09-16-2012, 01:07 PM | #21 | ||
RCC Addict Join Date: May 2008 Location: Southern,WV
Posts: 1,136
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? Quote:
Quote:
| ||
Sponsored Links | |
09-18-2012, 02:17 PM | #22 |
Pebble Pounder Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Portland
Posts: 156
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro?
Nearly 4 H.P. would be nice. Overkill, but nice. I'm not sure how everything else would hold up.
|
09-26-2012, 11:54 AM | #23 |
Rock Crawler Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Albany
Posts: 640
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro?
Why not. Remove the thought of a .21 size engine and go for a .40 "+" I had an out rigger boat (25 years ago) clocked at 65 MPH with a stock k/b marine motor running a oval. Not a straight line. I know there is not a lot of machinist out that what to do this. But comparing a R8 Tekin to a .21. There is no replacement for displacement. LOL Europe has a nitro foff class. but then they have a number of people running multipule .21s on a pulling tractor. I think the boys across the great pond like it. Imagine tuning that and getting it running. The sound is awesome. Evan |
09-26-2012, 03:09 PM | #24 |
RCC Addict Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Tekin, ID
Posts: 1,940
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? Have to disagree on that one, electric 1/8 scales can make a ton more torque than any nitro engine you could ever dream of fitting in it. An electric FOFF vehicle is going to have many advantages over a nitro. Not saying a nitro one wouldn't be cool, but it won't be making any more power/torque than an electric.
|
09-27-2012, 09:37 AM | #25 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rock Crawler Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Albany
Posts: 640
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? Quote:
I did not bring up Tekin R8 as a negative. I love electric motors. I love all means to make HP. Keep in mind title does not mention 1/8 scale. Nor did I. As for "There is no replacement for displacement" The term comes from 1 to 1 engines. Like a 350 ci engine makes said HP. The a 454 cid will make more. The saying is 50 years old. So a big motor makes more HP. Even with electric motors. Ty I have a question for you. I seems that I have to really dig or not find this info at all. So what gives. If you could show me where I can get this kind of info from Tekin that would be awesome. Specifications
This is Tekins info for a R8
Most people don't need of want this info, but to compare motor to motor you need it. Sorry about the hijack Remember I am not bashing you or TEKIN. Tekin produces a great product. Evan | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
09-27-2012, 10:38 AM | #26 | |
Pebble Pounder Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Portland
Posts: 156
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? Quote:
Cool factor is huge in this game! I'm pretty sure a lot of people would change their mind if they saw a nearly 4 H.P. nitro snorting and snarling up a nasty climb at 30,000+ RPM throwing a huge roost from all four paddles. To me, that is cool vs. HOLY SH!T. | |
09-28-2012, 08:32 AM | #27 | |
Rock Crawler Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Albany
Posts: 640
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? Quote:
Evan | |
09-28-2012, 08:45 AM | #28 |
RCC Addict Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Tekin, ID
Posts: 1,940
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro?
To keep it simple, most people just need to know the kV rating of a motor so they can match up the proper battery. All that other info is confusing to most people that don't understand what they are looking at and it ends up with tons of phone calls and e-mails with them trying to figure out what they need, so we made it simple. From that list, I see we are missing, the stator info, winding wire size, current, resistance, max power, timing, wattage and drive frequency. With the T8, since it has to go into cars that use opposite drive train rotation, the timing is fixed and is neutral to both rotation directions. Not really a needed spec, IMO. Drive frequency, well, that's all in the ESC and I'm not at liberty to give out that kind of information. Seriously, I'll probably get beaten by the Prez . Max current is always so over-hyped, on paper it can be worlds apart from real world conditions. I agree this is all good info, but for most of the people browsing motors it's too much and just causes confusion, especially for 1/8 scale. The real techy guys might want to know everything, but most want to match a motor to a battery and go race. As for the 1/8 scale comment I made, I used that because it was a scenario of nitro vs. electric in equal conditions. The electric 1/8's can produce a lot more instant torque than a nitro engine can, that's just how brushless motors are. Sure, nitros are fast and have power and sound cool, but electric has the potential to blow it out of the water in terms of torque a horsepower. Don't get me wrong here, I'm a gearhead and I ride snowmobiles, dirtbikes, jetskis and love my 2/4 stroke engines. Been eyeing an electric dirtbike though, can't imagine the snap something like that has! |
09-28-2012, 10:39 AM | #29 |
Rock Stacker Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Abbotsford, BC
Posts: 70
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro?
This thread is going a little sideways. It isn't a matter of electric vs. nitro. The question was why nobody seems to use nitro at all, fully recognizing the potential performance shortcomings vs. electric. I think it would be damned cool. Just like the multi engine RC pullers are damned cool even if a single 1/8 brushless can pull the same or more weight. Nitro is more work, both to design and build and also to run and maintain. Having something unique could be worth it though in smiles per mile. Same with monster trucks - yeah my Savage 4.6 can't do standing backflips and the Flux has a tonne more power but, for that truck, I want fumes and smoke and noise. It just seems to be a proper fit. |
09-28-2012, 10:56 AM | #30 |
Pebble Pounder Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Arnold
Posts: 194
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro?
i agree with dukk i dont think this about nitro vs electric both of witch have pro's & con's so i think anyone with a nitro based foff should post pics & lets see them |
09-28-2012, 01:52 PM | #31 |
Rock Crawler Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Albany
Posts: 640
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro?
Thank you Ty for telling me as much as you could legally. I understand. Evan Last edited by SlickRockSpider; 09-28-2012 at 01:56 PM. |
09-28-2012, 02:11 PM | #32 |
RCC Addict Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Auburn, MI
Posts: 1,177
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro?
Did everyone forget one major factor. FOFF means climbing hills of gravel and sand. That means you WILL get stuck. Being able to blip the throttle in reverse and come back down the hill is key, unless you like to crawl up a 45 degree incline while your nitro car snuffs itself out. In my opinion, Nitro limits what you can do with the car pratically. Even with a cheap short course style motor and controller, and a 2s lipo, you can have a ton of fun.. |
09-28-2012, 02:17 PM | #33 |
Moderator Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: chicago
Posts: 2,814
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro?
i have an old xtm xfactor i've thought about making a foff out of. i know it wouldnt be as fast and reliable (or clean) as an electric, but there is definitely a charm to the sounds and smells of nitro that electric rigs will never have. it was a pretty fun truck the one time i ran it before yanking the axles for a crawler,and it would benefit greatly with a much lower ride height and less suspension travel. |
09-28-2012, 09:53 PM | #34 |
Pebble Pounder Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Portland
Posts: 156
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? It's cool. I like when it gets sideways. I was driving my nitro FOFF style before it was ever called FOFF. Up hills steeper than 45 degrees at times, believe it or not. I loved it! However, my nitro is 2wd and doesn't get traction no matter where it is or what tires I have on it. That's where this idea was born. The only downfall that came to my mind was the reverse thing, as mentioned above. But with that kind of power I should be able to baloon the tires like a top fuel dragster, and not get stuck. Last edited by Dini; 09-28-2012 at 09:56 PM. |
10-11-2012, 01:29 AM | #35 |
Pebble Pounder Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Portland
Posts: 156
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro?
Any ideas on how to combat the reverse issue?
|
10-11-2012, 11:32 AM | #36 |
Moderator Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: chicago
Posts: 2,814
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? |
10-11-2012, 11:54 AM | #37 |
I wanna be Dave Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Rancho Relaxo. California. USA. Earth.
Posts: 3,292
|
A lot of the nitro mt's had a reverse option. Hpi Savage, Losi lst and Associated mgt all come to mind. A popular mod was to do the FOC (forward only conversion). It lightened up the drivetrain tremendously for better spool up to overcome the centrifugal clutch systems. However the greater momentum of a heavier drivetrain could help for foffing perhaps?
|
10-11-2012, 02:57 PM | #38 | |
RCC Addict Join Date: May 2008 Location: Southern,WV
Posts: 1,136
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? Quote:
| |
10-14-2012, 01:27 PM | #39 | |
Pebble Pounder Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Portland
Posts: 156
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? Quote:
That's good info. Now, do any of those listed have a 3 speed tranny? | |
10-14-2012, 05:53 PM | #40 |
RCC Addict Join Date: May 2008 Location: Southern,WV
Posts: 1,136
| Re: FOFF: Why Not Nitro? |
FOFF: Why Not Nitro? - Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nitro FOFF | Nitro_Geezer_UK | Formula Offroad | 4 | 12-16-2011 07:01 PM |
| |