R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-17-2012, 01:49 PM   #6166
Tech Elite
 
Pro10noob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,071
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Lol that is what i have been telling a lot of people
Since i run a F104Pro if was sick of the ballbearing in the diff as i couldn't get it as smooth as my F103 diff with the one piece trustbearing.
So rebuild my F104 diff with the one piece trust bearing and tadaaaa, smooth as butter.
Running it nu 2 years with the same parts and still smooth.

regards Roy

Quote:
Originally Posted by terry.sc View Post
Just like the F104 diff you can get the GT diff smoother and more reliable if you replace the MD3 bearing with the Tamiya 53136 one piece thrust bearing and turning the spring washers around like this )(
__________________
l===/o\===l
[_]-###-[_] V-link proto type Pro10,JKMR P235-SE Pro10
P235-VL Pro10 comming soon
Sponsered by me,myself and i :)
Pro10noob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2012, 07:24 PM   #6167
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 210
Default

For the price of replacement parts and upgrades on my f104w I can almost get an fgx, plus a bit more for tires. Tough choice.
kb525 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2012, 07:27 PM   #6168
Tech Adept
 
Tracy B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 156
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Looking for setup tips to try on Saturday during practice. I have the aluminum caster block installed on my f109. I also run a flat carpet oval.
I can adjust camber, caster, and toe in/out on my f109.

Here is my current setup:
caster set at 7
RF camber set at about -1 to -1.5 degrees
LF is set at about 0 to .5 degree.
Toe in/out is pretty even.
I'm running soft springs on both sides up front.
F103 foams 3630 C front & 3645 C rears.
Also have the option to put f104 foams, front & rear, A & B compounds, to put on either side for stagger or to make car want to turn left naturally.

I'm asking because after last week I noticed that my front tires were cone shaped & after further research I found that I had the front caster block installed backwards, so when it said -2 on the block it was really much more than that. I also noticed that car seemed to want to push when I applied throttle coming out of the corners. I could catch this on transmitter, but was hard to do when trying to pass slower cars.
__________________
TRex chassis with McAllister Xfinity Ford Mustang
Member of WRCRC
Authorized HobbyWing, Gens Ace batteries, McAllister Racing Bodies, and Precision Racing Systems dealer: BroeckerRacing@Gmail.com
www.facebook.com/BroeckerRacing
Tracy B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2012, 09:21 PM   #6169
Tech Champion
 
F N CUDA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mission Viejo, So Cal
Posts: 5,387
Trader Rating: 30 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kb525 View Post
For the price of replacement parts and upgrades on my f104w I can almost get an fgx, plus a bit more for tires. Tough choice.
But then you'd still only have a stone stock FGX that your 104W can destroy (literally too) on most any surface.
__________________
Craig Hammon
F N CUDA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2012, 10:25 PM   #6170
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 210
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by F N CUDA View Post
But then you'd still only have a stone stock FGX that your 104W can destroy (literally too) on most any surface.
The front suspension needs to be replaced, so I was considering changing it to a f104X1 by changing the front to 104 type, giving it 104 tires, the f60 body, TRG wings and a single piece Tbar-pod plate thing, replacing the part of the axle the wheels attach to and rebuilding the diff, Adding front springs, trg shock, upgraded electronics and bearings will make it a very much faster car than a stock fgx. But considering I mostly do bashing I wonder if i really need that much of a car.
kb525 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 06:43 AM   #6171
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 11
Default

I have had a hunt through and cannot see if this has been answered before so can anyone let me know if the Rear ally diff and axle from the HPI F10 will fit directly onto a Super F1 and be the correct size and offset?
sparkyboy22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 07:08 PM   #6172
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,937
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

3Racing F113 Prototype

I don't think the front end shock absorber design should be allowed, takes away from the realistic looks. What do you think?



Source: HKS Hobby



Source: http://kkchung.pixnet.net/blog/post/31259053
__________________
www.rccartips.com
www.f1rccars.com
www.f1rcclub.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/rccartips/
http://www.facebook.com/RCCarTipsFan

Last edited by rccartips; 10-19-2012 at 07:27 PM.
rccartips is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 07:27 PM   #6173
Tech Elite
 
fleetmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,642
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Default

That's one enormous can of worms you have opened with that question , lol.
fleetmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 07:33 PM   #6174
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Posts: 499
Default

If you ask me this is the type of development RC F1 needs. Kinda funny how a cheap chinese knockoff company is pushing the boundaries, while Tamiya is only recently gone to a link rear end, which has been around forever.
Stregone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 08:12 PM   #6175
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga
Posts: 2,087
Trader Rating: 57 (100%+)
Default

Seems a bit more realistic than the kingpin tiny spring versions.
PROMODVETTE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2012, 01:06 AM   #6176
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 525
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stregone View Post
If you ask me this is the type of development RC F1 needs. Kinda funny how a cheap chinese knockoff company is pushing the boundaries, while Tamiya is only recently gone to a link rear end, which has been around forever.
I wouldn't say link rear ends have been around forever and its still questionable if they are any better than T-Bar rear ends in F1. You just can't beat the F103 and that car is almost 20 years old.

Adding a whole heap of extra complication and weight to the front of an F1 doesn't make it any faster...
ixlr8nz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2012, 07:05 AM   #6177
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Stockport, UK
Posts: 977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccartips View Post
I don't think the front end shock absorber design should be allowed, takes away from the realistic looks. What do you think?
The bigger problem for it is that the wishbone mounting points are outside the bodyshell. Here in the UK as we introduced a rule that suspension mounts must be inside the body, to prevent anyone using a pan car front end on an F1.

It would probably look a lot better if the wishbones were more F1 in shape, rather than the fact the shocks are in there. Although Cross Fireforce style inboard shocks would look a lot better.
terry.sc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2012, 07:19 AM   #6178
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Stockport, UK
Posts: 977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ixlr8nz View Post
I wouldn't say link rear ends have been around forever and its still questionable if they are any better than T-Bar rear ends in F1. You just can't beat the F103 and that car is almost 20 years old.

Adding a whole heap of extra complication and weight to the front of an F1 doesn't make it any faster...
There were link cars being sold in the 1980s, and the now familiar 'modern' link design originated in the Trinity Evolution 10 in 1992 - it went on to win the worlds. If it was such a great improvement over the familiar T-bar rear end, why did it take a change of battery to make them more widely available.

It was only the introduction of lipo in 1/12th and the need to mount a single battery in the chassis that meant an alternative had to be found to the industry standard and successful T-bar design. If we were still using Nimh cells I expect we would still be using T-bar cars in 1/12th.

If it wasn't for Tamiya developing a 1/12th car and needing a link suspension for it, and therefore having the parts for it to stick on an F1 chassis, I wouldn't be surprised if Tamiya had never developed a link F1.
terry.sc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2012, 07:32 AM   #6179
Tech Master
 
ShadowAu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Somewhere you'd never heard of
Posts: 1,463
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccartips View Post
3Racing F113 Prototype

I don't think the front end shock absorber design should be allowed, takes away from the realistic looks. What do you think?



Source: HKS Hobby

This car has been rumored for over 6 months and pics showing the front end first surfaced maybe 3 months ago so IMO bringing it up now is kinda like locking the garage after the car has already been stolen.
__________________
I have only one more RC thing on my bucket list and I will keep racing (and probably coming last) till its done...
ShadowAu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2012, 11:31 AM   #6180
Tech Champion
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 7,400
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by terry.sc View Post
There were link cars being sold in the 1980s, and the now familiar 'modern' link design originated in the Trinity Evolution 10 in 1992 - it went on to win the worlds. If it was such a great improvement over the familiar T-bar rear end, why did it take a change of battery to make them more widely available.

It was only the introduction of lipo in 1/12th and the need to mount a single battery in the chassis that meant an alternative had to be found to the industry standard and successful T-bar design. If we were still using Nimh cells I expect we would still be using T-bar cars in 1/12th.

If it wasn't for Tamiya developing a 1/12th car and needing a link suspension for it, and therefore having the parts for it to stick on an F1 chassis, I wouldn't be surprised if Tamiya had never developed a link F1.
Crc and Speedmerchant have had multiple championships in 1/12 over 10+ years well before lipos. T bars were fine but links have always been good too
__________________
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
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 07:34 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