R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-27-2005, 10:45 AM   #6916
Tech Adept
 
SA_Racer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: South Africa
Posts: 138
Default

Are the composite cvd's alot weaker than the aluminum cvd's? Ive noticed the composites are about 1.5 grams lighter per cvd so thats 6 grams less rotational weight on the drivetrain, not sure if 6 grams will realy make a difirence but they look pretty strong ive just never used them so would be interested in knowing if anyone here has ever broken one, I also cant imagine them bending but I would expect a certain ammount of flex.

what are your thoughts?
SA_Racer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 10:49 AM   #6917
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 8,152
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Default

just get the Aluminum ones and be done with it.
__________________
Tekno|Schumacher|JConcepts|AMain|ProTek|RRP|LutzRC|BOOMrc
Bob Barry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 11:40 AM   #6918
Tech Master
 
AM03GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,007
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SA_Racer
Are the composite cvd's alot weaker than the aluminum cvd's? Ive noticed the composites are about 1.5 grams lighter per cvd so thats 6 grams less rotational weight on the drivetrain, not sure if 6 grams will realy make a difirence but they look pretty strong ive just never used them so would be interested in knowing if anyone here has ever broken one, I also cant imagine them bending but I would expect a certain ammount of flex.

what are your thoughts?
the weight difference isn't going to do much. i personally run the composite ones in the rear, i do this only so that i have more spare aluminum ones for the front where they wear more often and take more abuse. I've had composite bones in the rear since May and they are still in perfect condition.
__________________
Associated // Reedy // Radiopost // XP Digital // Parma PSE // Integy
AM03GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 12:33 PM   #6919
Tech Champion
 
Scottrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 6,122
Trader Rating: 238 (100%+)
Default

Reducing (or adding) rotational mass at the axis of rotation has realistically nil effect when you're talking comparatively small numbers (like 6g on a 1500g +/- car). It is certainly mass, no doubt about it but it doesn't have much effect other than between the ears, certainly no where NEAR as much (like, exponentially) as reducing mass toward the circumference of your tires/wheels, gears, etc.

Scottrik
Scottrik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 12:42 PM   #6920
Tech Elite
 
Boomer's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southern Cal - Claremont
Posts: 3,337
Send a message via ICQ to Boomer Send a message via AIM to Boomer
Default

This is a discussion that comes and goes over time - accompanied by much argument.

There are two schools of thought regarding droop.

First is that it is not, strictly speaking, affected by tire wear because it is the AMOUNT of drop-out from the chassis to some point measured at the end of the suspension arm (AE Gauge method). Tire wear is completely irrelevant here since we're not measuring anything having to do with tires. This is the DIFFERENCE between ride height and the amount of down-travel each arm has - call it down-travel instead of droop (D-T). As the tires wear down (we're talking foams here) this will not change.

The Second IS affected by tire wear because it is measured as an absolute value. It is the measurement, with the tire on the ground, of how far UP the chassis will travel. Use a RH gauge, hold the tire to the ground, and measure with the chassis lifted as far up as it will go - measure at all four corners. This IS affected by tire wear simply because the tires ARE a measure. Call it full-extension-RH (F-E-RH).

so, which is right? Again - different schools of thought.

Personally, I think the second is more important. Essentially, it's the RH at full extension. If, as you wear your tires, both your RH and full-extension-RH decrease, your handling is going to change, then you must make adjustment for it by adjusting BOTH your RH AND your F-E-RH. But you really need a base setup to begin with - that should include a starting tire-size, standard RH and D-T (which will establish a beginning F-E-RH) - then throughout the day you can adjust the F-E-RH and RH as needed.

I hope this made sense. I'm NOT dogmatic about it, I'm just trying to digest a LOT of previous argument into a short, explicit little blurb. . .
__________________
-
RC10L2.5W - RC12.4 - RCNTC3(bmi) - TC4 (modded) - B44.2 - plus rent-a-rides! :D
Boomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 12:42 PM   #6921
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SA_Racer
Are the composite cvd's alot weaker than the aluminum cvd's? Ive noticed the composites are about 1.5 grams lighter per cvd so thats 6 grams less rotational weight on the drivetrain, not sure if 6 grams will realy make a difirence but they look pretty strong ive just never used them so would be interested in knowing if anyone here has ever broken one, I also cant imagine them bending but I would expect a certain ammount of flex.

what are your thoughts?
I started with the RTR so all I had was the composite CVDs. As a beginner, I put the car through quite a torture test. I did manage to break one of the front CVDs, but not until I had a horrible crash that broke the front suspension arm and the steering hub and bent the hinge pin and the bolts that hold the steering hub in place. Given all the other damage, I was not surprised that I also broke the CVD.

The composite CVDs have survived slightly less dramatic crashes, including one that broke the suspension arm.

Thus, my conclusion is that the composite CVDs are quite tough. They are not as pretty, but I would not hesitate to use them. I was actually disappointed that my LHS did not have the composites, so I had to get a pair of alu CVDs to replace my broken one. Now I run alu front, composite rear.

Ira
iblumberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 12:44 PM   #6922
Tech Elite
 
Boomer's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southern Cal - Claremont
Posts: 3,337
Send a message via ICQ to Boomer Send a message via AIM to Boomer
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottrik
Reducing (or adding) rotational mass at the axis of rotation has realistically nil effect when you're talking comparatively small numbers (like 6g on a 1500g +/- car). It is certainly mass, no doubt about it but it doesn't have much effect other than between the ears, certainly no where NEAR as much (like, exponentially) as reducing mass toward the circumference of your tires/wheels, gears, etc.

Scottrik
I think you're right - but you might use a different number. Not all of the car rotates, so you'd be looking, more realistically, at 6g on a rotating mass of 150g (or whatever the drive-shaft, gears, dogbones, and tires would total - it'll be more significant than as compared to the entire car, but still small. . .)
__________________
-
RC10L2.5W - RC12.4 - RCNTC3(bmi) - TC4 (modded) - B44.2 - plus rent-a-rides! :D
Boomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 04:41 PM   #6923
Tech Master
 
AM03GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,007
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

someone asked me through PM to post pics of the shock upgrades and the battery strap. not the best pictures but i hope they suffice.





__________________
Associated // Reedy // Radiopost // XP Digital // Parma PSE // Integy
AM03GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 05:09 PM   #6924
Tech Master
 
BlackKat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northside San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,335
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boomer
This is a discussion that comes and goes over time - accompanied by much argument.

There are two schools of thought regarding droop.

First is that it is not, strictly speaking, affected by tire wear because it is the AMOUNT of drop-out from the chassis to some point measured at the end of the suspension arm (AE Gauge method). Tire wear is completely irrelevant here since we're not measuring anything having to do with tires. This is the DIFFERENCE between ride height and the amount of down-travel each arm has - call it down-travel instead of droop (D-T). As the tires wear down (we're talking foams here) this will not change.

The Second IS affected by tire wear because it is measured as an absolute value. It is the measurement, with the tire on the ground, of how far UP the chassis will travel. Use a RH gauge, hold the tire to the ground, and measure with the chassis lifted as far up as it will go - measure at all four corners. This IS affected by tire wear simply because the tires ARE a measure. Call it full-extension-RH (F-E-RH).

so, which is right? Again - different schools of thought.

Personally, I think the second is more important. Essentially, it's the RH at full extension. If, as you wear your tires, both your RH and full-extension-RH decrease, your handling is going to change, then you must make adjustment for it by adjusting BOTH your RH AND your F-E-RH. But you really need a base setup to begin with - that should include a starting tire-size, standard RH and D-T (which will establish a beginning F-E-RH) - then throughout the day you can adjust the F-E-RH and RH as needed.

I hope this made sense. I'm NOT dogmatic about it, I'm just trying to digest a LOT of previous argument into a short, explicit little blurb. . .
Thanks Boom,

So, two different concepts. Downtravel and Full Extension Ride Height...Downtravel is changed as tires wear and ride height gets reset to maitain the same full extension ride height. I get it!

A downtravel number for a foam setup seems irrelevant unless your going to run tires exactly the same size. Too bad the AE crew doesn't do what the Losi drivers do and write down what the full extension ride height is instead of the downtravel ("droop") number
BlackKat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 06:32 PM   #6925
Tech Regular
 
tr1kstanc3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 357
Trader Rating: 18 (100%+)
Default

AM03GT-

hey what online shop can i get that battery brace from? thanks man.

-joe
__________________
☆ Joe Tran ☆
tr1kstanc3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 07:00 PM   #6926
Tech Adept
 
beerbarron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 218
Default

Is there a difference between carbon and non-carbon parts? Other than $$$, I cant't seem to tell them apart.
beerbarron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 07:03 PM   #6927
Tech Master
 
Andrew Selvaggi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,087
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

So two different schools, 2 different methods...............1 simple solution........RUBBER

Thats what we have done down here in aus, at most major events we are now got a controled rubber tire, the tire war as we call it was just getting too big. But this is coming from an off roader who has just started onroad

I should get my FT TC4 on monday, man i cant wait, ive gone full out on starting to race onroad. new car, tire warmers, setup bored and all that TC crap you use. But i will forever think that Off road is where the racings at
__________________
Team Associated ~ JConcepts ~ Hobby Wing ~ Team Orion ~ nVision ~ Sav÷x ~ Upgrade RC
Andrew Selvaggi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 08:09 PM   #6928
Tech Master
 
koabich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Detroit Area
Posts: 1,360
Send a message via Yahoo to koabich
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beerbarron
Is there a difference between carbon and non-carbon parts? Other than $$$, I cant't seem to tell them apart.
Non-carbon parts are darker than the carbon parts. Carbon parts have lighter colored composite fiber through them.
Non-carbon is also less brittle but also not as stiff as their carbon based counterparts.
koabich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 08:19 PM   #6929
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: upstate New York
Posts: 1,364
Trader Rating: 21 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S_fender
Correct me if i'm wrong :

X 2.5 + square = 2.5 ░ toe in
X 3.0 + "O" = 1░ toe in

it could be the reason of your problem??
Just saw this.Not sure of the total with the "o" block.If your right I would imagine that at least is a factor.I was just wondering if that amount of wear could be considered normal or not.The car drives awesome like this,so if it's normal I'll deal with it.Just got home from practice,haven't measured anything yet,but the car was handling great.Set the front ride height to 4.5mm and got my low speed steering.The track was also warmer too.Thanks for all the help,Mario.
lotus1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 08:29 PM   #6930
Tech Regular
 
Jsaves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montana
Posts: 487
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Dave W.
This guy knows what he is talking about. Use it and see.
God Bless
Bryan
__________________
Proud member of Magic City RC Racers
Magic City R/C (Facebook)
CRC GT-R
CRC WTF-1
Jsaves is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS: Team Losi XXXS G+ with parts!! Team Orion V2 Hitec 5625 cola R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 9 06-18-2008 08:11 PM
BATTERIES - Team Orion 4200 SHO Team Cells (6 cell) packs................... For Sale 2-Bad Australia For Sale/Trade 0 03-21-2008 02:16 AM
New Items for Sale Tamiya F103gt Chassis Kit, Team Much More CTX-D, Novak, Team Orion Tsquare R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 14 04-17-2007 08:29 PM
>>> BRAND STINKING NEW NEVER RAN TEAM JAMMIN FACTORY TEAM FTE RACING BUGGY <<<< mach51 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 5 01-25-2007 09:13 PM
F/S Team Associated Factory Team RC18T with Mamba Comp X Brushless and Extras ZeroCool101 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 7 01-07-2006 01:54 PM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 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 05:13 AM.


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

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.0