Quote:
Originally Posted by _sleigh_
OK then a question to all....
Do you see it as a must that for a specific make of LiPo cell should fit a standard off the shelf car (ie, B4, XXX etc) without modification to either car or cell, before it is allowed to be homologated?
|
Personally, I think a dimensional control would be sufficient - I don't think any rule that defines a chassis would be able to keep up with the car manufacturers over time - and they'd always be one chassis that got left out. Don't overcomplicate it would be my advice - it would soon self regulate and tbh, any local or decent model shop would be able to advise on chassis / battery compatibility.
Modification to the battery itself - good idea - but can you consider wording it along the lines that the integrity of the cell casing should not be compromised by any accidental damage or deliberate modification. I've taken a 0.5mm chamfer off the very end of a LiPo to fit my TC - I'd hate for that blade marking to constitute a rule infringement of cell modification.
As for downsides as per Tom's original post - the main one would be cost related and the transience of going from an established 'old' technology to a 'new' one. I'd hate to see the off road rules written to preclude the mixed use of nimhs and lipos in the same class at the same meetings.
There's no reason why the technology can't exist alongside the homologated nimhs.
I'd like to see hard casing be made a mandatory requirement for the additional impact resilience it will give the cells but that can make it difficult to scrutinize the actual cells which may be a problem for the organisers.
Perosnally, I don't think that 1:10 off road can afford not to embrace the technology - many clubs are already running it (esp those that also run TCs) but these club members are currently alienated from attending regional or national events. There's good and bad and personally, I don't think that I'd go any faster with Lipos or with Lee's mega unbuyable team equipment
