Notices
 

Thread: World's Fastest RC Car Challenge

Page 5 of 28 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161718192021222324 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 677
  1.  
    Join Date
    03-20-2002
    Location
    Rockford IL.
    Posts
    359
    I would halfway have to agree, you might as well call it the CA closed course record. You'll set the world record but the odds are high it won't be the fastest car in the world(Of course the cars won't exist because you eliminated 80% of the nation before it got started). You should have thought it through and did the east west thing at least.



    It will still sell lots of mags though, I'm sure.
     

  2.  
    Join Date
    11-05-2003
    Location
    Mt. Holly, NC
    Posts
    1,835
    The entire USA racing world revolves around Charlotte, NC with about every young American racers dream is to race in NASCAR with even the California boys moving to the Charlotte, NC area.

    Of course some would say it is Indianapolis, but most of those limp wristed racers would love to be one of the good ole boys of NASCAR. You don't see NASCAR driver's giving up a ride to move to a Indy Car. But even with Tony Stewart and Robbie Gordon doing the Memorial Day double, the NASCAR Charlotte race has priority over Indy when they do it.

    Let's get this contest moved to the racing center of the USA in Charlotte, NC where it belongs.
     

  3.  
    Join Date
    06-26-2000
    Location
    Allen, TX
    Posts
    1,852
    The Irwindale Speedway organization has already shown itself to be open to this type of event, and SoCal is practically the world epicenter for RC activity (both in terms of manufacturers/importers and enthusiast participation), so the speedway was an easy choice. And let's not be too "America-centric": as a "World's Fastest" event, some might argue that we should hold the event in Japan or another RC hot spot. No matter where we do it, a lot of people will wish it were someplace else. I think Cali will please the most people and garner the greatest number of participants.

    As far as a "closed course" record, that's not quite accurate. The cars have to be driven from a fixed spot, so radio range quickly becomes a factor. I doubt any cars will be forced to slow for lack of room on the Irwindale oval, so the course is, in effect, "open".
     

  4.  
    Join Date
    11-24-2002
    Location
    Detroit-yeah,we make cars
    Posts
    1,185
    Well what about radio range Peter? Can you give any insite at to the use of aircraft radios,swithed to land frequency?My point is to get a higher output radio.It just seems to me more powerful radios would ultimately make a safery carand more room to open up a nitro car.
     

  5.  
    Join Date
    06-26-2000
    Location
    Allen, TX
    Posts
    1,852
    Sounds good to me Crank. If Irwindale lets us drive from the camera stand (quite high above the track--see the pic of Cliff Lett perched atop it in the online article about his 111mph run), radio range should not be an issue, especially since the rules require FM gear. And if range is an issue for a car, the "must use a fail safe" rule will prevent damage to the vehicle (and people!).

    Are airplane radios actually more powerful? I would think that if a radio were to be more powerful, it would be the car system, since a racetrack envireonment with 8 guys standing side by side is far more demanding on radio reception than any airplane meet I've seen. The planes get farther away, but they're in unobstructed sky.
     

  6.  
    Join Date
    06-26-2000
    Location
    Allen, TX
    Posts
    1,852
    Gyro, check this out: http://www.offshoreelectrics.com/MainPage.htm (thanks Chris LaPanse). This guy went 120mph with a boat, and look how little area he used to do it. So, two conclusions: Irwindale will be plenty big enough, and HOW THE HECK DID WE LET BOAT GUYS BEAT OUR SPEED RECORD???
     

  7.  
    Join Date
    07-12-2001
    Location
    North Cakalacky
    Posts
    1,842
    heres a thought...tether cars without a string. but thats not exactly rc. is it...

    If i had the money, id definetely enter this. i already have plans for a 1/10 and 1/18 scale screamer, just no funds for the things....i hate being a peasant.
     

  8.  
    Join Date
    10-08-2002
    Location
    SLC, UT
    Posts
    5,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Gyro Gearloose
    North Carolina is in the middle of the US?

    We have a big earthquake I missed?
    LMAO, my thoughts exactly.

    As for the venue, well, if they're not gonna move RCX to somewhere in the middle of the country (my vote for the middle would have to be Denver or KC, or maybe even OKC), they probably shouldn't move the race either, since hopefully they're gonna get them tied together timewise so that those of us who want to go to both can do it in one trip. Of course I'm excited for them to move RCX (assuming it's at the same time as the race) into the summer so that I actually can go (like most people on these boards, I'm still in school in April).

    Oh, and for radios, I'm thinking that maybe finding a battery company to sponsor the event and provide free AA's to everyone would be good. 12 volts will give better range than the high 10's that rechargable cells could put out.
     

  9.  
    Join Date
    03-20-2002
    Location
    Rockford IL.
    Posts
    359
    That is one very impressive boat, PeterV! I'd find it hard to believe a car couldn't do better with the same power, getting that power to the ground is the problem.

    Will electric have the edge? Possibly, with the torque characteristics of electric motors they will be hard to beat.
     

  10.  
    I recall Cliff saying that he had to slow down in for the corners when he was on TechTV's The Screen Savers.
    I also remember hearing that he crashed the L3, while trying to slow for the corner..
    -Nick
     

  11.  
    Join Date
    04-18-2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,538
    I don't know if a car could really go much faster with that same power setup. That boat was actually flying over the water with only the prop and rudder touching the water. This means it probably has less drag than a car at comparable speed. FYI-that was using a Lehner 2250/8 using a 32.170 schultze controller (32 cell, 170 amps continuous, water cooled) This setup spun the 2" prop at 47,500 rpm, producing over 3000 watts. Still, a car could probably go pretty fast on this setup, which would probably require a custom chassis, due to the fact that he was using 32 GP3300s, instead of the AA or smaller cells that the really fast cars sometimes use.

    Part of the reason boats go so fast is the annual SAW (straightaway) trials. Every year, the goal speed goes up by 20mph. In '01, the firs boat to go 80 did so at the SAW's, in '02, the first boat to go 100 did, and in '03, the first boat to go 120 did. This beat the record set by a .91 hydro a few years ago. This fall, the goal speed will be 140, and that boat from the video could probably do it, as it's motor, batteries, and ESC were cool after the run. That was a relatively "conservative" setup. Let's see if a car can hit 140 before a boat can
    Last edited by Chris LaPanse; 05-15-2004 at 12:53 PM.
     

  12.  
    Join Date
    09-07-2002
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    7,387
    I say dual brushless motors on a pan car. Too bad this is all in Cali, that'd be a nice thing to see.
     

  13.  
    Join Date
    12-09-2003
    Location
    my happy place
    Posts
    656
    what i am wondering is why so many people think that a light car is the way to go. look at bonneville cars; heavy is the name of the game. weight is free downforce. downforce from wings is drag. sure since these cars (and trucks?) will have to be turning, they can't exactly use cinder blocks for ballast, but i think a featherweight pan car would be a bad idea.

    kudos on the awards. their are nothing but names in a book at bonneville, and there are no shortages of people racing there.
     

  14.  
    Join Date
    05-12-2004
    Location
    Dayton/Riverside, OH
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris LaPanse
    FYI-that was using a Lehner 2250/8 using a 32.170 schultze controller (32 cell, 170 amps continuous, water cooled) This setup spun the 2" prop at 47,500 rpm, producing over 3000 watts. Still, a car could probably go pretty fast on this setup
    lol, i cant help but find humor in this, personally, i dont think any car is gonna go very fast usin the Boat prop
     

  15.  
    Join Date
    03-20-2002
    Location
    Rockford IL.
    Posts
    359
    ROFL! Maybe in a real heavy rain...
     

  16.  
    lol@ prop car
    :P
     

  17.  
    Join Date
    06-04-2002
    Location
    Belforest, AL
    Posts
    2,051
    Quote Originally Posted by ElectricThunder
    I say dual brushless motors on a pan car. Too bad this is all in Cali, that'd be a nice thing to see.
    LOL, you and me both. South Florida is like cut off from everything... We always have to travel for something.
     

  18.  
    Join Date
    06-04-2002
    Location
    Belforest, AL
    Posts
    2,051
    As far as weight goes. I think a heavier car would fair better as well. Because it wont be thrown so bad when It hits a bump. And everybody knows that Race Courses are nutorious for Cracks, Bumps, and dips.

    If and when I build my High Speed car, I will try to keep it around the 10-15lbs. And a fully custom body that has less drag then ANY body pro-lines made... Should be sweet.
     

  19.  
    Join Date
    11-24-2002
    Location
    Detroit-yeah,we make cars
    Posts
    1,185
    cretin: I'd say you are both right AND wrong.Lemme 'splain:

    You're right IF your car has the radio range to make use of the distance(like at the flats).

    You're wrong IF you don't have the range with radio,or perhaps battery.Then a lighter car will get up to speed more quickly.

    The radio range is still the big question mark in my mind;how to play it.I'm thinking a heavier car is the smarter way to play it too.
     

  20.  
    Join Date
    01-01-2001
    Location
    gaston,ore,USA.
    Posts
    149
    i have an idea for the electric guys, have a battery co make your wheels and your chasse into batterys that way you can get more on your car, just a thought. might cost a little. smile
     

  21.  
    Join Date
    10-08-2002
    Location
    SLC, UT
    Posts
    5,667
    I think weight could be good, but only to a certain point. Also, lack of weight can be overcome by proper distrubition of the weight that there is, and a body that can provide the right amount of downforce. Having a 25 lb vehicle will most likely eliminate any flight characteristics that it might otherwise have, but then you need that much more power to get the thing moving. Optomizing weight, downforce, distribution, suspension tuning, etc is the name of the game. Optimization is the key in every engineering project, this one isn't any different.
     

  22.  
    Join Date
    01-01-2001
    Location
    gaston,ore,USA.
    Posts
    149
    i think there should be some PRIZE MONEY for this event like 1-2-and 5000 K for the top speeder. I JUST DONT SEE WHY NOT, it cost a lot of money to do anything these days let alone R/C cars, put a little money out ?? more people will GO and e c t.
     

  23.  
    Join Date
    06-04-2002
    Location
    Belforest, AL
    Posts
    2,051
    Power is NOT everything for going fast. It is mostly about final Ratio, and top RPM's from the engine. But Power does indeed help
     

  24.  
    Join Date
    04-10-2004
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    123
    is there an ST class or does my T3 count as a MT and can i come with a 10 cell 6x5 T3 and race and lose just to have fun
     

  25.  
    Join Date
    05-18-2001
    Location
    albuquerque, santafe
    Posts
    1,761
    Acutally, power does play a large role. You can have a car geared to the moon, but if you're running an HPI 15FE, nothing special will happen.
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •