST car on earth.... even though they haven't ever driven a mini-z ... or any other RC Car.

It's more natural that experienced drivers want to have the fastest car around, because their background is asking for speed, and also because they "have" to be fast.

But for newcomers and everyday hobbyists, to be quick, they don't really need the Fastest car on the planet. They just need something they can drive.

Differences between FETs are undeniable. Put a 3004, a 3010, and an AdBand car in the same track, and you can clearly see the differences in speed between them. Like racing F1's against DTM's and street cars all together!!! It's crazy!!!

And that difference gets more relevant with motors that can use more power as happens with Atomic motors. Using the same Atomic "Stock" motor on the 3 PCB boards mentioned above shows totally different performances. Anyone can see that.

At our club we went one step down from everybody else in the world, and choose a motor for the Stock class that's slow, with small torque (making it easier for newcomers) and that can get up to speed once you start racing it. It's sick but it's the old XMods Stage 1 motors. It's a 26/27k RPM motor, and really shows little difference with different boards. Obviously nobody uses and adBand board with this.

The classic Stock motors as the Atm Stock, the Speedy's etc, are used in the Pro-Stock class, and you can notice easily the Fet Stacked cars, from the 3010's or the AdBand cars.

The higher motors that require FET's upgrade, and PCB boards with 2+2 and higher, are for the Open/Modified Class. That's where the 2.4 boards will go in our club....

We love 2.4. But allowing them to race against 3010 cars is just a commercial thing. Racers will have to upgrade their old High Performance Mini-Z cars to be able to be competitive. This means... sell all the old mini-z (or archive them in your shelves) and go buy a new 2.4 Ghz board.

I have no doubt this will happen. and maybe for next year this discussion is completely old stuff and we'll all be racing 2.4ghz mini-z.-

But is it necessary to do so many changes to our classes today? Even when no 2.4Ghz has been tested anywhere???leonen - let's step away from the "speed" aspect of this equation for a second. The FET rules are unlike anything else in any form of R/C racing. I really like your idea of the Xmods motor and we are trying to push for something similar. This will almost nullify any speed advantage in stock class from a PCB difference while allowing for cleaner radio signals for better racing. MOST importantly, it will allow a newcomer to race with an off-the-shelf car without breaking the rules.

Now for the other party - the experienced "fast" guys. Sure there will be a lot of people that feel the need to upgrade to 2x2 3010's. The fast guys already do that in mod. To use your analogy, can you imagine a 2008 F1 team trying to run the engine management system from 1999? The fast guys will always want to go fast and this change would effect them the least. For those "fast" guys that run stock, I would love to see a return to R/C's golden age in the 80's when experienced drivers ran mod, and stock was used for grassroots talent development. There are too many sandbaggers nowadays.

Our primary concern in this initiative isn't faster cars or commercial sales, but the future of this scale by promoting an influx of new drivers and also establishing it as a legitimate racing scale. There is a clear shift in technology, and by not embracing it, we risk losing new racers by trying to protect those that have 3004 boards. We have to be proactive, or it'll never happen, and Mini-Z will continue to be considered a "toy class".

ruf
2008.02.07, 12:48 PM
If I were to sum it up in one sentence:

"This isn't vintage racing..."

leonen
2008.02.07, 01:30 PM
It's a Hobby. And most of the people in local clubs can't buy or won't buy a new car every year to be able to race.

I have several cars myself, but I know not everybody has. And reading forums worldwide I see that's the way it is everywhere.

Established series are something else. Those are drivers that can afford and want and need to have the latest. It's cool. But it's not like that in local clubs.

There is no truth but the one you need to believe in. Every club has to adapt to the guys that race there. If in any particular club, the majority has all 2.4Ghz mini-Z ... what would you think Stock Class be?

ruf
2008.02.07, 02:08 PM
leonen - you're right. It is a hobby, but you don't need to buy a new car every year. That's what killed 1/10 TC. We're not talking about buying a new car, but preserving board technology that is almost a decade old! And for the record, I've won races with 3004 FETs... :) You don't need the latest greatest FETs to win, especially at most clubs.

But you are right, these big changes are for large established series rules. Eventually, those will trickle down to the club level. Of course the club owner has the right to establish whatever rules they want. The only concern that we have for club rules is with is the newcomers. We can't discourage newcomers from joining our hobby by saying they can't race unless they go through the hassle of finding and swapping a 3004 board that might blow up if they run a bad motor. If you have "regular" club members, they should understand that new people coming into the hobby is what keeps it alive and fun. If we feel the "need" to upgrade our FETs, then a basic FET upgrade is pretty inexpensive. I feel that as experienced ambassadors of the hobby, we should bear that cost instead of scaring off new drivers from racing.

As for your last scenario, I would love to see that day. Stock class should be a high-turn limited motor similar to how you have set it up for your club with the Xmod motor. That is a great idea and we are currently investigating what that turn limit should be. No more blown boards! :D

CristianTabush
2008.02.07, 02:09 PM
So you are saying that if a new guy comes to race at your club with a 2.4ghz car, but he's new, he can't run it in the stock class because he bought the latest car. It goes both ways Leonen. By doing this you are protecting the club person and limiting your growth.

What we are trying to say is limit the class, as you say by a motor, but not electronics. A 2x2 "AM" board will still be competitive in the modified class with AD band or 2.4ghz. The electronic type won't dictate if you win or loose across any of the categories, as long as there are equal. The reason for a wind rule in stock is not to sell more or less parts. It's to set a benchmark and actually slow the cars down to "stock" levels. So the issue is not about the old guys having to buy a new car to be competitive a you were trying to point out.

Now say that you have a guy that has a 2x2 FET car and wants to run 2 classes. He can't because it's against the rules to run it in the stock and super/pro-stock classes. So he has to buy another car, instead of just swapping motors.

The option to FET your board should be left to the individual, not the club. Putting a higher quality FET on your car will just increase the durability and increase the car's versatility...

arch2b
2008.02.07, 02:25 PM
racing does not require the latest and greatest. the biggest misconception in this hobby is that you haev to spend gobs of money on hop ups to be competitive. i can say with some certainty that, that is not so. i've seen some top drivers do VERY well with very simplified setups. i've seen some top drivers do VERY well with mr-01's against mr-02 and ma-010's. it's more the driver than the machine.

tha being said, for the sake fo future development and growth, i do no see how restrictions based on fet arrangements will be able to continue for large sacel racing venues. sure, for specific events that cater to those who typically can afford owning specific cars, it will be business as usual. but for the general masses, we've outgrown the fet rule.

Tim Johnson
2008.02.07, 10:08 PM
the biggest misconception in this hobby is that you haev to spend gobs of money on hop ups to be competitive

THis is why 1/10 scale Sedan racing is on life support.

stitchy
2008.02.08, 01:49 AM
+1 for making the classes around motors. Out of the box motor or equivalent for stock, Speedy etc. for super-stock, and mod for mod/open. And no mod/open guys running two classes sandbagging in stock. It's like Kobe Bryant going to a high school gym calling next on a pickup game. What's the point?

I'm new to mini-zs, and have yet to race my first mini-z race (used to race 1/10 scale). Seeing those "stock" lap counts one lap less than mod is really puzzling. A true stock class would let noobs like me learn how to drive better, not get in the way, and not be intimidated by "the fast guys." I have friends that I want to introduce to mini-z's but have reservations because I'm afraid they'll be intimidated by the cost of just getting competitive and not being able to upgrade their cars and skills at their own pace. While it's true you don't have to spend a ton on upgrades, increasing the speed to today's "stock" levels almost forces you to spend a fair amount on suspension pieces alone. I know because I resisted upgrading for a long time but finally gave in, spending around $100 for motor, motor mount, disc damper, springs, tires, etc. etc.

I thought this thread was about the 2.4 cars, but this is interesting too! :D

my two cents.

leonen
2008.02.08, 06:16 AM
Ruf, we're on the right road.... the day will come.

Archie, Christian, have you guys made the test to use 3 different cars - one using AdBand, one with a 3010 and one with the 3004 (the FETs that also the iSeries has right?) and using the SAME box stock motor, running around the same track???? And using the same batteries!!! Cause one thing Tim said, was that motors and batteries are two of the most important part of the speed you get from a car.

PCBs and Fets TOO! but they're not so easy to change as batteries and motors, so you have to set the rules on these too.

Having a high wind motor IS the way to go I think. What Stock Classes need is motors that can be easy to control for newcomers, high torque motors make it difficult for guys that are still trying to figure out how to drive.

Buying an MR02-LM to start racing Mini-z is a little bit dumb, let me tell you. It's like buying an 1:1 F1 to race at your local Karts track... because if you have the money to get one, why couldn't you?

It's not easy to establish something like this. We'll see what the 3 or 4 major Championships do about it and how they go year round. Whatever we may say, it's finally down to the people who decide, the racers. The guys that buy miniRc cars and compete.

At our club, we have clear ideas of what we want for the hobby and we'll try to make it happen. The main principles are:

1.- Making it easy for new guys to get into the hobby and aware that they can be competitive without spending a bang load of money.
2.- Having classes for experienced drivers that have the need for speed.
3.- Make it Fun for everybody.

That's it. Ruf.... keep us on the latest about that high wind motor you're investigating!!! We'll love to try it!

piper1944
2008.02.08, 08:29 AM
cant wait till the cars come out....

rharris
2008.02.08, 01:24 PM
I'm new to mini-zs, and have yet to race my first mini-z race (used to race 1/10 scale).

... I have friends that I want to introduce to mini-z's but have reservations because I'm afraid they'll be intimidated by the cost...

Do you live close to Acadia? There is an AWSOME track off the 215 and Huntington, close to the Santa Anna Race track called Kennon.

They have a ton of guys (all very cool and helpful) and you can run with the B and C main guys till you get up to speed.

Check http://www.kenonrcrc.com/ for open track times and race events.

Also, you can drag your friends out there on a off day when there is no racing and talk Toni into turning on the timing system for you so you can check your lap times.

Sorry to HiJack the thread, but It's always fun to meet someone new at the track.

stitchy
2008.02.08, 01:43 PM
Haha, that is the track I go to, and the lap counts (stock vs. mod) I was referring to are from that very track. I've actually seen you before. I was there one Saturday afternoon practicing when you showed up and wondered where everyone was. (as you later found out, they were at MPT, lol)

I'm just practicing now, but am going to work my way up to racing with the guys. You're right, they are all cool and very helpful.

As I understand it, Kenon is working on slowing stock class down. I think a stock and then a super stock class would be the way to go to let beginners have some early success and race at their own level. I'd hate to have my friend shell out $200 for a ready set, batteries, and charger and say, oh, by the way, to be competitive here, you need to upgrade your motor, motor mount, rear suspension, and tires so your car will be competitive in the "beginner" stock class.

When I started there, I made minimal modifications, tires, h-plate, and front springs. When I threw in the Speedy 05 to try and keep up with traffic, it was obvious I needed to spend on the above mentioned hop-ups so the car would handle right.

A "real" stock class with slower motors would fix this, but beginners in the club would have to see value in this. If people don't admit to themselves that they are beginners, and everyone just wants to go fast and kids want to throw in a hot motor and race in super stock, then the "real" stock class will die regardless. It all depends on the clubs and the tracks and the people who can fill all these classes.

Again, sorry for the thread jack. I intended to PM this, but found some of it relevant from a beginner's perspective.

stuZ
2008.02.08, 01:51 PM
"we just got tired of dealing with evolution of boards/fets so we stopped worrying about it and i have to say, we all enjoy ourselves much better now."

...and isn't that what it's all about?:D

stitchy
2008.02.08, 01:55 PM
Forgive me if i'm wrong, but wouldn't "policing" the motors be easier than checking everyone's fet setup anyways? In tenth scale, nobody cares what ESC you run, they just look at your motor.

Tim Johnson
2008.02.08, 02:21 PM
Sorry to HiJack the thread, but It's always fun to meet someone new at the track.

you thread terrorist!!!!!

rharris
2008.02.08, 02:50 PM
you thread terrorist!!!!!

SILENCE!!!... I Kill you....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uwOL4rB-go

Tim Johnson
2008.02.08, 02:54 PM
Hello, I'm Lindsey Lohan!!

gota love Achmed...LOL

CristianTabush
2008.02.08, 03:25 PM
Leonen, I think you are not understanding what I am trying to say. I do agree FETs make a difference. I don't think there is a need for the rule though. I know for a fact PN is eliminating this rule this year.

The FET rule is redundant, because anyone can FET their car for a lower price than that of a new car. In what class they run makes no difference. Beginners would probably benefit from having a 3004 board and a slower car. But does this mean they should not be allowed to race in the beginner class beacuse they bought new technology? Certainly not. A beginner will still be slower than an advanced guy, and making them buy older technology will only cost more money to your beginners in the long run.

What I am trying to say is that if everyone upgrades their old boards, they will still be competitive in the upper classes against anything. By opening up the FET rules you make the racing more inclusive across whatever level you are racing.

It's hard to verbalize, because I do agree with you in every sense. But what I am trying to say is that the FET rule should be eliminated and the individual, not the club should decide whether or not they will FET their board, buy AD or 2.4ghz. And then the club dictates what motor is run in each category. If somebody that is still a beginner does not want to change his FETs, that is up to him entirely. And after all, he's not going to be a beginner for ever, he will eventually move up.

Leaps in technology have to be embraced in a Pro-active way, not reactive as is the case with ROAR and LiPo for example. You have to embrace it, adapt to it and structure it early on so as to not make the transition too difficult in the long run.

Gigibesi
2008.02.10, 03:09 AM
in Malaysia we dont have any limit on what fet u put on your car... we only allowed to race on certain type of motor (motor control)...

leonen
2008.02.10, 12:23 PM
Christian, I really agree with you about 90% of what you say. I understand you perfectly, and also repect your point of view. Hey, you got real experience on this little things, so I think your word has some value.

When we opened our club, 3 years ago, the rule was all free in what referred to FETS. Non modified motors for the stock, everything else was allowed in the PRO class.

Not much guys had FETed their cars. Except for just one guys that had a 2+2. He FLEW!!!! he was not much of a winner, so.. no one never complained nor anything else.

When 3010's appeared in the market, we started noticing that the new guys had some advantage in speed over the older ones..... mmmm

Then some guy brought in an Ad band board.... and some other Fetted their cars with 2+2. The Result? Our classes had been really ****ed up, cause you could really see the "special boards" passing everybody else in the straights just as if they were standing still. Even though we all use the same motors.

I'm absolutely NOT against new technologies !!!!! Come On!!! LOL!!! What I say is that Each Club Has to Adopt their Stock Class to what their people has. It would be stupid to establish that Stock is "Non-fetted boards only" in a club where everybody has 2.4Ghz or AdBand PCBs!!!!!!

Some years ago there wasn't much problems. Everybody had 3004 from the box. Today.... well... this is why we are discussing these matters.

About newcomers with new boards.... well it's obvious, that will happen, always! But then again, it's the egg or the chicken...

If you're happy freeing from FETs, GREAT! If you think your club needs to restrict FETs. Perfect!. Do whatever you need to do, to keep competition balanced.

We are all happy at our club with what we did. For us, FETs made a big diference with certain motors.

Tim Johnson
2008.02.25, 03:14 PM
Just a heads up guys. The 2.4ghz cars are shipping out today. So you should start seeing them pop up at your LHS by Friday. :)

NOMOTORLIMIT
2008.02.25, 04:10 PM
Here's my question:

1. How about if we ask Kyosho to start using 4562's or something comparable? In my opinion, this not only eliminates the chance of burning a fet, it also improves the overall performance of the board.

2. If I were Kyosho, I would do a poll in this very website and see how many people would ACTUALLY prefer to have 4562s over 3004s and 3010s and 213s and 818s; unless of course, the 4562s or equivalent would be too costly.

lfisminiz
2008.02.25, 07:54 PM
There a double stack of 3010s. Wouldnt that take care of most motor/fett problems?

ruf
2008.02.25, 08:40 PM
Fet-to-fet, most people prefer the driveability of the 3010 to the 4562. The 3010 double stack that comes with the 2.4GHz board would be my configuration of choice.

Tim Johnson
2008.02.25, 09:12 PM
Fet-to-fet, most people prefer the driveability of the 3010 to the 4562. The 3010 double stack that comes with the 2.4GHz board would be my configuration of choice.


RUF check your email.... :)

ruf
2008.02.25, 10:10 PM
Yah sorry dude. It went to junk, but shouldn't happen again in the future. Hit up contact@reflexracing.net, and it'll get through for sure. You can reach me on my cell, too. I'll try to call you tomorrow morning. Thanks!

piper1944
2008.02.25, 11:50 PM
Just a heads up guys. The 2.4ghz cars are shipping out today. So you should start seeing them pop up at your LHS by Friday. :)

what shop in houston is getting these cars?

ruf
2008.02.26, 12:32 AM
We'll have them... :D

piper1944
2008.02.26, 11:15 PM
We'll have them... :D

any idea when?