[jman4747]

Originally Posted by Scott Kozutsky

The problem is that teams that can already effectively use them are likely already dominant and this would allow them to be more dominant. Or you get the consensus that it's not useful and end up with more throttle motors, but with their own entire section in the manual.

It also has the very real potential to be misused by less experienced teams and cause massive problems when it doesn't work properly.

IMHO it's a can of worms that does not need to be opened.

Not necessarily. Plenty of people use them for other robots and things like 3d printers or CNC routers as well as in industrial apps so there should be a large group to draw knowledge from. Plus I'd bet there's a good bit of overlap between the above the FIRST community. Thus I would imagine several teams who aren't "dominant" could acquire sufficient knowledge to use the technology effectively.

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

If I understand correctly, stepper motors require twice as many control signals as a brushed motor. So to save an encoder feedback you add another control circuit - with uncertainty if the torque isn't sufficient to make the step. It sounds like a step backwards, or at best sideways.

That might be a desirable trade off you never know. Or a co-processor could generate the singles from instructions sent over via serial or whatever. Options are options and more is more fun.