Like Tree293Likes

Yokomo BD9

Reply

Old 08-20-2019, 01:13 PM
  #526  
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 9
Default

Originally Posted by DaSilva3525 View Post


I glued mine as well. No pictures but the two pulleys sitting on each side of the spur gear. The guards pop off, pop them off by hand and just glue them right away.
Got it, I was just making sure I got the correct ones fixed up.
DaSilva3525 likes this.
Mightymango is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 08:35 AM
  #527  
Tech Master
iTrader: (8)
 
Jimmy Morris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,251
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

I got my kit from hong kong yesterday. I opted for the fast shipping and it seems they sent it via concord or fighter jet or something. The carbon is nice and looks very oem. They flex about the same also. The aluminum leaves a little to be desired but really just aesthetically. I wish it was black at the very least. Also no beveled edges but oh well. It all fits together really well which is the main thing. The rear bulkhead is a few mm more forward so body fit will be affected slightly, and the rear link is at a slight angle. I'll see how it works this weekend I guess. I need to rewire my speed control and it'll be good to go. Here's some pics.






Jimmy Morris is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 01:03 PM
  #528  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,321
Default

Hmm, I'm not happy about the rear bulkhead being moved forward. Why would they do this? That changes a lot of things, not just the body post holes. Shock angle, driveshaft angle, upper link angle. Some can be mitigated by shimming the shock tower but Ugh!
DavidNERODease is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 02:42 PM
  #529  
Tech Regular
 
DaSilva3525's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 440
Default

Makes me not want to install mine lol
DaSilva3525 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 06:17 PM
  #530  
Tech Master
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,081
Trader Rating: 11 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by DavidNERODease View Post
Hmm, I'm not happy about the rear bulkhead being moved forward. Why would they do this? That changes a lot of things, not just the body post holes. Shock angle, driveshaft angle, upper link angle. Some can be mitigated by shimming the shock tower but Ugh!

It's got to be a mistake drilling job on those 4 holes? But then again the top deck would be also wrong in it's length from center area to the bulkhead fastening points too?
190mph is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 08:21 PM
  #531  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (13)
 
CristianTabush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,108
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

The bulkhead distance has to be modified due to the design having the rear belt on the left side and having to run a tensioner to clear the motor mount. Otherwise you end up with different length belts. Every mid motor design has to have a compromise. This is Arrowmax's. I still will say, the mid motor set up, even with slightly different rear bulkhead position will probably be a net gain at the end of the day. Once people understand that they have to be driven more aggressively and on power, the laptimes will drop!
CristianTabush is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 08:52 PM
  #532  
OVA
Tech Champion
iTrader: (81)
 
OVA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: WASHINGTON
Posts: 9,423
Trader Rating: 81 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by CristianTabush View Post
The bulkhead distance has to be modified due to the design having the rear belt on the left side and having to run a tensioner to clear the motor mount. Otherwise you end up with different length belts. Every mid motor design has to have a compromise. This is Arrowmax's. I still will say, the mid motor set up, even with slightly different rear bulkhead position will probably be a net gain at the end of the day. Once people understand that they have to be driven more aggressively and on power, the laptimes will drop!
.
OVA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 04:33 AM
  #533  
Tech Master
 
mac853's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dirty place
Posts: 1,911
Default

Originally Posted by CristianTabush View Post
The bulkhead distance has to be modified due to the design having the rear belt on the left side and having to run a tensioner to clear the motor mount. Otherwise you end up with different length belts. Every mid motor design has to have a compromise. This is Arrowmax's. I still will say, the mid motor set up, even with slightly different rear bulkhead position will probably be a net gain at the end of the day. Once people understand that they have to be driven more aggressively and on power, the laptimes will drop!
So this is defect and is not purposely made for the design?
mac853 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 05:41 AM
  #534  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (13)
 
CristianTabush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,108
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

How do you get “defect” from my statement? All I said was it’s a compromise. It has to be done to achieve their vision for their design and keep equal length belts.
Marcos.J and DaSilva3525 like this.
CristianTabush is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 06:05 AM
  #535  
Tech Master
 
mac853's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dirty place
Posts: 1,911
Default

Originally Posted by CristianTabush View Post
How do you get “defect” from my statement? All I said was it’s a compromise. It has to be done to achieve their vision for their design and keep equal length belts.
Did you mean belt tensioner rear side?
OK, i understand now, that 1 used under motor mount, right?
Sorry, i remember now bd9 has 2 belt tensioners.
Yeah, i had some misunderstanding.
But i still feel little strange with this design.

Would you mind to tell me what difference setup you made comparing with original configuration?

Best regards
mac853 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 06:32 AM
  #536  
Tech Master
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,081
Trader Rating: 11 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by CristianTabush View Post
How do you get “defect” from my statement? All I said was it’s a compromise. It has to be done to achieve their vision for their design and keep equal length belts.
I suppose turning diffs around if Arrowmax would of done that for Right Rear belt and Left Front belt would of been impossible as the servo mount left side is in the way and such. I am not sure if right side servo works in that case with a full length touring car battery although I seen some mid motor kit perhaps or just chassis been made available to allow right side servos?

I sent Arrowmax a note to clarify their design on the bulkheads moving up for confirmation and why. Then I also sent a note to Rebellion RC on their bulkhead positions and parts if there is anything going on similar or if they stuck with stock mounting of stuff and were somehow able to do it.
190mph is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 07:07 AM
  #537  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,321
Default

I think in this case it would have been better to just use a tiny bit longer belt. The performance trade-off between 2mm's of belt length inequality (front and rear) vs f up the whole car seems ridiculous to me.

Last edited by Marcos.J; 08-23-2019 at 07:31 AM. Reason: language
DavidNERODease is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 08:09 AM
  #538  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,321
Default

Also note that if you are using an Axon spur gear that you have to shim it.... I wondered why the kit comes with a spur gear.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 09:19 AM
  #539  
R/C Tech Elite Member
iTrader: (208)
 
Marcos.J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Semper Fi
Posts: 30,360
Trader Rating: 208 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by DavidNERODease View Post
I think in this case it would have been better to just use a tiny bit longer belt. The performance trade-off between 2mm's of belt length inequality (front and rear) vs f up the whole car seems ridiculous to me.
the belts are 3mr pitch so 1 tooth is 3mm its impossible to have a 2mm shorter belt
Marcos.J is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 09:46 AM
  #540  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (13)
 
CristianTabush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,108
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

I don’t believe there is a perfect design or am saying theirs is the best, that I agree with the execution or that this is best or worse for that matter.

From a manufacturing point of view it is easier to have same length belts. Easier also for the end user to not confuse 2 belts that are 1T-2T apart (both which would cause conflict with WB or BH position).

If I was the designer I would have done what we did with the Gizmo. Flip the belts around. But our compromise here is having to move the servo out 5-10mm depending on if you cut your bottom inner servo ear off to clear the belt. (We find better Left to right balance this way) With the yokomo, it would likely require a new servo mount to keep it center line mounted, so it adds cost and parts.

Rebellion’s compromise is having an extreme asymmetric top deck. Point here is there is always constraints you have to consider and everyone comes up with a different solution. In the end they are option parts that are designed to further the enjoyment of our hobby.

In my opinion, moving your DS 2mm is not going to ruin a car. I would also argue that with the more centralized mass of this design, moving the ds in this direction may be a positive thing as straightening or angling the ds towards the rear frees up the rear end of a TC.
CristianTabush is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service