JimmyMac

iTrader: (2)

I see nothing wrong with plugs for club racing. Especially when you travel alot to tracks with no power. So soldering would be very difficult if you don't have a DC iron. As for a difference, I really don't see much of a difference at all really. And I went from hardwiring to Eagle plugs. But perhaps for the Snowbirds... I'll go back to direct solder. But til then, I see no need.

Anyways, the plugs may fit with just a tad little bit of dremeling. Just enough to make clearance... but not enough to cut through the whole chassis. We'll see I guess...

kewdawg

iTrader: (3)

Oh really? Try telling that to the Pro 3 owners, who tried running their stock tub chassis on carpet. Granted that chassis was plastic. The carbon graphite version didn't fair much better. A tub chassis has inherent flex. One made of stiffer material works better, but a dual deck woven graphite chassis(built correctly, of course), is as stiff as it gets. This is a big part of why the current top manufacturers are using woven graphite upper and lower decks. But I COULD be mistaken. How much carpet racing do you run?

Nightbreed

to disagree. All I'm saying is that molded graphite is not more durable than the molded plastic. Remember the TF TC3 discussion? You said the TF TC3 was stronger, lighter, and faster. My stand is lighter? Yes, stronger? No. Faster? Maybe, but only a pro driver could tell. Add some other things like the IRS input shafts, or the Ti CVDs, and some low drag bearings. Then I would say yes.

Chassis design is always the key to durability. In fact, AE built the TC4 with a much better bumper and beefier parts. The TC4 should be very strong.

I have had several CF plate TCs and I think the CF breaks down faster than I would like. In my opionion, the molded graphite is the better than CF plates. There are pros and cons to each.

I think the best anti-tweek chassis would have to be the XXX-S. Durable and the chassis design won't budge.

rayhuang

iTrader: (5)

The Main question I have for guys like Tony Phalen-is the tendency for the Tc3 and now Tc4 to be whicked fast-but inconsistent still there. And to be much more detailed.

I hve always felt that the TC3 is a tiring car to drive. By that I mean-you always have to stay on top of it and always making little corrections every foot around the track. YOu dont knw your doing it really-but any lapse in concentration leads to a missing a corner either hit a little early or maybe push a little wide. Yes it rewards with a few whicked fast laps and a good run, but it seems other cars achieve the same sort of speed-only more consistent on lap times and easier to drive.

I always theorized it was due in part to the shaft drive and the torque (not torque steer) applied to the tires.

But maybe it is the combination of things.

I do wonder if AE has any thoughts on the driveability of the Tc4 vs. the TC3.

Subjective, but honest on track feelings from Team AE drivers.

Ray

kewdawg

iTrader: (3)

Agreed! I think you're dead-on with the Losi xxx-s. If, Losi could've just found a way to shave 4 ounces off the car. That car is a brick! Sorry, Losi guys.

Nightbreed

since the new modifications have been made. I'm not so sure that I thought the TC3 was work to drive. There are so many other things that effect handling. Tweek, shocks, tire balance, tires, and so on. But then again I only race stock brushless. The TC4 now has better beefier floating hinge pins so the chassis won't bind. Plus the adjustments should be more precise with the new system.

I wonder if the car will flex more than the TC4. I race carpet mostly and I hope it's at least the same. I wish they would make some more mods to the chassis before it goes into production.

kewdawg

iTrader: (3)

Yeah, I mentioned that earlier on this thread. I don't know... milling the chassis may make it weaker. Then again, I've seen guys at my local carpet track do some crazy dremel work on the TC3 chassis w/ good results. If, AE doesn't do it for us, this WILL be a mod done to lighten up the chassis. We don't know what the car weights as of yet. So, unless the car is 50 ounces or less, expect to see dremels hittin' high rpms at a track near you.

robk

iTrader: (22)

"Try telling that to the Pro 3 owners, who tried running their stock tub chassis on carpet. Granted that chassis was plastic. The carbon graphite version didn't fair much better. A tub chassis has inherent flex. One made of stiffer material works better, but a dual deck woven graphite chassis(built correctly, of course), is as stiff as it gets. This is a big part of why the current top manufacturers are using woven graphite upper and lower decks. But I COULD be mistaken. How much carpet racing do you run?"

Hpi's pro3 chassis was a total pity. They did not have any type or cross bracing or reinforcement what so ever. Compare a TC3 chassis to the Pro3, and you'll understand.

nothing wrong with molded cars when done correctly. Look at the XXXS chassis. Ever try to twist one of those?

kewdawg

iTrader: (3)

The Pro 3 stock chassis was great for asphalt. I don't believe it was designed with carpet racing in mind. Hence, all the flex. The XXX-S' chassis, unlike the traditional tub design, has that central spine to give it more rigidity. Not a true "tub" chassis, in my opinion. Still, the carbon graphite version made the car a lot stiffer. I always wondered why Losi went in a totally different direction with the production version(I'm sure the answer is in one of these threads)? That prototype was sick!

robk

iTrader: (22)

i actually spoke to JR. about the Losi car when they were testing prototypes before Cleveland. He said they would run a molded chassis since he felt the plate cars are "tweak machines". He also wanted the chassis to have no braces which might tweak the car. I really like how the proto looked, but i understand his thoughts.

Actually, the most interesting thing was his picks for good cars. At the time, the TC3, and (here's the kicker), the Kawada SV10! He liked all the adjustment on it.

The Black Kat

Someone else noticed that too!

I've been having that problem in addition to consistancy problems with the car (the latter is less noticeable with a diff up from but still there) I'd be able to rip off a decent lap (ie: 14.15) but the next lap if I did the same exact thing I'd crush the wall, therefore jakking my time to a 15 + Its really annoying, happens with most setups I try and makes me want to switch cars again

Joe B

iTrader: (1)

90% of the time , having a car that wanders (one that always needs correction while driven) is set-up.......When Properly set-up Iv'e never had that problem with any of the tc'3 Iv'e had.....you could try 1 or 2 degrees of toe in in the front, this way you'll account for the possible excessive play in the front suspension that ,while in motion can be spreading your toe settings too far out, giving you a wandering car.........Just a thought

The Black Kat

Good suggestion! Thanks!

Joe B

iTrader: (1)

TimXLB

iTrader: (14)

Ray:

Hi,

Mini was talking about that when we were deciding what car to run this year. he is fast with the TC3 fast enough to keep Chuck busy most days. with the Xray he was smoother ( for lack of a better word at this time) but felt that it was missing the punch off the corners. (not a 1.77 car as of then) he still put in the A but was just off his normal pace (the .125/.062 B.M.I. chassis in stock).
we are hoping the FK will help in the punch/corner thing.
also after driving the modded rack on Mini's car did you still feel the same about the TC3????? I know it wasn't setup for your track put did it work any better after all the changes you made??
LMK.

Thanks.