01-18-2006, 10:48 PM
|
TinyRC Super Pro
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 69
|
|
xmods firebird
Hey i was wondering if thie firebird was a good car. Is it fast(how fast), does it have good suspension, does it handle well, and other pros and cons. thanks 4 yer feedback
|
01-19-2006, 05:32 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12
|
|
i got one
firebirds are in my hot rodder opinion the best evo but get the rechargables they save alot of money and make it go faster mine goes about 13 or 14 mph and thats stock except for the rechargables
|
01-19-2006, 07:26 PM
|
TinyRC Super Pro
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 69
|
|
what kind of rechargeables?
|
01-19-2006, 09:28 PM
|
|
No title
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 136
|
|
All of the Evo cars have the same performance since they all have the same chassis. The only difference is the LL chassis cars (G35 & Mustang might not turn as tight, but that will be only very slightly). I'll tell you the same thing I tell everyone else, get whatever body style car you like the best, because all 4 cars perform the same just as both trucks perform the same.
As far as rechargeables go, I use Energizer Ni-Mh because they have the highest mAh rating (850) but a friend of mine uses Duracells and seems to get 5 to 10 more minutes out of his.
__________________
4 gen1 Xmods, 2 Evo's, 1 Mini-Z, 1 ZipZap, a tank, & a 1:10thbuggy - I think I have an addiction!
Check out my RC page @
|
01-19-2006, 11:51 PM
|
TinyRC Super Pro
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 69
|
|
yea, i know i would like to have a firebird. And the reason ur getting less time is because the AAA rechargeables only have about 1.2 volts(it might say otherwise on the battery, but it is probably wrong) compared to the non-rechargeables 1.5 volts. anywho, thanks
|
02-06-2006, 11:34 AM
|
TinyRC Newbie
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 13
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by makg
yea, i know i would like to have a firebird. And the reason ur getting less time is because the AAA rechargeables only have about 1.2 volts(it might say otherwise on the battery, but it is probably wrong) compared to the non-rechargeables 1.5 volts. anywho, thanks
|
This is completely wrong. More voltage will not give you longer runtimes. Voltage = power, mAh = runtime. However, higher voltage does not mean you will get more power from your car, unless the battery also has a higher discharge rate to let more power get to the motor faster. A 1.2v NIMH will have more power than a 1.5v Alkaline due to the discharge rate. A 950mAh NIMH will have longer runtime than a 750mAh NIMH.
J.
|
03-19-2006, 02:27 AM
|
TinyRC Super Pro
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 69
|
|
You said Ni-MH vs. reg alkaline, , i was comparing rechargeable alkaline w/ regular. But for those who want to know answer the following question, read on.
" 15: How long will Rechargeable Alkaline last in my device as compared with a regular alkaline.
Answer: In ALL cases, this depends on how much power is required to run the device. Lower drain devices will give longer service hours while high drain applications will give less hours of service. Performance, therefore, varies by device. However, on average, the initial performance of a Rechargeable Alkaline will be up to 80% of that of a regular alkaline. Overall performance of Rechargeable Alkaline will be 10 times or more than that of a regular alkaline because Rechargeable Alkaline is rechargeable. Frequent recharging will prolong the life of Rechargeable Alkaline batteries."
-This information was taken from an actual battery company, and not just some guy with several assumptions.
(If this were for any other rechargeable battery type, such as lithium rechargeables, this answer would not be correct, but as for alkaline, it is.)
Last edited by makg; 03-19-2006 at 02:42 AM.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:29 AM.
|
|