Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3199 Excellent

About bRIBEGuy

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
    Alberta, Canada
  • Interests
    RC Cars, Cycling, photography, outdoors anything. Knives, flashlights, gear in general......

Recent Profile Visitors

1770 profile views
  1. Spent some time cleaning the basement and RC area, and found these old treasures... I think these were from ~1990?
  2. I hate questions like this, because it makes me actually count and realize how much "stuff" I have... ha ha ha! The main problems for me (and I'm sure for many who have been in the hobby a L-O-N-G time), is the concept of "collection creep", and also what defines a "runner". Collection Creep: This to me is where your collection grows over time. I think most would agree that acquiring 1-2 cars/year is a reasonable amount (as a hypothetical example). But over 10 years, that could be 20 cars. I got my first RC car in the mid 80's, so by similar math, I could feasibly have 40-80 cars in a collection. The number sounds obscene... but not when you break it down by time. Runner runner, what is a runner?: Here again, my collection poses a challenge for OP's query. Is a runner something that actively gets run? Something that has been run? Or something that could be/has intent to be run? Again, in context of an aging collection, I have cars that I used to run a TON, but haven't been driven now in years (enter various reason here), and may or may not ever be driven again. So do they count? Realistically I probably have ~12 active runners (4 of which "belong" to my wife & daughter), and another 12 "retired" or "semi-retired" runners. Some of these were initially purchased almost 30 years ago. That number is likely matched by un-run cars that have been built as display pieces and fun special projects. Seems like a lot. And yet at the same time, it doesn't.
  3. Looks like a Traxxas TRX6: https://traxxas.com/products/landing/trx-6-flatbed-hauler/
  4. A friendly suggestion/best practice for this... When you go to re-insert the screw, start off by slowly turning it backwards (counterclockwise) as if removing it. As the screw rotates around, there will be a point where the threads in the screw line up with the threads in the plastic, and you will feel a "click". At that point start threading normally, and the threads in the screw will be aligned with the threads in the plastic.
  5. Well said @Saito2! I think there are some who will claim NiMh out performs LiPo, but that is neither here nor there in context of the rest of your write up. Ain't nothing wrong with sticking to what you like... even if it just is because you like it. It reminds me of a thing I heard once on the "proper" way to drink Whisky... after much debate and opinion someone just stated that the "proper way" was however you enjoyed it most. Here here!
  6. Yes there is "data" on speed and time, but it has to be taken at face value. And as I pointed out previously, the criteria to start with are not equal. The power that a battery can produce is linked both to voltage and capacity. At a 1C discharge rate, the NiMh in his "test" would produce 36w of power. At the same 1c discharge rate, the smaller capacity (yet higher voltage) LiPo would only produce 29.6w. So without even delving into the quality of battery, where they are in their life cycle, or any other aspect of the test, the NiMh already starts off objectively with almost 20% more output available (at 1c). Not a fair test. The problem with "better" is that it in itself could be considered subjective. From a breakdown, I personally would look at it this way for listing (more objective) criteria between chemistry: Voltage: LiPo wins. Higher voltage per cell. Power: LiPo wins. Higher discharge rate per cell. Capacity: LiPo wins..... usually. It really just comes down to how many cells you want to wire in parallel, which usually comes down to... Weight: LiPo wins. Lighter per voltage/capacity equivalent NiMh cell/pack. Size: Tie. LiPo fits better in stuff designed for it, and the same goes for NiMh. Durability: NiMh. LiPo has an intrinsic "fragileness" to it physically. NiMh cells are pretty darn tough if they get bumped, poked, etc. A hardcase on a LiPo can help... but it can also just mask a problem you don't know is happening. Reliability: LiPo. Specifically I refer here to "how long will a battery last" as far as operational life. LiPo wins hands down. Ease of use: Tie... leaning slightly towards NiMh (in an RC setup). The challenge here (IMO), is that it is based on equipment. If you have a proper LiPo charger, an ESC with proper cutoffs, and a good LiPo, then I think using these packs is a no brainer. NiMh however just seems simpler because you don't need additional features to use it. If you're setup properly, either is easy. Safety: NiMh (at least on paper). I have had MANY NiMh and NiCd cell explode or pop over the years. It can scare the crap out of you, but the damage is pretty limited as the cells are small. LiPo's can produce hydrogen and oxygen in some scenarios, so a fire ( an unfortunately potential byproduct of puncture or extreme overcharge) can get really bad really quick. BUT... this is also a danger hyped up online, and rarely seen in reality. When good quality cells are used and maintained properly, there is very low risk involved (see laptops, cell phones, etc...). BUT... risk and potential outcome are different... so NiMh is safer on paper. As for preference... that's a completely different matter. People can use and run whatever they want... both chemistry types are completely functional in making our toys zip around. And that's what counts at the end of the day right? But if we want to play arm-chair scholar and race scientific and mathematical fact... well, I'm afraid NiMh will come out looking as old and tired as it actually is.
  7. I 100% get this, and yet for me personally, I don't have much hate for NiMh or anyone that still uses them. I'd say 90% of my running now is LiPo, but I still have a few NiMh packs, and in my older Tamiya cars (re-re, etc...) they do just fine. Are they as fast or as powerful as my LiPo's? Heck no.... nor do they last nearly as long. But I'm not stuffing them into my TC-01 or dual brushless Clod... they're ending up in Lunchbox's, Midnight Pumpkin's, Thunder Shot's and other cars that an extra few km/h or an extra 10 min of run time don't really matter.
  8. I'm not convinced that NiMh is obsolete, but it is certainly less relevant than it once was. I would agree that LiPo is superior in almost every way... physical durability is probably it's weak point, IMO. ^^^ This! Great answer. Agree on living through NiCd's making LiPo seem awesome... ha ha ha! The biggest issue with NiCd and NiMh "maintenance" comes down to internal crystallizing, and it's effects on "memory" and performance. NiCd needed to be discharged, charged, and cycled properly (and frequently) or else internal crystalline build up would create "memory" in the packs, reducing their capacity and output. The move to NiMh helped to mitigate some of the "memory issues" (by removing the reactive Cadmium), but the intrinsic nature of a Nickel battery still leads to crystallization over time. If a LiPo sits for a long time, it may self discharge a bit, but if all else is equal, it should be pretty much GTG once charged back up. A NiCd/NiMh however, requires frequent cycling (every 1-3 months) however to mitigate the crystalline formation that would otherwise limit the cells performance. It's not directly applicable here (though really none of this is really applicable to the OP's query...lol), but that video bugs me SO much from a "Scientific Method" perspective. It's a completely subjective test, with no actual data, no proof of test validity, and using dissimilar equipment. Comparing a 5000mah brand-name NiMh to a 22% lower capacity 4000mah LiPo from a no-name amazon/bangood company is hardly apples to apples. I will gladly give you the "good for fitting in Tamiya Rere Chassis" bit... LiPo sucks for that now... ha!
  9. Bullitt Benny sitting steady and waiting for the last of the work to be completed... we're getting close now!
  10. With the chassis cover mounted up, you can see how the clear back still allows for the period-correct electronics to be displayed, while the black front allows for a bit more focus on, and pop from, the driver figure.
  11. Not a bang-on perfect replica of the box art helmet, but as noted before, the shapes are different... and quite frankly, I'm not that talented. In all actuality, it looks half-way decent in real life (as opposed to at 50x the size on a computer screen), and I'm reasonably happy with the outcome here. I opted to add the "present in the instructions, but not present on the box art" Arai sticker to the helmet because it just kinda looked right... and it seemed a bit of a shame to leave an OG sponsor sticker alone on an otherwise empty sticker sheet. Mounted up to the torso and this is actually sorta coming together, IMO.
  12. Great start to a thread! I love the "old school" approach to tinkering with the motor...
  • Create New...