SlotForum banner
1 - 4 of 68 Posts

· Gary Skipp
Joined
·
6,804 Posts
I don’t think that you’ll get anywhere with the current version of Chrono.

When next gen RCS is released I think you’ll have some usable options, but whether that was in the frame for consideration as a timing system or not I don’t know..

I suggest you focus on determining if, and by how much, the motors need to be balanced at all before you look at how to balance them. My guess would be that they don’t need any balancing in the first place, and Chrono can definitely handle that 😉
 

· Gary Skipp
Joined
·
6,804 Posts
I'm trying to keep out of this thread but I feel I must offer some clarifications, and objections, at this point. Not only has the HB Test Bench been mentioned numerous times, but so has DiSCA and it's rulesets and several of the comments are erroneous.

Clarification;
The Baby King and Baby Raptor, along with the 1325 G25 tyre and the NSR 5214/5 have been added as options for independent race organisers who prefer so. Any DiSCA competitions will use either the ProComp3 or 4 tyre, and ONE of the motor options.

Context;

The Belgian series has chosen to simultaneously use the Baby Raptor and Baby King. Ok. When I learned of this, I assumed at the time it was because they were the same motor. Apparently this is not the case.. but from reading the thread it appears that the same group of racers already have an analogue series where both motors are allowed.

But, for some reason, without ever holding a race with these specs, some suggestion has made to use Chrono to balance these motors.

Objection;

Why? If you have already proven that the motors themselves are different, why are they both allowed?
If any discrepancy is insignificant to your analogue rule set, why must it be balanced for a digital rule set?

Where's your analogue BOP eh?

Request for common sense;

Rather than re-invent the dyno-wheel, why don't you just have a bloody race. From what I know of the Belgian series plans, I understand there was to be "test" race before the series proper, began. So test. Run a race, both motors, and see if there's an advantage. If there is, the question becomes what to do about it.

Well, Idk, you could always just use the original spec. Wow!

Alternatively;
Think about it. Let's just say that the Raptor gets a software BOP nerf. Tamar can smile and be smug about his experiment and gives every Raptor a 15% reduction because "the proof is in the pudding!". What do you think happens next?

Everyone goes out and buys a King.

And now, by this single action, you have categorically subverted the intention of selecting these alternative motors in the first place, which was to save costs and prevent people from having to buy extra motors.

In conclusion;

Please use you brains.
 

· Gary Skipp
Joined
·
6,804 Posts
Just to be clear Greg, I don’t have a problem with using software or other means of introducing some kind of balances, success penalties, whatever. I’ve raced using these things in RCS64 and had great fun.

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.

And with my DiSCA hat on, never say never. It would only need to make sense. In this instance, for me, it does not.
 
1 - 4 of 68 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top