R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-06-2010, 03:01 PM   #1741
Tech Champion
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 7,399
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MantisWorx View Post
Interesting, i am working on a mount design right now that should work with minimal interference with the pod. Funny you say that there is not much room on the f1, compared to the mini-z there is plenty of room! if you think about it there is not much suspension movement so a large shock is not really needed, i wonder what the problem with the double wishbone is? you think it is just development? i cant imagine that it cant be made to work properly.
It's not a matter of the miniz being small, how much suspension articulation does it have--not much. I had the Ferrari F1, and it doesn't move a lot.

The bigger cars move much more.

As far as development, so far only the Yokomo car has really won anything. And your talking about the biggest names in rc working on those cars, factory efforts from Associated, Trinity, HPI, Delta, etc. I'm not saying it won't work, but they used the AE "new" front end for almost 20 years in 1/12, and the 'old' front end was out for almost 30 years...

New Yokomo



Delta




Associated


Trinity


HPI




They still wound up running the old stuff
__________________
A mutually re-enforcing cascade of failure

"Failior [sic] crowns enterprise." Robert Goddard

I-Lap Scoring Systems http://www.rclapcounter.com/
robk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 03:56 PM   #1742
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hudson Falls, NY
Posts: 872
Default

MantisWorx, I am looking forward to seeing your rear wing mount, front suspension, and front wings for the 1/10 scale F1 cars. I think you are absolutely on the right track, and what you say about how the rear wing works on these cars is spot on! Post those pics when you are ready!

It is so refreshing to see someone think "outside the box" with some new and common sense ideas for not only F1 cars, but ALL pan cars. Thanks to very backwards governing bodies like ROAR, pan car design, which includes F1 cars, has become stagnant, making very little progress in the last 30 years.
Things need to be shaken up, and pan car design needs to move forward.

I for one am in favor of re-writing the rules about what constitutes a direct drive pan car. For example, why does ROAR insist that all pan cars have to have a solid rear axle? There are other ways, (that I can't reveal here because I'm working on one right now) to have a direct drive, pinion gear to spur gear rear end without having a solid rear axle.

There are several other changes I would like to see and I plan on addressing them to ROAR this week. As I said, pan cars, which includes F1 rc cars, needs to move away once and for all from the old "slot car" solid rear axle that uses either an archaic T plate or a link rear suspension, and move up to a true fully independent rear suspension with direct drive. Believe me, it can be done!
Team Lotus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 04:03 PM   #1743
Tech Apprentice
 
JohnWinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 71
Default

I personally would like to see an updated version of this:

http://d-drivesportsenglish.blogspot...kyosho-f1.html

I know the F201 was kind of a step in that direction, but it was 4wd....
__________________
“We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities.”
JohnWinn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 04:31 PM   #1744
Tech Champion
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 7,399
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Lotus View Post
MantisWorx, I am looking forward to seeing your rear wing mount, front suspension, and front wings for the 1/10 scale F1 cars. I think you are absolutely on the right track, and what you say about how the rear wing works on these cars is spot on! Post those pics when you are ready!

It is so refreshing to see someone think "outside the box" with some new and common sense ideas for not only F1 cars, but ALL pan cars. Thanks to very backwards governing bodies like ROAR, pan car design, which includes F1 cars, has become stagnant, making very little progress in the last 30 years.
Things need to be shaken up, and pan car design needs to move forward.

I for one am in favor of re-writing the rules about what constitutes a direct drive pan car. For example, why does ROAR insist that all pan cars have to have a solid rear axle? There are other ways, (that I can't reveal here because I'm working on one right now) to have a direct drive, pinion gear to spur gear rear end without having a solid rear axle.

There are several other changes I would like to see and I plan on addressing them to ROAR this week. As I said, pan cars, which includes F1 rc cars, needs to move away once and for all from the old "slot car" solid rear axle that uses either an archaic T plate or a link rear suspension, and move up to a true fully independent rear suspension with direct drive. Believe me, it can be done!
This is totally common in dirt oval, and the Corally Assassin has this as well.

The real question is why? Do we need $500 pan cars was well as $500 sedans? The added complexity does not seem to be helping sedan.

http://www.jefferyracingconcepts.com...products_id=84 DD trans for oval

Mane Eclipse:
__________________
A mutually re-enforcing cascade of failure

"Failior [sic] crowns enterprise." Robert Goddard

I-Lap Scoring Systems http://www.rclapcounter.com/
robk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 05:15 PM   #1745
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 160
Default

It actually wouldn't be anywhere near as complex as you might think, and it wouldn't really have much effect on price either if done right. No need for $500 pan cars.

The point is that the basic parameters that determine electric rc car design are archaic, outdated and in need of a rethink. This involves chassis and drivetrain design, motor, and batteries; all key components in rc car design. and it is my suspicion that ROAR is in some sort of collusion with the chassis, motor and battery manufacturers to keep things just as they are with what amounts to 30+year old designs that have been mearly updated somewhat. Take a close look at the cream of the crop of todays' pan cars and compare them to ones of 30 years ago and there is really very little difference and very little advancement. Sad.

Last edited by Enforcerman; 09-06-2010 at 05:28 PM.
Enforcerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 05:42 PM   #1746
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hudson Falls, NY
Posts: 872
Default

Enforcerman's reply is absolutely correct! ROAR is a huge part of the problem because everyone wants ROAR acceptance and sanctioning. If ROAR would "see the light" and allow for direct drive pan cars without solid rear axles to compete and allow for other changes, then we could finally see some truely new designs instead of the same old ideas rehashed over and over with only small differences between each car. The solid rear axle design has hit a brick wall in terms of advancing pan cars and on-road racing is in enough trouble as it is and needs some fresh ideas to spice it up and make it more interesting and also to ultimately improve performance. You can only do so much with a solid rear axle; I believe they have run out of ideas on that one, and if ROAR doesn't see the light and allow for other designs, then another 30 years will go by and we will still be racing the same old designs and being suckered by the manufacturers to think they have the next "new" thing. What's next?, a double T plate, mulitple links? Yawn
Team Lotus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 05:45 PM   #1747
Tech Champion
 
RedBullFiXX's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Intergalactic Planetary
Posts: 6,539
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Thumbs down

Know what else still has a solid axle.
Race Karts.
Maybe they need a total renovation too
__________________
--> 12th scale Information Source <--

"Men do not quit playing because they grow old; they grow old because they quit playing."
― Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
RedBullFiXX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 05:53 PM   #1748
Tech Regular
 
Firefox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ks.
Posts: 303
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Wonder if there are any RC karts being raced, about the size of a 1/10 car.......
Firefox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 06:09 PM   #1749
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Newville,Pa
Posts: 2,152
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

There have been a few DD IRS cars in the past and even before roar wrote it's rules, you know why the solid rearaxle prevailed???..... cause it just works plain and simple... It's durable, light weight and fast....
IMPACTPLAYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 06:20 PM   #1750
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Newville,Pa
Posts: 2,152
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robk View Post
It's not a matter of the miniz being small, how much suspension articulation does it have--not much. I had the Ferrari F1, and it doesn't move a lot.

The bigger cars move much more.

As far as development, so far only the Yokomo car has really won anything. And your talking about the biggest names in rc working on those cars, factory efforts from Associated, Trinity, HPI, Delta, etc. I'm not saying it won't work, but they used the AE "new" front end for almost 20 years in 1/12, and the 'old' front end was out for almost 30 years...
The double wishbone suspension wasn't widely accepted for 2 reasons..... because you need to isolate damping and spring rate side to side and that can't be done with a mono shock, when you add a second shock you need to compensate for the extra weight and that means making the parts lighter and less durable. Secondly racers are way to quick to give up on new concepts unless you can develope them very rapidly, had someone came out with a double wishbone suspension that was as fast and durable out of the box then they would have adopted it right away and been willing to accept the "developemental pains"....
IMPACTPLAYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 07:08 PM   #1751
Tech Champion
 
RedBullFiXX's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Intergalactic Planetary
Posts: 6,539
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Racers are way to quick to give up on new concepts unless you can develop them very rapidly
Amazing we ever got used to all these new concepts...

2.4 GZ
Fm
Brushless
ESC's
Lipo
Nimh
Spool Diffs
Ball Diffs
Belt Drive
Shaft Drive
Touring Cars
Mini's
Micro's
etc....
__________________
--> 12th scale Information Source <--

"Men do not quit playing because they grow old; they grow old because they quit playing."
― Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
RedBullFiXX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 07:23 PM   #1752
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hudson Falls, NY
Posts: 872
Default

You all make some good points, and for sure the simple solid rear axle design does work, but why do we have to be forced by some organization like ROAR to race ONLY solid rear axle direct drive pan cars? Why not open open it up for some fresh new ideas and allow them to be built? The rules should be changed to: "Pan cars must be direct drive with only 2 gears, a pinion and a spur" and then leave it at that and allow for different approaches; who knows what ingeneous designs we might then see! All I'm asking for is more freedom of design!

The same could be said for the front suspension as well. Now we have the debate about double wishbone front suspensions vs the old sliding kingpin design. Both and other designs should be allowed by ROAR or any other sanctioning body. Why is it necessary to be so restrictive?

There are 2 other key elements in car design, the motor and the battery pack, that also need to be addressed as they are extremely influential in the basic design of all electric rc cars. They are the two largest and heaviest components on the car and as a result the entire chassis is designed around them. If their size parameters were allowed to be changed it would allow for more freedom of design.

As I stated earlier, I plan on addressing these ideas to ROAR directly. They will probably choose to ignore me, but I have to try!
Team Lotus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 08:25 PM   #1753
Tech Champion
 
MantisWorx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,829
Trader Rating: 27 (97%+)
Default

ok guys here is my first attempt at this! when you are drawing things up in CAD you tend to lose track of sizing, that and most of my stuff has been mini-z for the past three years. which is why this is way bigger than it needs to be! with that being said i can definately streamlint it alot without diminishing its strength as well as adding a truss design to it. also note that i have made the wing plates fully adjustable so now you can adjust the "total wing rake" and just the main element! it is made out of dry carbon too!







my thinking about the front end issues are that we need to stick to it until it works! pretty much everything that partains to a 1:1 car works on our scale so why not the front suspension? granted its much easier to just go with what ya know but eventually you will run into a guy like me that will make it work and work well!! thanx a bunch for the pix, i was having a hard time tracking down anything good to look at. i am in the process of designing a very simple front end that for now will use existing off the shelf parts with a few machined pcs that i will make custom. i am fortunate to have a CNC mill at my house so my R+D tends to go much quicker than most!
MantisWorx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 09:02 PM   #1754
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hudson Falls, NY
Posts: 872
Default

Marcus, now you just have to go out and test that new setup. Please let us know how well it works!
Team Lotus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2010, 09:25 PM   #1755
Tech Champion
 
MantisWorx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,829
Trader Rating: 27 (97%+)
Default

weather permiting i will test on thursday. i have some rubber tires coming in wednesday. that i want to test too. how bout this design for the braces:

its almost half the size and it angles so that you should only have to trim a little off of the body.
MantisWorx is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tamiya Championship Series Neil Rabara Racing Forum 20781 11-21-2016 05:43 AM
TAMIYA F103 RM energyracing Electric On-Road 2342 01-09-2016 02:15 AM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 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 12:51 PM.


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

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.0