12LikesNew Schumacher KF2
07-29-2016, 08:27 AM - Wikipost
|
|||
|
|||
|
08-01-2015, 11:52 AM
#376
Tires are proline holeshot.
08-01-2015, 05:59 PM
#377
Tech Regular
KF2MM
That's really interesting. A whole second per lap is a lot at that level. Now I'm even more eager to try out this MM kit seeing as how it was outperforming the KR on a surface typically judged as more suitable for the KR. The video I watched showed most cars running small pin tires in the rear and ribbed tires in the front. Is that correct?
If you would be willing to share his KF setup with us here or email it to me personally that would be really helpful. But I understand if you aren't comfortable with that or would want to ask his permission first.
I think the race starts Monday if I remember correctly? I'd love to see Michal (or anyone else for that matter!) beat Lee Martin....
If you would be willing to share his KF setup with us here or email it to me personally that would be really helpful. But I understand if you aren't comfortable with that or would want to ask his permission first.
I think the race starts Monday if I remember correctly? I'd love to see Michal (or anyone else for that matter!) beat Lee Martin....
08-01-2015, 06:24 PM
#378
While waiting for the MM kit to arrive I decided to put the car on the scales using the existing layout (low grip configuration) and compare it to the MM layout (using the Facebook photo of Orlowski's car as a reference). Not that it so much matters because I am just looking at deltas here but I weighed the car with the (now obsolete) CF chassis, rear and front arms reversed with rear hubs all the way forward and no tires. I also removed the aluminum side stiffeners as they do not allow for the shorty lipo to fit in between them.
The results were surprising to say the least. This is because the F/R weight distribution with both of the layouts is almost identical! About 39.5% / 60.5% front / rear. My speculations about what the effect on the weight distribution would be were completely and utterly wrong.
A few posts back someone put Maizer's car on the scales with a similar modification to this factory kit with respect to layout. The results were similar to what I found here. I should have remembered.
This of course means that Schumacher is relying on the motor's dynamic forces under acceleration to manipulate the chassis to put more weight on the rear. Assuming the effect is substantial enough to meet our needs in terms of forward bite then they have done something quite clever. We will have less on-power steering in exchange for that forward traction but the overall feel of the car around the track and the way it handles at large will stay mostly the same. Well done.
Another thing I noticed while doing the measurements was that the battery is now sitting almost perfectly longitudinally centered on the car's center of mass. I replaced the standard shorty lipo weighing 210g with one of my LRP super shorty packs, which only weighs 138g. On the scales the F/R weight distribution of the car once again did not change but the car just lost 68g of weight.
Now I don't know if the engineers at Schumacher had intentionally designed the car with this MM configuration up their sleeve in case they wanted to add some rear grip in the future if the team/customers decided they really needed it or if this just happens to be a coincidence that they discovered while testing the idea. Either case is really interesting for different reasons.
And for those who may be considering running the MM kit without the CF top brace to save weight or add flex I really, really would recommend not doing so. The engineers are clearly relying on the chassis to transmit the forces generated by the motor under acceleration to improve rear grip so removing any of the rigidity will compromise the design. And now with the aluminum side stiffeners gone removing the top brace will probably hurt a lot more than it might help in other areas.
The results were surprising to say the least. This is because the F/R weight distribution with both of the layouts is almost identical! About 39.5% / 60.5% front / rear. My speculations about what the effect on the weight distribution would be were completely and utterly wrong.
A few posts back someone put Maizer's car on the scales with a similar modification to this factory kit with respect to layout. The results were similar to what I found here. I should have remembered.
This of course means that Schumacher is relying on the motor's dynamic forces under acceleration to manipulate the chassis to put more weight on the rear. Assuming the effect is substantial enough to meet our needs in terms of forward bite then they have done something quite clever. We will have less on-power steering in exchange for that forward traction but the overall feel of the car around the track and the way it handles at large will stay mostly the same. Well done.
Another thing I noticed while doing the measurements was that the battery is now sitting almost perfectly longitudinally centered on the car's center of mass. I replaced the standard shorty lipo weighing 210g with one of my LRP super shorty packs, which only weighs 138g. On the scales the F/R weight distribution of the car once again did not change but the car just lost 68g of weight.
Now I don't know if the engineers at Schumacher had intentionally designed the car with this MM configuration up their sleeve in case they wanted to add some rear grip in the future if the team/customers decided they really needed it or if this just happens to be a coincidence that they discovered while testing the idea. Either case is really interesting for different reasons.
And for those who may be considering running the MM kit without the CF top brace to save weight or add flex I really, really would recommend not doing so. The engineers are clearly relying on the chassis to transmit the forces generated by the motor under acceleration to improve rear grip so removing any of the rigidity will compromise the design. And now with the aluminum side stiffeners gone removing the top brace will probably hurt a lot more than it might help in other areas.
Last edited by motorcitymatt; 08-01-2015 at 09:37 PM.
08-01-2015, 06:45 PM
#380
I don't think the top deck is needed. I'm holding off on the mm "kit" and will try adding much more weight to the battery area along with the lrp super shorty. My car with std shorty is 1504g. I wanna try adding 30g as rear as possible first.
08-02-2015, 12:51 PM
#381
While waiting for the MM kit to arrive I decided to put the car on the scales using the existing layout (low grip configuration) and compare it to the MM layout (using the Facebook photo of Orlowski's car as a reference). Not that it so much matters because I am just looking at deltas here but I weighed the car with the (now obsolete) CF chassis, rear and front arms reversed with rear hubs all the way forward and no tires. I also removed the aluminum side stiffeners as they do not allow for the shorty lipo to fit in between them.
The results were surprising to say the least. This is because the F/R weight distribution with both of the layouts is almost identical! About 39.5% / 60.5% front / rear. My speculations about what the effect on the weight distribution would be were completely and utterly wrong.
The results were surprising to say the least. This is because the F/R weight distribution with both of the layouts is almost identical! About 39.5% / 60.5% front / rear. My speculations about what the effect on the weight distribution would be were completely and utterly wrong.
I guess you can't argue with data from the scales, but I have a hard time believing that swapping the motor position with the battery doesn't increase the rearward weight. Your earlier post weighing the motor assembly at 290g is roughly 80g more than a standard shorty battery. Do the hold down straps, lipo stop, and front brace equal the 80g difference between? You're also subtracting the front stiffeners.
08-02-2015, 02:44 PM
#382
Tech Addict
iTrader: (1)
Scales can only give you static weight in one configuration... complete stand-still at ride height. The Inertial qualities of battery and motor as well as there positions will have significant effects on the dynamics of the vehicle on the track.
For me it is hard to rule out a design based on scale readings alone. Scales are not the end-all be-all.
For me it is hard to rule out a design based on scale readings alone. Scales are not the end-all be-all.
08-02-2015, 07:16 PM
#383
Tech Regular
Maizer
While waiting for the MM kit to arrive I decided to put the car on the scales using the existing layout (low grip configuration) and compare it to the MM layout (using the Facebook photo of Orlowski's car as a reference). Not that it so much matters because I am just looking at deltas here but I weighed the car with the (now obsolete) CF chassis, rear and front arms reversed with rear hubs all the way forward and no tires. I also removed the aluminum side stiffeners as they do not allow for the shorty lipo to fit in between them.
The results were surprising to say the least. This is because the F/R weight distribution with both of the layouts is almost identical! About 39.5% / 60.5% front / rear. My speculations about what the effect on the weight distribution would be were completely and utterly wrong.
A few posts back someone put Maizer's car on the scales with a similar modification to this factory kit with respect to layout. The results were similar to what I found here. I should have remembered.
This of course means that Schumacher is relying on the motor's dynamic forces under acceleration to manipulate the chassis to put more weight on the rear. Assuming the effect is substantial enough to meet our needs in terms of forward bite then they have done something quite clever. We will have less on-power steering in exchange for that forward traction but the overall feel of the car around the track and the way it handles at large will stay mostly the same. Well done.
Another thing I noticed while doing the measurements was that the battery is now sitting almost perfectly longitudinally centered on the car's center of mass. I replaced the standard shorty lipo weighing 210g with one of my LRP super shorty packs, which only weighs 138g. On the scales the F/R weight distribution of the car once again did not change but the car just lost 68g of weight.
Now I don't know if the engineers at Schumacher had intentionally designed the car with this MM configuration up their sleeve in case they wanted to add some rear grip in the future if the team/customers decided they really needed it or if this just happens to be a coincidence that they discovered while testing the idea. Either case is really interesting for different reasons.
And for those who may be considering running the MM kit without the CF top brace to save weight or add flex I really, really would recommend not doing so. The engineers are clearly relying on the chassis to transmit the forces generated by the motor under acceleration to improve rear grip so removing any of the rigidity will compromise the design. And now with the aluminum side stiffeners gone removing the top brace will probably hurt a lot more than it might help in other areas.
The results were surprising to say the least. This is because the F/R weight distribution with both of the layouts is almost identical! About 39.5% / 60.5% front / rear. My speculations about what the effect on the weight distribution would be were completely and utterly wrong.
A few posts back someone put Maizer's car on the scales with a similar modification to this factory kit with respect to layout. The results were similar to what I found here. I should have remembered.
This of course means that Schumacher is relying on the motor's dynamic forces under acceleration to manipulate the chassis to put more weight on the rear. Assuming the effect is substantial enough to meet our needs in terms of forward bite then they have done something quite clever. We will have less on-power steering in exchange for that forward traction but the overall feel of the car around the track and the way it handles at large will stay mostly the same. Well done.
Another thing I noticed while doing the measurements was that the battery is now sitting almost perfectly longitudinally centered on the car's center of mass. I replaced the standard shorty lipo weighing 210g with one of my LRP super shorty packs, which only weighs 138g. On the scales the F/R weight distribution of the car once again did not change but the car just lost 68g of weight.
Now I don't know if the engineers at Schumacher had intentionally designed the car with this MM configuration up their sleeve in case they wanted to add some rear grip in the future if the team/customers decided they really needed it or if this just happens to be a coincidence that they discovered while testing the idea. Either case is really interesting for different reasons.
And for those who may be considering running the MM kit without the CF top brace to save weight or add flex I really, really would recommend not doing so. The engineers are clearly relying on the chassis to transmit the forces generated by the motor under acceleration to improve rear grip so removing any of the rigidity will compromise the design. And now with the aluminum side stiffeners gone removing the top brace will probably hurt a lot more than it might help in other areas.
08-02-2015, 08:55 PM
#385
I'll be able to answer that question for you soon. I hope to have my MM-converted KF2 on the track this week for our Friday night club race at the latest. The owner of our track started racing with a YZ-2 over his RB6 so maybe I can get him to take a few laps with my car and vice versa and we can compare notes.
With the MM conversion on the KF2 the cars look fairly similar in terms of layout with the motor/gearbox a little further back on the Yokomo. I believe the YZ-2 is a four gear transmission so the forces the motor puts on the chassis during acceleration should be similar as well.
With the MM conversion on the KF2 the cars look fairly similar in terms of layout with the motor/gearbox a little further back on the Yokomo. I believe the YZ-2 is a four gear transmission so the forces the motor puts on the chassis during acceleration should be similar as well.
08-02-2015, 09:06 PM
#386
I found some more nice pictures of the KF2 with the MM conversion. These are Ben Jemison's car he is going to run at the Euro's this week.
https://www.facebook.com/41103186907...53621421486013
https://www.facebook.com/41103186907...53621404819348
Take a look at the rear toe-in blocks. Are those brass? All the ones I have seen are black anodized aluminum.
https://www.facebook.com/41103186907...53621421486013
https://www.facebook.com/41103186907...53621404819348
Take a look at the rear toe-in blocks. Are those brass? All the ones I have seen are black anodized aluminum.
Last edited by motorcitymatt; 08-02-2015 at 09:32 PM.
08-02-2015, 09:55 PM
#387
I found some more nice pictures of the KF2 with the MM conversion. These are Ben Jemison's car he is going to run at the Euro's this week.
https://www.facebook.com/41103186907...53621421486013
https://www.facebook.com/41103186907...53621404819348
Take a look at the rear toe-in blocks. Are those brass? All the ones I have seen are black anodized aluminum.
https://www.facebook.com/41103186907...53621421486013
https://www.facebook.com/41103186907...53621404819348
Take a look at the rear toe-in blocks. Are those brass? All the ones I have seen are black anodized aluminum.
08-02-2015, 10:58 PM
#388
08-03-2015, 01:12 AM
#389
Yes he is running small bore, Schumacher re-released them. They say it feels better on low-grip tracks.
08-03-2015, 01:15 AM
#390
