SpikeX

I think it's about time people came out with completely new technology for nitro engines. We need more power, more torque, less / easier tuning, etc. These little engines are really finicky, and a lot of people are quitting the hobby because of that. We need cheaper fuel (or make these engines run on a completely different fuel altogether). If designers could fullfill all those needs, without increasing the price of engines and associated equipment, I think a lot more people would buy nitros.

HeatFire

hmm i guess anyway we pay overprice for methanol.... methanol can be manufactured really cheap... sure.. no "top of the line" stuff like they say the fuels we buy are... but hey.. if the costs of the fuel were really low compared to today... why care if it aint stable to store for like 1 year + like it's now..

splcrazy

yes and thats why i own a baja5b too , but cant help it , still like my nitros too for some reason . what they should make is an engine that runs on NATURAL GAS it would be so easy to refill just like refilling up a cigarete lighter and gas is way cheaper than methanol & petrol . electric run models lose peak power when the batterys start getting flat lol whats the point of that lol

black mamba

I think nitro engine technology is pretty much maxed out. Aside from little improvements with porting and timing, there's not really much else that can be improved upon without completely redesigning/retooling the "nitro engine" as we know it. Will nitro engine companies invest the money to go that route? If there's a business case they will, but to just do it, I doubt it. What you see in the high dollar, top end engines is the best of what nitro technology has to offer. There will come a point in time when electric hits this point as well, but as of right now, electric technology is hot, hot, hot and will be for at least a couple more years.[8D]

holinger91

lol... the thing about it is... is that the electrics just dont jump and take the beat as nice... the battery packs are so heavy that they often go flying, the engine often has the wires come loose, its just not as fun.... sure i have fun with my electrics, but every jump is a jump, then run up and plug things back in, then go again... tho the nitros take time to go... the savage just goes and goes once its goin good... i dont care about speed... the current brushless motors are perfect for my likings... they just have some durability improvements to make IMO

SAVAGEJIM

I agree with you as far as nitro goes. Yes, nitro engines are maxed out as they are, but if they want to remain competitive with motor, engines will have to go multi-cylinder and go with a fuel that has way more BTUs per unit mass than what nitro has. That way, you could gear way high since the new fuel and engines would have the torque to push them.

Foxy

We won't ever see 100mph RTRs, maybe some kind of e-version of 1/8th road racers, but even then...no, I don't think so. They can't be driven at that speed. They have to be lightened and made specially aerodynamic in such ways to make the cars very weak, from a customer service point of view it makes no sense. Some of these 100mph brushless cars are almost snapped in half when they inevitably wreck at that speed. The size of the cars and the laws of physics simply procude the average hobbyist from owning or even wanting such a car. Like you said Traxxas 'for the masses'. Imagine a 13 year old kid getting a brushless touring car cos it said 100mph on the box, after the first run, he'll be back at the shop saying first he can't control it, and second that it's broken. Those kinds of speeds will always be a niche.

SAVAGEJIM

LOL, to prevent punks from ramming stuff with a $500 RC, I can see RC makers putting limiter of one sort or another on newer RCs that are capable of very high speeds.

Yes, RTRs, even electric, has a way to go before they can achieve the true 100MPH mark, but it will not be too long before it is breached and I strongly believe an electric will be the one that does it. If a nitro RC wants to see anything near 100MPH true speed, it would have to mount multiple engines, no less than two or three very powerful engines; and there are very few RTRs that are dual engine mounted. Actually, I am guessing that it might take at least 4 nitro engines and a very very very high gear ratio. The reason why I say at least 4 is because nitro engines are very very very weak in torque. Gasoline engines are the option then since gas has way more BTUs per unit mass than nitro. This factor alone should double or exceed double the current torque output of that of nitro.

cossack71

I don't know if I agree with multiple motors. Yes, it will give you more torque, but it also adds a lot of weight (motors plus gas tanks + ) and weight slows you down.
Look at 1:1 cars like the Lotus and Porsche, little motors, high speed. Most of it is done through gearing. and high revs.
Now if they could build a small 4 stroke, multi cylinder, extremely high rev motor (think F1, little 2.4 V8 that spins up to 19K), and a 5 or 6 speed trans, then 100+ wouldn't be a problem. You would have the torque, and the gearing after 3rd or 4th would be overdrive. You could do a 2 stroke with a 6 speed, but you would lose some of the torque, and have the revs but with a 4 stroke, you could run regular gas, or even alternate fuels.
Multiple motors work in tractor pulling, but they aren't really known for a quick ET.

black mamba

I'd think again before saying we won't see 100mph RTRs. Take a look around you-speed is king these days and will be for a while. Everything and everybody is advertising SPEED, SPEED, SPEED. It's what the people want! The first company to hit the century mark in top speed is going to go down in RC History....and the payout is going to be huge. Sit back, crack open a cold one or two and just wait. It WILL happen, and sooner than later.[8D]

black mamba

That sounds nice and is true, except you are forgetting or forgot to state one KEY aspect of those cars. Low weight. And turbos for sake of argument. They can perform like they do because they are very light and that gives them a very favorable power to weight ratio. And turbos or a turbo give those little engines the "artifical" displacement boost they require for a decent torque curve and hp boost for top end pull. If those cars were even 500lbs heavier, they'd see a major hit in performance. Add that weight and take the turbo or turbos off and they'd be slugs that couldn't run with a Geo Metro. The time tested "formula" for weight loss/gain and it's affect on performance is such: every 100lbs gained will add a tenth of a second to your acceleration times......and on the same hand, every 100lbs you lose will drop a tenth off your acceleration times.[8D]

edit-I think multi cylinder engines, in a V configuration for weight and space savings would be a great idea. A cool V2 nitro burner would be sweet. You'd see huge torque increases automatically via increased displacement and the HP would shoot up big time. This would be a step in the right direction to close the gap between nitro and brushless.[8D]

cossack71

Agreed, but I never said turbo. Not all Porsche or Lotus run them (I'm a former Lotus mechanic back in the 70's) The Lotus Europa was the only car I ever owned, and worked on that could redline in 5th gear, Why? Little high rev 4 cylinder (1.6), low weight, great gear spread, aero package etc. And not all Porches are turbo, but they are small flat 6, high rev, great gear package.
The weight is a very big factor, and the Lipos are a big help to the electrics, low weight, high output, hooked to a motor that turns high revs.
100+ is a goal, but not one that everyone will want to own. Biggest problem would be, where do you run it? Not all of us have spaces that wide open.
Speed yes, I think quickness (acceleration) is much more important. When I run at the track, I want to just blast out of the corner, but I also want to slow down before the next. So balance is important also.

black mamba

It all depends on how fast they can hit 100mph. The faster it hits it, the less space you need to run it. Look at RC drag cars. They hit insane speeds in less than 200 feet. Add a little distance to that for a non drag type car and you could still easily run in a parking lot or the street in front of your house. People will find a way, trust me.

black mamba

I agree, but in today's modern European performance car, the turbo charger is more common than not. And why not? Turbos can make sick power/torque and do it efficiently. A win-win for the manufacturers/tuners.[8D]

supertib

I think you guys are really missing the overal picture here....... There is soo much more to this hobby then whats fastest... Honestly do any of you think going faster is really a issue worth even considering ? Yes brushless systems are faster, but really going fast is not really that much of an issue if you ask me... Nitro vehicles are already faster then the limits of control, brusheless are purely overkill.... I mean seriously whats the point of going 100 mph when the vehcile is a RTR peice of junk, you seriously cant control a vehicle properly at those speeds, and if you do ever attain those speeds rest assured you wont be making too many passes.... With huge power comes huge maintenance, drivetrains melts, tires melt, crashes cause massive damage... I seriously could care less if a brushless has 20 mph more thne my nitros, as currently my nitros are faster then i can use.....

As well the limits of nitro arent in making power, the limits are finding a clutch sytem that can hold the power, in Truggies we are finding that todays high powered motors are too powerful for the avaialble cluthing systems...... There is no real need for nitro engines to become faster and more powerful, as seriously todays vehicles and mechanical components are truly not meant to be handling the type of power we already make....

I like brushless, but i much prefer the sound and characteristics of nitro.. the sound and feel of these motors is something special the brushless will never capture , there is alot more to this argument then what is faster, to me even if brusheless is twice as fast I am still not buying into it... I love the smell, feel, sound, and excitment that nitro offers..... On a track having 1 nitros running is awesome, it has such adrenaline and exceitment....Brushless sounds like a bunch of sewing machines... sure they are straightline fast, but whan can you really use that speed anyways.....

cossack71

Very well put, and I agree completely.
I love nitro. The electrics are OK, but no where near the feel and emotion that nitro has.
And to me, so much more realistic.
And maybe that's because of my age, I'm not a Prius kind of guy. Give me a small block with carb and I'm a happy camper.
I learned to accept a long time ago, nitro is a headache, but well worth it for the enjoyment.
And that's what this hobby is all about. Doing something we enjoy, no matter what class or speed it is.

supertib

I am an old schooler as well....electrics are too sterile for my likings.... fastor not it doesn't matter... I enjoy doing huge jumps and track racing, the weight of the electric systems would be more of a hasle then its worth IMHO

SAVAGEJIM

The V-configured 2-cylinder nitro is something I was dreaming up last night. It can work asn is very simple to design based on how nitro engines are designed at the moment; double the torque out one crankshaft and gear higher and higher speeds are possible.

SAVAGEJIM

No disagreement here, the hobby has a wide range of aspects to enjoy. Some desire control and nimbleness over top speed, and that is excellent for racing on most tracks, particularly since very few tracks have very long straights.

There are others who value acceleration, especially for drag racing. Nimbleness is not a factor since drag racing is a straightline hobby.

But there are many in the hobby who also desire top speed, and the number of hobbists who deam of reaching very high top speeds is actually fairly significant. No, such a top speedser is not nimble by any means nor will it outaccelerate a dragster, its whole goal is to go very very fast in a straight line on a long stretch of road.

As far as clutches go, I feel it will not be long before the RC industry comes up with a more efficient and effective contact areas. The swinging arm clutches of our off road trucks and buggies are very simple and very very crude devices. I am greatly surprised that off road vehicles have not had a Centax style clutch for off-road big blocks. Centax gives you more contact area for a much better grip and less slip. As for engines being too powerful for a clutch, the clutch can be redesigned to take the new loads. It's just a matter of time before somone will match a decently designed clutch to take the power of a modern race .21ci engine. Afterall, a Chevrolet Corvette must handle more than 500fl-lbf torque with very little or no slipping.

I too love nitro, I have a special place in my heart for all things mechanical. That is why I chose nitro over electric; I like the hands-on requirements of engines, motors are too simple for me. Additionally, the smell of nitro when running your RCs is just exilerating! To me, mortors are way too silent for me. Additionally, even with LiPo batts, modern brushless motors will still suck them dry very quickly.

Even if motors spank engines y two-fold or even three-fold, I too will hold dearly to my nitro engines. If I ever go electric, it will only be to upgrade my radio, RX, and servos, and maybe a batt to run those longer.

black mamba

For those that think speed isn't a big deal, you would be the minority. For every "conservative" RC'er like yourselves, there's 10 speed freaks, and the companies are going to go after the speed freaks because they will spend the money to do whatever it takes to have the fastest RC around. You can see the speed invasion here on nearly every car/truck forum on RC Universe. You've got guys spending $$$$$$$$ to say they have the fastest (fill in the blank) on the forum. Don't believe me? Take a look around. We can see this almost weekly on our own HPI monster truck segment of the forum. Why else are guys getting top end engines with top end pipes and gearing them at 19/47 and higher with a 3spd? Lately we've had lots of STS, Picco, RR and Spec 3 talk, and all those engines are more than capable of creating a very fast Savage. I'd bet you a mortgage payment pure speed is the reason behind it all. And you'd be kidding yourself if you think the "need for speed" hasn't been around since the first .21 Savvy was pulled out of the box and that stock engine was yanked the first week the owner had it. Put that all in perspective of where the majority in this hobby want to go and what you have is the speed generation taking over. Does that mean the non-speed freak is being shoved out? No. I personally like the speed craze. Why? Because the technology will flow downwards and everyone will benefit. We already see this with brushless and the modern batteries-the benefits of both are now everywhere in the hobby and the "electric side" of the hobby has been greatly enhanced by that trickle down effect. Nitro needs a revolutionary change like what brushless and LiPo has done. Take it or leave it, but one thing is for sure, the RC companies are going to go after the money.[8D]

edit-some guy just built a 1:1 radial engine (think old airplane) "Harley" that could do about 200mph........could you imagine a radial engine'd Savvy? Wild stuff. Granted that wouldn't be something mainstream or even plausible for say HPI to produce, but radical thinking like that is what is needed to spark a fire within a R&D dept.[8D]

azzman

Yup...If it sells more, then a manufacturer will do it!! [&:]

azzman

Even though methanol has only half the heat value of gasoline, the net gain in "volumetric mass efficiency" is over three times. So, for example, if the gasoline/air mixture in a given engine cylinder produces 100 Btu on each stroke, the same engine would produce 150 Btu per stroke with methanol. This power gain due to increased volumetric mass efficiency is the primary reason for the popularity of methyl alcohol as a racing fuel. Overall, this power increase with alcohol fuels considerably mitigates the liability of low heat value.

EDIT:
Oh and what about fuel injection will that be the next big improvement for Nitro engines...its happening now for Dirt Bikes...and as we all know, technology filters down...

black mamba

FI has been out in the motorcycle world in general for quite a while now...dirt bikes are just getting their turn though. I think FI in RC is a while away as it would require some major engineering to incorporate it onto a nitro engine for mass consumption.[8D]

SpikeX

Some nitro airplane engines already have something close to fuel injection...

SAVAGEJIM

Methanol is all good and great as far as power goes, especially when considering volumetric mass efficiencies at higher RPMs. What is hurt here is mileage and low end torque. What I was trying to get at is a type of fuel that will allow model engines to turn at lower RPMs but produce way more torque so you can gear very very high and achieve very fast speeds through gearing and not y the very very high RPMs of the engine. I was proposing a way to increase torque out of our single cylinder engines, and not just by increasing displacement.

An alternative that allows us to keep on using our nitro fuels is to begine to make multi-cylinder nitro engines and increase displacemnt and therefore torque by that method. That way you do not have one massive cylinder with a piston speed that is too fast; you can disperse that displacement over smaller cylinders and keep cylinder speed managable. I am a strong proponent for a V-twin nitro, in-line 4, or 6, V-4, 6, or 8, or maybe a radial 6! The more the cylinders, the shorter the strokes allowed to maintain a reasonable piston liner velocity and also increase displacement for increased torque output.