Why NO Top Shaft Tourers?
04-21-2006, 04:27 AM
#61
Tech Regular
does anyone realize that belt drive car actually contribute in providing traction during braking and acceleration. When you accelerate, the motor causes the car to rotate and counter the weight transfer to the back. When you brake, the motor causes the car to rotate the other way around and counter the weight transfer to the front.
04-21-2006, 10:08 PM
#62
Originally Posted by azmio
does anyone realize that belt drive car actually contribute in providing traction during braking and acceleration. When you accelerate, the motor causes the car to rotate and counter the weight transfer to the back. When you brake, the motor causes the car to rotate the other way around and counter the weight transfer to the front.
....
04-25-2006, 09:01 AM
#63
belt vs shaft
hi all:i agree 100%with you hobbipro,mod classes for belt and stock and spec 19t for shaft.it is also what ever type drive system you feel more cofortable with.the quality of touring sedans today makes most bands and types a worth while investment.thanks for the time 
04-25-2006, 04:04 PM
#64
Originally Posted by nf_ekt
Yeah check the post by ark earlier in the thread-- he is a saying this without spelling it out. Just as in nature things evolve for a reason, could be why the BD has been very sought after. I think AE outta at least take a stab at making a belt car-- they sure do get the whole pricing thing right now it's time for more options. If i ever go shaft I'm taking the Pro4 but then again there's the cyclone ....
....
07-12-2006, 11:35 AM
#65
Tech Adept
somebody said some post ago that the best shaft drive car would be one with motor 90 degrees turned , so no torque steer can happen...
well, how about the TA-02? i know i know , its a very old design , it would need a lot of modern improovements ,but it does have the motor oriented in the right way !
why tamiya (or any other) dont do the same thing with the new SD cars?
more cone gears needed? , yes of course, but i dont think is a problem if you think that torque steer is going to leave
well, how about the TA-02? i know i know , its a very old design , it would need a lot of modern improovements ,but it does have the motor oriented in the right way !
why tamiya (or any other) dont do the same thing with the new SD cars?
more cone gears needed? , yes of course, but i dont think is a problem if you think that torque steer is going to leave
07-14-2006, 04:47 PM
#66
Originally Posted by DrKucho
somebody said some post ago that the best shaft drive car would be one with motor 90 degrees turned , so no torque steer can happen...
well, how about the TA-02? i know i know , its a very old design , it would need a lot of modern improovements ,but it does have the motor oriented in the right way !
why tamiya (or any other) dont do the same thing with the new SD cars?
more cone gears needed? , yes of course, but i dont think is a problem if you think that torque steer is going to leave
well, how about the TA-02? i know i know , its a very old design , it would need a lot of modern improovements ,but it does have the motor oriented in the right way !
why tamiya (or any other) dont do the same thing with the new SD cars?
more cone gears needed? , yes of course, but i dont think is a problem if you think that torque steer is going to leave
07-14-2006, 07:04 PM
#67
Tech Adept
cool !
but why they dont do that in a onroad chasis?
but why they dont do that in a onroad chasis?
07-14-2006, 11:54 PM
#68
Originally Posted by YR4Dude
Its already been done. Go check out the new Tamiya Dark Impact DF03 offroad 4wd buggy.
You cant solve the problem, the nature of the shaft dictates that limitation.
07-15-2006, 03:25 AM
#69
Tech Adept
yes but shaft can be very light , so torque steer should be minimum.
have you seen ta02 shaft? it is very thin and light , it vibrate when using low turn motors but that doesnt affect the car in any way ( i run 13x3 motor on a ta02 and handles well)
have you seen ta02 shaft? it is very thin and light , it vibrate when using low turn motors but that doesnt affect the car in any way ( i run 13x3 motor on a ta02 and handles well)
07-15-2006, 04:31 AM
#70
Originally Posted by floodo1
There is still a shaft running front-back. So you're going to have torque from that.
You cant solve the problem, the nature of the shaft dictates that limitation.
You cant solve the problem, the nature of the shaft dictates that limitation.
The torque-related issues with shaft drive's have NOTHING to do with the shaft themselves - it's to do with the longitudinally mounted motors and the way the chassis reacts under acceleration and braking.
ALL cars, even belt drives, have chassis movement coming from the torque of the motor - the difference is that when the motor is mounted across the car the torque reaction is fore-aft movement, and when the motor is mounted longitudinally then the torque reaction is laterally orientated - and it's this that gives the "torque-steer" effect.
NO car with the motor mounted across the chassis, regardless of transmission type, suffers from lateral torque movement.
07-15-2006, 06:32 PM
#71
Originally Posted by hobbipro
Just buy one of each and be done! Everyone here agrees the shaft cars excell in stock, 19t spec classes, and belt rules everything else. The more power you feed a belt the more it likes it. Some days I can post better times with my Hara, and others my belt. Track size, layout, grip, and motor type used greatly effect both chassis. I've decided having both types is not a car A VS car B thing, just another option on what to run at the track race night, gotta love having choices!
..Why stop at one of each..I mean you have "carpet" cars and cars that do better on asphalt so just buy as many as you want..It works with radios also.. 
07-15-2006, 07:55 PM
#72
Originally Posted by bender
Sorry, you've got it all wrong.
The torque-related issues with shaft drive's have NOTHING to do with the shaft themselves - it's to do with the longitudinally mounted motors and the way the chassis reacts under acceleration and braking.
ALL cars, even belt drives, have chassis movement coming from the torque of the motor - the difference is that when the motor is mounted across the car the torque reaction is fore-aft movement, and when the motor is mounted longitudinally then the torque reaction is laterally orientated - and it's this that gives the "torque-steer" effect.
NO car with the motor mounted across the chassis, regardless of transmission type, suffers from lateral torque movement.
The torque-related issues with shaft drive's have NOTHING to do with the shaft themselves - it's to do with the longitudinally mounted motors and the way the chassis reacts under acceleration and braking.
ALL cars, even belt drives, have chassis movement coming from the torque of the motor - the difference is that when the motor is mounted across the car the torque reaction is fore-aft movement, and when the motor is mounted longitudinally then the torque reaction is laterally orientated - and it's this that gives the "torque-steer" effect.
NO car with the motor mounted across the chassis, regardless of transmission type, suffers from lateral torque movement.
So true....
A lighter shaft does little to help torque steer. ideally, you'd want to balance the centre shaft with the motor armature and gearing. Not great because this would hurt acceleration, but it could reduce the incidence of bent centre shafts!! (FYI - the centre shaft usually spins in the opposite direction to the motor armature in a shaft driven car, hence the ability to balance the motor torque)
07-16-2006, 12:54 PM
#73
Tech Adept
Originally Posted by bender
The torque-related issues with shaft drive's have NOTHING to do with the shaft themselves
it makes sense for me but i am not an expert on theese things so i cant really say
if this is correct, the good part is the shaft is making oposite torque to the motor rotor s it is spinning contrary directon , so part of the torque steer is canceled...
07-16-2006, 02:20 PM
#74
Originally Posted by DrKucho
i get conused right now, there is some people saying that the shaft does makes its own torque because the theese kind of longitudinary torques are made by the rotary masses , so whatever rotary mass on the car, like the shaft and of course the rotor inside the motor.
it makes sense for me but i am not an expert on theese things so i cant really say
if this is correct, the good part is the shaft is making oposite torque to the motor rotor s it is spinning contrary directon , so part of the torque steer is canceled...
it makes sense for me but i am not an expert on theese things so i cant really say
if this is correct, the good part is the shaft is making oposite torque to the motor rotor s it is spinning contrary directon , so part of the torque steer is canceled...
A driveshaft is very narrow and all its mass is very close to the center...compared to the motor, with lots of mass far out from the center...it's not going to have any significant effect on any chassis rotation (what you guys are calling "torque steer").
07-16-2006, 02:28 PM
#75
Tech Adept
Originally Posted by Turbo Joe
The closer to the centerline the weight is, the less inertia ("polar moment", IIRC) an object is going to have.
A driveshaft is very narrow and all its mass is very close to the center...compared to the motor, with lots of mass far out from the center...it's not going to have any significant effect on any chassis rotation (what you guys are calling "torque steer").
A driveshaft is very narrow and all its mass is very close to the center...compared to the motor, with lots of mass far out from the center...it's not going to have any significant effect on any chassis rotation (what you guys are calling "torque steer").