R/C Tech Forums

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

    Hide Wikipost
Old 03-09-2017, 12:23 AM   -   Wikipost
R/C Tech Forums Thread Wiki: Official Team Associated RC10 B5m Mid-Motor Thread
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been a member for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: RCBuddha
Quick link to the front page

First Page

Print Wikipost

Like Tree9Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-29-2014, 08:31 AM   #736
Tech Prophet
 
Wildcat1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 16,932
Trader Rating: 81 (100%+)
Default

Well, I dont 100% agree. For medium bite indoor, sure. But outdoors on non sugared dirt, I can disagree. My b4 was way too twitchy with a shorty in 17.5 outdoors. I tried to mess with roll centers and shock packages, but I could never lay down power without the rear breaking loose. The car always felt better with a full pack and was easier to drive. The downside was some layouts would have jumps that were an issue. So I decided to split the difference. I ran a shorty and added wight in the tray a little at a time until the car calmed down. I was around 260 grams with the shorty and lead. When I ran indoors, I always ran the shorty with only 1/4oz in the rear triangles and the ballast. My tlr22 was the same way. even though the base car weighed a lot more than the b4, it also felt better with a fill pack than a shorty. In fact, my current car has a shorty in it and I am not really liking it. It feels better with a full pack. Again, indoor I ran a shorty and it was great. Anyone that ran sct 4x4 outdoors on loamy tracks will also confirm that light trucks just could not bet the power down. It was one of the reasons the sc10 4x4 sucked outdoors and owners when to the alum chassis and added a bunch of weight.
__________________
Support: Team Associated | Reedy Motors & ESC's | Sanwa Radios | Avid | Proline Tires
Wildcat1971 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 09:21 AM   #737
Tech Champion
 
Davidka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 9,859
Trader Rating: 75 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat1971 View Post
Well, I dont 100% agree. For medium bite indoor, sure. But outdoors on non sugared dirt, I can disagree. My b4 was way too twitchy with a shorty in 17.5 outdoors. I tried to mess with roll centers and shock packages, but I could never lay down power without the rear breaking loose. The car always felt better with a full pack and was easier to drive.
This may be an example of your just not having enough time to find the correct adjustment for the conditions. With more weight, the rear should be stepping out more, all other things being equal. More weight = more lateral load for the tires to manage.

This is very similar to when we ran weight in the B4 with lipo until the team found a setup that worked better at minimum weight (ironically, pretty similar to the base setup of the original B4, when 6-cell batteries were lighter than they became).
__________________
"I have no idea what you're talking about, so here's a bunny with a pancake on it's head."

In mind and body, we're all heading towards old age. It is slower to go by bike.
Davidka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 09:29 AM   #738
Tech Prophet
 
Wildcat1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 16,932
Trader Rating: 81 (100%+)
Default

yes, but weight also applies more friction. And it slows down the agility of the car, or makes it feel more calm. The b4 was always too twitchy for me. And Where the weight is can effect the pendulum effect. It the weight is more central, as it is with the battery, that weight is more split between the front and rear wheels. If its more in the rear, then you can overload that end of the car and swing it. But IMO its a balancing act. You dont want too much or too little weight. Imagine if the car weighed 1oz with an 6.5 motor. You would be hard pressed to get much of that power to the ground. My point is, you need the right amount of weight, for a given amount of power on a given surface. You can go too far in either direction. Some people like very nimble cars... I dont like them. I prefer a more balanced feel from front to rear traction.
__________________
Support: Team Associated | Reedy Motors & ESC's | Sanwa Radios | Avid | Proline Tires
Wildcat1971 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 09:57 AM   #739
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 95
Default

.

Last edited by C.Borgia; 01-29-2014 at 10:39 AM. Reason: Coffee
C.Borgia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:02 AM   #740
Tech Prophet
 
Wildcat1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 16,932
Trader Rating: 81 (100%+)
Default

that was not the conversation, but thank you for your input.
__________________
Support: Team Associated | Reedy Motors & ESC's | Sanwa Radios | Avid | Proline Tires
Wildcat1971 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:08 AM   #741
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 656
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

So guys looks like in getting the b5m and going to dump 200$ on factory team hop ups
xTotalghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:14 AM   #742
Tech Adept
 
C4PT4IN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Ft Sill
Posts: 233
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Default

Ooorrrrr… Just buy both buggies
C4PT4IN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:24 AM   #743
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 656
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C4PT4IN View Post
Ooorrrrr… Just buy both buggies
I would it my heli wasn't being a pay in the ass lately
xTotalghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:26 AM   #744
Tech Adept
 
C4PT4IN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Ft Sill
Posts: 233
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Default

Well upgrades it is then

There is already a complete stainless steel set out there for the buggy

http://www.ebay.com/itm/RC10B5-Buggy..._qi=RTM1562569
C4PT4IN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:35 AM   #745
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 656
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C4PT4IN View Post
Well upgrades it is then

There is already a complete stainless steel set out there for the buggy

http://www.ebay.com/itm/RC10B5-Buggy..._qi=RTM1562569
What advantage does that give?
xTotalghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:38 AM   #746
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 95
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davidka View Post
Weight is a band-aid for setup. Remember when guys would put 6oz under their lipo batteries? Dakotah Phend just posted that he only runs 7gm in his 22 MM, a car with a reputation for needing a lot of weight.

If lots of weight must be added then either the setup hasn't been worked out (which can understandably take a while) or the car has adjustment limitations (Link locations, available spring rates, etc) to reach the right setup.
It might be worth noting that more and more drivers are moving to a short servo in their c4.2, which is something like 20 grams less up front.
C.Borgia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:41 AM   #747
Tech Adept
 
C4PT4IN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Ft Sill
Posts: 233
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xTotalghost View Post
What advantage does that give?
nothing Your screws will be 'shiny' though, but that's about it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by C.Borgia View Post
It might be worth noting that more and more drivers are moving to a short servo in their c4.2, which is something like 20 grams less up front.
I can understand if people are worrying about stock class and saving weight in one place to put it where you want it somewhere else, but I like the extra 20 grams up front. And with how the plates on the chassis are designed it won't even give more room for the electronics so unless those 20 grams make a big difference, I don't see why. But I've never read too much into it either so that might be part of it
C4PT4IN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:48 AM   #748
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 95
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C4PT4IN View Post
I can understand if people are worrying about stock class and saving weight in one place to put it where you want it somewhere else, but I like the extra 20 grams up front. And with how the plates on the chassis are designed it won't even give more room for the electronics so unless those 20 grams make a big difference, I don't see why. But I've never read too much into it either so that might be part of it
You are right that it will not give more room in either of the b5's. I only mean to point out that it is worth trying pulling weight instead of adding weight, as davidka has tried to point out the problems of simply piling on weight. In short, The c4.2 seems to me to be more forgiving when coming on power with less weight up front. I'm wondering if we have to reconsider how weight transfer works on mm cars and not think only in terms of rm weight transfer.
C.Borgia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:50 AM   #749
Tech Prophet
 
Wildcat1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 16,932
Trader Rating: 81 (100%+)
Default

Shorty servos are often used on open chassis for space. The b5 is not open. The servo area is closed off. IMO, the full size servos are more durable and have better speed and torque specs. But in some cars, you need to run a shorty servo or it just does not work.
__________________
Support: Team Associated | Reedy Motors & ESC's | Sanwa Radios | Avid | Proline Tires
Wildcat1971 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 10:55 AM   #750
Tech Prophet
 
Wildcat1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 16,932
Trader Rating: 81 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C.Borgia View Post
You are right that it will not give more room in either of the b5's. I only mean to point out that it is worth trying pulling weight instead of adding weight, as davidka has tried to point out the problems of simply piling on weight. In short, The c4.2 seems to me to be more forgiving when coming on power with less weight up front. I'm wondering if we have to reconsider how weight transfer works on mm cars and not think only in terms of rm weight transfer.
yeah, its not just weight, its also weight transfer. how the chassis uses that weight on/off power or in a corner, or powering in a straight line. The is kinda the point of MM. The shifting of weight forward. What bother me is shifting the weight forward, then strapping a 50gram weight on the rear of the car, 30 grams on the sides and using a brass from toe plate. I am hoping the AE MM is designed with the right weigh balance out of the box. Or at least very close. Adding a couple 1/4oz weights is fine. These cars tossing on $100 in brass to function, dont seem properly designed for MM. The xfactory is very light in MM and appears to gave great traction. Maybe, too much traction in the rear. So it can be done and I hope AE gets it right.
__________________
Support: Team Associated | Reedy Motors & ESC's | Sanwa Radios | Avid | Proline Tires
Wildcat1971 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply



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 08:03 AM.


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