# Novak 17.5



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

I see the 17.5 was released and there has not been much talk about it, or so it seems. What does anyone think about this "spec" motor. Add spec tires, body, and an Orion 3200 (TC racing).........just a thought


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

I know the 17.5 is going to be great for oval racing. I haven't heard of anyone running it in a TC. My 13.5 TC is pretty fast for being a "stock" motor. A 17.5 would be a great entry level for someone starting racing. The trick is convincing the new guys to slow down a little bit to help fundamental growth....that's another thread topic though.

Ben


----------



## Miller Time (Sep 24, 2006)

I think the 17.5 should be the motor of policy in a mixed brushed / brushless class. It is evident the 13.5 is faster than a CO-27...Till a track makes it policy though, ... you can't blame those running the 13.5


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

Problem is, the 17.5 is slower than a good CO27. Last Tues., it was slower than a good Core stock.


----------



## swtour (Oct 8, 2001)

The 17.5 is an AWESOME motor...

Been playing with it for several months with both lipo 3200's and 4 cell in the oval cars.

I think it would make a great touring spec type motor...


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

S. Jerusalem said:


> Problem is, the 17.5 is slower than a good CO27. Last Tues., it was slower than a good Core stock.


Yeah, I think 17.5 is too high of wind to match up. I don't think a 13.5 is much faster then a top notch C027. I don't/can't build a brushed motor to top specs. What has people sore is that any idiot (like me :hat: ) can put a 13.5 in and be cream of the crop on motor. A 17.5, I believe, would put the motor tuner and deep pockets back at an advantage. Which I guess is racing in most aspecs.

The worst and most logical still is to keep them separated. 

I think we should outlaw brushed motors all together and run spec brushless/lipo classes. :woohoo: 

Ben


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

Yeah, I'm not too keen on spending an afternoon tuning four Cobalt stocks to find the best two for next weekend. Running the 13.5 against brushed isn't fair. Especially after about three minutes. Not so much in TC but in 1/12, it's very noticable. For TC it's nice 'cause it's like having the best motor you ever tuned every time you put your car on the track.


----------



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

S. Jerusalem said:


> Problem is, the 17.5 is slower than a good CO27. Last Tues., it was slower than a good Core stock.


How much slower? A couple of tenths? Or was it considerable


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

'Bout .5 per lap.


----------



## squeeker138 (Nov 12, 2002)

jerusalem, was the driver w the 17.5 new to brushless? where were they geared? 
I hear that the 17.5 is to be geared very high.


----------



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

S. Jerusalem said:


> 'Bout .5 per lap.


was this on a oval, or road course


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

S. Jerusalem said:


> For TC it's nice 'cause it's like having the best motor you ever tuned every time you put your car on the track.


Yeah, every round, week after week! Why are people stuck on brushed motors? If everyone said "we're only gonna run brushless", ROAR would have to change the policy.

Ben


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

squeeker138 said:


> jerusalem, was the driver w the 17.5 new to brushless? where were they geared?
> I hear that the 17.5 is to be geared very high.


This was 1/12 road course with two national level A-main wheels. One running a Core stock to get ready for Cleveland and the other running the 17.5. So it was a side-by-side comparison for 3 packs. The fella running the 17.5 is not new to BL so appropriate gear was applied. If he ran an absolutely perfect lap, he could keep it close. Improbable for 8min


----------



## JimmyJon (Sep 11, 2007)

well I think I talked to the person with the 17.5 in 1/12 onroad. it seems very similar. he would give the edge to the brush co27. But for the most part the 17.5 is alot closer to the brushed co27 than the 13.5. he was using a 13 mm rotar geared at 2.74. Motor comes off at 111 degrees and speedo was 94 degrees.. he just picked up a 78 tooth robinson. before he was using a Kimbrough 88 with 43 tooth pinion.


----------



## brian0525 (Jan 17, 2005)

111 deg? you need lots more gear!


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

JimmyJon said:


> But for the most part the 17.5 is alot closer to the brushed co27 than the 13.5. No doubt in my mind. The 13.5 is too fast for stock. Could dumb it down and put the bonded rotor and drop a couple teeth. But the 17.5 is closer. Maybe start roll-out around 3?:freak:


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

So now we're gonna have to have cars designed to handle the rollout. The 13.5 in my Losi Jrxs type R, I had to buy a spur adapter kit and pinions up to 44 to get close. I still haven't got down to where I need to be on the final drive.

Ben


----------



## kevinm (Jan 16, 2002)

I still think a possible solution to the "make a brushless run like stock" problem is to build a *shorter *motor. This would decrease the torque, and allow them to raise the RPMs back up a bit so that torque and speed are similar to a brushed stock. But there's probably no way to make one run exactly like a stock because the efficiency is so much higher. You'll always use a lot less battery so the end of the race will always be faster with brushless. (I suppose we could add big resistors outside the motor to eat up battery :lol: ) For some reason, this seems to show up much more in 4-cell classes. From what I've seen in touring cars, the 13.5 and brushed stock are very close on most tracks.


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

OOOHHHH whats another motor to buy its only $80 bucks.....Why do we (brushless drivers) have to worry about if we are comparable to brushed...If you dont want to run against the 13.5 w/a 27t then buy a 13.5 or just keep'm seperated......This is gonna turn into the 5cell vs.6ell debate or the lipo vs 4200 debate isnt this what the manufacturers want to keep feeding us endless options so we can only get three drivers in a class or get are LHS to stock it only to have it change in 3mnths :freak: ..I am a beginner in on road and slowing down would probably due me some good but with the new technology in todays speed controls its not hard to slow these cars down....does this get under anyone elses skin.....my 2CENTS


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

You've been hangin' with those boys from Summit haven't you? :woohoo: Let me tell you that those guys are no good and nothing but bad influences.

Ben


----------



## 420 Tech R/C (Sep 15, 2006)

speakin from a 'back in the day' perspective; before the re-buildable stock motors were introduced stock racing was a much more competitive class because the tuning options were way more limited with fixed tab motors. you could tune using brushes and springs, that was it.It kept the cost of racing stock classes low.then the stock motor comm lathe was invented as a way to cheat. After that was accepted as the norm, the rebuildables came into the picture under the rouse of ease of maintenance.This was probally the absolute worst thing to ever happen to stock class racing. The whole idea of stock racing is to even out the ponies so it would break things down to driving and chassis set-up. So heres the question ; is the 17.5 consistant with the torque and top end of an UNTWEAKED stock motor? Not a tweaked out motor with a cut comm and perfectly alligned hoods to get an extra degree or degree and a half of timing, but an as it comes out of the package 30.00 stock motor.Because its obvious that the 13.5 is much faster than an out of the package stock motor.


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

420....Isnt that kind of what brushless is doing for us now??? Isnt B/L a steroid version of a sealed can....Brushed motors are they history? Probably not but how much longer will they be around? NiMh are going to die off w/lipo around....But this is not the intention of this thread....So I ask this what are we to do have a 17.5 beginner stock class, 13.5 class,10.5 class and then open mod? How about a 4/5cell 17.5 beginner class,6cell 13.5 class,lipo 13.5 class and then open mod :freak: wont we have to eliminate say 13.5 to go 17.5....and what about the 21.5 soon to be released :drunk: from battery wars to motor wars :woohoo: :woohoo: :wave:


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

sportpak said:


> You've been hangin' with those boys from Summit haven't you? :woohoo: Let me tell you that those guys are no good and nothing but bad influences.
> 
> Ben




......HHHHMMMM....Good point......


----------



## 420 Tech R/C (Sep 15, 2006)

nah just let the brushed stuff be for novice and RTR stuff, 17.5 for stock, and then open mod. that way we can keep the 6 cell standard until 7.4 lipo becomes the standard and we wont have to fool witth this whole 5 cell stuff.Every one is talking about slowing stuff down so why not just go with the 17.5 for stock?


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

17.5 for stock sounds good but do you really want to run 13.5 against 10.5 or are you just saying let the whole 13.5 thing go.....


----------



## 420 Tech R/C (Sep 15, 2006)

personally I would use the 13.5 in some sort of spec class for people that want to go faster than stock class, but not go full blown open mod. Like maybe a ' super stock class' or something along that line to take the place of the current 19t brushed class.But really there are enough small backroom style tight carpet tracks out there where a 13.5 or a 10.5 is borderline more motor than what you really need. For example last week I ran a trophy race where the difference between stock TQ and open mod TQ was only 2 seconds difference with the same amount of total laps. so running big motor really didnt do you much good at all, and the TQ in mod class was running a 6.5 while there were guys running 3.5's. It was very obvious that the guys running the faster motors were spending the whole race ' fighting the trigger' to keep from pushing deep in the corners.


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

If I could afford the tires, I'd run mod every week. That's why stock(13.5) and 19t(10.5) get so much play here. But there is a good point out there.....how many more classes does a local track need? I'd get bored racing the other two fellas running 10.5, lipo, sedan, rubber, odorless trac. compound, Alfa body week in, week out....Almost forgot. Speedpassion is releasing a 15.5.


----------



## 420 Tech R/C (Sep 15, 2006)

Thats my point exactly. We could keep subdividing or we can set a standard and run it. i think that li-po's and Nimh should run together. Pick your power source and live with it. Ni-mh ARE on their way out, so why make seperate classes to encourage the continued use of them. I am still running them, but you had better beleive that when its time to re-up in the battery department they will be given to my kid for practice packs, and they will be replaced with li-po's.regardless on the motor end of things its the same way, it's obvious that brushed is on its way out , so why keep subdividing classes to accomodate the few that wish to live in the past when the majority of the racing community are ready to move toward the future.The only real option I can see to end this whole subdivision within classes is a straight-up run what you brung approach. you either run stock, or mod... no other subdivisions within classes. :thumbsup:


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

The issue is the power disparity. There is no real "stock equivalent" BL motor. All it takes is one "brushed" guy at the track to point and say, "That's not fair", and the class will get split. And ya know what?......He's right. It's not exactly cheap, initially, to get set up with a BL system so you can't make someone get it. Locally, the majority are running lipo, so that's a non-issue around here.


----------



## 420 Tech R/C (Sep 15, 2006)

Your right on the not fair tip jerusalem, but what are you going to do we are literally in the middle of a technology melt down.That means its up to the racers to sort this out, so we dont end up with 10 classes for 20 racers.some one some where has to bite the bullet so we can reel this whole thing back into a reasonable number of classes, so who should it be , the guys running new tech. or the guys running old tech... I saw this whole thing happen when rebuildable stock motors came onto the scene, so to me this is just history repeating itself. In the end the guys running the new tech. (rebuildables) won the arguement. It was resolved with a simple " if you choose to keep running the older version thats your choice".. on the cost Traxxas makes a nice CHEAP brushless system that runs sensored or sensorless motors and brushed motors. its 169.00 and comes with a 3500Kv sensorless motor.I run one in my dirt car, its good stuff! As for the brushless equivalent, your right there is no true brushless equall to a brushed stock motor, because brushless is just WAY more efficient. so why not take the closest thing , which is the 17.5, and make it the standard for stock class racing. and for those who choose to keep running brushed stuff, your right we cant make them go brushless, but we can say "if you wish to keep using it, that's your choice"


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

I would go out and buy the 17.5 right now if ten other guys were runnin it...But they(manufacturers) do this on purpose and call it variety...Whats the deal its seems to me that its always been 27t stock and 19t in the brushed market why make this 17.5 motor...Whats wrong with the 13.5 seems to me we are still trying to cater to the dying 27t market...I say no to run what you brung unless were just saying that to include the 27t in the race w/the 13.5...4200 vs Lipo I am cool w/that but its time will come and will be discussing which size lipo should be ran in stock....I guess the whole answer lies in how many guys are running what in the end....The national market will do what it wants but as for your LHS that will be how its always been.... :wave:


----------



## swtour (Oct 8, 2001)

> I would go out and buy the 17.5 right now if ten other guys were runnin it...But they(manufacturers) do this on purpose and call it variety...Whats the deal its seems to me that its always been 27t stock and 19t in the brushed market why make this 17.5 motor...Whats wrong with the 13.5 seems to me we are still trying to cater to the dying 27t market


I can partially answer the question of "WHY the 17.5 motor"

We approached NOVAK about building a Brushless Motor for oval racing that WOULD be closer to the speeds were are currently running with a 27t motor and 4 cell..but using LIPO batteries.

The 17.5 motor was the first attempt to find this motor. 

After a lot of testing it was found that the 17.5 motor was TOO fast for this application, however through testing it was also determined that the 17.5 motor on the 3200 LIPO ran virtually identical to the 10.5 motor(aka 4300 motor) being used with 4 cell...and having several drivers test with it...THEY LOVED IT and LOVED the idea of being able to take THAT class speed to a LIPO battery...so we convienced NOVAK to make it on a limited availability (Which has become great enough for them to take this to a regular production level due to it popularity) 

Also, during the testing of this motor it was found that on 4 cells, it DID run a lot closer to the speeds of a STOCK 4 cell combo than did the 13.5 (Which was actually very close to speeds of 10.5) Thus we found at least 2 possible class combinations for the 17.5 motor.

I've tested it in several other applications as well, and I've talked to others about testing it as well..and most like the results they have seen when putting this motor in a TC w/ 6 cells OR LIPO. VERY Drivable, close to STOCK/6 cell Touring Speeds...a possible GREAT Entry Level motor...and a GREAT race motor.

...the only bad part...it wasn't the motor we had been looking for to create a LIPO based motor that would run 4 cell STOCK speeds...so we've had NOVAK work up a New motor, that will be 21.5


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

I don't race oval, I'm coming from an onroad stance. 13.5 has been started as the "stock BL" class. I think it should stay that way. Looking to the future, the future started a year ago. Hundreds of local race tracks have started allowing 27t/13.5 classes. It's basically the evolution of things. The more we sit around kissing narrow minded asses, the longer we're stuck with these problems. 27t is dying, 13.5 is the next thing. The sooner we ALL embrace it, the better we'll be. New racers are who's gonna save the sport. New racers have embraced BL. It's time ROAR accepts this. The crusty veterans holding ROARs hand will finally have to follow.

I am impressed and jealous that the oval crowd has been lucky enough to make this great new technology work in their favor and continue to make strides. Why can't we do that??

Ben


----------



## swtour (Oct 8, 2001)

> New racers have embraced BL. It's time ROAR accepts this. The crusty veterans holding ROARs hand will finally have to follow.


Roar had nothing to do with any of the B/L choices being made so far...but like you said about NEW blood being what will cause RC to grow...it is felt by many....MANY....that first we need to slow things down to the speeds that RC was when it had some if it's biggest growth.

These days we've got it SO GOOD with awesome 'stuff', but speeds are so much faster right out of the box now vs. what they were in the late 80's when RC growth was probably at it's highest.

The really cool thing with Brushless is - the NEW GUYS (unlike myself) won't be subject to spending $$$$ for motors that are JUNK, plus you can have a total of 4 motors per CAR and cover virtually EVERY speed possible. (Where as in the past most guy needed 4 or 5 of EACH style motor, plus SPRINGS, BRUSHES...DYNOS, COMM LATHES, BREAK IN TOOLS...and the list goes on)


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

Now that you mention it, I think I remember hearing the 17.5 was geared towards oval. Now, if the 13.5 is too fast, and the 17.5 is too slow, isn't a 21.5 a step in the wrong direction? For what it's worth, this is the best conversation I've ever seen on HT.


----------



## Fred Knapp (Oct 7, 2001)

From what I've seen the 17.5 is the ticket.
We had two very well known drivers at our track last night running 12th scale.
One with the 17.5 and 4200's and the other with a well tuned CO27 and 4200's.
The only difference I could see was the up front power of the driver running the CO27 and that was short lived.


----------



## 420 Tech R/C (Sep 15, 2006)

Cool , then we all agree that 27t brushed is DEAD. so why not have a run what you brung attitude toward it and allow them to runin the "stock " class , whether it be 13.5 or 17.5, although i do beleive the 17.5 is closer to the 27t stockers of today which is where this discussion was headed towards. all these different options are going to keep coming unless someone says " this is the standard we are running by". Like I said in my previous post, once a decision has been made for sure on which brushless we are going to call the "stock" brushless, a "if you wish to continue to run brushed motors that is your choice" attitude should be taken. NOT making a brushed class to further complicate a day of racing.


----------



## rjvk (Aug 27, 2003)

Stock is getting to fast already, especially if you consider the newer or less gifted drivers. 13.5, being faster than a brushed 27t motor, would be a step backwards speed wise. 

Unfortunately, ROAR has yet to make a spec motor class for brushless. Everybody bought these 13.5 motors thinking they would be close to 27t, and now it turns out 17.5 is probably better. I'd point the finger at Novak, but all they are doing is trying to help us out. Maybe we can sell the 13.5s to the oval guys, and buy their 17.5s.....


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

Well maybe we can all agree on this its not gonna happen this season anyway.....maybe some testing ..I am allready interested enough that I am going to get one and run it and see how it compares to the 13.5 cause I dont give a crap about the 27t market R.I.P.......But with this being a new age in R/C isnt stock what we make it or in 25 years are they still gonna try and find something the same speed as the 27t....


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

Has anyone heard if this motor is being considered by ROAR or I guess helping w/ the whole B/L debate or are we the enthusiasts trying to set the standard?


----------



## 420 Tech R/C (Sep 15, 2006)

we entusiast are trying to set the standard because as usual roar is remaining silent until WE figure it out for them.


----------



## 420 Tech R/C (Sep 15, 2006)

some governing body!!!


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

Some things never change.....


----------



## JimmyJon (Sep 11, 2007)

well strickly speaking about the topic of this thread regarding the 17.5 brushless motor and how it runs in the classes I am interested in (1/12th & sedan). I would say I have observed it to be very very close to same as what the current stock motors we are runin.

Obviously when there are only 10 to 15 racers showing up and 1 or two have brushless it is nice to be able to have everyone run similar speeds. I feel the 17.5 is a better choice for those who want to use brushless than the 13.5. with regard to 1/12th & sedan. 

This all great information....


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

knapster said:


> From what I've seen the 17.5 is the ticket.
> We had two very well known drivers at our track last night running 12th scale.
> One with the 17.5 and 4200's and the other with a well tuned CO27 and 4200's.
> The only difference I could see was the up front power of the driver running the CO27 and that was short lived.


Where did Terry end up for rollout? Pinion as big as the spur?


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

88/64


----------



## swtour (Oct 8, 2001)

Great discussion guys, and it's been a pleasure to read...

Keep it up~


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

Maybe I'll get a 17.5 to try in my 12th scale. There is a sector of our club that view the 13.5 as "cheater". I feel my driving and setup skills are a up a level from last year, yet my peers are still only seeing a 13.5 in action. My enjoyment of racing doesn't in any way revolve around peer pressure, but unfortunate as it is, I just may have to meet in the middle.

Ben


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

None of those guys would say that.....


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

Where are guys rolling out the 17.5 in 12th scale road couse? I had the 13.5 up around 2.150. Are you going farther with the 17.5? How much gear can we fit on there???

Ben


----------



## swtour (Oct 8, 2001)

PRS I believe makes a 78 tooth pinion...and upward of 60 on the pinion side.

With the small size of a 1/12th scale tire...you may need it ALL.

On our large VELODROME OVAL tracks we are finding the we need HUGE gears..and we have tall (2.5") tires.


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

sportpak said:


> Where are guys rolling out the 17.5 in 12th scale road couse? I had the 13.5 up around 2.150. Are you going farther with the 17.5? How much gear can we fit on there???
> 
> Ben


We've been starting @2.30 w/ the 13.5 and going up from there. For the 17.5?......dunno......probably just under 3. Seriously.


----------



## swtour (Oct 8, 2001)

how tall/short are the tires being run on the 1/12th scale tires?


----------



## brian0525 (Jan 17, 2005)

Add .50 to your roll out when switching from 13.5 to 17.5 and then you may still want a little more.


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

swtour said:


> how tall/short are the tires being run on the 1/12th scale tires?


1.85 down to just under 1.65.


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

S. Jerusalem said:


> We've been starting @2.30 w/ the 13.5 and going up from there. For the 17.5?......dunno......probably just under 3. Seriously.



:freak: 
Holy Crap!! I'll have to check on that 78 spur. I don't want to have to run baloon tires to get it rolled out. I'll never have a chance if I can't get into that sweet spot.

Ben


----------



## JimmyJon (Sep 11, 2007)

from what I saw ...the 17.5 was using a 78 spur to a 40 pinion. I think they said 2.83 but check with Fred.


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

JimmyJon said:


> from what I saw ...the 17.5 was using a 78 spur to a 40 pinion. I think they said 2.83 but check with Fred.


Good lawd, I need to buy some pinions......and spurs.......and 17.5......huh......why did I buy the 13.5? Oh yeah. "Stock equivalent"?


----------



## swtour (Oct 8, 2001)

from what I've seen...guys who have the 13.5 motors (with sintered rotors) have no problem moving them pretty quickly in the swap and sell area. (Around 60.00 seems to be the going price)


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

swtour said:


> from what I've seen...guys who have the 13.5 motors (with sintered rotors) have no problem moving them pretty quickly in the swap and sell area. (Around 60.00 seems to be the going price)


Are you making an offer?


----------



## swtour (Oct 8, 2001)

LOL, no I have 2 of my own already (I won't tell you what I paid for mine), but I do watch them...cause guys are always looking for them.


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

Maybe this was allready stated but how much rollout change or just pinion size change do you see from 13.5 to 17.5......


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

Crptracer said:


> Maybe this was allready stated but how much rollout change or just pinion size change do you see from 13.5 to 17.5......


Someone said earlier to add .50 to the rollout of your 13.5. So that's, what, about 10 teeth give or take? Don't have a chart in front of me.


----------



## Fred Knapp (Oct 7, 2001)

Jason,
I think Terry had a 43 tooth pinion on, I'm not sure about the spur though.


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

I have my 17.5 ordered. I also ordered a 76t and a 80t spur from Precision. As it is, the 13.5 is too fast for a stock class. I look forward to trying it out against some of our other stockers. The only way we're gonna figure this out, at local track level or beyond, is to get them and see how they work in person. The sooner we get this going smoothly maybe the sooner ROAR can get us all back on the same page and playing together. I'll keep this thread posted. I think this is an awesome thread and we should keep this going.

Ben


----------



## 420 Tech R/C (Sep 15, 2006)

Ben your right. the sooner we get this figured out, the sooner we can bring it to roars attention that an answer has been found.And the sooner that we can get the costly brushed motors out of the race scene.Brushless is sooooo nice. no comm lathe,dyno,spare armatures,brushes and springs.It's much more cost effective when you look at the over all picture of how much money it costs to race a brushed setup and stay competitive.I have BOXES of the stuff and I couldnt even take a guess at how much money I have put into it in just the last 3 or 4 years!! probally enough to buy a complete brushless set-up or 2 just in stock motors and accessories.


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

Tell me about it. Myself and some friends are going to the Gate for the Halloween Classic at the end of the month. Today one of those guys I'm going with told me he spent $100 on a couple motors and brushes for that weekend. That doesn't include hotel and food. You can't go to a big race without some new tires too. Are your batteries up to snuff? Cocktails?? When does it end? 
I've elected to run the "exhibition" class. The exhibition class is a 13.5/lipo/TC class. Perfect! I'd love to run 12th stock, but I figure this is my chance to support the BL/Lipo movement. I'm not a motor tuner or particularly great at 12th scale. All I need are tires and a new body. I should be on a level playing field equiptment-wise. Driving and setup I'll have to work on though. 

Ben


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

Sportpak....I can pick it up(17.5) in INdy and bring it to Summit on sunday.....There stockin'em down here......Big on oval down here...


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

Crptracer said:


> Sportpak....I can pick it up(17.5) in INdy and bring it to Summit on sunday.....There stockin'em down here......Big on oval down here...


Thanks man, but it's in the mail already.

Ben


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

sportpak said:


> Thanks man, but it's in the mail already.
> 
> Ben




Thats cool just thought I would offer I am thinkin of pickin one up to run in my T/C just to see the difference...... :wave:


----------



## jmccormick (Nov 25, 2002)

My thoughts o the 17.5 are it's a nice way to run stock without having to worry about rebuilds. I run oval with a roll out around 3.66 and 3.90 within that range I run @ about 105 to 130 can temp. I do notice that at the start of a race the brushed motors have a definate advantage but after the 3 min mark they are almost equal with a slight advantage to the 17.5.


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

I think our track has had luck with them on the oval. I want to see what they do on the road course. We're kind of on the cusp of a lot of things changing. I see things much better in the future. In the mean time, we need to test these things, help make the future a lot of us see, a reality. That reality won't happen until people start seeing it in real life. I hope my motor shows up tomorrow so I can try it tomorrow night in 12th.

Ben


----------



## Crptracer (Feb 19, 2007)

Sport.....Did you run the 17.5?.....If so what did u think?....What kind of lap times did u turn?


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

I just got it last night. I hope to go in and practice this Sunday before the Fall Classic. If I can't, I'll run it for sure Tuesday in GT.

Ben


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

Hello all, it's been awhile.

First impression of the 17.5 in my TC was awesome. We run rubber tire on a pretty tight layout. I had my final drive down around 4.45. I think I could have easily gone down to 4.2. Temps at 4.45 we still around 120f. Next time we will be lower in final drive.

I thought the car was smooth with the 13.5. The 17.5 was even better. The power comes on so smooth, it doesn't unsettle the car. If it does get a bit nervous feeling, it's easier to gather up. 

I actually had to free the car up slightly. I don't know if traction was that much better this week or if it was the gentler power band. I'll have to see over the next couple weeks. I've also done a lot of homework on understanding my car/chassis. I hope some of last night was due to setup. 

I tq'ed and won my class with it. I was running with 27ts and 13.5s. I don't know where the 13.5s were geared. I think they were on the low side. I find that a lot of guys new to that motor are scared to gear it truly where it needs to be. That's why people think it's a fair stock motor. A lot of guys are seeing only half of what it has.

Our gt1 class was running 10.5s and 13.5s. Their fast laps were 11.2-11.5. My fast lap was 11.5 I believe. I was much more consistent though. I was only 2 or 3 seconds off the TQ pace for GT1.

It is early in the year. I think the pace will increase quickly. Time will tell if I can be competitive with it. Convikt and I were talking about it. He liked how smooth the motor looked on the track. He was close with his 27t, but his motor didn't like our 7min runs. 

We want our GT2 class to be nose to nose, good clean racing. This motor might help us find that goal. More people need to try this motor. I think it's the answer for "stock BL".

I may have to get another 17.5 for my 12th scale. I really don't want to take this one out of my TC.

Ben


----------



## swtour (Oct 8, 2001)

sportpak,

Sounds like great news.... I'm hoping this motor will catch on with the TC's....


----------



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

sportpak said:


> Hello all, it's been awhile.
> 
> First impression of the 17.5 in my TC was awesome. We run rubber tire on a pretty tight layout. I had my final drive down around 4.45. I think I could have easily gone down to 4.2. Temps at 4.45 we still around 120f. Next time we will be lower in final drive.
> 
> ...


I will be tring a 17.5 soon! That was simply awesome. I think if everyone gets on the same page with those...wow that will be real close racing. Maybe I'll have one next points race :thumbsup:


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

I'd love 5 or 6 of us on the same lap, all 7 minutes. The motor doesn't exagerate what's wrong with your chassis as much as the 13.5. That helps us guys with a lot of wheel time race close. We can be down on chassis tune or tires and still be close to pace. It will be a great motor for a real beginner too. Dale's watching this motor close.

Slow is fast.

Ben


----------



## S. Jerusalem (Feb 21, 2007)

That's great news. Our hobby is starving for a good low maintenance, user-friendly class.


----------



## kings kid (Aug 28, 2006)

I'm running one in my 1/12th pan car,very smooth and easier to drive than the 13.5 of a year ago. Our local track allowed 13.5's in 1/12th scale last year, but won't this year because of the speed difference. They seem to be very happy with the 17.5 instead.
I defininetly am!


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

Yo convikt, you looked pretty good with the 17.5 last night. What do you think? It feels slow as hell, but you really turn in the laps. I ran the 13.5 yesterday, chasing Eric, I had to really push the car. I was way overdriving it. When I settled down and cruised, the lap times went down. That's why I think I still prefer the 17.5. I can have at it and the car stays settled. 

I guess I shouldn't be helping those guys gear the 13.5. They're getting pretty fast. What final drive did you end up with?

Ben


----------



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

sportpak said:


> Yo convikt, you looked pretty good with the 17.5 last night. What do you think? It feels slow as hell, but you really turn in the laps. I ran the 13.5 yesterday, chasing Eric, I had to really push the car. I was way overdriving it. When I settled down and cruised, the lap times went down. That's why I think I still prefer the 17.5. I can have at it and the car stays settled.
> 
> I guess I shouldn't be helping those guys gear the 13.5. They're getting pretty fast. What final drive did you end up with?
> 
> Ben



It doesnt feel very puchy, but it just makes it eisier to drive smooth. I thought that the banana cars were getting faster there at the end  lol
I think when I finished I was at 4.51, it seemed cooler than it did at 4.83 :freak: You had some impressive lap times...wow 

cant wait till next tuesday now


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

Thanks. I never thought I'd get a 10.4. 
I had my 17.5 down around 4.2 without much trouble. Track layout will dictate how low we can go. Without the punch, corner speed is everything. You have got to keep the car rolling.

Ben


----------



## sportpak (Dec 23, 2005)

Hello all, I ran the 17.5 in my 12th scale this week. I liked the feel, but sadly I don't think it'll work. I ended up rolling it out to around 2.95. I had pretty large tires at 1.85 and was running a 41t pinion on a 80t spur. If I was running smaller tires, which is preferred, I don't think I could keep enough rollout in it. So I think I'll keep the 17.5 in my rubber tire TC. I don't know how much more 12th I'm going to run. I may put together a foam TC. We'll see though. Keep your eyes peeled for a sweet GenX....

Ben


----------



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

sportpak said:


> I may put together a foam TC.
> 
> Ben


Now were talkin' :thumbsup:


----------



## DLS II (May 31, 2007)

Hey Convikt, how much runtime are you getting on a TC with a 17.5. From what I see in this column a 17.5 is the way to go for "stock" class. I want to put one in my 2wd TC. (I posted pics of it in the RC Tech 2wd column) Don


----------



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

DLS II said:


> Hey Convikt, how much runtime are you getting on a TC with a 17.5. From what I see in this column a 17.5 is the way to go for "stock" class. I want to put one in my 2wd TC. (I posted pics of it in the RC Tech 2wd column) Don


I have it geared at 4.86 fdr, and we race for 7 minuets on rubbers. I think I could get maybe 8 1/2 minutes before it dumps.


----------



## DLS II (May 31, 2007)

OK, what kind& capacity battery are you using? I'm trying to get an idea of average current draw. Thanks, Don


----------



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

I use EP4200's


----------



## DLS II (May 31, 2007)

What variety of TC are you using? Thanks, Don


----------



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

DLS II said:


> What variety of TC are you using? Thanks, Don



Corally RDX, and I used it for a while in my T2 as well


----------



## DLS II (May 31, 2007)

Thanks, I really appreciate the info. Don


----------



## convikt (Nov 2, 2005)

your welcome


----------

