Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road
Tamiya TRF416 / TRF416WE / TRF416X >

Tamiya TRF416 / TRF416WE / TRF416X

Like Tree4Likes

Tamiya TRF416 / TRF416WE / TRF416X

Old 07-22-2009, 08:18 PM
  #6001  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (7)
 
sonic31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Hollywood,FL.
Posts: 765
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

i managed to build a slipper spool with the diff parts and slipper pads from assoc. and was wondering if anyone else did this and if so how did the 416 drive with it? im racing this weekend and wanted to know what to expect since practice time for me will be very limited. thanks
sonic31 is offline  
Old 07-22-2009, 09:26 PM
  #6002  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,544
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by veecee View Post
Hey Randy, what body do you run on your setups? If you want steering, maybe give the LTC-R a try. I hear the R9-R gives crazy steering...
Problem is with that body, it needs support to keep the hood from flapping up and down. Has anyone other than me try cutting out the slots in the rear wing ?
I though it had less drag and more down force.
John St.Amant is offline  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:40 PM
  #6003  
R/C Tech Elite Member
iTrader: (47)
 
Randy Caster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Costa Mesa, CA
Posts: 16,716
Trader Rating: 47 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by veecee View Post
Hey Randy, what body do you run on your setups? If you want steering, maybe give the LTC-R a try. I hear the R9-R gives crazy steering...
I have been using the Mazdaspeed 6 LW body mostly lately. For the new track, I am having a 4 or 5 year old Yokomo Stratus Type E body painted up. This body has more steering than anything else on the market, hands down. I think they stopped production on them though. If anyone sees one on a shelf somewhere PM me and I'll buy it!
Randy Caster is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 12:18 AM
  #6004  
Tech Master
iTrader: (16)
 
over gear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,136
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Default

Camber link questions. Please correct me if i'm wrong.

long and paralle camber link = more traction?
short and angled camber link = less traction?
over gear is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:04 AM
  #6005  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,544
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by over gear View Post
Camber link questions. Please correct me if i'm wrong.

long and paralle camber link = more traction?
short and angled camber link = less traction?
Others may tell you it is but it's just not that simple.
And without a visual aid , I can not explain.
John St.Amant is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:28 AM
  #6006  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (13)
 
Korey Harbke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 6,169
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Randy Caster View Post
I have been using the Mazdaspeed 6 LW body mostly lately. For the new track, I am having a 4 or 5 year old Yokomo Stratus Type E body painted up. This body has more steering than anything else on the market, hands down. I think they stopped production on them though. If anyone sees one on a shelf somewhere PM me and I'll buy it!
I agree... that body was awesome. Still my favorite one to date.

-Korey
Korey Harbke is online now  
Old 07-23-2009, 04:35 AM
  #6007  
Tech Regular
 
HI_808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 359
Default

Originally Posted by over gear View Post
Camber link questions. Please correct me if i'm wrong.

long and paralle camber link = more traction?
short and angled camber link = less traction?
I think longer links mean more roll and short links give less roll. But the shorter you make the camber link, the more camber change you get through the travel of the suspension. So, altering the links' angle and length for more traction depends on the reason why you don't have enough traction. A car can under-steer and over-steer from too much or little weight shift. Camber change also affects traction. That's where the "feel" comes in and you have to determine what effect you need.

For a 416, it might be best to go with Jilles Groskamp's set up for the camber links and 0.5 mm suspension mount spacers under the rear blocks. It provides great roll characteristics and camber change. Personally, after spending some time playing around with those links, I wish I had seen the set up earlier because it would have saved a lot of time.
HI_808 is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 05:13 AM
  #6008  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (34)
 
CraigM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 7,009
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by HI_808 View Post
Personally, after spending some time playing around with those links, I wish I had seen the set up earlier because it would have saved a lot of time.
hehe yeah I felt the same about Jilles' base setup
CraigM is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 05:22 AM
  #6009  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,920
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

yeah

the only thing i have changed from the jille base set up is the springs , i use HPi silver and gold
sidecarphil1 is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 05:26 AM
  #6010  
Tech Elite
 
niznai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,974
Default

Originally Posted by HI_808 View Post
I think longer links mean more roll and short links give less roll. But the shorter you make the camber link, the more camber change you get through the travel of the suspension. So, altering the links' angle and length for more traction depends on the reason why you don't have enough traction. A car can under-steer and over-steer from too much or little weight shift. Camber change also affects traction. That's where the "feel" comes in and you have to determine what effect you need.
I think you're trying to fight it with your memory instead of trying to understand what happens and that's why you said it the other way around. It is not the length of the link that dictates your roll. The length of your camber link allows you to use camber intake to keep traction (i.e. contact patch) as the car rolls into corners but if you don't have body roll in the first place there's no use for camber intake.

Secondly, understeer and oversteer are often confused with slipping. Oversteer and understeer have more to do with inherent design characteristics of the car rather than traction (and indeed with a few settings that can correct one way or another this situation).

Slipping on the other hand does have everything to do with traction and quite often people look at the car that basically drifts and they say "oh it has too much oversteer (or understeer, as the case may be)". I think "oversteer" and "understeer" should be kept for when grip is not lost but because of certain characteristics/settings of the car determine it to follow the respective trajectory (tighter than your input would have you think for oversteer or larger for understeer) but without losing grip at any time.

Sure, at the limit, and oversteering car can end up in a slide as can a badly understeering car, but those are indeed extreme situations.

I have opened this side argument because I see too many people trying to cure false symptoms by applying rules mechanically like magic formulae (which they're not).

My suggestion then is make sure you do indeed have the symptom (problem) you say you do, otherwise you will end up in confusion.

Our cars should probably be designed as neutral as possible to allow for tuning in all situations, traction conditions and power levels. This is very difficult to achieve from a manufacturer's point of view (just as it is with real cars), but I think most cars on the market right now are very close, so you can tune them to oversteer, understeer or be neutral.
niznai is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 06:31 AM
  #6011  
Tech Regular
 
HI_808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 359
Default

Originally Posted by niznai View Post
I think you're trying to fight it with your memory instead of trying to understand what happens and that's why you said it the other way around. It is not the length of the link that dictates your roll. The length of your camber link allows you to use camber intake to keep traction (i.e. contact patch) as the car rolls into corners but if you don't have body roll in the first place there's no use for camber intake.

Secondly, understeer and oversteer are often confused with slipping. Oversteer and understeer have more to do with inherent design characteristics of the car rather than traction (and indeed with a few settings that can correct one way or another this situation).

Slipping on the other hand does have everything to do with traction and quite often people look at the car that basically drifts and they say "oh it has too much oversteer (or understeer, as the case may be)". I think "oversteer" and "understeer" should be kept for when grip is not lost but because of certain characteristics/settings of the car determine it to follow the respective trajectory (tighter than your input would have you think for oversteer or larger for understeer) but without losing grip at any time.

Sure, at the limit, and oversteering car can end up in a slide as can a badly understeering car, but those are indeed extreme situations.

I have opened this side argument because I see too many people trying to cure false symptoms by applying rules mechanically like magic formulae (which they're not).

My suggestion then is make sure you do indeed have the symptom (problem) you say you do, otherwise you will end up in confusion.

Our cars should probably be designed as neutral as possible to allow for tuning in all situations, traction conditions and power levels. This is very difficult to achieve from a manufacturer's point of view (just as it is with real cars), but I think most cars on the market right now are very close, so you can tune them to oversteer, understeer or be neutral.
Did I leave a "magic formula" somewhere? Please clarify what you mean and answer my questions. First off, I said the length of the links has an effect on roll as well as camber change. What you are saying is that the length of the roll center link/camber link has no effect on roll?

And as far as understeer and oversteer, tires always operate under some slip angle when the car is in motion and slip angles increase as you approach the limit of adhesion. Thus, a car which understeers at corner entry and and a car that oversteers at corner exit will both "slide" if you push it enough. Do you define "slide" and "slip" as going beyond the limit of adhesion? Practically speaking, when cornering, I also don't quite understand how you can slide or slip without over-steer or under-steer first occurring.

Last edited by HI_808; 07-23-2009 at 06:44 AM.
HI_808 is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 07:28 AM
  #6012  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,544
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

u/k > u/s

I had to take some toe in out of the rear , for some reason one of my blocks didn't change to what I wanted so I made a compromise and ended up wider and even less toe that I wanted..... and it was awesome baby ! 1B/1F 2 deg and wide, no spacers at the wheel. Aggressive and yet stable.
John St.Amant is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 07:28 AM
  #6013  
Tech Elite
 
niznai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,974
Default

Originally Posted by HI_808 View Post
Did I leave a "magic formula" somewhere?
I didn't say you did (or anyone else for that matter). What I did say however was that incomplete explanations induce a false sense of understanding in people who end up not realising there is a logic behind all reasons why you should do that or the other and believe it's all some sort of black magic. You used vague notions quite similar to black magic yourself here:
Originally Posted by HI_808 View Post
That's where the "feel" comes in and you have to determine what effect you need.
And here's an example of mechanical formula (I don't think there's any magic within):

Originally Posted by View Post
Camber link questions.
.....
long and paralle camber link = more traction?
short and angled camber link = less traction?
why does anyone need to memorise such useless gobledygook?

I prefer to use logic and observation and my explanation reflects that rather than "magic" or "feel" or "vibe" or whatever else people come up with.

And don't take it personal, I am just trying to suggest people can reconstruct things by thinking (rather than rely on memory), no need to get defensive.

Last edited by niznai; 07-23-2009 at 08:01 AM.
niznai is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 07:32 AM
  #6014  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,544
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by niznai View Post
I didn't say you did (or anyone else for that matter). What i ddi say was that incomplete explanations induce a false sense of understanding in people who end up not realising there is a logic behind all reasons why you should do that or the other and it's all some sort of black magic (you used the word yourself here: ) and end up trying to memorise nonsense like it is a magic formula like this:
+1
John St.Amant is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:47 PM
  #6015  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,920
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

i have just tried my car out with the steering support off to provide more chassis flex and to me it was inconsistant ...

felt like one lap the car would turn in good and stay tight but then the next lap it was pushing the front end on and then sliding the rear out on power out of the corner !!!!

i will try it with the plate fitted again tommorrow evening and see what happens
sidecarphil1 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.