R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-06-2003, 12:28 AM   #196
Tech Elite
 
CristianTabush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,839
Trader Rating: 11 (100%+)
Default

You are right about the way I set up my steering. I set my steering throw to full lock to the max as far as the car will let me (w/ Losi or CRC steering blocks) I don't use all the throw while driving, just whenever I'm facing the opposite direction, and I need to make a small radius circle to turn around and get back on the track. My dual rate is my fingers turning the wheel on my radio... (Besides that way I don't have to worry about the assymetrical steering setup, etc...)
__________________
REFLEX RACING/ RSD/ GIZMO RACING USA/ HOBBYWING/ AXON/ QTEQ/ TEAM PRIME
CristianTabush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 06:52 AM   #197
Tech Elite
 
Lonestar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,364
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Who's da man? Cristian's da man!!! How's it going my fellow texan friend? Hey John, long time no speak... Hello everybody else too

back to the "asymetrical steering throw" with the 0deg castor blocks... here's a direct quote from AE's TC3 FAQ webpage:

Q: I have 7 degrees more steering to the left than I do to the right
A: That is correct, it's the way the front steering blocks were designed. The rack will turn all the way to one side and not the other. That is to prevent the servo from locking when it turns left.

Call it whatever you want, either a voluntary anti torque-steer engineering feat, or an anti servo-lock design, or simply saving on molds by not having a left and a right mold, I call it an obvious design flow... Given the fact that AE claimed as loud as they could when the TC3 was released that there were absolutely no torque-steer issues, I can't see why they would have designed a fix to something that doesn't exist!

But, as mentioned below/above (Depending on your settings), your fingers should be your dual rate. However it is disturing when checking geometry to discover the car doesn't steer the same left and right.

Later yall

Paul
Lonestar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 08:15 AM   #198
Tech Elite
 
DaveW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 2,964
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Megatech makes a great set of aluminum steering knuckles that give you full throw left and right with the standard steering rack. The machining is dead on... bearings fit very well... with little to zero slop when mounted on the arm. Not to mention, stripped kingpin holes are no longer an issue! (if you run on smooth high bite carpet tracks that allow little suspension stroke... then the added weight to the arms wont affect the unsprung weight... if you run on bumpy asphalt tracks, it would be best to run the lighter parts) You can also add thin washers under the ballstud to change rollcenter gradually, but only if you use the smaller ballcups. Dynamite makes a set of the rear Losi hubs in aluminum... but the quality is nowhere near the same. Bearings had a bit of slop when placed in the hubs...and the ASC bearing spacers had to be wet sanded (1000 grit and synthetic oil) a few thousandths to allow the bearings to sit flush in the hub. But with a little ingenuity, these too can be used for the adjustability of the ballstud. Im sure they are stronger than the standard parts... but im not going to whack anything just for scientific purposes! I also want to mention that when the Losi rear hubs, and 4 or more degree front caster blocks are used, if you look from the top of the car, you will see the outer end of the camber link angled towards each end of the car respectively. This angle added to the link will make camber rise more progressive... chassis roll is now transferred to the hub in a non direct angle. Kinda follows along the same line of strokin out a motorcycle engine, and where you place the mounting point of the connecting rod to the flywheel. The closer to the edge of the flywheel, the longer the stroke of the connecting rod and piston is going to be. (hope that makes sense) My dual rate on my M8 is 100. But my EPA is 65 both left and right, and my exponential is no more than -5%. The servo is lowered, and balance is consistent from right to left hand turns. If the car pushes in any way, i wrench on the car... not the transmitter. But usually i have so much steering, i am barely moving the steering wheel 20% of full throw. Of course, this is subjective to each persons personal preference to handling.
- Dave
DaveW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 09:06 AM   #199
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

Thanks for the posts on the assymetric steering. Dave-thanks for bringing it up.

Lonestar-good to hear from you again. Heard you were out of the country.

I wonder if the TC3 faq question is backwards. My car has less steering travel when turning left with the stock parts.

Maybe the reason that no torque steer was advertized is that this assymetric steering was designed in to eliminate it. Honestly I have never noticed an effect from torque steer on this car even when running mod on our indoor asphalt track. This is something you can quite easily correct for subconsciously. I don't really ever drive with the radio wheel on center (except to test for wander in practice) or on the left and right stops. I am always actively steering the car.

Camber link angle- I don't think that camber link angle forward or backward affects the camber gain to any degree. The link is sligtly more prone to pop off with an angle. Friction might be increased a tiny amount with an angle. The camber gain is affected by the position of the inner pivot up or down in or out, but not by position fore and aft. Just think of an angled camber link as part of an upper A-arm. An upper a-arm would have highly angled arms to the A, but the camber gain would only be affected by the position of the inner pivots in and out and up and down.

Last edited by John Stranahan; 03-06-2003 at 09:34 AM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 10:16 AM   #200
Tech Master
 
johnbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Malta. G.C.
Posts: 1,762
Default

Hi guys. Greetings from Malta.

Front upper camber link. The new Yoke has this moved rearwards on the hub end. I don't quite understand what difference it would make, though I must admit I haven't sat down with a pencil and paper and tried to figure it out. However I'm sure there must be a good reason for it. It is actually very pronounced on the new SD Yoke.

If you want to see pics log into the appropriate thread on rctech. There are some good pictures of various details of the car. looks very interesting, especially for Yoke fans like myself.

Regards

Joe from sunny Malta.
johnbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 11:09 AM   #201
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

I took a look at the Yokomo pictures. I see where the camber link is angled. I would expect this was done for convenience in clearing the kingpin screw since the upper kingpin screw is not used as the camber link pivot like on a Losi or TC3. I don't think there is any particular advantage or disadvantage to this small angle. The Tamiya 414 has a pair of upper camber links forming an A. This setup probably would reduce front wheel hop or chatter under some conditions. I always thought that it was odd on this Tamiya car that the outer ends of the paired camber links were not in line with the long axis of the car Creating a small bind as the suspension moved. Maybe this was intentional to reduce slop or chatter on hard cornering.

Last edited by John Stranahan; 03-26-2003 at 10:28 AM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 01:10 PM   #202
Tech Elite
 
DaveW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 2,964
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

John... maybe this can make it a little bit easier... Stand with your right arm out facing a wall. Place your hand against the wall and apply pressure. Then take your hand and move it one foot to the right of the original position...and try and apply the same forward force as before. Your body will try and move left away from the direction you are applying force. This is what i mean by indirect force. If you look at the suspension eye level from the back with the shocks off...build one side with the standard AE hub, and the other with a Losi hub (adjust camber as well)... you will see the camber changes more with the standard hub as you move the suspension through its rage of motion... not because of geomery change from the differences in the hubs (physically they are VERY similiar when measured with calipers) but the geometry change from the agressive angle of the link. The chassis roll is transferred in direct left and right motions... that link on the Losi hub is taking some of that force and "losing" it in transfer. If you add lateral transfer of weight to the mix (as most cars do when going through a corner) then when you are off throttle or on the brake... the force is even less pronounced on the outside rear hub, and moreso on the outside front hub. I wish i could draw diagrams on here to demonstrate what i mean. LOL This is very similar to the way shock positions change progression in damping, and why you would need a heavier spring the more laid down your shock becomes. This is actually a waste of transferred energy in comparison to the standard hub. To me, it makes the sidebite in the rear easier to feel when driving the car on the edge. With the standard hubs the car would lock in tight and would need a dab more brake (mod) to induce rotation through the turn. With the Losi hubs, the car is just as planted, but through weight transfer on and off throttle/brake.. the car is more predictable. Nothing sucks worse than a car that surprises you with traction rolls. How this affects the front end is a bit more complicated... all this is tied into where you add traction additive to your tire... caster, camber, and ackerman....... And then we have those guys that buy a car off of E-Bay for 40$ and put it on the track with a sport speedo and wax our A$$! LOL Anyways... i hope i explained myself a little better.
- Dave
DaveW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 01:52 PM   #203
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

Dave- I aggree with this statement ". Place your hand against the wall and apply pressure. Then take your hand and move it one foot to the right of the original position...and try and apply the same forward force as before. Your body will try and move left away from the direction you are applying" The problem is when you try and apply this to the steering camber link problem you will find that the hub cannot move to the side like the body can. It is constrained by not having a ball joint for the bottom pivot. I aggree that the indirect force is slightly less efficient and causes slightly more friction in the joints. Probably not a noticeable amount. It does not change the camber gain to move the inner pivot fore and aft a bit assuming the same initial camber. It is not like the shock angle changes, nor like stroking a crank. It is just like removing one arm of an upper A-arm. The camber gain would be exactly the same with slightly increased stress on the components.

Can't argue with your on track experience. Might be due to more flex of the angled link.

Last edited by John Stranahan; 03-06-2003 at 01:55 PM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 06:27 PM   #204
Tech Elite
 
DaveW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 2,964
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Well fooey... just when i thought i had explained to myself why it felt like it did. LOL
- Dave
DaveW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2003, 05:57 AM   #205
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default More on the Chamelean 19x1

Tommy tried the Chamelean motor setup which is posted above last night except with 4499 brushes. I bent the positive red Warlock Spring and extra 30 degrees and used an unaltered red spring on the negative. He said the power was better than before but possibly faded a little in the second half of the main (fourth heat). Speed at the end of the straight was excellent. Brushes looked OK afterward but the positive was just slighly discolored. Geared at 7.2. The TC3's were fast. My 4505's Crosscut (99 plus compound, the non cross cut version is the 4503) had 12 runs on them at this point, so they maybe hold up just a llittle better than the 4499's on the 19 turn.

Last edited by John Stranahan; 03-07-2003 at 09:33 AM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2003, 06:51 AM   #206
Tech Elite
 
DaveW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 2,964
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

For a medium size track with a few good 180 switchbacks and one good straight, we run 4503 and red spring on the positive and 4499 and a red spring on the negative. The chameleon 2 seems to like this combo, making long lasting and efficient HP. No 105's on the dyno like the old chameleon, but plenty of torque and mid to high rpm.
-Dave
DaveW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2003, 05:29 PM   #207
Tech Apprentice
 
Tweeter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Buena, NJ
Posts: 59
Default

Yo Dave or John

any setups for the Reedy Spec motors? outdoors with a lot of turns and a 120 ft straight? i haven't touched one of these motors before and just wanted to know you guys have. Sorry i'm a stock motor and low turn mod guy.
Tweeter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2003, 10:19 PM   #208
Tech Elite
 
DaveW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 2,964
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Im like you Tweet... mod or stock. I am only somewhat familiar with 19t because our local track runs them in TC... and the track im from in VA was primarily oval based. So 19t is the primary lingo there. I wish i had more experience with the spec motors, then i could be of more use to ya! Is this a class you are entering, or something you are just tooling around with?
-Dave
DaveW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2003, 09:04 AM   #209
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

Tweeter-I don't see any detail on this spec 19x1 on the Reedy site. If the brushes are laydown they should respond well to the setups posted above. If they are standup brushes might need a different motor setup. We have run one Fantom 19x1 which has standup brushes at the track, have not had much luck with it compared to a Chameleon II yet. Even put on a set of laydown brush hoods.

Last edited by John Stranahan; 03-08-2003 at 10:20 AM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2003, 05:57 PM   #210
Tech Elite
 
DaveW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 2,964
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Is there a spur gear adapter out there that will rid me of this constant spur gear wobble? I have tried a GPM mount made of aluminum. Not only did it feel like i added a friggen flywheel to my car, but it allowed the gear to wobble as well. I have seen graphite plates that are added to the outside of the gear...but are they effective? Any help would be choice!
- Dave
DaveW is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Team Associated 1/8 scale Truggy Info and Tips Kevin Boyle Nitro Off-Road 4505 11-14-2017 12:51 AM
Associated Factory Team TC5, Brushless, LiPo, Li-ion Nanophosphate, Tips and Tricks John Stranahan Electric On-Road 839 11-01-2011 04:31 PM
TEAM DON'T CROWD ME...TIPS FOR PIT SPACING TeamButter Florida Racing 3 10-26-2006 05:51 AM
FS: Factory Team NTC3 with Sirio Evo 2 World Champ Engine, K Factory, MX3-S Radio.. R3VoLuTiOn R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 11 09-23-2006 08:37 AM
factory team rc10t4 and factory team rc18t for sale Zac R R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 28 05-26-2005 05:42 AM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 05:25 AM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net