[GRUNZ]

Nice one Tamar.

 

[GRUNZ]

Comparing the NSR Baby King and Sideways Baby Raptor has been discussed earlier this year see this post.

that thread would require a nice clean up.

 

[GRUNZ]

Tamar, I think you only backed half of your cake...
Just to give you some reference. And sure, this is about a small track with simulations...but I am sure that over a year we (drivers in my club here) put down more miles and hours on Oxigen racing than others here.
We use RCSO2 with fuel sim: basically the power of the cars at the start of the race is 80% and then increases up to 100% while fuel goes down. The reduction of power is similar to apply a max power reduction of chrono: when you put the max power to 80% then only the first 80% of the trigger travel will be used and the top 20% ignored. I have to say that this is done so subtle that I could not feel I was losing 20% of trigger travel. Anyway, we regularly find that our best laps happen when we have between 20 to 30% of fuel left in our tanks, which translates to 90-95% of max power.
So I am trying to say here is that limiting the max power could give people with unfair advantage with respect to people that have to deal with an unrestricted max power profile.
Or it could be the other way around: with no restricted power profile, I can use 100% of the trigger travel and module better my driving.

The other half of the cake...
The next step would have been to take exactly the same car, swap the motor for a baby king, and then put on a bench to achieve the same mx speed and then test it.
But I am sure that you will do this next.

 

[GRUNZ]

I believe your interpretation might be outside the intended spec.
In the above it says must be ONE of the following ONLY. If it said "can be any of the following" then your point is solid.

Hi Greg,
The idea here is that for this inter club competition to allow either the baby king or the baby raptor (at least this what I understood).
I think Tamar's use of the baby sprinter serves only as an example.
Both motors are labelled as 17K and some have commented that they are the same.
In reality, the baby king is a 16.8K motor (this figure is quiet consistent when I run these motors in) while the baby raptor can vary from 17K to up 18.3K.
So if both motors should be allowed in the same competition, having a way to equalize these differences would be a nice to have.

 

[GRUNZ]

Why's it always about slowing the quicker drivers? They shouldn't have to be penalised because there are usually the better racers!

I do not think that what Tamar is trying to achieve here is to slow down the quicker drivers. I am sure a quick driver is going to be still the best driver when everything else is comparable.

 

[GRUNZ]

I think we are saying the same thing here. I like to equalize as much as possible.
The DiSCA Euro spec was designed to be based on a single motor (the baby sprinter).
But it turned out that not all the baby sprinters are made equal: there is a huge variance in RPMs.
Plus they are sensitive to rotation direction: NSR AW pods are mirrored compared to other AW pods allowed in the series which means if you are using one of these pods your baby sprinter will not pull the same RPMs as one installed in a slot.it AW pod.

I think some of the people that are running this inter club series, believe that:
a) the baby sprinter is an extra motor one has to buy to participate in this series (while Sideways already provides in their cars the baby raptor)
b) many have the baby king and baby raptor motors already available
c) both the baby king and baby raptor are the same motor

Not all of the above points are completely true...Hence Tamar's approach to try to introduce a Software BoP.

 

[GRUNZ]

Almost correct, and yes we are all saying more or less the same thing...but lets keep the facts and data clear.

What was not correct on what I wrote?

 

[GRUNZ]

See you guys again...after Le Mans. I do wish everybody a very good weekend.

Enjoy Le Mans.

 

[GRUNZ]

"The DiSCA Euro spec was designed to be based on a single motor (the baby sprinter)."
The Scaleauto SC 027B isn't a Baby...its a Junior As in Scaleauto SC 027B Sprinter Junior.

Gee Tamar, guilty as charged! ;-)
PS: what is the "wave"? - Edit, I should have read all the posts before Tamar's

 

[GRUNZ]

Sorry, Tamar but adjusting the RMS isn't what I'd call as being a fair racing format as you'll be reducing the amount of available power (11-12v) to individual cars.
Is a bit like saying to Max and Charles, Sorry but because Lulu's car isn't as quick as there's. The Stewards are going to reduce the power to the RedBull and Ferrari powertrains by ?% to even it up. Never gonna happen. Same in any other racing format either 1-1 or scale!

Hi John
Not completely true. In real scale GT3 and GTLM there is power reduction applied with air restrictor and other means to balance the HP each car outputs. And there are other rules that are applied during an event such as longer pitstops for the top qualifiers/placers, extra weights to be carried during the race (DTM), etc.
Just to be clear, I know that I am not a good driver (at least when I am not racing at my home tracks) and I know that with the same car someone like you or Gary would be faster than me.
Personally, I do not care as I still enjoying the racing.

 

[GRUNZ]

What I am personally arguing against in this topic use the use of O2 Chrono to balance two 17k motors which so far have no race conditions proof of being significantly different from each other in performance. In fact the opposite appears to be true due to their dual inclusion in the analogue series.

The two motors are definitely not the same motors or at the very least they are not made the same.
With the proviso that RPMs represent only one part of the performance of a motor, when I run in the two motors the NSR is always below the 17K mark while the sideways ranges between 17K and 18K+.
Personally, if I had to participate to such a race, I would choose as option the baby raptor in slot.it AW setup.
Given that Tamar is so data driven, maybe he could collect some stats about the analog series going on in belgium to see the adoption of the NSR motor VS the Sideways one - and since he is at it, maybe also getting some data on which AW configuration people use (NSR vs Slot.it/Sideways).

 

[GRUNZ]

Tamar
do not be put off by our comments. I think we are all trying to help here.
My main concern (as I told you in person on our chat) is that Chrono max power setting might be too crude as a BoP solution.
To me it feels like implementing BoP in 1:1 scale by putting a brick behind the throttle pedal so that the driver cannot press it fully and the car will not get full power.
In RCS64, I can build profiles to limit the full power but in RCS64 I can use all the 64 positions/values of throttle information to achieve this not just the first X%.

 

[GRUNZ]

bring whatever-you’ve-got,

I think it is far from this.

 

[GRUNZ]

...while at least some of them could have started up their Chrono, do a run with car at max speed 100%, do a second run at 80% and post their findings. At least then their opinions would be backed up by first hand experience.

Now that would help not only me...but also this discussion.

I think that we need more than this. In particular, you want to have two identical chassis one with the baby king and one with the baby raptor and then use the RMS to balance their RPMs or speed at wheel. Then you want to do a test run with both chassis (with a body of course), say 100 laps each, and see what are the differences, if any.

 

[GRUNZ]

So in the mean while I have a question for you all. How would "sufficient" data translate for you guys ..in numbers?
Test 10 motors each, 20?,30? 50?...100?

As a start I would like to know the distribution of motors (# of drivers using the Sydeway motor vs the # of drivers using the NSR motor) in their analog series.