R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-16-2009, 07:38 PM   #11386
Tech Champion
 
geeunit1014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The dirty burnie
Posts: 5,417
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kriiiss View Post
does associated make an aluminum bellcrank for the tc5?
They do not. Integy does make one, but their quality control is about as good as McDonald's that's been sitting around for 3 weeks.
__________________
Mike Gee

Awesomatix USA/Pyscho Cells Racing/LRP/Sweep Racing/RSD/Middle River Hobbies/Johns Mobile Raceway/TQ Wire/Avid
geeunit1014 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 07:39 PM   #11387
Tech Elite
 
Scottmisfits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,104
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

It's not a need. But is is the wave of the future. People always want bigger and better and faster. Tell me who else can come close to that. And let's be honest, how many power supplies will actually be able to handle the amount of watt's that a 7.4v 25amp charge rate.
Scottmisfits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 08:11 PM   #11388
Tech Lord
 
Hebiki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 12,919
Trader Rating: 26 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by geeunit1014 View Post
They do not. Integy does make one, but their quality control is about as good as McDonald's that's been sitting around for 3 weeks.
quoted for emphasis.
__________________
Hebiki Design Works
Custom R/C Vinyl Graphics & Apparel: Your gear, your way!
Web Design - Web Development - Logo Design - Graphic Design
www.facebook.com/HebikiDesignWorks
Hebiki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 08:39 PM   #11389
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 626
Trader Rating: 26 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to kriiiss
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by geeunit1014 View Post
They do not. Integy does make one, but their quality control is about as good as McDonald's that's been sitting around for 3 weeks.
lol ok thanks for the info
kriiiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 10:05 PM   #11390
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 230
Default

I see there are a few mods going on the car, and wondered about doing them

firstly people are laying the servo 90 degree for a more linear feel, i see Rick Hohwart mentions on page 722 & 723 about using an RC8 throttle servo horn to give a similar feel without needing to flip the servo.

secondly i see that there are some keyed bulkheads that team guys are using to move the motor in about 5mm, is this necessary?, if one is able to achieve balance left to right using the standard motor mount, then will this mod achieve faster lap times?. I saw christer anderson ran the exotek chassis but used the std motor position. What i'm asking is are people noticing faster laps by making the motor more inline, or is it more easier to just balance and why did AE not do this on the original car and only 2.5 years later decide to do it. As far as i can see they are one of the few cars that does not have the motor inline, what was the thinking behind it?

I dont particularly want to dremel my chassis, nor grind away the bulkhead to try and get inline motormount without messing up, or not getting the motor to be exactly square to the chassis.

Thanks Ya`All
MoonTrap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 04:29 AM   #11391
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Perth, Australia.
Posts: 1,343
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

For the inline motormount, I can think of a couple reasons. Firstly the weight balance is more towards the center of the car, and secondly the motor has a decreased chance of motor damage or bulkhead damage. I've seen a TC5 in mod take out its motor as it hit a Xray motor side, the faceplate has attached like normal yet the can and rotor had been bent. It was running 2s LiPo with a LRP 4.5
I've been hit hard motor side while racing 10.5 which moved the Rx and ESC towards the center of the car by half an inch, I'm surprised my $109 motor survived.
It has a hit that would've nearly and easily done $600 worth of damage. All I received was a paint rubbed motor and ESC, some tape that needed replacing, a crease in the body, and a bent motor mount and bulkhead. I was it full speed by another 10.5 just after I spun it so it was a good 60km/h+ slam into the electronics side of my car.
__________________
Team Associated B5m | Team Associated T5m | Team Associated TC6 | Team Associated TC5x
Scooter79rs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 04:13 PM   #11392
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,181
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Default

For those of you who have drilled bleeder holes in their shocks: Do you drill the hole through the blue retainer or through the molded cap?
Thanks,
Kane
Kane-o is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 04:16 PM   #11393
Tech Elite
 
Scottmisfits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,104
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kane-o View Post
For those of you who have drilled bleeder holes in their shocks: Do you drill the hole through the blue retainer or through the molded cap?
Thanks,
Kane
Kane, you'll have to do it through the plastic.
Scottmisfits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 04:32 PM   #11394
Tech Master
 
trerc's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,821
Trader Rating: 89 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kane-o View Post
For those of you who have drilled bleeder holes in their shocks: Do you drill the hole through the blue retainer or through the molded cap?
Thanks,
Kane
Here's a couple of pics of the mod to help you out
Attached Thumbnails
Team Associated TC5-cap-001.jpg   Team Associated TC5-cap-002.jpg  
trerc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 05:01 PM   #11395
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
Here's a couple of pics of the mod to help you out
Why not just use the new 6443 caps ?
rcspeed.usa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 05:17 PM   #11396
Tech Master
 
trerc's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,821
Trader Rating: 89 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcspeed.usa View Post
Why not just use the new 6443 caps ?

I don't believe they are available just yet but they also aren't made to be used with a bladder style shock. this is basically Associateds answer to the Yokomo bleeder caps everybody used to use.
trerc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 06:04 PM   #11397
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 329
Trader Rating: 3 (80%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trerc View Post
Here's a couple of pics of the mod to help you out
sorry too ask this , but after drilling the holes upon reassembly do you use the blue foam pieces? Thanks in advance.
traitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 06:34 PM   #11398
Tech Master
 
trerc's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,821
Trader Rating: 89 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by traitor View Post
sorry too ask this , but after drilling the holes upon reassembly do you use the blue foam pieces? Thanks in advance.
The rebound foams are not needed.
trerc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 09:55 PM   #11399
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooter79rs View Post
For the inline motormount, I can think of a couple reasons. Firstly the weight balance is more towards the center of the car, and secondly the motor has a decreased chance of motor damage or bulkhead damage. I've seen a TC5 in mod take out its motor as it hit a Xray motor side, the faceplate has attached like normal yet the can and rotor had been bent. It was running 2s LiPo with a LRP 4.5
I've been hit hard motor side while racing 10.5 which moved the Rx and ESC towards the center of the car by half an inch, I'm surprised my $109 motor survived.
It has a hit that would've nearly and easily done $600 worth of damage. All I received was a paint rubbed motor and ESC, some tape that needed replacing, a crease in the body, and a bent motor mount and bulkhead. I was it full speed by another 10.5 just after I spun it so it was a good 60km/h+ slam into the electronics side of my car.

I understand that placing the motor 5mm is better for weight balance, but i wonder why the TC5 was never designed like that originally?, could it be because lipo is lighter, that the need to get it closer is bigger?, but what about the guys that ran 5 cell mod?, surely that pack was also lighter. As well as the servo mod, if using a low profile in the standard position the weight is closer to center than it would be flipping it 90 degrees?

On another note, i tried the servo mod, and by drilling the holes in the chassis, the aluminum servo mount overhangs about 0.5-1mm off the chassis, and when i drilled the 5th hole on the bellcrank it is about 0.1-0.2mm off center, i dunno how you guys get it exactly in the center. Also the turnbuckle that connects from servo to bellcrank is at a big angle this way as well, So i am more inclined to do ricks suggestion and use an RC8 servo horn, which should give the desired effect the same as flipping the servo 90 degrees.

Also you say you bent a motor mount and bulkhead, im sure this can also happen even with the aftermarket parts, or by grinding your existing parts. A hit that hard would bend them even if they were 5mm closer to the center?


Thanks Ya`All
MoonTrap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2009, 02:28 AM   #11400
Tech Adept
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 188
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonTrap View Post
I understand that placing the motor 5mm is better for weight balance, but i wonder why the TC5 was never designed like that originally?, could it be because lipo is lighter, that the need to get it closer is bigger?, but what about the guys that ran 5 cell mod?, surely that pack was also lighter. As well as the servo mod, if using a low profile in the standard position the weight is closer to center than it would be flipping it 90 degrees?

On another note, i tried the servo mod, and by drilling the holes in the chassis, the aluminum servo mount overhangs about 0.5-1mm off the chassis, and when i drilled the 5th hole on the bellcrank it is about 0.1-0.2mm off center, i dunno how you guys get it exactly in the center. Also the turnbuckle that connects from servo to bellcrank is at a big angle this way as well, So i am more inclined to do ricks suggestion and use an RC8 servo horn, which should give the desired effect the same as flipping the servo 90 degrees.

Also you say you bent a motor mount and bulkhead, im sure this can also happen even with the aftermarket parts, or by grinding your existing parts. A hit that hard would bend them even if they were 5mm closer to the center?


Thanks Ya`All
I have not tried the servo mod but if I did I think I would just servo tape it down to test first. Did you turn it so that the bit that turns on the servo (dont know the proper name for this) was towards the outside of the car? If so was the turnbuckle still at a big angle, because this might cause problems with steering throw.

As for the new bulkheads, the second benefit I can see is that the motor mount is attached directly to the bulkhead, and NOT screwed to the main chassis. With the standard mounts (also with the mod to the AE mounts) you have to screw the motor mount to the chassis, which ultimately acts like one bulkhead is longer than the other. This is not good for flex, and might make the car handle different left to right.

I had previously ran the stock bulkheads but without the screw connecting the motor plate to the bulkhead to alleviate this problem, but got worried about the pinion coming away from the spur during high flex situations, so I bought the new bulkheads.

Another bonus I just remembered is that the layshaft sits 5mm lower on the aftermarket bulkheads. It is a pain if you want to remove your layshaft or change spur, but it lowers the CG slightly. I am not sure how great that is, but I think there is a feeling in this hobby that high layshafts are bad, I just can't figure out why it is so heinous, except for a slight increase in CG.

Regards

Neal
Redwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS: Team Losi XXXS G+ with parts!! Team Orion V2 Hitec 5625 cola R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 9 06-18-2008 07:11 PM
BATTERIES - Team Orion 4200 SHO Team Cells (6 cell) packs................... For Sale 2-Bad Australia For Sale/Trade 0 03-21-2008 01:16 AM
New Items for Sale Tamiya F103gt Chassis Kit, Team Much More CTX-D, Novak, Team Orion Tsquare R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 14 04-17-2007 07:29 PM
>>> BRAND STINKING NEW NEVER RAN TEAM JAMMIN FACTORY TEAM FTE RACING BUGGY <<<< mach51 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 5 01-25-2007 08:13 PM
F/S Team Associated Factory Team RC18T with Mamba Comp X Brushless and Extras ZeroCool101 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 7 01-07-2006 12:54 PM



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 11:50 PM.


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