belt vs shaft
07-10-2004, 09:16 PM
#1
Tech Apprentice
Thread Starter
belt vs shaft
Is a belt driven car is easy to drive than a shaft driven car because I have a nitro tc3 an everbody is saying belt is the way to go? And which kits is the one to go for average joe a serpent, trinity, mugen, hpi,
07-11-2004, 08:16 PM
#3
Shaft is much better than have much less resistance therefore they go faster and have much greater fuel economy. The big plus is you don't get stones in your belts and pullies. Nothing worse than one stone costing you $40 bucks.
If the same car came out in shaft or belt I would go shaft every time
If the same car came out in shaft or belt I would go shaft every time
07-11-2004, 09:04 PM
#4
Tech Adept
So the only advantage of shaft driven cars is that it doesn't get damaged that easily?
what about other advantages?
does it have better handling? better acceleration? or better top speed?
what about other advantages?
does it have better handling? better acceleration? or better top speed?
07-11-2004, 09:08 PM
#5
Originally posted by dragoneuh
So the only advantage of shaft driven cars is that it doesn't get damaged that easily?
what about other advantages?
does it have better handling? better acceleration? or better top speed?
So the only advantage of shaft driven cars is that it doesn't get damaged that easily?
what about other advantages?
does it have better handling? better acceleration? or better top speed?
07-11-2004, 09:31 PM
#6
With belt drive you could adjust over-drive and under-drive ratios.
07-11-2004, 10:09 PM
#7
When the NTC3 first came out I couldn't wait to try it. I took the car to a State Championships and it was clearly faster but failed to finish, not good enough. Went back to belt drive for the reliability, now I'm trying the FW05 as this drive train has been developed over the last 7-8 years in other Kyosho models. I also knew that the stock cast alloy crown wheel and pinion would wear out eventually and have fitted optional gears. I have had the car to two race meetings and am trully impressed.
As to which is better? Only time will tell.
As to which is better? Only time will tell.
07-11-2004, 10:42 PM
#8
Originally posted by PSI Racing
With belt drive you could adjust over-drive and under-drive ratios.
With belt drive you could adjust over-drive and under-drive ratios.
Handeling shouldn't be any better as the cars are usually heavier but acceleration is much better top speed isn't noticeable but is theoricaly higher. The biggest thing is the acceleration and the fuel economy. With the V1S and FW05-s the difference is about 1 minute so I have been told. I haven't compared myself as I don't have a FW0-s yet.
07-12-2004, 12:53 AM
#9
Over/Under drive is another tool to adjust your car.
It's especially helpful when it comes to trying to get your tires to wear evenly.
It's not meant to make your car faster.
It's especially helpful when it comes to trying to get your tires to wear evenly.
It's not meant to make your car faster.
Originally posted by InitialD
In an ideal world and situation, same overdrive is required all the time. But this is not the case during racing when the rear tires wear faster than front causing different tire diameters front and rear.
Front overdriven car has steering on power. Pushes off power.
Underdriving the car will make it push on power and give you more off power steering.
In an ideal world and situation, same overdrive is required all the time. But this is not the case during racing when the rear tires wear faster than front causing different tire diameters front and rear.
Front overdriven car has steering on power. Pushes off power.
Underdriving the car will make it push on power and give you more off power steering.
07-12-2004, 12:57 AM
#10
Overdrive is an option for the FW05 as well, handy on short tracks but on larger tracks you can keep it.
07-12-2004, 06:17 AM
#11
I try over/under on my a car a long time ago it was terrible the car never felt right and was always slower. The car did look really cool going into great power slides or being able to pull out of near 180 spins but the car wasn't as fast.
No one I raced against that was fast used it either on slower drivers used it to compensate for very bad setup.
No one I raced against that was fast used it either on slower drivers used it to compensate for very bad setup.
07-12-2004, 06:42 AM
#12
Originally posted by frozenpod
I try over/under on my a car a long time ago it was terrible the car never felt right and was always slower. The car did look really cool going into great power slides or being able to pull out of near 180 spins but the car wasn't as fast.
No one I raced against that was fast used it either on slower drivers used it to compensate for very bad setup.
I try over/under on my a car a long time ago it was terrible the car never felt right and was always slower. The car did look really cool going into great power slides or being able to pull out of near 180 spins but the car wasn't as fast.
No one I raced against that was fast used it either on slower drivers used it to compensate for very bad setup.
Did you true your tires when you were trying over/under drive with your car?
Last edited by PSI Racing; 07-12-2004 at 06:47 AM.
07-12-2004, 06:44 AM
#13
Belt drive is proven to be very easy both on maintanance as well as driving forgiveness (GP or EP is the same thing).
If you play in parking lot, shaft might be a good choice since most of them using covered gear box (at least when standard
). Using front one ways is another problem for shaft driven car. Why, if one of the front wheel hit the board, it will try to break the shaft, if you change the shaft to harder material, other weaker connected parts including the gear, wheel axle, diff joint, etc will broke. So no matter which side is stronger, the other side will broke on impact. With belt drive, the belt tens to slipped from its pulley. This would be the point I said driving is more forgiving. Maintainning is the other easier area as most of the time you could clean those pulleys externally unlike if it were using the gear box that needs to be opened.
Shaft drive is always good for low end, it produce more torque with that particular tranny system but of course lack of top speed as someone mentioned here before. It also react to driver input faster and will give you more responsive kind of feeling.
Both some of the reasons below are still not answering your question because all car will be consider easy to drive if you set them up right. I meant, most car would have toe, camber, ride height, etc that could be changed. Plus make sure the have identical balance both R/L side, your car would perform as you like it. Only in theory, you wont get better balance out of the car that its fuel tanks is not center. But that only in locigal theory; the fact is still a lot of car without its tank center still enjoyed good handling. I guess around 80grams of constant unbalance weight does not do very much to the R/C car.
Hope simple explanation without those R/C slangs jargon explanation could enlighten your choice.
If you play in parking lot, shaft might be a good choice since most of them using covered gear box (at least when standard
). Using front one ways is another problem for shaft driven car. Why, if one of the front wheel hit the board, it will try to break the shaft, if you change the shaft to harder material, other weaker connected parts including the gear, wheel axle, diff joint, etc will broke. So no matter which side is stronger, the other side will broke on impact. With belt drive, the belt tens to slipped from its pulley. This would be the point I said driving is more forgiving. Maintainning is the other easier area as most of the time you could clean those pulleys externally unlike if it were using the gear box that needs to be opened.Shaft drive is always good for low end, it produce more torque with that particular tranny system but of course lack of top speed as someone mentioned here before. It also react to driver input faster and will give you more responsive kind of feeling.
Both some of the reasons below are still not answering your question because all car will be consider easy to drive if you set them up right. I meant, most car would have toe, camber, ride height, etc that could be changed. Plus make sure the have identical balance both R/L side, your car would perform as you like it. Only in theory, you wont get better balance out of the car that its fuel tanks is not center. But that only in locigal theory; the fact is still a lot of car without its tank center still enjoyed good handling. I guess around 80grams of constant unbalance weight does not do very much to the R/C car.
Hope simple explanation without those R/C slangs jargon explanation could enlighten your choice.
07-12-2004, 07:13 AM
#14
I used rubber tyres
But when I have used foam tyres I haven't had much of a problem with tyres wearing out unevenly. In fact they were almost perfect you couldn't tell a difference by sight only with verniers.
But when I have used foam tyres I haven't had much of a problem with tyres wearing out unevenly. In fact they were almost perfect you couldn't tell a difference by sight only with verniers.
07-12-2004, 07:16 AM
#15
Originally posted by frozenpod
I used rubber tyres
But when I have used foam tyres I haven't had much of a problem with tyres wearing out unevenly. In fact they were almost perfect you couldn't tell a difference by sight only with verniers.
I used rubber tyres
But when I have used foam tyres I haven't had much of a problem with tyres wearing out unevenly. In fact they were almost perfect you couldn't tell a difference by sight only with verniers.