Gear Box Ratio's
#1
Tech Apprentice
Thread Starter
Gear Box Ratio's
Does anyone here change their gearbox ratio for particular tracks or racing conditions? (Not to be confused with Spur/Pinion Gear Ratio or Final Drive Ratio). If so, what gearbox ratio have you settled on most of the time and why? I've figured I can change mine pretty much anywhere between 2.25-1.88. What seems to be most efficient for you? I know there are tons of factors to consider but I thought it would be an interesting, fun topic to discuss.
Currently running 107/36 Spur/Pinion, 2.0 gearbox with FDR of 5.94
Currently running 107/36 Spur/Pinion, 2.0 gearbox with FDR of 5.94
#2
Tech Elite
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Colorado, USA, The land of the free and the home of the brave!
Posts: 2,880
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
I wouldn't think it would be an efficiency issue but instead an issue that deals with getting an appropriate FDR for higher turn brushless motors.
I've never changed nor would consider changing my vehicle's internal drive ratio.
I've never changed nor would consider changing my vehicle's internal drive ratio.
#3
Tech Apprentice
Thread Starter
If you compared a gearbox 36/18 to 34/17 the ratio would be the same, 2.0. Depending on a given course one combo has to have an advantage over the other.
#4
Tech Elite
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Colorado, USA, The land of the free and the home of the brave!
Posts: 2,880
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
#5
Tech Apprentice
Thread Starter
I would think that one ratio would be more efficient on the motor, or better on acceleration, or holding speed for certain parts of the course.
#9
Tech Apprentice
Thread Starter
#12
Tech Elite
iTrader: (16)
All kidding aside now, some might say the 18/36 set of pulleys might have a slight efficiency advantage over the 17/34 due to the belts making bigger radius turns, but there might be a loss of efficiency with the bigger pulleys due to increased friction having more belt teeth engaged than with the smaller set. I have no idea which would work better.
If we're comparing different ratios in the same car, then there are situations where one might prove better. I can think of two cases off the top of my head... You might find that you can't achieve the final ratio you want given pinion/spur availability unless you use a certain transmission ratio, in which case the choice is made for you. In other cases, you might be able to get to your ideal final ratio with either of several pulley ratios, but depending on pulley ratio you might find a spur piniono combo that moves the motor slightly forward or rearward in the car to optimize front/rear weight bias without having to add ballast to the car.
I've never actually gone so far as to change pulley ratio in a TC to tune weight bias, but I suspect some might go that far. I will say that I HAVE at times changed spur/pinion combos in a pan car to keep the same gear ratio, but move the motor further or closer to the rear axle.
If we're comparing different ratios in the same car, then there are situations where one might prove better. I can think of two cases off the top of my head... You might find that you can't achieve the final ratio you want given pinion/spur availability unless you use a certain transmission ratio, in which case the choice is made for you. In other cases, you might be able to get to your ideal final ratio with either of several pulley ratios, but depending on pulley ratio you might find a spur piniono combo that moves the motor slightly forward or rearward in the car to optimize front/rear weight bias without having to add ballast to the car.
I've never actually gone so far as to change pulley ratio in a TC to tune weight bias, but I suspect some might go that far. I will say that I HAVE at times changed spur/pinion combos in a pan car to keep the same gear ratio, but move the motor further or closer to the rear axle.
#13
Tech Apprentice
Thread Starter
All kidding aside now, some might say the 18/36 set of pulleys might have a slight efficiency advantage over the 17/34 due to the belts making bigger radius turns, but there might be a loss of efficiency with the bigger pulleys due to increased friction having more belt teeth engaged than with the smaller set. I have no idea which would work better.
If we're comparing different ratios in the same car, then there are situations where one might prove better. I can think of two cases off the top of my head... You might find that you can't achieve the final ratio you want given pinion/spur availability unless you use a certain transmission ratio, in which case the choice is made for you. In other cases, you might be able to get to your ideal final ratio with either of several pulley ratios, but depending on pulley ratio you might find a spur piniono combo that moves the motor slightly forward or rearward in the car to optimize front/rear weight bias without having to add ballast to the car.
I've never actually gone so far as to change pulley ratio in a TC to tune weight bias, but I suspect some might go that far. I will say that I HAVE at times changed spur/pinion combos in a pan car to keep the same gear ratio, but move the motor further or closer to the rear axle.
If we're comparing different ratios in the same car, then there are situations where one might prove better. I can think of two cases off the top of my head... You might find that you can't achieve the final ratio you want given pinion/spur availability unless you use a certain transmission ratio, in which case the choice is made for you. In other cases, you might be able to get to your ideal final ratio with either of several pulley ratios, but depending on pulley ratio you might find a spur piniono combo that moves the motor slightly forward or rearward in the car to optimize front/rear weight bias without having to add ballast to the car.
I've never actually gone so far as to change pulley ratio in a TC to tune weight bias, but I suspect some might go that far. I will say that I HAVE at times changed spur/pinion combos in a pan car to keep the same gear ratio, but move the motor further or closer to the rear axle.
Yeah, I'd think smaller pulley would be and advantage for tight, twisty tracks or a need for quik accelerations and the larger pulley for long high speed flow tracks.