MaxAmps Race Edition Lipos

[josh9mille]

Originally Posted by JERRY2KONE

What I would like to see is for someone in teh R/C hobby call them out in a big way. How about if they contact one of the major networks and request a spot for getting out consumer news on comparisons of Lipo technology in general. Using R/C batteries as their platform and put it all on the table for all to see.

Sounds like a good idea, but unfortunately tv stations are not going to give a crap about r/c stuff

[JERRY2KONE]

Originally Posted by josh9mille

Sounds like a good idea, but unfortunately tv stations are not going to give a crap about r/c stuff

You don't watch the news much do ya? Have you seen some of the crapy stories runing lately? News stations are always on the hunt for anything new and interesting. These are the kind of stories they send out their newest reporters out on to help them learn. I bet if enough of us wrote in to RCaction magazine requesting that a comparison be done, that they would eventualy cave and get-er-done. How many comparisons have we seen in their magazine in just the last year between different Monster trucks, Buggys, short course trucks, Etc, Etc..... Some one has to take this serious enough and realize that a great injustice is being done by some of these half A$$ companies and step up to the challenge of testing and reporting on some real world specs that we can all live with.

Who really cares about graphs anyways. To be honest even if they posted graphs I wouldn't believe them. Their claims are simply bogus and that is the end of it. Even if the cells were up to it (and they are not) for a battery with pissy 12awg wires and Deans plug to be able to support the kind of C ratings (150C or 75C or what ever the reckon it is) that they advertise is just pure BS. This is a company that has time and time again lied through it's teeth and probably will continue to do so.

[molak]

Originally Posted by JERRY2KONE

You don't watch the news much do ya? Have you seen some of the crapy stories runing lately? News stations are always on the hunt for anything new and interesting. These are the kind of stories they send out their newest reporters out on to help them learn. I bet if enough of us wrote in to RCaction magazine requesting that a comparison be done, that they would eventualy cave and get-er-done. How many comparisons have we seen in their magazine in just the last year between different Monster trucks, Buggys, short course trucks, Etc, Etc..... Some one has to take this serious enough and realize that a great injustice is being done by some of these half A$$ companies and step up to the challenge of testing and reporting on some real world specs that we can all live with.

Rc car action .. are you serious ????

Are you speaking about the magazine who gave Maxamps 3 consecutive "best battery of the year " price ??

And the editor of that magazine is now marketing director of Maxamps ...

Great idea!! That will be a fair un-biased review!

http://maxamps.com/products.php?cat=285

It says 39 minutes average runtime. How do they get that number exactly? 39 minutes at 150c.. HOLY CRAP! Screw fusion reactors, let's use MaxAmps batteries instead!

So.. if I buy a pack that says 39 minutes average runtime, run it in any normal powerful setup and get an average of 20 minutes runtime, does that mean I can get my money back? Aren't there laws against false advertising? This is like Neu saying that their motors average about 60 MPH...
Also, 100% waterproof? So I can run this in my truck underwater, like in a pool? If the electrical connectors on the pack aren't waterproof (deans/traxxas/other connectors), you can't really advertise your product as waterproof. That's like advertising a waterproof camera that has an exposed battery pack and shorts underwater. Maybe I should buy a battery pack, go underwater with it, shock myself, and then sue?
I'm going to have to look into the laws of advertising, because I'm pretty sure that a lot of Maxamps' marketing tactics are shady, if not even unlawful..

It just makes me sad thinking of people inexperienced with the hobby looking in to electric cars. They see Maxamps have the best rated batteries, 3 years in a row of the "Best Battery" and claims of the best prices, etc. so they go for it and take the plunge to lipos, only to have a dead cell, or something that doesn't perform to it's rating... leaving them dissatisfied with electrics and maybe even RC as a whole. Kind of a shame, really.


On a side note, anyone want to buy this shrink wrapped duraflame log-- Err mystery battery I have here? It's waterproof, has a TRUE 175c rating, and will give you an average of 2 hours runtime. It's the best log-- err battery we have tested! I can post graphs of it's performance too if you guys just hang tight for a few days.

[JERRY2KONE]

Originally Posted by molak

Rc car action .. are you serious ????

Are you speaking about the magazine who gave Maxamps 3 consecutive "best battery of the year " price ??

And the editor of that magazine is now marketing director of Maxamps ...

Great idea!! That will be a fair un-biased review!

He does not own the magazine. He is an editor. You might want to look into what that means. He is responsible for making sure that the information provided is true and correct and does not get the owner sued or held liable for false advertising, or slander by making any claims that one product is better than another without proof to back up that report. Of course as the editor he does not have to prove that an ad is factual. Those are paid for by the vendors. As the marketing director he should have the ethics to make sure that what he is advertising does not put their company in hot water by making claims that are false.

The owner must decide on what stories are written and how fair and balanced comparisons are done. Otherwise they would have had law sutes from some of the RC manufatcutrers already on camparisons between different vehicles over the years. This is why I am suggesting that we all write to the magazine's owner/CEO/director or whoever runs this rag and request some testing/results on Lipo comparisons. If you want results in this matter then we have to step up as a major support group and demand some level of reality in their advertising. Or put together some level of equal, factual testing of our own that is unbiased in any way and find some varifiable truth of our own which would hold up in a law sute and do something about this. All of this bashing in someone else's private site is doing nothing to stop that maddness.

[JERRY2KONE]

So.. if I buy a pack that says 39 minutes average runtime, run it in any normal powerful setup and get an average of 20 minutes runtime, does that mean I can get my money back? Aren't there laws against false advertising? This is like Neu saying that their motors average about 60 MPH...
Also, 100% waterproof? So I can run this in my truck underwater, like in a pool? If the electrical connectors on the pack aren't waterproof (deans/traxxas/other connectors), you can't really advertise your product as waterproof. That's like advertising a waterproof camera that has an exposed battery pack and shorts underwater. Maybe I should buy a battery pack, go underwater with it, shock myself, and then sue?

Funny read there Cody, but they are not claiming that some other manufacturers battery connections are water proof. Their claim is that the battery pack itself is waterproof. If you have seen some of their photos on this claim it shows a battery pack sitting in a pitcher of water, with the leads hanging out of the water. Just like we want them to provide factual proof that their ads are reality you have to be careful how you write complaints about their products. Slander goes both ways ya know.