icon

they can do a offset shaft design, but if they do that too much the one of the diff outdrive will be much longer than the other, and you remember what happened with the Pro 3 by using that design .

i prefer cars with great left right balance over acceleration. and i dont like the idea of having torque steer. in offroad vehicles i dont think the torque steer is as noticeable because the grip isnt as high as asphault surface. so in offroad i'd definitely pick a shaft driven design.

bbntc3

Hmm, my NTC3 tweaks almost the same empty, or full of fuel. It's so close it's not worth changing tweak/balance . I don't notice any difference in handling with it full or empty of fuel. Torque steer? well I'll have to agree with you guys there, it takes sometime getting use to. To me a shaft car carrys more speed in and off the turns than belt cars. The CG on a shaft car is lower than any belt car , especially if you use the new BMI chassis for the NTC3. (All the weight is dist. below the shaft)

vulso

The Tamiya TG10R uses that design.

frozenpod

iTrader: (1)

I have an off road electric that has an offset drive shaft. Diddn't see to be a problem. The engine is also monted like a belt drive car

rjl

Kyosho had a nitro car with the engine centred, shaft down the side and little belts transferring the drive in to the gear boxes front and rear. Contemplate the torque effects on that.

Rabbit

Hpi RS4 has radio gear and batteries on one side and fuel tank and engin on the other, why offset the shafts?? the balance is awesome....

just a little torque steer tho

RcRacerX

Could be because the experiment was done with electric powered cars.

The physics apply the same between electric and gas. The crank shaft is spinning just like an armature of an electric motor.

intimidator

how bout a car with a centered engine,with two shafts like a kyosho.having the drive shafts be on oppossite sides so the engine is smack in the middle of the chassis,with the diff cases offset.like that you could have a thinner tank where the shaft normally would be.then the engine and tank would be as centered as possible.btw,i like shafts best.they accelerate faster,no question bout that,and i have yet too break one.less parts to maintain in a shaft drive too.

RcRacerX

It's not so much the drive line that is causeing the torque steer delema......it's the rotating mass of the crankshaft or armature. there is more wieght/mass in an armature/crank then there is in a drive shaft. the best way to counter this is to have an identicle power plant spin the same speed but in the opposit direction.....but this is impracticle for race cars, since you will have twice the power consumption.

rice

for me i hav to choose or prefer a shaft driven coz the drive train is very free i mean no drag. in corners it can glade freely.

andy147

belt drives are perfect for on road cars

MaDaGAS CAR

geee this thread is only 2yrs old

dnitro

What??? Josh Cyruls drove a TM G4?

How did his car perform?

Artificial-I

iTrader: (17)

This is a pretty well known fact. Its also why they say shaft is better in 19t , cause the shaft gives more punch , where the belts are stretching and giving a little more grip , then it snaps back and your up to speed the same. But then again every new chassis is belt so the shaft cars are just slower now.

rmdhawaii

iTrader: (4)

That's what I said.

I think I read somewhere that Joel Johnson had driven it as well.

Quite a number of people in the forum have owned the G4, you just wouldn't know about it unless you read through the old G4 threads. The car has been around since April 2003. Yeah, you read that right - 2003!

Here is Nick Ko's original post with a picture of the car:
http://www.rctech.net/forum/showthre...712#post300712

And check this out...