Revo questions

[Doby]

It's working now.

That's better...but that thread was essentially useless, only 6 posts with minimal complaining and innuendos...

[keithbradley]

I've had castle motors that were labeled with the incorrect kv, as well as Neu motors, and a handful of lessor-know brands. Some Neu motors have stickers on the box that don't match the rating listed on the website, so I guess we can't use those either. My $1000 Schulze 40.334 state of the art ESCs tell me that the system is at over 50v when I'm running only 42v...I guess those should be promptly thrown in the trash as well. Other guys just opt to make an intelligent decision and NOT throw the component out with the proverbial bathwater but maybe they are just suckers... Multiple times I have referenced the NAMBA website to check the records, only to find out that what it says on the site doesn't match the ACTUAL current records. I guess they better attend a seminar alongside Revo so they can get their crap together as well. However, I have some Chinese motors here that say on the box "best motor for RC", so I guess that settles that.

Let's stop pretending everyone is too dumb to think for themselves. Banning a lipo based on an immeasurable parameter is a fools errand, and it always was. Anyone who didn't see this happening at the Genesis of this issue is at best short-sighted.

By the way Terry, what would you like my lipos to say on the sticker to make sure they're legal? Just let me know and I'll be sure to conform.

[Doug Smock]

It was a simple question Keith. I asked it for a reason.
So mistakes can happen with labels at the factory?
Is it possible my 70C cells are actually 30C? It would explain the lack of performance in a T Mono and why they run ok in my scale. My packs don't have a inner label. Why is that?

So you see it is a legitimate, reasonable question.

Also,
If you had taken the time to read the link I posted you'd see that NAMBA has a proposal out to address the nominal voltage rule.

Their current rule is what it is and I know there was a lengthy discussion on it before it went out for a vote. Good bad or indifferent it is a rule and it was in place long before the Revo "fan boys". Don't make it out to be something it isn't.
It's real easy for someone that wasn't / isn't involved in the rule making process at a director/ chairman level to sit back and throw stones.
If you want an real education on why the rules are why they are go over to Rumrunner Racing and read some of the closed threads.

Tyler posted rules prior to their NAMBA record trial last fall that included this.
a. FE boats will be subject to a pre-tech before they tape up. Individual cell voltages cannot under any circumstance exceed 4.23V/cell. A simple cell checker will be used. If any cell is at 4.23V, a Fluke DVM will be used as a secondary check to confirm.

This year it was reduced to this.
e. General battery tech for FE boats.
You'll have to ask Tyler what that means.

It doesn't appear that they want to make the cells illegal. Quite the opposite.

So relax a little, go do a little reading if you'd like and consider forgiving those that don't have your superior intellect.
Also consider the fact that you might not be the smartest member on the forum. It's getting old Keith.

Doug, The toy boat racer.

[T.S.Davis]

First a history lesson. Maybe it will help. It's my thread. Too bad.

You would not believe the wars we went through to get ANY lithium in the rule book. We should all be dead by now. It was going to be the end of racing according to some. Guys were so desperate to get them in that we had a proposal that had nothing to do with power where a guy edited the approved proposal and tried to slide it through with lithium added. Did it on his own. That went well. The battle raged on. People left racing forever. Friendships were destroyed. The FE community was completely divided.

The book was a mess then. Power parameters read "any chemistry". The Lipo proponents said "we're in!". The book also said "Sub C, 1.2 volts per cell". Obviously that can't be done with Lipo. "CRAP!"

The problem was that many people had thousands and thousands of dollars invested in Nimh. I still have a $1000 worth of chargers I can't use myself. The new tech was a complete retool for a lot of guys.

It's funny to me that the argument is exactly the same..........."are you going to really turn someone away?" The guys running "legal" cells would get crushed. Fun for them huh?

So we waited............and waited.....for the technology to become main stream. We needed the plane and car guys to get on board. Getting me on board was described as "pushing a rope". Then when we finally did adopt them I was accused of being in Chris Fines pocket. Fun stuff. I resigned from my position as chairman.

These HV cells are a new technology. The change isn't nearly as dramatic as the introduction of Lipo itself but they could provide a distinct advantage. Yes, debatable but in the right hands, with the right combo, in theory, they "should" be better.

A miss labeled Schultz isn't on the edge of a rule set.

Maybe I'm hyper sensitive (see above, I earned it) but the impression I've gotten on more than one of these Revo debates is that there is some devious motivation for not wanting Revo legal. That would be sleazy and frankly the implication offends me. Now we see that the company has all these discrepancies in their products vs data sheets vs what guys thought they bought. After all the poop disturbing over them there is something questionable about them? Give me a break.

I will continue to get in the way of anything I feel will screw up racing. That said, I still listen. Convince us the timing is right. Show how they're "the norm". Same way we went brushless. Same way we left Graupner 700 motors behind. Same way we went Lipo.

I'm just a racer. I forget sometimes. Haha I take this crap way too personal. For that, I apologize to you all.

[keithbradley]

Based on your above post, Doug, It's apparent that my post went directly over your head. You seem to be addressing questions/issues that I didn't bring up, but I guess you must have really wanted to get that off your chest. However, believe it or not, every post is not in response to something YOU said. There are other people out there too buddy.

It was a simple question Keith. I asked it for a reason.
So mistakes can happen with labels at the factory?
Is it possible my 70C cells are actually 30C? It would explain the lack of performance in a T Mono and why they run ok in my scale. My packs don't have a inner label. Why is that?

I'm not sure how to explain your lack of performance Doug. My crystal ball is in the shop right now, sorry. I offered to send you my packs that DO perform and you threw it back in my face and told me you "don't care about numbers" and "don't care about what my equipment does". Whatever you've got there, it sounds like you're content with it and definitely NOT looking for an answer/solution.

Also,
If you had taken the time to read the link I posted you'd see that NAMBA has a proposal out to address the nominal voltage rule.

Their current rule is what it is and I know there was a lengthy discussion on it before it went out for a vote. Good bad or indifferent it is a rule and it was in place long before the Revo "fan boys". Don't make it out to be something it isn't.

I'm not sure what your point is here. I'm aware of the proposal...

It's real easy for someone that wasn't / isn't involved in the rule making process at a director/ chairman level to sit back and throw stones.

Great point/straw man. That doesn't change the validity of a sticker. I'm not sure anyone could read this thread and come to the conclusion that putting all of our eggs in the sticker basket is a good idea, regardless of the chair they're setting in.

Tyler posted rules prior to their NAMBA record trial last fall that included this.
a. FE boats will be subject to a pre-tech before they tape up. Individual cell voltages cannot under any circumstance exceed 4.23V/cell. A simple cell checker will be used. If any cell is at 4.23V, a Fluke DVM will be used as a secondary check to confirm.

This year it was reduced to this.
e. General battery tech for FE boats.
You'll have to ask Tyler what that means.

It doesn't appear that they want to make the cells illegal. Quite the opposite.



So relax a little, go do a little reading if you'd like and consider forgiving those that don't have your superior intellect.

I'm not condescending enough to feel the need to tell you to "go do some reading " (that one really did make me LOL, Doug...if only I could be as educated as you we wouldn't have to have these discussions, huh?), but I will tell you that while the post you quoted may have included your wording, it SPECIFICALLY stated that HV lipos were considered illegal and WOULD NOT be allowed under any circumstances. I'm 100% certain of this. I didn't attend the event because of it. Furthermore, Terry has also told anyone reading this thread NOT to show up at an event if they are running Revos (just FYI to anyone reading this thread, the HV component only refers to ONE of a number of lipo types Revo sells), so your accusation that I'm "making something out of nothing" is nonsense. The truth is, I'm not making "something" at all. I didn't start the thread. This info has been out there for a long time, and the same people continue to ask the same question without accepting the answer.

Also consider the fact that you might not be the smartest member on the forum. It's getting old Keith.

Oh boy, I hope not. If so we're all in trouble!
I certainly don't think I'm smarter than everyone Doug.
By the way, I think in your signature you should say you're a seasoned "amateur", since "amature" isn't a word.

[keithbradley]

First a history lesson. Maybe it will help. It's my thread. Too bad.

You would not believe the wars we went through to get ANY lithium in the rule book. We should all be dead by now. It was going to be the end of racing according to some. Guys were so desperate to get them in that we had a proposal that had nothing to do with power where a guy edited the approved proposal and tried to slide it through with lithium added. Did it on his own. That went well. The battle raged on. People left racing forever. Friendships were destroyed. The FE community was completely divided.

The book was a mess then. Power parameters read "any chemistry". The Lipo proponents said "we're in!". The book also said "Sub C, 1.2 volts per cell". Obviously that can't be done with Lipo. "CRAP!"

The problem was that many people had thousands and thousands of dollars invested in Nimh. I still have a $1000 worth of chargers I can't use myself. The new tech was a complete retool for a lot of guys.

It's funny to me that the argument is exactly the same..........."are you going to really turn someone away?" The guys running "legal" cells would get crushed. Fun for them huh?

So we waited............and waited.....for the technology to become main stream. We needed the plane and car guys to get on board. Getting me on board was described as "pushing a rope". Then when we finally did adopt them I was accused of being in Chris Fines pocket. Fun stuff. I resigned from my position as chairman.

These HV cells are a new technology. The change isn't nearly as dramatic as the introduction of Lipo itself but they could provide a distinct advantage. Yes, debatable but in the right hands, with the right combo, in theory, they "should" be better.

A miss labeled Schultz isn't on the edge of a rule set.

Maybe I'm hyper sensitive (see above, I earned it) but the impression I've gotten on more than one of these Revo debates is that there is some devious motivation for not wanting Revo legal. That would be sleazy and frankly the implication offends me. Now we see that the company has all these discrepancies in their products vs data sheets vs what guys thought they bought. After all the poop disturbing over them there is something questionable about them? Give me a break.

I will continue to get in the way of anything I feel will screw up racing. That said, I still listen. Convince us the timing is right. Show how they're "the norm". Same way we went brushless. Same way we left Graupner 700 motors behind. Same way we went Lipo.

I'm just a racer. I forget sometimes. Haha I take this crap way too personal. For that, I apologize to you all.

Good post Terry.

In all honesty, I have no skin in the pro/anti-revo battle. I really don't care what YOU or anyone else uses. Everyone else can run 5C rx packs for all I care. I do care when people try to "educate" others on the merits of (or lack thereof) a product they have ZERO experience with. I see that you feel attacked somehow, but it's really for the wrong reason. Ask yourself how much of a $hit you would give if I post a label from the inside of a turnigy 20C pack that said 15C (I've had them, I don't know how many because I rarely check them). Would you question their viability in racing? That edge of the rules stuff is just fuel for an unnecessary fire. John has said from day one that these were technically considered 3.7v nominal just like every other popular lipo and the 3.8v designation was just a label to tell them apart from the other cells that can't safely be charged over 4.2v. THAT'S NEVER CHANGED. It was that way before you or anyone else on this forum ever even heard of Revo HV427 lipos.

In regard to these being "new lipo technology", yup, they are. So are all the other lipos. Lipo technology changes constantly. The chemistry has changed multiple times since the introduction of lipo that you mention, probably in more profound ways, even if the label didn't change (although the C rating changed, so I guess they did). I know you used early lipos Terry. Would anyone have a "distinct advantage" over someone using those if they were using todays non-HV lipos?

I'm not saying promote them. I don't think there is any reason to so vehemently oppose them though. Wait until some guys start running them, you might find that they are at a disadvantage in NAMBA...you never know.

[tlandauer]

Before this thread goes any closer the the South Pole and be locked forever, l want to thank Terry for the history lesson.
I am as much of a non racer as Terry is The Racer. So for me to learn a bit of history, is very very good. I have so much respect for all of you.
However, it's difficult to see the labels printed oneway knowing the facts are differnt. If I buy these cells then quite frankly l want to use whatever the edge l might have. If I am buying 4s with the knowledge that they are HV cells, then the info on the label will confuse me. I have already stated before, no need to revisit.
It's one thing if the product is out of spec and therefore inconsistent with the info given on the label, quite another when common knowledge is already available and to be confused again with inconsistent info given by the maker.
I am not taking anyone to the task here, but as I said before, since l am dumb enough to have already stuck my neck out on this one, might as well further clarify my point.
Let us hope this thread will stay healthy.
Cheers everyone!

Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk

[keithbradley]

Before this thread goes any closer the the South Pole and be locked forever, l want to thank Terry for the history lesson.
I am as much of a non racer as Terry is The Racer. So for me to learn a bit of history, is very very good. I have so much respect for all of you.
However, it's difficult to see the labels printed oneway knowing the facts are differnt. If I buy these cells then quite frankly l want to use whatever the edge l might have. If I am buying 4s with the knowledge that they are HV cells, then the info on the label will confuse me. I have already stated before, no need to revisit.
It's one thing if the product is out of spec and therefore inconsistent with the info given on the label, quite another when common knowledge is already available and to be confused again with inconsistent info given by the maker.
I am not taking anyone to the task here, but as I said before, since l am dumb enough to have already stuck my neck out on this one, might as well further clarify my point.
Let us hope this thread will stay healthy.
Cheers everyone!

Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk

I don't understand Tim, how would the nominal voltage rating affect how you used them?

[Doug Smock]

Oh I'm LOL too Keith. And I didn't expect you to have the answers.
I edited my sig. thanks for pointing that out. I finally got something out of this thread

[T.S.Davis]

You miss quoted me Keith. Very nice. Subtle and elegant. Changed my meaning and even added to it things I didn't say.

As far as the printed labels. ........how about his data sheets?

I guess really it doesn't matter. He can make those up too. Any company could make data sheets or labels or what ever they wanted. Very very few hobby guys have the knowledge and fewer the equipment to verify it.

However, if company x,y,Z is going to try to push the tech it's going to have to earn some trust. It can't do that by having data sheets that don't match their labels. Then labels that don't match the cells under the shrink. Then when somebody notices, the cheer team points at the guys that noticed? Yeah okay. Sure that makes sense.

If the cells are actually just 3.7 then rewrite the data sheets, stop marketing them as HV, and stop selling special chargers to max them out. Um.........in my best Dr Evil.........rrrrright.

[keithbradley]

You miss quoted me Keith. Very nice. Subtle and elegant. Changed my meaning and even added to it things I didn't say.

Can you show me where? I honesty don't know what you're talking about. I'll change it if I did.

Then labels that don't match the cells under the shrink.

How sure are you of this? Do you have any real data to back this up? Have you seen an actual 70C pack taken apart to show another label? I haven't. According to Doug, he hasn't either. He said his cells didn't have labels. I've taken the shrink off of a bunch to make different pack configurations, I've never once seen the label in the picture. I don't know where that picture came from, but unless it's yours I'm not sure I would bet the farm on it. It seems like an absolute anomaly at best, and intentional propaganda at worst.

If the cells are actually just 3.7 then rewrite the data sheets, stop marketing them as HV, and stop selling special chargers to max them out.

Why would you stop marketing an HV cell as an HV cell? I don't follow your logic here. Just because nominal voltage is 3.7v, doesn't change the fact that they can be safely charged to a higher voltage.
They're just lipos. They have a coating that prevents them from gassing at higher voltages. That doesn't change nominal voltage, but it does change the termination voltage.

I can't believe that no one is concerned or curious about any REAL issues with these lipos.

[tlandauer]

Keith, sorry, I have no internet today and mobile signal is weak around my residence. As I have no trouble in admitting my ignorance, since day one when this topic was discussed, I wasn't interested in its nominal voltage. I was interested in terminal voltage. Knowing that it has the ability to handle a higher charge with the proper equipment is of great importance and interest to me. I understand the point John made. My confusion is that when I saw the discrepancy, my first thought was I was looking at the wrong thing. It can't not affect a guy who is about to invest a few hundred dollars worth of batteries. It's very simple and innocent. I don't care about race legality. I just want to know that I can have a higher terminal charge with the up to date equipment. And if not, I like to know that they are not maxxed out and will last longer. That was my gripe with the inconsistencies. Not accusing anyone of intentionally doing any funny business.
I guess ( no sarcasm here) with you guys being seasoned racers and builders, it's hard to imagine what goes on in the mind of a guy like me.
BTW, I am not talking about the inside label, that has as much meaning as nominal voltage. May be this is where the problem was. Having seen the higher number for a period of time, then saw what I saw, I just wanted to educate myself a bit more. I feel uncomfortable because my questions stemmed from a sale that took place here, none of my comments are meant as innuendos. If for some reason I offended the seller and buyer, I like to apologize before hand.
Thanks

Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk

[Jeff]

I really don't see what the big deal is here. Like Doug P. said, would you turn someone away? Even at the 2014 NAMBA nationals they didn't turn Ray away. If it was O.K. there why wouldn't it be O.K. everywhere?

[ray schrauwen]

I didn't really know they weren't allowed until I got there.

[T.S.Davis]

Can you show me where? I honesty don't know what you're talking about. I'll change it if I did.

I said this
By all means, ya like em, run em. I get that. Run what works. But don't bring them to a race. Not when others are running within the limitations of the rules.

Then you elaborated with this
Terry has also told anyone reading this thread NOT to show up at an event if they are running Revos (just FYI to anyone reading this thread, the HV component only refers to ONE of a number of lipo types Revo sells), so your accusation that I'm "making something out of nothing" is nonsense.


Like I said, it's subtle. I didn't say Revo not welcome. I said bring legal gear. Paraphrasing. See the difference? What you wrote reads like a conspiracy against Revo specifically. This is what drives my panties into a bunch. The same guys that cry conspiracy will also defend the companies data.........weirdness for lack of a better word. Deception? I don't know. I'll accept that maybe that's not fair. How about anomalies?

For the record. I give exactly zero poops about Revo the company. I only care about racing and anything that messes it up.

Now, as a consumer I would be concerned about what I referred to as weirdness above.

How sure are you of this?

I guess I'm not sure at all. I didn't post it. Could be a fluke. I'll bet there's a bunch of shrink peaking going on now though. This is the conspiracy thinking that makes me cranky. If there is a concerted effort to keep Revo itself out of racing I am unaware of it. Maybe I'm naive.

Why would you stop marketing an HV cell as an HV cell? I don't follow your logic here.

Because of the conflicts. The rep says "well they're really only 3.7v cells". Paraphrasing again. Then the data sheets says they are 3.775v. They're marketing plan claims 3.775 volts and they round that up to 3.8v. So guys buy them. More power. Hey, why not! Then the cells get to the house with labels that are........what? Besides irrelevant. Imagine you're Joe average consumer guy and they get to your house and a 4s pack says 14.8 when you bought 15.1. John just bought cells. They're second hand but never used. He has no clue what they really are. Guys buying HV cells don't know what they'll get. Then there's the legality question. Are they 3.7 or are they what they advertise and put on their data sheets? ugh I'm typing in circles.

Let's blame the observant for asking WTF. Conspiracy! Conspiracy!

I think that the way IMPBA does it is the right way to do it. A full charge voltage range. I also think that with what Dave's proposed,that's where NAMBA will end up too.

The 3.7v "nominal" could probably go away. When that was written (in late 2007 I think) we were all kinda winging it. It was like we were trying to race laptop batteries. Short sighted? Maybe. Likely. There was a lot to figure out. We lost a whole set of classes because we couldn't come of with a nice equivalent for 8 sub C cells. Some guys from Germany were throwing in their 2 cents. They wanted weight limits instead of Mah limits. There were the "we're all going to die in a thermal nuclear explosion" guys. The N1 guys wanted to keep Nimh..........."and we're never going brushless in N1.........ever". Ahhhhhhh. Flashback. Sorry.

Not my yob to fix it this time but it's what I think I would do if put in the position to have to make a decision on the spot. I'd go with the charged voltage range.

At the NATS, Ray was sitting literally 4 feet from me. He was running his Revo in my pet class. I knew how he was charging them. I knew he could only charge them to 4.2. Common sense prevailed and I didn't bring it to anyone's attention. So I was racing against him and did not file a protest. Keep in mind, I was not in charge of anything at that race. Accept yelling. That was my job. I did yell at some people. Most everybody I think. If I missed you I'll make up for it at the Cup. Same thing this year. My job is to look pritty. FAIL!

I can't believe that no one is concerned or curious about any REAL issues with these lipos.

I'll bite. What are the real issues with these Lipos?