Like Tree218Likes

XRAY T4'19 SPEC

Reply

Old 09-11-2019, 12:44 PM
  #586  
Tech Champion
Thread Starter
iTrader: (12)
 
RC MARKET's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: HK
Posts: 6,230
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Default


Arrowmax Medius Mid Conversion have new Type 2 upper deck
RC MARKET is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 02:21 AM
  #587  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (13)
 
Lonestar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,509
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by RC MARKET View Post

Arrowmax Medius Mid Conversion have new Type 2 upper deck
whoa @ the cut 80

Are we gonna go to 2-piece decks shortly a la Lazer ZX or what?!?
Lonestar is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 07:14 AM
  #588  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Airwave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,200
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

3 parts in fact... That's what I got after the crash lol
Airwave is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 01:53 AM
  #589  
Tech Fanatic
 
daleburr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 943
Default

I ran the Arrowmax mid-motor conversion this weekend. Carbon version, medium grip asphalt. The car has way too much flex, you can see it on the bench, and feel it on track. The car is reluctant to turn in, then on exit wants to keep turning when it's time to straighten up. It feels similar to when I tried the 1.6mm topdeck outdoors.

So I'm going to cut some different topdeck options to try. I've seen the Rebellion style one work really well, and that should be much stronger in a crash. I can easily cut a few different widths to try different flex options.


Skiddins, DavidNERODease and Daffs like this.
daleburr is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 06:21 AM
  #590  
Tech Elite
 
Skiddins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Windsor, UK
Posts: 4,873
Default

Originally Posted by daleburr View Post
I ran the Arrowmax mid-motor conversion this weekend. Carbon version, medium grip asphalt. The car has way too much flex, you can see it on the bench, and feel it on track. The car is reluctant to turn in, then on exit wants to keep turning when it's time to straighten up. It feels similar to when I tried the 1.6mm topdeck outdoors.

So I'm going to cut some different topdeck options to try. I've seen the Rebellion style one work really well, and that should be much stronger in a crash. I can easily cut a few different widths to try different flex options.


Dale, did you have a second 'std' car to test it against at Bedworth, or did you just throw caution to the wind for the Clubman's

So did it feel similar to your layshaft conversion you made for Sorex tyres?
Skiddins is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 08:01 AM
  #591  
Tech Fanatic
 
daleburr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 943
Default

Originally Posted by Skiddins View Post
Dale, did you have a second 'std' car to test it against at Bedworth, or did you just throw caution to the wind for the Clubman's

So did it feel similar to your layshaft conversion you made for Sorex tyres?
I didn't race the Clubmans. I gave the Arrowmax kit a run on Saturday after practice had finished, so great track conditions, lots of rubber down, and ideal temperatures at 6pm. The best I could manage was a 13.32 lap, compared to a 13.08 the week before in similar temperatures and grip level. It was lacking corner-speed and consistency.

I actually ran my one-piece motor mount the week before, with the carbon centre-brace to stiffen things up. Probably the best I've had the car go in warm weather:
RC-Results - Bedworth RCCC - 08/09/2019 - Summer Series 2019 Round 9 - Finals - Round 2 - Race 6 - Open TC - A Final
daleburr is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 09:33 AM
  #592  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,280
Default

Originally Posted by daleburr View Post
I ran the Arrowmax mid-motor conversion this weekend. Carbon version, medium grip asphalt. The car has way too much flex, you can see it on the bench, and feel it on track. The car is reluctant to turn in, then on exit wants to keep turning when it's time to straighten up.
This is 100% exactly my experience with the Medius kit so far and extremely irritating to say the least.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 10:41 AM
  #593  
Tech Fanatic
 
daleburr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 943
Default

Originally Posted by DavidNERODease View Post
This is 100% exactly my experience with the Medius kit so far and extremely irritating to say the least.
They've gone with a different design to most of the other conversion kits. The ARC, Arrowmax, Capricorn, Awesomatix, Zerotribe, Rebellion... all have a long motor mount, with a mounting point in front of the spur to make the chassis fairly stiff at the front.

The Arrowmax mount is very small, with the mounting points all close together, giving lots of flex.

On the plus side, the Arrowmax quality is great, and the one-piece mount won't tweak like some of the others. And it keeps the motor and battery nice and central. Hopefully with a stiffer top-deck it can be good.
daleburr is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 11:47 AM
  #594  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (2)
 
Panther6834's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 291
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

So, with different manufacturers going different "routes" (especially in regards to the upper deck) on their mid-motor conversion kits, which (if any) are TRULY good, and produce the best end-results? By "best", on a 0-10 scale ('5' is equal to the T4's stock configuration, '0' is "ruined the car beyond belief", and '10' is "made the car way better than anyone ever thought possible"), I'm talking 8, or above.
Panther6834 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:29 PM
  #595  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (13)
 
CristianTabush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,085
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by daleburr View Post
They've gone with a different design to most of the other conversion kits. The ARC, Arrowmax, Capricorn, Awesomatix, Zerotribe, Rebellion... all have a long motor mount, with a mounting point in front of the spur to make the chassis fairly stiff at the front.

The Arrowmax mount is very small, with the mounting points all close together, giving lots of flex.

On the plus side, the Arrowmax quality is great, and the one-piece mount won't tweak like some of the others. And it keeps the motor and battery nice and central. Hopefully with a stiffer top-deck it can be good.
Our motor mount is small as well and I canít say that I necessarily agree with you that this causes excessive flex. More than likely, the Arrowmax top deck is too narrow at the front. This has a substantial effect in overall stiffness. We found big increases in stiffness simply by widening it by only 2mm in the front section. Our car, while quite flexy, is very responsive on entry and stable on exit.

I will add that kits like the ZT use a std 2.2mm deck, which returns quite a bit of the overall stiffness.

Iím pretty sure that a lot of the ailments can be cured with a stiffer deck. In the meantime, have you guys considered going with softer front springs and stiffer rear to compensate for the difference in flex characteristic? You can remedy some of that behavior by changing springs or raising the roll centers.



CristianTabush is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 01:40 PM
  #596  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,280
Default

Originally Posted by CristianTabush View Post


Our motor mount is small as well and I can’t say that I necessarily agree with you that this causes excessive flex. More than likely, the Arrowmax top deck is too narrow at the front. This has a substantial effect in overall stiffness. We found big increases in stiffness simply by widening it by only 2mm in the front section. Our car, while quite flexy, is very responsive on entry and stable on exit.

I will add that kits like the ZT use a std 2.2mm deck, which returns quite a bit of the overall stiffness.

I’m pretty sure that a lot of the ailments can be cured with a stiffer deck. In the meantime, have you guys considered going with softer front springs and stiffer rear to compensate for the difference in flex characteristic? You can remedy some of that behavior by changing springs or raising the roll centers.




The Medius upper deck is very frail in the middle section as well. When I added a centre post to stiffen the car, the flex point just shifted more to the middle but still flexed way too easily. I doubt that it's comparable to the new Genesis based on what pics have been shown so far - Cristian your design looks quite a bit stiffer. The Medius feels like the original MTC1.
Regarding motor mounts, I have had very positive results on other cars such as my Destiny that has a very long & stiff motor mount that you can tune with screws and shims. It's fantastic actually. If we had this tuning ability at the front of these mid pulley cars, we'd be golden.
I have the luxury of just running a different car until the proper parts are available to fix this flex issue so I'll wait rather than chase setup that may never work. I mean, I've been through all this before with other flexy flyers. It's a lost cause unless you have no other options.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 02:26 PM
  #597  
Tech Fanatic
 
daleburr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 943
Default

Originally Posted by CristianTabush View Post


Our motor mount is small as well and I canít say that I necessarily agree with you that this causes excessive flex. More than likely, the Arrowmax top deck is too narrow at the front. This has a substantial effect in overall stiffness. We found big increases in stiffness simply by widening it by only 2mm in the front section. Our car, while quite flexy, is very responsive on entry and stable on exit.

I will add that kits like the ZT use a std 2.2mm deck, which returns quite a bit of the overall stiffness.

Iím pretty sure that a lot of the ailments can be cured with a stiffer deck. In the meantime, have you guys considered going with softer front springs and stiffer rear to compensate for the difference in flex characteristic? You can remedy some of that behavior by changing springs or raising the roll centers.



Thanks for the info, sounds like it should easily be sorted via topdeck design. I'm going testing tomorrow so will let people know what I find.
CristianTabush likes this.
daleburr is offline  
Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service