JustWill75

I would like to see the answer to this one as well.........

vivo quevas

iTrader: (19)

I'm no engineer but I did stay at a holiday inn. To me it has a more direct feel to the steering. I don't know if it is real or imagenary.

wtcc

iTrader: (2)

I felt no difference in steering at all.

Positive is the space you have for the receiver, etc. and that you are able to equal the front tire load by moving weight on the motor side to the front (equalling the battery).

YoDog

iTrader: (28)

Hi Tommy,
there is actually a discussion on rctech regarding this topic. It's my understanding that since there is only one servo mounted on one side of the chassis, there is unequal flex at the front of the chassis as long as the servo is part of the chassis structure. The "floating" principal is a little misleading as the servo doesn't need to be lifted from the chassis plate or "floating", the more realistic term should be "single point mounting" or "central point mounting". There are a few benefits of using this type of mounting configuration.
1) Turning the servo 90* will move the weight of the servo more forward in the chassis to help with offsetting the motor weight (if on the same side of the chassis).
2) More room for the electronics and freedom to dictate their location better.
3) A single center line mounting point for the servo which helps to remove rigidity bias toward one side of the chassis by eliminating the servo as a structural member.

I've heard many alternatives to achieving this effect but most of them involve servo tape or Shoo Goo. These solutions are not likely to be reliable and still create some structural bias on the side that the servo resides.
It seems these days it's all about controlling chassis flex and reducing the influence of other components on it. The more flexible the chassis, the more other factors will have influence over said flexibility.

I hope this helps...

Tommy R

iTrader: (21)

Thanks, YoDog! Yes, that helps very much and hits on the topics I was thinking would be most relevant. Tell me this. I can certainly understand wanting to eliminate the servo (or other components) from adversely affecting the rigidity of the chassis. But what about the battery on the other side? Is that not as big a factor because it's not physically fastened down? I would imagine tape or straps don't provide near the same structural integrity. Or do manufacturers consider then when they design the chassis?

Regardless, expect a PM from me soon.

bertottius

iTrader: (28)

The battery does stiffen the chassis. A simple fix is to put a couple strips of battery tape under the battery so as to create a gap between the battery and the chassis. It doesn't take much and it does the trick.

bertottius

iTrader: (28)

Is that what you mean?

YoDog

iTrader: (28)

This is what I do. I actually provided some thin foam strips with the very first batch of the servo mounts.
The battery, when taped down still allows the chassis to twist without too much restriction since it is not actually bonded to the chassis in some way.

Tommy R

iTrader: (21)

Yep, that was my concern. So are y'all saying to put a couple strips of tape under the front and rear of the battery to ever so slightly elevate it off the chassis? Or do orientate the tape another way?

Rockin G

iTrader: (6)

Tommy, next time you're out there, come by my pits. I'll show ya.

Tommy R

iTrader: (21)

So you've been hiding this secret from me all this time while I'm struggling to keep up with Jimmy??

YoDog

iTrader: (28)

Here is a pic of my arrangement.

Tommy R

iTrader: (21)

Thanks, Rick! Do you use a couple thicknesses of tape or is one sufficient?

jmoneym

iTrader: (358)

Where can you get that vertical servo holder?

SANCHA

I put three layers of tape in the middle and that does the trick.