Originally Posted by Artificial-I
Just to make a little point. The more you lighten your drivetrain , the less traction it will get in low traction situations.
Same goes for cars or motorcross even. When your not getting grip out of the hole we will usually run a heavier flywheel. Which is the same as running heavier driveshaft components.
So its not 100% the best idea to just lighten your drivetrain..
dude i htink you are wrong. a lightweight transmission on a car is beneficial especially when the engiens we use rely on rpm to produce power. Your example of a motorcross bike is wrong to apply to a rc car. why? because a flywheel on a motorcross bike is on the rear wheel. you are getting more traction not due to the heavier flywheel, but due to the added weight on the rear wheel which acts as a lever pushing the tyre down more (ie imagine accelerating a bike as 5 guys push down on the rear).
guys, a lightweight drivetrain is the best modification you can do to a car. Remember that these engines rev upt o 41K + so therefore the quicker you get it up to it's peak rev range (whatever it may be...20,000 to 30,000, or whatever it is) then the more punchy the car will be and the better power it will have out of the corners.
a lightweight drive train does not make the car less grippy, this is a falacy, that originates from a bad example (ie motocross). a car that is close to minimum weight will wear out the tyres less (to an extent) use less fuel (to an extent) place less strain on the engine (to an extent) and will be more punchy out of corners.
drivetrain mass i remember someone saying here ages ago, is equivalent to x2 static weight (or something like that) basically what i am saying is that rotating mass is x2 more important and worthwhile eliminating than static weight.
artificial your comment of pivot balls being better to lighten goes against what you said about motocross bikes and your flywheel example. ie, if your flywheel motorcross example was correct, then the heavier pivot balls would also seem a better option if we continue your analogy. ie more weight then on the ends of an arm, according to the motocross flywheel principle would be better as it places more downwards force on the wheels, hence more grip right? BUT OF COURSE THIS IS WRONG! reduction of unsprung weight is important, and so is rotating mass.
experiment by drilling holes in a flywheel (ACUARATELY!) and you will eventually find the maximum you can drill it out to without affecting idle. this is the lightest the flywheel can go without ruining the idle...done problem solved, and fallacy of a heavier flywheel is good analogy solved!
remember these are not drag cars, or motocross bikes, two things that require and rely
on weight over rear wheels to lay down power effectively.