R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric Off-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-20-2013, 10:55 AM   #1006
Tech Prophet
 
Casper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Orange, Ca
Posts: 17,664
Trader Rating: 33 (100%+)
Default

I cannot say I have seen it on an 8th scale but that has been tried for years with 2wd buggies. the XXX-CR even came with a piece like the the kit if I am not mistaken.
__________________
TLR/Losi Team Driver
TLR/Losi | Tekin | DE Racing | Spektrum | Exotek | JBRL | Kolor Koncepts | OC/RC |Sticky Kicks | Imagine It Graphics | Casper-RC.com
TLR 22 3.0, TLR 22SCT 2.0, TLR 22-4 2.0, TLR Ten-SCTE 3.0, Spektrum DX6R

WWW.CASPER-RC.COM TLR and Tekin setups
Casper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 06:54 PM   #1007
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 13
Default

Casper, I have seen the front end wings on a f1 car or indy car. So let me just get this out of the way, the term downforce on a race car is a terminology used to help the average person to understand the science behind zero lift. The goals of every race car or any moving object is to achieve zero lift and zero drag. So with that said the front wing you were referring to, at close inspection you will find a wing very similar to a airplane wing that is upside down why is that you ask? The purpose is to create a low pressure area below the wing and a high pressure area above the wing at the same time create a low pressure area behind the wing so that it will not produce unwanted dragg such as a blunt windscreen and yet be able to reduce any amount of front end lift which gives us more traction. The rear wings function is to help balance the effects of the front end of the car . The vertical sides of the wing gives the car more side traction just like the vertical vein on the new e body. The wicker bill on the new wing is to create drag or act like a air brake to aid in a unbalanced car when jumping or to help aid in breaking. So I guess the reality to the new aero package is to provide less aerodynamic efficiency to the vehicle. Does it help make the car easier to drive? You betcha any car is easy to drive when the brakes are left on. As far as the size of the car it should make a more profound difference on our rc cars due to the fact that at this scale we are moving at a much higher speed than the real cars that they try to emulate. You say that the top guys are winning with the cab forward bodies that is great, but they were winning without them too, a good driver is a good driver behind any car period. I am curious to what the actual fluid dynamics results would be with these cab forward designs I think it would be very interesting to see. Bottom line I love my 3.0e as I did my 2.0e I just wish the aero package was better executed that's all.

Last edited by Asianman02; 11-20-2013 at 07:37 PM.
Asianman02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2013, 09:00 AM   #1008
Tech Prophet
 
Casper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Orange, Ca
Posts: 17,664
Trader Rating: 33 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asianman02 View Post
Casper, I have seen the front end wings on a f1 car or indy car. So let me just get this out of the way, the term downforce on a race car is a terminology used to help the average person to understand the science behind zero lift. The goals of every race car or any moving object is to achieve zero lift and zero drag. So with that said the front wing you were referring to, at close inspection you will find a wing very similar to a airplane wing that is upside down why is that you ask? The purpose is to create a low pressure area below the wing and a high pressure area above the wing at the same time create a low pressure area behind the wing so that it will not produce unwanted dragg such as a blunt windscreen and yet be able to reduce any amount of front end lift which gives us more traction. The rear wings function is to help balance the effects of the front end of the car . The vertical sides of the wing gives the car more side traction just like the vertical vein on the new e body. The wicker bill on the new wing is to create drag or act like a air brake to aid in a unbalanced car when jumping or to help aid in breaking. So I guess the reality to the new aero package is to provide less aerodynamic efficiency to the vehicle. Does it help make the car easier to drive? You betcha any car is easy to drive when the brakes are left on. As far as the size of the car it should make a more profound difference on our rc cars due to the fact that at this scale we are moving at a much higher speed than the real cars that they try to emulate. You say that the top guys are winning with the cab forward bodies that is great, but they were winning without them too, a good driver is a good driver behind any car period. I am curious to what the actual fluid dynamics results would be with these cab forward designs I think it would be very interesting to see. Bottom line I love my 3.0e as I did my 2.0e I just wish the aero package was better executed that's all.
Last post on this and I will let this die.

I stated the fastest drivers in the world have tested the bodies back to back and improved lap times with cab forward bodies. Yes the top pro's in the world will win races because they are talented and not always because of the equipment they drive but at the highest level of competition they are all looking for advantages.

As for your zero lift zero drag. I agree full size race cars look to minimize drag. At the same time they are always looking to maximize downforce which increases traction and this usually comes with a penatly of drag more drag. There are a few cases like indy cars at Indianapolis or NASCAR at Talledaga or Daytona but in general race cars look to maximize downforce. I am fully aware of what a wing does and how it works. From Nascar to F1 teams are always looking at ways to maximize downforce without creating too much drag and wings in general are a good way to do this. Working to achieve zero lift? We must have a different idea of what that means. An F1 car can drive upside down. NASCAR's have enough downforce on the body the car basically compresses down to bumpstops so it will not drag on the ground. There is a balance act that has to go on. Create down force but as you have stated a large front windshild results in larger surface area and this increases drag for the body to move through the air. The goal is to use that to your advantage and get something out of it.

Also 30mph wind is 30mph wind. The size of the car does not make a 30mph wind feel like 300mph just becuase the object is 1/10th scale. Does not really work that way. Now due to the lighter weight these cars are affected more but they also have less surface area so not quite a one to one. Due to the slower speeds we generally run on a track we do add quite a bit of drag to our cars you would not see in a full size car to get downforce. It is needed due to the slower speeds and how aerodynamics work. Would you put a wicker bill to trap air on a car that does 200mph. Probably not. No need to and at those speeds you can get the down force you want without creating that extra drag.

Look at F1. They have high downforce wings on what has to be considered the most advance race cars in the world. F1 obviously values down force for corner speed more then they do zero drag as eveidence from the DRS. If zero drag and zero lift were the goals there would be no need for DRS. The body should be able to be designed to not crate lift but these cars have wings to create downforce. F1 implimented the DRS system to signifcantly reduce drag of the rear wing which reduces down force in the rear on strights and increase top speed for passing. If reduction in drag was the full goal why have a wing on the car that holds it back so much and create all this extra downforce instead of having the car designed for maximum speed and zero lift? These cars generate signicantly more down force then is needed to keep the car from leaving the ground.

Again little cars and relativly slow speeds. Fact: Cab forward bodies have been proven to improve steering and corner stablity. Top pro's have shown they do reduce lap times. (yes they will win with more tradtional looking bodies but that is not my point). Top pros are always good bench mark as they are consitant and are able to get the most out of there equipment. Aero effects are in play with RC cars but due to low speeds you cannot always take a one to one analogy as speeds can effect how air effects a surface and the amount of turbulence you get and its over all affect.

End of story. The body was designed with performance in mind based off testing different body styles. As with anything cosmetic some will like it some will not. Different companies will make bodies for this car in time and will all have there own style and performance characteristics. TLR values on track performance and do a great job of testing different ideas and providing a product that the average racer can have a lot of fun with and race with there buddies. At the same time the cars have design features in them that help support some of the top racers in the world maintain adavantage when racing at the highest levels of the hobby.
__________________
TLR/Losi Team Driver
TLR/Losi | Tekin | DE Racing | Spektrum | Exotek | JBRL | Kolor Koncepts | OC/RC |Sticky Kicks | Imagine It Graphics | Casper-RC.com
TLR 22 3.0, TLR 22SCT 2.0, TLR 22-4 2.0, TLR Ten-SCTE 3.0, Spektrum DX6R

WWW.CASPER-RC.COM TLR and Tekin setups
Casper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2013, 10:44 AM   #1009
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 13
Default

Lmao! Seriously Casper? If what you need is a body to slow the car down to make it easier to drive more consistently so be it I can respect that. Heck that's why I use a cab forward design body for my 22 I'm just not good enough to handle the speed of stock body, but with my the eighth scale things are little different for me. Look I'm not here to spend all of my time keystroking just to try to educate you in fluid dynamics there is plenty of information to be had if you do your homework, I would rather be playing with my toy cars. I will say that in the twenty years I've been in the automotive racing industry you sure have made a very memorable and humorous experience for me thank you. ;-)
So with that said back to my original request, can we get a buggy body for the race buggy? For those of you that prefer the rolling billboard look of the stock body or truck looking body without having to run a truggy or stadium truck belive me I respect that, it's just not my cup of tea. See you boys at the track peace out!
Asianman02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2013, 10:52 AM   #1010
Tech Regular
 
StepPins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 412
Default

Can we take a break from this downforce piece and help me find a way to get a response from Bill at BCSpeed because it seems that the email address that Ive been using to track/ask about my chassis order has never been responded to
But the purchase portion of the site seems to work just fine... took my money as soon as i clicked to purchase the chassis....
StepPins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2013, 11:58 AM   #1011
Tech Addict
 
NITROALM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 685
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StepPins View Post
Can we take a break from this downforce piece and help me find a way to get a response from Bill at BCSpeed .
Hi Steppins I have looked for your emails, and don't see anything listed
As well with pm here
Please check your PM ,as I have left one for you .

Thank you
NITROALM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2013, 12:10 PM   #1012
Tech Regular
 
StepPins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NITROALM View Post
Hi Steppins I have looked for your emails, and don't see anything listed
As well with pm here
Please check your PM ,as I have left one for you .

Thank you
Read and responded to your PM... thanks
StepPins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2013, 12:39 PM   #1013
Tech Addict
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 673
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper View Post
Would you put a wicker bill to trap air on a car that does 200mph. Probably not. No need to and at those speeds you can get the down force you want without creating that.
My 1187hp Ford GT has a wickerbill on the rear end of the car and it's designed for 200+ mph speeds (I've gone over 225 in it many times).

Just wanted to throw that out there.
__________________
Tekno: NT48, ET48, EB48, SCT410
Xray: 2 XB9E, XB9, XT9 E, XB8 E 2014, 808E, 2 T4, XB4, XB4 2015
Losi: SCTE 2.0, 8T 3.0E, 2 8T 2.0E, Mini8T, 2 Mini8,
Mullet1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2013, 12:50 PM   #1014
Tech Prophet
 
Casper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Orange, Ca
Posts: 17,664
Trader Rating: 33 (100%+)
Default

I was talking about the add on part to the 8ight wing that kind of acts like an air trap when I was saying wicker bill not a angled flat piece like a NASCAR spoiler or what we leave on a 10th scale wing.
__________________
TLR/Losi Team Driver
TLR/Losi | Tekin | DE Racing | Spektrum | Exotek | JBRL | Kolor Koncepts | OC/RC |Sticky Kicks | Imagine It Graphics | Casper-RC.com
TLR 22 3.0, TLR 22SCT 2.0, TLR 22-4 2.0, TLR Ten-SCTE 3.0, Spektrum DX6R

WWW.CASPER-RC.COM TLR and Tekin setups
Casper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2013, 12:54 PM   #1015
Super Moderator
 
Cpt.America's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Washington State
Posts: 11,083
Trader Rating: 52 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asianman02 View Post
I don't know but from the industry that I come from I've yet to see a real race car on or off-road that has such a configuration.
1:1 scale racing isn't like racing a small scale RC car. Physics of course always apply, but different aspects of physics scale differently when you have a tiny car with so much power... so what might produce a faster lap time in a full sized car might be a different direction than what produces a faster lap in a small scale RC car.

For example, our cars have almost no wind drag, weigh a tiny fraction of what a real sized car weighs (even calculating in the scale), and have a power to weight ratio that you can't find in full scale racing. So the first rule of thumb when looking at wings, bodies, down force, putting power to the groun, etc... is throw out whatever you think you know about it from full scale racing and start over.

Take a step back a bit and listen and learn first.
__________________
A big thanks to my sponsors:
- Fantom Racing - www.fantomracing.com -
- Fusion Graphix- www.fusiongraphix.com -
- RCSpecialties -
Cpt.America is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 07:18 AM   #1016
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt.America View Post
1:1 scale racing isn't like racing a small scale RC car. Physics of course always apply, but different aspects of physics scale differently when you have a tiny car with so much power... so what might produce a faster lap time in a full sized car might be a different direction than what produces a faster lap in a small scale RC car.

For example, our cars have almost no wind drag, weigh a tiny fraction of what a real sized car weighs (even calculating in the scale), and have a power to weight ratio that you can't find in full scale racing. So the first rule of thumb when looking at wings, bodies, down force, putting power to the groun, etc... is throw out whatever you think you know about it from full scale racing and start over.

Take a step back a bit and listen and learn first.
So just that I am clear, what you are saying is that the physical rules do not really apply because our cars are 1/8 of the real thing? Odd considering that whatever physical force that is being applied to our 1/8 scale is eight times greater than that of a 1:1(real car) which I find is absolutely amazing as to what we put these cars through. So then wouldn't we agree that due to the eight times of atmospheric pressure and resistance that is being exerted to our cars, that the importance of aerodynamic efficiency should be a necessity? Here's how the physics apply, with a more aerodynamic vehicle we are able to travel the same amount of speed and distance without the need for a lot of power. What that does for us is it allows the use of a much more efficient power system which will not only provide us with longer run times but a lot less wear on our drivetrain. So then why would anyone not want that?
Now for the new cab forward body designs they do make the car easier to drive I agree but at the expense of efficiency, the design slows the already overpowered cars down to make them more consistent (easier to drive).Which is totally fine as a tuning option if that fits your desires. I would just like to see a more efficient aero package to these cars or any rc cars not only to challenge ourselves, but to the rc car manufactures and third parties to see how far we can push the boundaries of speed, efficiency, and durability of these cars. I mean isn't that the holy grail of automotive racing?
By the way I never said anything negative about the functionality of the new bodies I knew what they are trying to achieve. I just didn't want my 3.0e to have a identity crisis not knowing if it's a buggy or a baby truggy thats all, the buggy is always more efficient than a truggy just not with the current new aero package. So with that said I hope you guys have a better understanding of where I am coming from, I am just a paying customer that's all.
Asianman02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 08:41 AM   #1017
dtr
Tech Master
 
dtr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: budapest, hungary
Posts: 1,481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asianman02 View Post
So just that I am clear, what you are saying is that the physical rules do not really apply because our cars are 1/8 of the real thing? Odd considering that whatever physical force that is being applied to our 1/8 scale is eight times greater than that of a 1:1(real car) which I find is absolutely amazing as to what we put these cars through. So then wouldn't we agree that due to the eight times of atmospheric pressure and resistance that is being exerted to our cars, that the importance of aerodynamic efficiency should be a necessity? Here's how the physics apply, with a more aerodynamic vehicle we are able to travel the same amount of speed and distance without the need for a lot of power. What that does for us is it allows the use of a much more efficient power system which will not only provide us with longer run times but a lot less wear on our drivetrain. So then why would anyone not want that?
Sorry man, but your understanding of physics is way off. Different physical factors scale differently with size. To put it simple some are proportional to length, some to surface area, some to volume and some to more exotic properties. 1/8th in length is 1/512 in volume so that can lead to a huge difference in which force has stronger effect at which scale.
dtr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 11:48 AM   #1018
Super Moderator
 
Cpt.America's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Washington State
Posts: 11,083
Trader Rating: 52 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asianman02 View Post
So just that I am clear, what you are saying is that the physical rules do not really apply because our cars are 1/8 of the real thing? Odd considering that whatever physical force that is being applied to our 1/8 scale is eight times greater than that of a 1:1(real car) which I find is absolutely amazing as to what we put these cars through. So then wouldn't we agree that due to the eight times of atmospheric pressure and resistance that is being exerted to our cars, that the importance of aerodynamic efficiency should be a necessity? Here's how the physics apply, with a more aerodynamic vehicle we are able to travel the same amount of speed and distance without the need for a lot of power. What that does for us is it allows the use of a much more efficient power system which will not only provide us with longer run times but a lot less wear on our drivetrain. So then why would anyone not want that?
Now for the new cab forward body designs they do make the car easier to drive I agree but at the expense of efficiency, the design slows the already overpowered cars down to make them more consistent (easier to drive).Which is totally fine as a tuning option if that fits your desires. I would just like to see a more efficient aero package to these cars or any rc cars not only to challenge ourselves, but to the rc car manufactures and third parties to see how far we can push the boundaries of speed, efficiency, and durability of these cars. I mean isn't that the holy grail of automotive racing?
By the way I never said anything negative about the functionality of the new bodies I knew what they are trying to achieve. I just didn't want my 3.0e to have a identity crisis not knowing if it's a buggy or a baby truggy thats all, the buggy is always more efficient than a truggy just not with the current new aero package. So with that said I hope you guys have a better understanding of where I am coming from, I am just a paying customer that's all.
You have it ALLL wrong. First off, the bodies arne't designed to "slow them down", they are designed to give down force characteristics that produce better lap times, in certain track conditions. Why are you so obsessed with "aero", and "efficiency", and "speed"? Who cares? This isn't a 12th scale car on carpet, or a 21.5 turn spec class in onroad. In that type of environment, all of those things really come into play into lap times... But you're not, you are talking off road. There is ALREADY too much power in these cars, and typically not enough traction. When was the last time somebody lost an offroad RC car race because one guy's absolute top speed was 1/4 mph faster than the next guy? Answer? never.

The only question you need to ask, is what will produce a better lap time? That is it. Because the one thing holding these cars back is typically traction, setup, and tires. (and then usually in-air stability) For a lot of tracks, the body with the down-force characteristics that create the traction bias they are looking for, will produce the better lap times, albiet tiny tiny tiny fractions, usually only noticeable by higher tiered drivers.

It sounds to me like you are a basher... if so, then none of it matters anyway. Pick a body that looks best to you, paint it your favorite color, and go at it. If you are RACING... then lap times are it. You pick the body that produces the best lap times, and deal with the fact that your car might have a small identity crisis.

When I read your replies, you seem overly obsessed with something that will have zero impact on the car. If you think a shell that has a tiny tiny bit better drag co-efficient will have ANY noticeable or significant affect on your motor temp or run time, the you haven't put enough time in at the track...because it wont.

Basically what I am saying, is that all that crap that you are worried about and keep spewing here, won't mean a damn thing on the racetrack. For example, if you ran a shell that was an oval dome.. one that produced the LEAST amount of drag-co efficient as possible and allowed the MOST amount of non-turbulent air to reach the wing, do you think you could then magically run a much softer motor? You now wont have to rebuild your drive train ever, or as much? maybe the car will accelerate slightly better (you're talking microscopic at this point), but then you would need to brake slightly stronger as there would be the same microscopic loss of drag. Any lap time gain you think you have gained in drag co-effecient, you have now lost due to reduced down force, making the car unstable in the air, or reduced traction against the surface.

Like I said... take a step back, relax, and watch and learn from the guys that are winning races.
__________________
A big thanks to my sponsors:
- Fantom Racing - www.fantomracing.com -
- Fusion Graphix- www.fusiongraphix.com -
- RCSpecialties -
Cpt.America is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 03:16 PM   #1019
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 107
Default

Sorry to change gears here, but I have a question for casper or Ryan. I am running at 3400g ready to race. Will this be too heavy for the Tekin t8i setup? I run at the same indoor track as Jason rc, incase you haven't seen his videos its med. size clay, high bite. I am running a light 4s pack, I could drop 50g by switching to a SMC 4s shorty. Finally making it to the track this Sunday and dont want to burn up this new motor. Thanks for any advice.
old carpet rcr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2013, 03:27 PM   #1020
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Africa, Durban
Posts: 299
Default

Asianman02 get a plane mate
akshayp14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
e-buggy, eight 3.0, losi, spur gear


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 06:10 PM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net