R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-04-2014, 12:29 AM   #241
Tech Fanatic
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora La Reina de Los Ángeles del Río de Porciúncula
Posts: 912
Trader Rating: 29 (100%+)
Default chassis upgrades

Is everyone with a 418 going to upgrade to the 419?

Curious what strategy's you guys use. One car per season/year?

Or so you wait a couple of generations?

Since these cars seem to be on a yearly cycle, I'm thinking to just do what I do with my phone, upgrade every 2 years.

I'm an average driver so upgrading to a better car won't really make me faster. I suppose that's the biggest motivator.
lagcisco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2014, 02:08 AM   #242
Tech Fanatic
 
Salkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 882
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lagcisco View Post
Is everyone with a 418 going to upgrade to the 419?

Curious what strategy's you guys use. One car per season/year?

Or so you wait a couple of generations?

Since these cars seem to be on a yearly cycle, I'm thinking to just do what I do with my phone, upgrade every 2 years.

I'm an average driver so upgrading to a better car won't really make me faster. I suppose that's the biggest motivator.
Unless you are a top racer I really do not think that you need to upgrade every year, unless you simply just can afford and like to have the latest and greatest.

Several racers at my club change car every second year. They are still very competitive.

Some user here on rctech.net had a signature saying something like; "The only real upgrade to any car is some driver skill".

For us club racers, average racers, more driving will probably give better lap times than simply getting this years latest version of our brand car.
__________________
Yokomo BD7 2016 Black Series - MuchMore Fleta Pro / MuchMore ZX - Highest DLP650 - Sanwa M12
Salkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2014, 04:00 AM   #243
Tech Elite
 
niznai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lagcisco View Post
Is everyone with a 418 going to upgrade to the 419?

Curious what strategy's you guys use. One car per season/year?

Or so you wait a couple of generations?

Since these cars seem to be on a yearly cycle, I'm thinking to just do what I do with my phone, upgrade every 2 years.

I'm an average driver so upgrading to a better car won't really make me faster. I suppose that's the biggest motivator.
Depends. Many people here seem to think the driver is fast (or slow, as the case may be), not the car.

I keep some really old cars to check how good I am. If I can tune my old car to be faster, it probably means I learnt something. If I'm faster with a new car it may be that the car makes me look better but I'm the same slow driver with a new (faster) car. Every now and then a fast lap with the old car helps me think. It's like a benchmark for my skill measured against myself, not others.

Last edited by niznai; 10-04-2014 at 04:11 AM.
niznai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2014, 04:01 AM   #244
Tech Elite
 
niznai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raman View Post
Tamiyas blue metal is also consistently anodised the same tone. My BD7 had 3 different shades of blue anodising

Sorted. It's all black now.

They probably realised they suck at anodising. Looking at some of their older cars (such as the ancient YR4M2 J, or YRF2 I have), their anodising was top notch back then. More beautiful blue than Tamiya's too (deeper, and so was their red).
__________________
Team Greasy Weasel

The best upgrade to any car is some driver skill.

Last edited by niznai; 10-04-2014 at 04:13 AM.
niznai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2014, 04:44 AM   #245
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: santa monica / manchester
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lagcisco View Post
Is everyone with a 418 going to upgrade to the 419?

Curious what strategy's you guys use. One car per season/year?

Or so you wait a couple of generations?

Since these cars seem to be on a yearly cycle, I'm thinking to just do what I do with my phone, upgrade every 2 years.

I'm an average driver so upgrading to a better car won't really make me faster. I suppose that's the biggest motivator.
I ususally hold off until there is a large change, (2-3 years) Chassis number changes are usually something that makes me want to get a new TRF. My 418 has been epic though and it just seems perfect for my track and class so I am not really in need of buying one... although I probably will
__________________
http://www.theRcRacer.com/

TRF419, TBEvo6, TT02, VDF, TRF501x, TRF201, TRF101, Mi5, X-Ray T4-13, BD7 2014, A700 Evo, WR-02G
Qatmix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2014, 05:16 AM   #246
Tech Regular
 
TB03Racer09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 408
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

I have been buying a new Tamiya tub chassis every 12 months for the last 4 years. I hoping to do 24 months with the TRF419, being a proper race grade chassis and all. Would rather work on my driving and setup skills then play the latest equipment game
TB03Racer09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2014, 05:30 AM   #247
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,030
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lagcisco View Post
Is everyone with a 418 going to upgrade to the 419?
I will upgrade at the end of the year. Either a 419 or BD7.

If I get the BD7, will probably offload it.

If I get the 419, I'll keep it for lower class (21.5 and maybe VTA) duties.
cplus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2014, 08:35 PM   #248
Tech Elite
 
JimmyMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NC
Posts: 4,343
Default

I told myself I won't be upgrading at all. If I did I want the 419, however the BD7 motor forward option has me leaning towards that car now. Would be awesome for Blinky class.
__________________
M.J. McIntyre

R1Wurks
Yokomo YRX12
Ho-B Max
JimmyMac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 07:50 AM   #249
Tech Fanatic
 
d16dcoe45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Armonk, NY
Posts: 932
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by energyracing View Post
Hello Folks,
I was wondering why are touring cars still running full size lipo packs and not shorties?
This is a GREAT question! I think the minimum weight for TC should be lowered to 1250 worldwide. In the states we have 1380 which is easy to drop below even with 7500 packs.

Full size 2s lipos are a throwback that mimics 6 sub c cells which of course are not used anymore so why do we INSIST on keeping the shape? Its funny to me! In off road --where there is actually some real innovation--almost everything is shorties, saddles & squares and guys are putting shorties where saddles used to go for weight savings & faster reacting, faster cars .

In mod TC there is ZERO reason to run a heavy full size lipo beyond making legal weight and fitting in to some archaic rule. You can still make run time with a 4700 shorty. The main shorty issue is throwing the balance off which can be somewhat alleviated by mounting the esc on the battery side but that is a stop gap--not a real solution. The full size pack on one side/electronics & motor on the other is a throwback to ni-mh/brushed motors. It makes a car roll more and not able to change direction quickly.

I am of the opinion that TCs would do well with a major overhaul with the emphasis on CENTER mounted batteries and center mounted motors. If they can do it with 4wd electric off road they can do it with TCs. Having a full size pack hanging off the side is a "put it wherever it fits " mentality and shows a real lack of creativity & innovation.

There is SO much innovation going on in off road right now where designers are designing entire chassis around the smaller, lighter cells that it makes me wonder why not the same for on-road TC? Maybe if on-road was more popular in the states you would see manufacturers step it up.

I feel like people accept the status quo for TCs and then come up with reasons/excuses why a full size pack is necessary. IMO its
similar reasoning to the "factual" reasons that brushless motors would NEVER work in competition. I bet in a few years, full size lipos which mimic 6 sub c in size will be relegated to bashing vehicles and the order if the day for race cars will be cells of ALL shapes and sizes that will best fit each class of vehicle.

Sorry for the novella, but I just had to give my take :-)
__________________
Jay Lestingi


Tamiya/Team Associated/Orca

Last edited by d16dcoe45; 10-08-2014 at 08:27 AM.
d16dcoe45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 11:54 AM   #250
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 8
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by d16dcoe45 View Post
This is a GREAT question! I think the minimum weight for TC should be lowered to 1250 worldwide. In the states we have 1380 which is easy to drop below even with 7500 packs.

Full size 2s lipos are a throwback that mimics 6 sub c cells which of course are not used anymore so why do we INSIST on keeping the shape? Its funny to me! In off road --where there is actually some real innovation--almost everything is shorties, saddles & squares and guys are putting shorties where saddles used to go for weight savings & faster reacting, faster cars .

In mod TC there is ZERO reason to run a heavy full size lipo beyond making legal weight and fitting in to some archaic rule. You can still make run time with a 4700 shorty. The main shorty issue is throwing the balance off which can be somewhat alleviated by mounting the esc on the battery side but that is a stop gap--not a real solution. The full size pack on one side/electronics & motor on the other is a throwback to ni-mh/brushed motors. It makes a car roll more and not able to change direction quickly.

I am of the opinion that TCs would do well with a major overhaul with the emphasis on CENTER mounted batteries and center mounted motors. If they can do it with 4wd electric off road they can do it with TCs. Having a full size pack hanging off the side is a "put it wherever it fits " mentality and shows a real lack of creativity & innovation.

There is SO much innovation going on in off road right now where designers are designing entire chassis around the smaller, lighter cells that it makes me wonder why not the same for on-road TC? Maybe if on-road was more popular in the states you would see manufacturers step it up.

I feel like people accept the status quo for TCs and then come up with reasons/excuses why a full size pack is necessary. IMO its
similar reasoning to the "factual" reasons that brushless motors would NEVER work in competition. I bet in a few years, full size lipos which mimic 6 sub c in size will be relegated to bashing vehicles and the order if the day for race cars will be cells of ALL shapes and sizes that will best fit each class of vehicle.

Sorry for the novella, but I just had to give my take :-)
I completely share this opinion.
EvoFreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 12:01 PM   #251
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lynnwood, Washington
Posts: 761
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by d16dcoe45 View Post
This is a GREAT question! I think the minimum weight for TC should be lowered to 1250 worldwide. In the states we have 1380 which is easy to drop below even with 7500 packs.

Full size 2s lipos are a throwback that mimics 6 sub c cells which of course are not used anymore so why do we INSIST on keeping the shape? Its funny to me! In off road --where there is actually some real innovation--almost everything is shorties, saddles & squares and guys are putting shorties where saddles used to go for weight savings & faster reacting, faster cars .

In mod TC there is ZERO reason to run a heavy full size lipo beyond making legal weight and fitting in to some archaic rule. You can still make run time with a 4700 shorty. The main shorty issue is throwing the balance off which can be somewhat alleviated by mounting the esc on the battery side but that is a stop gap--not a real solution. The full size pack on one side/electronics & motor on the other is a throwback to ni-mh/brushed motors. It makes a car roll more and not able to change direction quickly.

I am of the opinion that TCs would do well with a major overhaul with the emphasis on CENTER mounted batteries and center mounted motors. If they can do it with 4wd electric off road they can do it with TCs. Having a full size pack hanging off the side is a "put it wherever it fits " mentality and shows a real lack of creativity & innovation.

There is SO much innovation going on in off road right now where designers are designing entire chassis around the smaller, lighter cells that it makes me wonder why not the same for on-road TC? Maybe if on-road was more popular in the states you would see manufacturers step it up.

I feel like people accept the status quo for TCs and then come up with reasons/excuses why a full size pack is necessary. IMO its
similar reasoning to the "factual" reasons that brushless motors would NEVER work in competition. I bet in a few years, full size lipos which mimic 6 sub c in size will be relegated to bashing vehicles and the order if the day for race cars will be cells of ALL shapes and sizes that will best fit each class of vehicle.

Sorry for the novella, but I just had to give my take :-)
I don't really know anything about off-road. Besides layout what else is innovative about off-road? On the surfaces they don't look radically advanced.
malkiy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 12:18 PM   #252
Tech Fanatic
 
d16dcoe45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Armonk, NY
Posts: 932
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by malkiy View Post
I don't really know anything about off-road. Besides layout what else is innovative about off-road? On the surfaces they don't look radically advanced.
The innovation is the fact of the recent use of machined alloy chassis, very aggressive cab forward bodies, mid motor & even center motor 2wd buggies--3 diffs for 4wd off road & designing cars AROUND current lipo technology--not designing cars around old style brick packs.

Why no center diff for 1/10 electric TC? It can give the corner speed advantage of a one-way without the negative effects (ie loss of front brakes) of a one way.

The aluminum chassis only came to on road (talking about electric) after it was tried and worked quite well in off road.
__________________
Jay Lestingi


Tamiya/Team Associated/Orca
d16dcoe45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 12:23 PM   #253
Tech Fanatic
 
d16dcoe45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Armonk, NY
Posts: 932
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by malkiy View Post
I don't really know anything about off-road. Besides layout what else is innovative about off-road? On the surfaces they don't look radically advanced.
The innovation is the fact of the recent use of machined alloy chassis, big bore emulsion shocks (even in TC emulsion/aeration shocks seem to give better traction) very aggressive cab forward bodies (obviously can't carry this over completely) mid motor & even center motor 2wd buggies--3 diffs for 4wd off road & designing cars AROUND current lipo technology--not designing cars around old style brick packs.

Why no center diff for 1/10 electric TC? It can give the corner speed advantage of a one-way without the negative effects (ie loss of front brakes) of a one way.

Why no new style TC bodies? Current sedan bodies do not look realistic anyway so why not design a sedan body that REALLY has some aero?

The aluminum chassis only came to on road (talking about electric) after it was tried and worked quite well in off road. And while its still not the clear way to go I doubt that it would've even have been tried if it wasn't for off road.

I know this is the 419 thread and I apologize for going off topic. Lets get back to tradition & brick packs. :-)
__________________
Jay Lestingi


Tamiya/Team Associated/Orca
d16dcoe45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 12:27 PM   #254
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by d16dcoe45 View Post
The innovation is the fact of the recent use of machined alloy chassis, big bore emulsion shocks (even in TC emulsion/aeration shocks seem to give better traction) very aggressive cab forward bodies (obviously can't carry this over completely) mid motor & even center motor 2wd buggies--3 diffs for 4wd off road & designing cars AROUND current lipo technology--not designing cars around old style brick packs.

Why no center diff for 1/10 electric TC? It can give the corner speed advantage of a one-way without the negative effects (ie loss of front brakes) of a one way.

Why no new style TC bodies? Current sedan bodies do not look realistic anyway so why not design a sedan body that REALLY has some aero?

The aluminum chassis only came to on road (talking about electric) after it was tried and worked quite well in off road. And while its still not the clear way to go I doubt that it would've even have been tried if it wasn't for off road.

I know this is the 419 thread and I apologize for going off topic. Lets get back to tradition & brick packs. :-)
You can thank ROAR for stopping a couple of those from happening.
redbones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 01:27 PM   #255
Tech Champion
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 7,402
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by d16dcoe45 View Post
The innovation is the fact of the recent use of machined alloy chassis, big bore emulsion shocks (even in TC emulsion/aeration shocks seem to give better traction) very aggressive cab forward bodies (obviously can't carry this over completely) mid motor & even center motor 2wd buggies--3 diffs for 4wd off road & designing cars AROUND current lipo technology--not designing cars around old style brick packs.

Why no center diff for 1/10 electric TC? It can give the corner speed advantage of a one-way without the negative effects (ie loss of front brakes) of a one way.

Why no new style TC bodies? Current sedan bodies do not look realistic anyway so why not design a sedan body that REALLY has some aero?

The aluminum chassis only came to on road (talking about electric) after it was tried and worked quite well in off road. And while its still not the clear way to go I doubt that it would've even have been tried if it wasn't for off road.

I know this is the 419 thread and I apologize for going off topic. Lets get back to tradition & brick packs. :-)
What you are talking about is making sedan even more like 1/8 on road which of course is the path to popularity.

Btw the reason you dont see sedans designed around short packs or any mod cars with short packs is that they dont provide the power(not referring to capacity) that bigger packs do. In offroad the load is not the same. To prove my point, dirt oval racers (on high bite tracks with foam tires) who tried the short packs in *17.5* went back to full sized packs.

As far as a center diff, i'm not sure if its legal. Slipper clutches were outlawed early on for sure, and I'm not sure if a 3rd diff is allowed.
__________________
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: 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 01:19 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