R/C Tech Forums

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

Like Tree50Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-11-2017, 03:55 PM   #991
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Medina Ohio
Posts: 814
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

I am hoping there isn't a move to 2s anytime soon. I am just finalizing my 1s stuff!

Chris
__________________
BFast www.BFastrc.com "Feel the Diff"!
NORCAR www.norcarracing.com
Medina R/C Raceway Find us on Facebook!
ccm399 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2017, 04:02 PM   #992
Tech Champion
 
liljohn1064's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Deerfield, WI
Posts: 5,564
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Default

One of our racers was at the Birds and asked Dumper what the correct setup for our surface should be. Well, he nailed it.

Gen X 10 R/T -

On the Front:
5mm ride height
.45 springs
Medium width
0* caster blocks
3 caster shims forward
Set to bump steer out, 3mm shim on the arm ball stud giving a down angle from arm to to servo.
Turnbuckles 4mm back from steering arm to servo.
Kimbrough medium servo save with the balls located on the inner holes.
.5 toe out
Final width was 193mm

Center:
White spring
Stock oil (32.5 wt)
Long ball stud (tried to lengthen the shock)
Stock spacing under ball studs front and rear, shock angle down to battery.

Rear:
.45 side springs
20k damper lube (need to try lighter again)
5.5mm ride height
200mm final width

Ford GT body, Inline setup with battery in front of the ESC. Reedy Mach 3 17.5 1S, Fantom 7800 battery, Toro 120S ESC, RSx12 servo.

The car didn't misbehave all night last night on the old, beat up and patch taped Gray Fastrack (multiple generations). I had fun.
__________________
John Higgins former student of The Ian Ruggles Negative Reinforcement Driving School. The "Team Principal".
liljohn1064 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2017, 07:28 PM   #993
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Medina Ohio
Posts: 814
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by liljohn1064 View Post
One of our racers was at the Birds and asked Dumper what the correct setup for our surface should be. Well, he nailed it.

Gen X 10 R/T -

On the Front:
5mm ride height
.45 springs
Medium width
0* caster blocks
3 caster shims forward
Set to bump steer out, 3mm shim on the arm ball stud giving a down angle from arm to to servo.
Turnbuckles 4mm back from steering arm to servo.
Kimbrough medium servo save with the balls located on the inner holes.
.5 toe out
Final width was 193mm

Center:
White spring
Stock oil (32.5 wt)
Long ball stud (tried to lengthen the shock)
Stock spacing under ball studs front and rear, shock angle down to battery.

Rear:
.45 side springs
20k damper lube (need to try lighter again)
5.5mm ride height
200mm final width

Ford GT body, Inline setup with battery in front of the ESC. Reedy Mach 3 17.5 1S, Fantom 7800 battery, Toro 120S ESC, RSx12 servo.

The car didn't misbehave all night last night on the old, beat up and patch taped Gray Fastrack (multiple generations). I had fun.
That's a pretty detailed setup!

One question, the line I high lighted in bold isn't clear to me. From the sound of it the text it sounds like the servo is back from the centerline of the steering arms. Meaning the servo mounting point is rearward of the steering arms. Maybe I am mis-reading it though as most seem to have the servo inline or forward of the steering arm centerline.

So my question is looking down from the top do the tie rods angle toward the rear of the car at the center or the front?

Thanks!
Chris
__________________
BFast www.BFastrc.com "Feel the Diff"!
NORCAR www.norcarracing.com
Medina R/C Raceway Find us on Facebook!
ccm399 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2017, 10:18 PM   #994
Tech Champion
 
liljohn1064's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Deerfield, WI
Posts: 5,564
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Default

As you look down from the top, the Ackerman angle is servo saver ball studs in front of the steering arm ball studs by 4mm.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ccm399 View Post
That's a pretty detailed setup!

One question, the line I high lighted in bold isn't clear to me. From the sound of it the text it sounds like the servo is back from the centerline of the steering arms. Meaning the servo mounting point is rearward of the steering arms. Maybe I am mis-reading it though as most seem to have the servo inline or forward of the steering arm centerline.

So my question is looking down from the top do the tie rods angle toward the rear of the car at the center or the front?

Thanks!
Chris
__________________
John Higgins former student of The Ian Ruggles Negative Reinforcement Driving School. The "Team Principal".
liljohn1064 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2017, 05:53 AM   #995
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Medina Ohio
Posts: 814
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by liljohn1064 View Post
As you look down from the top, the Ackerman angle is servo saver ball studs in front of the steering arm ball studs by 4mm.
Thanks!

That is what I suspected but my brain kept getting in the way...

Chris
__________________
BFast www.BFastrc.com "Feel the Diff"!
NORCAR www.norcarracing.com
Medina R/C Raceway Find us on Facebook!
ccm399 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2017, 01:11 PM   #996
Tech Elite
 
celt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: /dev/null
Posts: 2,364
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccm399 View Post
I am hoping there isn't a move to 2s anytime soon. I am just finalizing my 1s stuff!

Chris
I can't imagine a single benefit to running 2S in this class. I know Dumper has commented already, just trying to get my head around why this would even come up as a consideration/discussion?

To the contrary, I think F1 would benefit greatly by going to 1S. 2WD rubber tire pancars can suffer from to much low end torque - that is what can make them harder to drive. 1S mellows them out beautifully...

Geez, can't imagine 2S in these cars.
__________________
"Soon they will get everything they deserve. This isn't about trite elitism, but the otherwise intellectual and educated classes refusing to think for themselves. I call it situational ignorance, and painfully intolerable."

Stan Garvin
celt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2017, 01:18 PM   #997
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Medina, Ohio
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by celt View Post
I can't imagine a single benefit to running 2S in this class. I know Dumper has commented already, just trying to get my head around why this would even come up as a consideration/discussion?

To the contrary, I think F1 would benefit greatly by going to 1S. 2WD rubber tire pancars can suffer from to much low end torque - that is what can make them harder to drive. 1S mellows them out beautifully...

Geez, can't imagine 2S in these cars.
When F1 became 25.5 testing was done to determine the best way to go. 1cell lower turn or to the higher turn motor staying with 2cell. I believe the 25.5 was chosen because of existing batteries and esc's. It was cheaper to buy a motor than to replace those. I was part of the testing and did the 25.5 part. I never did try a 1cell.
I don't believe we need to change a thing for indoors. This is easily one of the most competitive classes for skilled racers around and beginners can run it.
__________________
www.norcarracing.com
NORCAR @ The Gate
old_dude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2017, 01:45 PM   #998
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Medina Ohio
Posts: 814
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Well said Ron.

For the record I wasn't the one asking for or about 2s I was simply commenting on the desire to keep things as they are. I haven't yet run the class on race day but I can see from watching the cars and running mine during a practice session where the class formula is a good one.

Chris
__________________
BFast www.BFastrc.com "Feel the Diff"!
NORCAR www.norcarracing.com
Medina R/C Raceway Find us on Facebook!
ccm399 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2017, 03:47 PM   #999
Tech Champion
 
liljohn1064's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Deerfield, WI
Posts: 5,564
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Default

Celt is pretty much dead on with the 1S vs. 2S thing. I've tested F1 with 1S 13.5 and the car was marginally slower than 21.5 2S on very high traction, but still faster and easier to drive than 25.5 2S. The decision for 25.5 was based solely on existing hardware. F1 is pretty set in stone, so no arguments from me on trying to change it at this point. I do prefer the scale realism based classes.

Back to your regularly scheduled program.
__________________
John Higgins former student of The Ian Ruggles Negative Reinforcement Driving School. The "Team Principal".
liljohn1064 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2017, 03:20 AM   #1000
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 7
Default

Wouldn't 2S 25.5 be only slightly more power than 1S 13.5? Comparing 13.5 1S to 21.5 2S would be ridiculous. Benefits include standard ESCs and some chargers don't seem to like charging 1S at high amps. No boosters or Rx packs needed either, I guess that falls under "standard" ESC. I always thought 1/12 should move to 3S and use lower kV 380 size motors to maintain the same power level, just alot lighter and alot less amp draw needed for the same power. I ran 1/12 with 3S and micro motors about 10 years ago, could never understand why it went to 1S.
Nickoftime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2017, 04:44 AM   #1001
Tech Elite
 
howardcano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 3,610
Trader Rating: 35 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickoftime View Post
Wouldn't 2S 25.5 be only slightly more power than 1S 13.5?
Yes, but that's if one is comparing an older 13.5 to a 25.5. ROAR specs have pretty much capped the performance of 25.5 at the level of the Novak motors, since that was the benchmark for minimum resistance. 13.5 motors have no ROAR spec for minimum resistance, and newer designs exploit that fact.

Also, most 2s packs are heavier than 1s, which will make the car slower if it can't make the same minimum weight.
__________________
Howard Cano
When race results are re-calculated using the IOF (Index Of Fun), I always win.
1993 ROAR 1/8 Pan National Champion
howardcano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2017, 05:24 AM   #1002
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Medina, Ohio
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by howardcano View Post
Yes, but that's if one is comparing an older 13.5 to a 25.5. ROAR specs have pretty much capped the performance of 25.5 at the level of the Novak motors, since that was the benchmark for minimum resistance. 13.5 motors have no ROAR spec for minimum resistance, and newer designs exploit that fact.

Also, most 2s packs are heavier than 1s, which will make the car slower if it can't make the same minimum weight.
In F1 the weight actually helped, some run full size 2 cell packs just for it.

You are right about the new motors. It was like night and day between a old TSR short stack and the new "One". Instant .2 seconds per lap. Almost halfway to an old 13.5. It took away about half of the complaints of the class being to slow.
Right now I only lag my F1 car by .2 to .3 on a typical 11 second indoor track.
__________________
www.norcarracing.com
NORCAR @ The Gate
old_dude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2017, 06:21 AM   #1003
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,140
Trader Rating: 114 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by old_dude View Post
When F1 became 25.5 testing was done to determine the best way to go. 1cell lower turn or to the higher turn motor staying with 2cell. I believe the 25.5 was chosen because of existing batteries and esc's. It was cheaper to buy a motor than to replace those. I was part of the testing and did the 25.5 part. I never did try a 1cell.
I don't believe we need to change a thing for indoors. This is easily one of the most competitive classes for skilled racers around and beginners can run it.

Agreed, 2S / 25.5 in F1 is perfect.
Chris Furman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2017, 07:48 AM   #1004
Tech Elite
 
howardcano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 3,610
Trader Rating: 35 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by old_dude View Post
In F1 the weight actually helped, some run full size 2 cell packs just for it.
That's a good bit of info! Does the extra weight seem to help more in high grip or low grip conditions?
__________________
Howard Cano
When race results are re-calculated using the IOF (Index Of Fun), I always win.
1993 ROAR 1/8 Pan National Champion
howardcano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2017, 09:33 AM   #1005
Tech Champion
 
liljohn1064's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Deerfield, WI
Posts: 5,564
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickoftime View Post
Wouldn't 2S 25.5 be only slightly more power than 1S 13.5? Comparing 13.5 1S to 21.5 2S would be ridiculous. Benefits include standard ESCs and some chargers don't seem to like charging 1S at high amps. No boosters or Rx packs needed either, I guess that falls under "standard" ESC. I always thought 1/12 should move to 3S and use lower kV 380 size motors to maintain the same power level, just alot lighter and alot less amp draw needed for the same power. I ran 1/12 with 3S and micro motors about 10 years ago, could never understand why it went to 1S.
Actually, the 13.5 1S and 21.5 2S run about the same lap times. 2S just has more availabe torque and even the 25.5 suffers from this. The ESC problem is a non issue and plenty of chargers that can charge at a higher current. It really depends on your desire to run a certain class or not and what you're willing to invest in the hobby. I'm cheap, so $50 1S esc with a booster for me. Works great. We had a guy run a 380 for a while in 12th as an experiment about 6 years ago and he did alright. 3S with a 380 would definitely be easier on the electronics.
__________________
John Higgins former student of The Ian Ruggles Negative Reinforcement Driving School. The "Team Principal".
liljohn1064 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 07:24 PM.


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