Future Car
12-12-2002, 03:08 PM
#32
Re: About strength
Originally posted by AQuionIV
WHen was there a time when anyone has ever seen a rear wheel drive or 4wd car (a real car) that uses a belt?? and if so, effectively?? All the RWD or 4wd cars on the market run shafts. Also if you look under some big rig trucks on the freeway, you will see a huge pipe spinning right under the truck.. SHAFT.. Whatever you say, shafts will still be stronger than belts. So far I have already replaced my belts twice. I still have never had a need to replace my shaft=)
WHen was there a time when anyone has ever seen a rear wheel drive or 4wd car (a real car) that uses a belt?? and if so, effectively?? All the RWD or 4wd cars on the market run shafts. Also if you look under some big rig trucks on the freeway, you will see a huge pipe spinning right under the truck.. SHAFT.. Whatever you say, shafts will still be stronger than belts. So far I have already replaced my belts twice. I still have never had a need to replace my shaft=)
although...one thing i did notice was that my factory team tc3 was quite a bit louder then my TRF414MII becuz the shaft would make a small rattling noise when it started up or slowed down to a stop. like u kno, u can actually shift/move the actual shaft in it's position. All in all though, i loved my FT TC3 and lov emy 414MII. belt shaft, it's all GOOT.
12-12-2002, 05:23 PM
#33
Tech Champion
iTrader: (32)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: In a land of mini-mighty mental giants
Posts: 8,854
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
I know this is off topic but......Why would anybody buy a Harley for any reason other then the name.....when you can go buy a Honda for cheaper in most cases and it will start every time not when it feels like it. Honda goldwings are a far better bike and ride way smoother then a Harley......guess thats why they say Harley's are knowen for Hardly start or Hardly run.
And where is this pic of the Losi shaft drive car
And where is this pic of the Losi shaft drive car
12-12-2002, 08:02 PM
#34
losi shaft car........ there is none
12-12-2002, 08:45 PM
#35
Tech Addict
iTrader: (17)
whoa there
Don't lash out on me or anything. I didn't mean to offend the belts der. Don't trip, I luv my Belt drive too. Everyone tried to make comparisons using motorcycles, which ain't fair since bikes r on 2 wheels. And All I'm sayin is, Shafts are just stronger. If you had the same power to weight ratio that a shaft drive RC does on a real car, U'd be swerving off the highway in the first jump of the gear. All I was saying was, watever u say, a belt will wear out.. BUt a shaft will only wear if it gets messed up or something. It wasn't meant to be a scale comparison, just to say that watever u say, solid driveshafts are still stronger than rubber belts..
Sorry if I offended anyone.. geezness.. heheh
Sorry if I offended anyone.. geezness.. heheh
12-12-2002, 09:39 PM
#36
Tech Addict
bottom line, I like having options.
I want to have some choices. Where did someone see Losi's new proto-type shaft car? I hope they don't jump on the bandwagon.
What ever happened to Losi? Since Horrizon Hobbies bought them out, the company has really cut back on making their own upgrades. Losi is so slow to make anything. They just now came out with the low roll center blocks. Anyone else notice?
I like both the TC3 and the XXX-S. The XXX-S is just so simpe in design that its a joy to work on. Not to mention its smooth and quiet.
What ever happened to Losi? Since Horrizon Hobbies bought them out, the company has really cut back on making their own upgrades. Losi is so slow to make anything. They just now came out with the low roll center blocks. Anyone else notice?
I like both the TC3 and the XXX-S. The XXX-S is just so simpe in design that its a joy to work on. Not to mention its smooth and quiet.
12-12-2002, 11:03 PM
#37
i like the idea of shaft drive in some applications but in most other applications i prefer belts. Most shaft drive cars have the shaft in the middle with the batteries and motor on the side. On the other hand it seems that belt drive systems have more variety in layouts with motor, batteries, etc. I like my cars with left and right to be as symmetrical as possible, so i've always favored dual belt cars with saddle packs like the Tamiya 414 and HPI Pro 2.
12-13-2002, 04:31 AM
#38
Interesting discussions...
Icon, I believe, has hit on one of the main difference between different chassis in his post. Weight distribution. That is why the RcLab is so interesting as it has a truly mid mounted engine. Why does the Xray have so many cell cutouts on its chassis? Why can you move the cells backwards and forwards in both the TC3 and XXX-S to adjust the weight distribution.
The other main difference is the suspension geometry, which arguably has the most difference in handling between cars.
Belt vs Shaft drive seems to me to be a pointless debate. My brother has a TC3 and is is blisteringly quick with a P2K2 Pro. My Xray is like a lame duck with the same motor. However, you but my motor in his car and the situations are reversed. What makes the most difference to punch, gearing and your cells, not what transmission your car has.
Icon, I believe, has hit on one of the main difference between different chassis in his post. Weight distribution. That is why the RcLab is so interesting as it has a truly mid mounted engine. Why does the Xray have so many cell cutouts on its chassis? Why can you move the cells backwards and forwards in both the TC3 and XXX-S to adjust the weight distribution.
The other main difference is the suspension geometry, which arguably has the most difference in handling between cars.
Belt vs Shaft drive seems to me to be a pointless debate. My brother has a TC3 and is is blisteringly quick with a P2K2 Pro. My Xray is like a lame duck with the same motor. However, you but my motor in his car and the situations are reversed. What makes the most difference to punch, gearing and your cells, not what transmission your car has.
12-13-2002, 05:37 AM
#39
If more than one or two companies are involved in the shaft options and use them in anger then what ever comes out of their R&D is bound to improve things and that can only be better for us racers.... I think that is important for the evolution of the sport .
reflekt: Of course ultimately is down to the drivers after all so that point doesnt even need be mentioned, I (we) were more like discussing technical merits of different drive trains...
IMPACTPLAYR: Interesting test, though simple one, interesting that "thrown out" belts theory... I take it they were free-wheeling and the 2 cars were using different internal rations right? I'm not picking holes as right now I am contemplating on making a make-shift rolling road for a laugh!!!
.reflekt: Of course ultimately is down to the drivers after all so that point doesnt even need be mentioned, I (we) were more like discussing technical merits of different drive trains...
IMPACTPLAYR: Interesting test, though simple one, interesting that "thrown out" belts theory... I take it they were free-wheeling and the 2 cars were using different internal rations right? I'm not picking holes as right now I am contemplating on making a make-shift rolling road for a laugh!!!
12-13-2002, 05:39 AM
#40
Uni_dave.... thought you had a Lab??? Xray???
12-13-2002, 06:10 AM
#41
Yes the cars where free wheeling, and of coarse the internal ratios were different, ut both were set-up to have the same FDR. The belt being "thrown out" or "slung out" isn't just a theory it is pure physics and totally provable, I can see the belts lift off of the pulleys ever so slightly when spooling up the drivetrain on my Mission and on my dad's RS4....This causes less contact area and thus less friction.
12-13-2002, 06:28 AM
#42
Well that's a theory that works then
Thinking aloud, when the belt lifts then only the its teeth will be in contact with the pulley, then it sort of simulates a correctly meshed gear train... I mean, afterall a belt is a gear turned inside out!, if your gears are meshed right then there is always air between the 2 gears minus then par that the teeth of the gear makes contact.... but doesnt that mean the gears are more efficient cos there are less teeth in contact compared with belt??? .... interesting... I think the real bitch to get a shaft system to work perfectly is to get everything balanced so in full flight the whole system floats and not vibrate and thus loosing efficiency.... and I know no centre shaft is correctly balanced....
I guess that is why my LAB flies when I loosen the belts!!!
Thinking aloud, when the belt lifts then only the its teeth will be in contact with the pulley, then it sort of simulates a correctly meshed gear train... I mean, afterall a belt is a gear turned inside out!, if your gears are meshed right then there is always air between the 2 gears minus then par that the teeth of the gear makes contact.... but doesnt that mean the gears are more efficient cos there are less teeth in contact compared with belt??? .... interesting... I think the real bitch to get a shaft system to work perfectly is to get everything balanced so in full flight the whole system floats and not vibrate and thus loosing efficiency.... and I know no centre shaft is correctly balanced....
I guess that is why my LAB flies when I loosen the belts!!!
12-13-2002, 06:56 AM
#44
Soneteer---- exactly!!
Ok, I have seen belts break, usually it takes a stone or foreign object. I have also seen a TC3 loose the shaft, and both bevel gears in a extreme crash (it also took a fractured chassis, but it happened!)
Always remember, if you give me a titanium bowling ball I can find a way to break it eventually!!!!LOL
Ok, I have seen belts break, usually it takes a stone or foreign object. I have also seen a TC3 loose the shaft, and both bevel gears in a extreme crash (it also took a fractured chassis, but it happened!)
Always remember, if you give me a titanium bowling ball I can find a way to break it eventually!!!!LOL
12-13-2002, 08:47 AM
#45
Originally posted by sonneteer
Uni_dave.... thought you had a Lab??? Xray???
Uni_dave.... thought you had a Lab??? Xray???
Just got one question, why did you think I had an RCLab?