Originally Posted by
LitemodzUK
If you were to ask a full scale designer about chassis flex they would say it is bad. But they have hours in simulators and sophisticated suspension designs to over come compliance problems. As racers we have very little time to absolutely dial in the ultimate set up and rather old fashioned suspension design so we can use chassis flex to help. We can be 1lb out on the spring 20 cst out on the oil 0.5mm out on the position of the shock for the ideal configuration, but chassis flex will overcome all that and get a car that we can drive around the track in the quickest possible way.
So, chassis flex is bad but it is a compromise and a way of achieving balance easily.
An interesting point is that now MotoGP are talking about bike frame flex...so maybe someone is looking at RC
You my friend are exactly right.
Originally Posted by
oldrcr
I am also "frustrated" with chassis flex, as a former 1/1 scale person, but do agree about the true feedback and adjustability we lack when compared to full scale.
Here's another thing I am wondering about, 3* or so of rear toe. Why so much? never came close to that in full scale. Anyone have a "good" explanation, other than its possible, it has a positive enough effect, vs the negative drawbacks, so use it.
Thanks.
The main explanation for so much toe is this, we don't really need to worry about top speed. Very few of us run on tracks where we can even hit terminal velocity much less spend much time at it. Therefore, we run very high drag wings and lots of toe to maximize grip, corner speed and acceleration at the expense of reducing a top speed that we will never reach anyway.
Plus tire wear is much less of an issue and our power to weight ratios are much higher than most 1:1 racing.