R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-19-2013, 09:20 AM   #61
Tech Master
 
AM03GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,007
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jsaves View Post
I hope this is not too dumb of a question.
What are DCJ and DCV?
Used to run touring car up here until it fell off, it could be making a come back soon so I am looking.
Thanks and God Bless
DCJ, DCV are new updated constant velocity drive shaft designs. On the old traditional CVA the dogbone has one pivot point to the axle and with large angles when the hubs are turned the joints would chatter and bind. The new designs use an intermediate sub-joint in the hub so that there is 2 pivot points one from the dogbone to this intermediary piece and then from this piece to the axle. What it does is allow the hub to turn the same angle without the binding and chatter... That's my attempt at a general description
__________________
Associated // Reedy // Radiopost // XP Digital // Parma PSE // Integy
AM03GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 10:40 AM   #62
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 794
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keven H View Post
I had the chance to test the new DCV this week end at the Timezone GP and they worked awesome and the fit was great.
What method is used to hold the DCV's together? Heatshrink, set screws, a retaining clip of some kind, or some other method?
Serzoni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 10:58 AM   #63
Tech Master
 
jag88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,075
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AM03GT View Post
DCJ, DCV are new updated constant velocity drive shaft designs. On the old traditional CVA the dogbone has one pivot point to the axle and with large angles when the hubs are turned the joints would chatter and bind. The new designs use an intermediate sub-joint in the hub so that there is 2 pivot points one from the dogbone to this intermediary piece and then from this piece to the axle. What it does is allow the hub to turn the same angle without the binding and chatter... That's my attempt at a general description
yep, everything you said is true. A further explanation would say that in a single joint design you get a 'lumpy' feel in the power transmission because of the velocity change through the joint rotation of 360 degs.. One shaft leads for 90 degrees and the other shaft lags for 90 degs. If you could plot this it would look like a sine wave through 360 degs.. If you add a second joint in the proper position then the two waves cancel each other out and you get a smooth transmission of power through the shaft. You can find them on the drive shafts of higher end luxury cars and also on the steering wheel shaft to the rack or steering box.
that's my best shot a general explanation ....lol
jag88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 11:18 AM   #64
Tech Elite
 
R3VoLuTiOn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,193
Trader Rating: 24 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keven H View Post
I had the chance to test the new DCV this week end at the Timezone GP and they worked awesome and the fit was great. I also ran the steel outdrive with no blade all week end long in modified with no wear.

we will also have setup available soon for when the car is released, drivers have something to run. I can ensure you that the car will be great out of the box and all it will need is the dcv and you will be ready to rock.

I am looking forward to the release and get a good group of people running the car to show its potential.
what size are the pins in it?
__________________
John Tsang 🏁 VBC Racing USA 🚗 ORCA RC 🚗 GripworksRC 🚗 MotivRC 🚗 GravityRC 🚗 RC America

http://www.facebook.com/VancouverRRR 🏁 http://www.facebook.com/OvergearedRacing
R3VoLuTiOn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 12:28 PM   #65
Tech Regular
 
Jsaves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montana
Posts: 487
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Thanks Guys for the time and effort explaining that to me.
That is a great up grade.
__________________
Proud member of Magic City RC Racers
Magic City R/C (Facebook)
CRC GT-R
CRC WTF-1
Jsaves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 04:54 PM   #66
Tech Champion
 
John Tag's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Huntersville, NC
Posts: 8,911
Trader Rating: 41 (100%+)
Default

Nice looking car...............
__________________
www.express-motorsports.net for all your motor needs
Multi time National Champions,Reedy Champs,Vegas Champs,Birds, Champs,Tagstime@hotmail.com

Team Associated-Express Motorsports-Trinity-Reflex Racing-A Main Hobbies-ProtekRC
John Tag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 09:44 PM   #67
Tech Elite
 
JimmyMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NC
Posts: 4,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Tag View Post
Nice looking car...............
Hmmmm... wondering why orange is for sale.....
__________________
M.J. McIntyre

R1Wurks
Yokomo YRX12
Ho-B Max
JimmyMac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 12:49 AM   #68
Tech Initiate
 
MostlyTorso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Monterey County, CA
Posts: 30
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

I've been a big fan of Team Associated, and who knows how much money I've sent their way. Between my TC4 and TC6.1 I've spent what some people spend on college. While my first reaction to seeing the new kit come out was excitement and awe, I am sorry to say that I'm a little disappointed in a few aspects of the 6.2.

For starters, the FIRST thing I would've changed would have been the suspension plastics! Even BRAND NEW there was an abundant amount of 'slop' in the movement of the steering blocks, C-hubs, and rear uprights. I come to find out that it's something they left alone? Really? AE didn't fix the jiggle in all 4 wheels?

On that same note, I wish AE would take a look at their ball-cups (tie rod ends) and think of a redesign. They're a little wimpy and I feel that I've replaced more than a few on a regular basis because it'd loosened up too much.

Secondly, while they did fix the problem of the bulkhead-mounted hinge pin blocks, the new chassis-mounted blocks are still but plastic inserts! The Exotek chassis conversion for the 6.1, X-Ray, ARC, and probably others have a metal-on-metal connection, providing for a near frictionless joint. Anchoring both ends of the hinge pin in grippy plastic (granted, I've not had the chance to play with the car yet) seems like a bad idea. You are then relying on the arm to rotate around the hinge pin, rather than having the hinge pin ball-end rotate in the ball socket AND arm rotate around the pin.

Don't get me wrong... I think that this redesign was desperately needed and will run laps around the old design. There's no question that the 6.2 is a way better platform than the 6.1. The fact is that there is nothing on the car that you can point at (aside from the High-Definition Roll Control) that feels original to AE. The dual-bellcrank steering, center-mounted overhanging servo mount, and the floating spur gear layshaft are all old news and are current characteristics of many other TCs out there.

I hope that this post doesn't come off sounding too negative. I am still a fan of Team Blue and continue to run my 6.1 (with all the Exotek options, mind you) for my VTA car. Please feel free to challenge any of my above statements, as I am curious as to others' experiences with the car. In the end I just feel that the 6.2 is AE playing catch-up to the other manufacturers out there instead of being the pioneers that I've always felt they had been.
MostlyTorso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 05:31 AM   #69
Tech Initiate
 
David Home's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: N.Ireland
Posts: 44
Default

Quote"Secondly, while they did fix the problem of the bulkhead-mounted hinge pin blocks, the new chassis-mounted blocks are still but plastic inserts! The Exotek chassis conversion for the 6.1, X-Ray, ARC, and probably others have a metal-on-metal connection, providing for a near frictionless joint. Anchoring both ends of the hinge pin in grippy plastic (granted, I've not had the chance to play with the car yet) seems like a bad idea. You are then relying on the arm to rotate around the hinge pin, rather than having the hinge pin ball-end rotate in the ball socket AND arm rotate around the pin."

The simple answer here is that it's a lot cheaper to replace the plastic insert than it would be the whole block, which you would have to do if it were metal on metal. I think that's the idea behind it?
David Home is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 06:56 AM   #70
Tech Master
 
wtcc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,137
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Yeah, but still he got a point there. I am always surprised how much slop there is in my front suspension after driving my TC6 with the old suspension parts. On the other hand, on track I do not recognize any disadvantage. The TC6.1 is easy to drive and fast. So I wonder how the 6.2 will compare to it. To be honest: I do not expect much, still hoping for a little more "dialed in feeling" in the middle of the corner because of the changed chassis flex.
__________________
AE / Reedy / RSD
wtcc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 08:35 AM   #71
Tech Adept
 
Michael@USPN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NORCAL Baby!
Posts: 190
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

The TC6.1WC IS a A-Main car. It made the A-main at the Reedy Race just this year. So the car is top notch in my opinion, with the cost that is much more affordable. So what if they're made out of plastic inserts, I'm glad they are. I'd much rather replace those cheaply priced parts then the more expensive parts that bend too. Now of course, the car is priced less...right. But if you dont want the plastic parts, there are always after-market parts for those parts...so you can get those too....and be happy. So its all on what you prefer I guess.

Im curious as to what other manufactures has come out with something that is ground breaking for next year 2014. (Serious question) I'd like to know too

I see ones point about plastic parts, Im simply saying...Im glad they are, and you can win with it too

Cheers!
__________________
NORCAL HOBBIES | FAST PACE RACING | INSIDE LINE RACING
U.S.P.N. PAINTBALL | DAVIS PAINTBALL | NORCAL P.F.O.A.
TAMIYA EX05V2 | TC6.1 WC (2013 Reedy 17.5 A-main) | AWESOMATIX A700Lx2 17.5 & VTA
R1 Wurks Motors, Batts & Fans! | Tekin RS Gen2 | R1 Wurks Servos | Reflex Racing RSD Upgrades
Michael@USPN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 08:48 AM   #72
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 969
Trader Rating: 24 (96%+)
Default

just pre ordered mine, does any one make a carbon front bumper support for this kit, I am a Tamiya person, this will be my second ae, I did have a tc3 back in the day, like to bling out my rc cars, thanks
zaraz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 10:01 AM   #73
Tech Elite
 
Rick Hohwart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,857
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MostlyTorso View Post
For starters, the FIRST thing I would've changed would have been the suspension plastics! Even BRAND NEW there was an abundant amount of 'slop' in the movement of the steering blocks, C-hubs, and rear uprights. I come to find out that it's something they left alone? Really? AE didn't fix the jiggle in all 4 wheels?
I believe that most of the slop can be remedied by gluing the inserts into the hub carriers and caster blocks. I'm not sure about steering block slop as I have not really experienced this. In my opinion, most cases of weird handling behavior can be traced back to a component that is too tight or bound up. Being a little too loose is always better than a little too tight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MostlyTorso View Post
On that same note, I wish AE would take a look at their ball-cups (tie rod ends) and think of a redesign. They're a little wimpy and I feel that I've replaced more than a few on a regular basis because it'd loosened up too much.
I actually don't like the ball cups either but I think they are too tight. They rarely break. However I use Yokomo ball cups.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MostlyTorso View Post
Secondly, while they did fix the problem of the bulkhead-mounted hinge pin blocks, the new chassis-mounted blocks are still but plastic inserts! The Exotek chassis conversion for the 6.1, X-Ray, ARC, and probably others have a metal-on-metal connection, providing for a near frictionless joint. Anchoring both ends of the hinge pin in grippy plastic (granted, I've not had the chance to play with the car yet) seems like a bad idea. You are then relying on the arm to rotate around the hinge pin, rather than having the hinge pin ball-end rotate in the ball socket AND arm rotate around the pin.
This design does not affect handling in testing. And it means that racers can change inexpensive plastic insets rather than buy expensive aluminum pieces. Also, if the arm rotates on the pin and the ball rotates in the socket you will introduce more play into the suspension.

Ultimately, the new version is an improvement on the old model while still remaining easy to drive and a great value with excellent parts support.
__________________
www.reedypower.com
Rick Hohwart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 01:30 PM   #74
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Woodinville, WA
Posts: 2,512
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael@USPN View Post
Im curious as to what other manufactures has come out with something that is ground breaking for next year 2014. (Serious question) I'd like to know too
Awesomatix's new floating front gearbox, perhaps?

I have to say, my T4'14 definitely looks less sexy after seeing the pics of the new AE. But the AE shocks on the TC6.1 were pretty awful.

As far as the hinge pin pivoting goes, I think the ball isn't really supposed to rotate with suspension travel, as much as it's supposed to let the hinge pin align properly with various inboard toe settings. The T4'14 doesn't even use balls. I think the inside of the insert is kinda shaped like this ) ( or maybe this / \ so that it grabs the pin pretty tight, but gives it room to align with inboard toe settings, without tweaking the pin. After some careful reaming on the arms with a 3mm drill bit, the arms move so free on the pins, without being sloppy, that I really don't think it matters.

-Mike
grippgoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 01:31 PM   #75
Tech Champion
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 7,402
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

"spend on college. While my first reaction to seeing the new kit come out was excitement and awe, I am sorry to say that I'm a little disappointed in a few aspects of the 6.2.

For starters, the FIRST thing I would've changed would have been the suspension plastics! Even BRAND NEW there was an abundant amount of 'slop' in the movement of the steering blocks, C-hubs, and rear uprights. I come to find out that it's something they left alone? Really? AE didn't fix the jiggle in all 4 wheels?"

You must never have owned a Tamiya. Sloppiest $500 car around but they work like no other.
__________________
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



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 07:58 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