Scioly.org

I totally had a 0 cm gap, 0 sec run time and was 0 cm away from the target

invisiblebanana wrote:I totally had a 0 cm gap, 0 sec run time and was 0 cm away from the target

Why not go for the universe breaking -1 cm gap?

invisiblebanana wrote:I totally had a 0 cm gap, 0 sec run time and was 0 cm away from the target

Totally doable! Buggy glider flies over photogate with an on point landing!

Anyway at state my goal is under 3 sec, under 3 cm, under 25 cm gate. Can always get a tighter gate but doubt I will need it. Gota study thermo more anyway...

Tendan wrote:

invisiblebanana wrote:I totally had a 0 cm gap, 0 sec run time and was 0 cm away from the target

Why not go for the universe breaking -1 cm gap?

Imagine if the rules counted the bonus distance as the distance chosen by the participant for the bonus and also had no bonus distance limit.

Then you could have a -99999....... gap

And get a -9999999999....... score

sciolyperson1 wrote:

MattChina wrote:

MadCow2357 wrote: Hmm so do you think this is a troll or do you think they meant regionals.

They either have a godly buggy or they got reallly lucky. Idk, maybe its a troll

Its bs lol
1.9 seconds is faster than my run at nats (2.086, fastest run at nats last year)

while it is bs its probably possible even with dc motors

sciolyperson1 wrote:

OhioRockstar wrote:We got 1st at States but it was close. We had a 12 cm gate. We had a time of 1.9 and got 0.3 cm from point. So thats a score of -46.5

Ohio states didn't happen yet.

Im from the future

shrewdPanther46 wrote:

sciolyperson1 wrote:

MattChina wrote: They either have a godly buggy or they got reallly lucky. Idk, maybe its a troll

Its bs lol
1.9 seconds is faster than my run at nats (2.086, fastest run at nats last year)

while it is bs its probably possible even with dc motors

I mean, you can buy a 3000 rpm dc motor, and use an absurdly high gear ratio and make it have less than a 1 second speed.

Although most people don't do that since it lowers the accuracy by a lot.

invisiblebanana wrote:

shrewdPanther46 wrote:

sciolyperson1 wrote:
Its bs lol
1.9 seconds is faster than my run at nats (2.086, fastest run at nats last year)

while it is bs its probably possible even with dc motors

I mean, you can buy a 3000 rpm dc motor, and use an absurdly high gear ratio and make it have less than a 1 second speed.

Although most people don't do that since it lowers the accuracy by a lot.

ever heard of torque?

shrewdPanther46 wrote:

invisiblebanana wrote:

shrewdPanther46 wrote: while it is bs its probably possible even with dc motors

I mean, you can buy a 3000 rpm dc motor, and use an absurdly high gear ratio and make it have less than a 1 second speed.

Although most people don't do that since it lowers the accuracy by a lot.

ever heard of torque?

yeah, you probably would have to make the buggy super light, like literally balsa chasis

OhioRockstar wrote:

shrewdPanther46 wrote:

invisiblebanana wrote:
I mean, you can buy a 3000 rpm dc motor, and use an absurdly high gear ratio and make it have less than a 1 second speed.

Although most people don't do that since it lowers the accuracy by a lot.

ever heard of torque?

yeah, you probably would have to make the buggy super light, like literally balsa chasis

<1.9 s is definitely possible, and not necessarily at the loss of accuracy. The national EV champion in 2016 had 1.6 seconds with perfect accuracy and was not the fastest device at the tournament. Although they used brushless motors, I think 1.9 is possible with brushed. That said, I agree its unlikely.