137LikesTeam Associated RC10 B5m Mid-Motor & Rear Motor Thread
04-22-2024, 12:09 PM - Wikipost
|
|||
|
|||
|
02-21-2014, 06:27 AM
#4036
Tech Initiate
WE IN HERE TALKING ABOUT PRACTICE?
BTW JC fins turnbuckles are dialed.
On a real note, I ran the 3mm front spindle without the 3mm ackerman and the car was great, but felt a little lazy getting in to precise turning. That may be why they run the extra 1mm shim on the ackerman, I didn't have any at my disposal. It would turn on a dime mid corner and exit, but "hesitated" getting to that point. Really not sure how to describe that any better, it still turned, and did not push, just wasn't as sharp as the mid to exit.
Still messing with the setup though, going to try a few things out here soon that will either be terrible, or great.
On another note I broke my first part, sorta. I caught a nail that holds a pipe in, and it pulled my front skid plate threw one of the screws...
BTW JC fins turnbuckles are dialed.
On a real note, I ran the 3mm front spindle without the 3mm ackerman and the car was great, but felt a little lazy getting in to precise turning. That may be why they run the extra 1mm shim on the ackerman, I didn't have any at my disposal. It would turn on a dime mid corner and exit, but "hesitated" getting to that point. Really not sure how to describe that any better, it still turned, and did not push, just wasn't as sharp as the mid to exit.
Still messing with the setup though, going to try a few things out here soon that will either be terrible, or great.
On another note I broke my first part, sorta. I caught a nail that holds a pipe in, and it pulled my front skid plate threw one of the screws...
02-21-2014, 06:32 AM
#4037
Think for 10 seconds? 
I wouldn't go so far as saying it's the only reason but if you don't think the opportunity to sell proprietary products at a high price is a priority in product development then you are woefully niave.
They saw the shorty battery make a lot of $$ for Losi before the aftermarket came in and made it a standard.
I wouldn't go so far as saying it's the only reason but if you don't think the opportunity to sell proprietary products at a high price is a priority in product development then you are woefully niave.
They saw the shorty battery make a lot of $$ for Losi before the aftermarket came in and made it a standard.
Proprietary technology by definition is technology that someone is claiming an ownership right in -- meaning they would seek exclude others from using, manufacturing or selling the technology.
In this case AE is not asserting any legal right against anybody that would make square batteries, nor have they created an artificial barrier to entry into the market. E.g. a special battery/esc connector they might patent. Or a chassis that wouldn't hold a saddle or stick -- ROAR rules helped ensure that would not happen.
Maybe the square just made sense to AE -- splitting 2 cells into two boxes with a cable in between is pointless and needlessly complicated/inefficient on the C4.2 and the B5. But racers want the option to run larger higher capacity batteries in their buggy.
There is nothing evil about this. It is a fairly pedestrian example of an innovation making a company profit ... and yes AE obviously does (and should) consider whether an innovation, no matter how simple or obvious, will be profitable before investing in the effort in taking it to market.
02-21-2014, 06:43 AM
#4040
Tech Initiate
The hubs were the next place I was going after kick up. I am actually running the 2 degree spindles and it made a significant difference. Now off power turning lacks a little. Feels almost there...
02-21-2014, 06:47 AM
#4042
I dunno. There is nothing terribly proprietary about a square. Or a lipo battery. Or a square lipo battery. Especially one that can be easily replaced with two smaller squarish batteries and a cable between them that is already sold by countless companies.
Proprietary technology by definition is technology that someone is claiming an ownership right in -- meaning they would seek exclude others from using, manufacturing or selling the technology.
In this case AE is not asserting any legal right against anybody that would make square batteries, nor have they created an artificial barrier to entry into the market. E.g. a special battery/esc connector they might patent. Or a chassis that wouldn't hold a saddle or stick -- ROAR rules helped ensure that would not happen.
True, it's not truly proprietary, no more so than the short pack that Losi brought to market (there were smaller capacity packs at that weight in longer lengths available). Still, if many racers decide to buy packs from AE of this size that aren't split down the middle, it proves out. A smart company would not attempt to force a truly proprietary battery size unless they were supremely confident that it resulted in a competitive advantage that could not be answered with a conventional configuration. There's also that bit you mention about the rules plus winning sanctioned racing being their #1 marketing engine..
Maybe the square just made sense to AE -- splitting 2 cells into two boxes with a cable in between is pointless and needlessly complicated/inefficient on the C4.2 and the B5. But racers want the option to run larger higher capacity batteries in their buggy.
There is nothing evil about this. It is a fairly pedestrian example of an innovation making a company profit ... and yes AE obviously does (and should) consider whether an innovation, no matter how simple or obvious, will be profitable before investing in the effort in taking it to market.
Proprietary technology by definition is technology that someone is claiming an ownership right in -- meaning they would seek exclude others from using, manufacturing or selling the technology.
In this case AE is not asserting any legal right against anybody that would make square batteries, nor have they created an artificial barrier to entry into the market. E.g. a special battery/esc connector they might patent. Or a chassis that wouldn't hold a saddle or stick -- ROAR rules helped ensure that would not happen.
True, it's not truly proprietary, no more so than the short pack that Losi brought to market (there were smaller capacity packs at that weight in longer lengths available). Still, if many racers decide to buy packs from AE of this size that aren't split down the middle, it proves out. A smart company would not attempt to force a truly proprietary battery size unless they were supremely confident that it resulted in a competitive advantage that could not be answered with a conventional configuration. There's also that bit you mention about the rules plus winning sanctioned racing being their #1 marketing engine..
Maybe the square just made sense to AE -- splitting 2 cells into two boxes with a cable in between is pointless and needlessly complicated/inefficient on the C4.2 and the B5. But racers want the option to run larger higher capacity batteries in their buggy.
There is nothing evil about this. It is a fairly pedestrian example of an innovation making a company profit ... and yes AE obviously does (and should) consider whether an innovation, no matter how simple or obvious, will be profitable before investing in the effort in taking it to market.
02-21-2014, 06:57 AM
#4043
Tech Initiate
I saw the same thing. Looks as though the servo and transponder wires run on top of each other with the battery wire next to them in the slot. Assumed he cut the ae battery pad to space the battery up over the wires. Thought it was I kinda cool way to do it.
02-21-2014, 07:07 AM
#4044
Tech Initiate
Mounted my hobbywing with the wires facing rearward though. Thought it was cleaner
02-21-2014, 07:14 AM
#4045
02-21-2014, 07:29 AM
#4046
02-21-2014, 07:53 AM
#4047
Tech Master
iTrader: (4)
Im confused... To me on both cars why is the angled ball cup on the outside steering rod pointing toward the front of car rather than to the rear?
My reasoning is this; when your steering is hitting the stops that ball cup should be facing rearward so in effect it can reach around the rim and not rub on it due to hard turning forces.
Of course we have seen all the pics with it facing forward so there is another engineering reason to it but I dont get it......
Please 'splain Lucy?!
My reasoning is this; when your steering is hitting the stops that ball cup should be facing rearward so in effect it can reach around the rim and not rub on it due to hard turning forces.
Of course we have seen all the pics with it facing forward so there is another engineering reason to it but I dont get it......
Please 'splain Lucy?!
02-21-2014, 07:58 AM
#4050
Tech Master
iTrader: (4)
Im confused... To me on both cars why is the angled ball cup on the outside steering rod pointing toward the front of car rather than to the rear?
My reasoning is this; when your steering is hitting the stops that ball cup should be facing rearward so in effect it can reach around the rim and not rub on it due to hard turning forces.
Of course we have seen all the pics with it facing forward so there is another engineering reason to it but I dont get it......
Please 'splain Lucy?!
My reasoning is this; when your steering is hitting the stops that ball cup should be facing rearward so in effect it can reach around the rim and not rub on it due to hard turning forces.
Of course we have seen all the pics with it facing forward so there is another engineering reason to it but I dont get it......
Please 'splain Lucy?!