Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road
CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks >

CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks

Like Tree1Likes

CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks

Old 08-28-2010, 11:44 AM
  #1651  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 209
Default

John, will the Scimitar Pro 10 be the 2011 car to replace the JSPro10?
JIM1 is offline  
Old 08-28-2010, 12:51 PM
  #1652  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

Yes. One and the same. Scimitar and 2011 JS Pro 10. I will use the Scimitar name from now on. The chassis is almost built.
John
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 08-28-2010, 04:14 PM
  #1653  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 209
Default

Looks awsome. Great to have a proper 235mm become available. How much faster is it over the 2010 JS Pro? I'll have one when they become available.
JIM1 is offline  
Old 08-28-2010, 04:41 PM
  #1654  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 209
Default

John, I see u posted my email above. I forgot to add that I have had trouble with the lightweight diff rings that u supplied with the JS Pro. As the lightweight rings do not use as much contact area on the hub there is less area for power to be transmitted through. This has resulted in the ring twisting and ripping the corner off the half moon shape area of the hub. No damage is caused to the ring but I did have to replace the hub. This may only be in conjunction with using high powered motors? I have now gone back to using the standard diff rings and I actually prefer them!

Regards.
JIM1 is offline  
Old 08-28-2010, 05:27 PM
  #1655  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

Jim-Thanks for the posts. I have noted Your problems on the diffrings.

The main improvements of the Scimitar Pro 10 will be in durability at high speed. The chassis is not going to break in the front. The front top plate has 3 points of support now. The rear pod will have no axle tramp related vibration or chatter with its increased wear on the rod ends. The pod top plate is much more rugged, the motor plate will no longer bend. The Panhard bar and its mounts are now much more heavy duty with increased gear clearance as well. The rear shock mounts are revised and hopefully stronger with a Stranahan-RC graphite side plate that requires no modification. The front bumper is the same modified RPM piece and does a good job of holding two body posts while allowing clearance for a diffuser if desired. It can be straightened many times with a heat gun if it ever gets out of shape. New lighter nerfwings are incorporated to protect the axle. The battery top brace is minimized for a quick top load battery install. The front O-ring strap incorporates battery case stiffness into the frame. The right hand hub is now one piece due to the widened rear pod. And here are the pics to introduce this new model from Stranahan-RC.

Scimitar Pro 10


Call this model the Scimitar Pro 10, named after the curved blade pod top plate. Here is what is new.
  • Motor plate is moved 5 mm to the right giving an intermediate pod size between the narrow pod and the original Associated RC10 wide pod. Axles have similar support on both sides. The use of the wide pan hub now makes a car of decent width. 232 mm. The old style pod side metal is used for superior strength outdoors running the 3.5 motor. The hub extensions are no longer needed but can still be used with standard 200 mm pan hubs.
  • The standard pod side metal allows a top plate which braces the top of the motor plate to the top of the left side pod plate. This prevents possible motor plate bending on a severe high speed bump where the pod hits the ground due to a too low ride height. It also allows a rear mounted top link. The forward end is now far back on the battery. This allows a minimized battery plate for less weight and cost. I fit a CRC O-ring and posts to top load the battery instead of using the four screws from the bottom.
  • A new chassis will still have Nerf wings so the sides can be elevated for roll clearance. These Nerf wings will protect the axle, hold electronics for a rear weight bias. There will be much less overlap of the graphite needed reducing the amount of weight.
  • The 3-link rear end with vertical dampers (not shown) is retained. The dual A-arm front suspension is improved with a 3 rd point of support on the front top plate. The chassis will be stronger in the front with smooth sides all the way to the bumper. This will prevent some crush damage to the frame.
  • There is no doubt that the CRC adapted Losi Battery tray gets the LiPo as low as possible on the chassis. It is retained.
  • A new Panhard bar and mount use HD Dubro rod ends. It will be more rugged and farther forward than the present bar allowing huge pinions.
  • The front top plate has 3 points of support now and can mount a fifth body post to preserve the wheel arches of the body.
  • New lower price $399.
Features that are retained from the JS Pro 10
  • I experienced an 8% higher speed on a bumpy straight
  • I experienced a full 1.4 second, 8% reduced lap times on a bumpy track
  • Modern Fully Oil Dampened Dual A-arm Front End
  • Modern 3-link with Panhard Bar Solid Rear Axle Support with twin Oil Dampened Shocks
  • Meets Ifmar Wide Pan Weight Minimums
John
Attached Thumbnails CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-scimitar-left-rear-corner-view.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-scimitar-rear-view.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-scimitar-dual-arm-view.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-scimitar-top-load-battery-view.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-scimitar-front-right-corner-view.jpg  


Last edited by John Stranahan; 08-28-2010 at 10:40 PM.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 08-28-2010, 05:52 PM
  #1656  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

These views show the 3-Link suspension and the Panhard bar.
Attached Thumbnails CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-scimitar-3-link-view.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-scimitar-panhard-bar-001.jpg  
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 08-28-2010, 09:19 PM
  #1657  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (9)
 
SWTour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hot Mountains of S.E. Arizona
Posts: 3,012
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

SWtour-Thanks for the post. Good luck. I expect an advantage on the banked oval.
I have to say...very interesting on the CARPET...

I hadn't run this class for a while - so I had to get use to the speed, and find the proper gearing, and ESC setup...

We played with that while making subtle changes to spring tensions mostly, plus a tire change (Just one tire) - Most of the changes we in effort to try to reduce the amount of actualy steering angle - but I never did get it reduced as much as I would have liked to today (We'll keep trying different things).

A harder RR tire did help, but then once the traction sauce wore off, the car wanted to step out a little.

We ran the car in the 21.5 Brushless / 2 cell class. The TQ's fastest laps were either 3.7's or 3.8's ( I forget ) and we started at 4.4's - and got down to 3.9's in the main with more traffic (TQ only had 3.8's I believe in the main w/ Traffic)

Steve has a Medium Downforce Protoform DODGE body - I think we could have solved the steering rate issue w/ a HD Dodge or Toyota body... (NEXT TIME)

Now I can't wait to try the other one on the Banked CAP track!!
SWTour is offline  
Old 08-28-2010, 10:35 PM
  #1658  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

SWtour-thanks for the oval report on the hand built Scimitar oval car. Sounds like you made great progress. Another thing to try to reduce steering angle is to lower the front roll center. Use a set of thin shims to lower the outer upper A-arms a bit. Moving an entire .080 plastic shim may be too much if you are within .1s of Tq lap time once in a while. Play with rear steer a little. Rear steer out to loosen the car. Set the car on the setup table with rear centered and tires back up against a block set flush with the back of the setup board. Check how far the front is offset from the center. 0 offset is 0 rear steer. 1/8 inch offset is about 1/2 degree rear steer. To calculate rear steer take the INV Tan (.125/12) where 12 is the length of the car and 1/8 inch (.125) is the offset. If the front of the side links are elevated still, you already have some roll steer out as you have noted previously. To adjust rear steer just change the side link length a little.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 08-29-2010, 03:09 AM
  #1659  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 209
Default

John, new car looks great.

Why have you tilted the rear shocks over? Did you find an improvment on handling or was it down to clearance?
JIM1 is offline  
Old 08-29-2010, 11:14 AM
  #1660  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

Jim1
I mounted it like this for more tire clearance in the 200 mm applications. The top of the shock is moved forward. The tilt makes the shock only a tiny bit softer as it is not tilted very much at all. In the 235 mm application there is plenty of clearance. I plan to test this new shockmount on my personal car. I don't see why it won't work great. It should be stronger than the narrow graphite plate that it replaces. One racer has broken the graphite shock mount plate. I have not had any trouble with it myself, though.
John
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 08-29-2010, 11:40 AM
  #1661  
Tech Master
 
NiMo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Luton, England
Posts: 1,704
Default

Today was a sad day.
I was the only pan car there today (had to run with the 10.5 Tourers).
I fear the class is now dead as many have sold their cars
(shame that a few of our club members talk on here about how good the car is, but have never raced).
On way home I purchased a new Touring car, and will now mothball the pan cars.
Pan cars RIP
NiMo is offline  
Old 08-29-2010, 04:35 PM
  #1662  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

NiMo-Sorry for the loss of your class. I understand your problem. We had a similar Problem at Mikes running slightly up-powered World Gt cars on asphalt 2s LiPo, 10.5. Here is a list of complaints that may have led to the classes demise.

Front full size graphite bumpers broke regularly-Spares were a week + 1 day away so no bumper for the next week either.

Rear CRC axles went through a teething phase where the threaded axle ends pulled out. This happened on every single car at our track requiring a new axle.

Rear pod plates broke at the link mounting holes by tearout of the screw.

Screws were lost on each run making the car undrivable.

There was a Lack of rear cornering and forward traction even on medium high traction days.

I have tried to rectify all of these problems in my line of cars with

A shortie bumper to complen-ment the stiff foam bumper
more material around the screw holes at the front of the pod
steel screws with loctite where needed
More rear traction from the 3-link

The cars are still harder to drive than touring cars but make up for it in speed. If you take the speed away then it is just different.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 08-29-2010, 07:10 PM
  #1663  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

1-12 Scale with 3-Link Rear End and Dual A-arm Front End.

I had a very short road test with 1 cell 10.5 at the big track. The car showed some promise. Turn in was just outstanding without kicking the rear end out. It fit this Protoform body with few problems except for the HAVOC 1 cell speed control which was not only very tall but very heavy. More on weight later.

The body is set to touch the ground with the chassis all around.

John
Attached Thumbnails CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-1-12-dual-arm-body-001.jpg  
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 08-30-2010, 03:22 AM
  #1664  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (13)
 
GWH74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 254
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Looking good John

How is the rear shock clearance? Do you have a photo from behind with the wheels off?

Gareth
GWH74 is offline  
Old 08-30-2010, 07:19 AM
  #1665  
Tech Master
 
NiMo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Luton, England
Posts: 1,704
Default

Originally Posted by John Stranahan View Post
NiMo-Sorry for the loss of your class. I understand your problem. We had a similar Problem at Mikes running slightly up-powered World Gt cars on asphalt 2s LiPo, 10.5. Here is a list of complaints that may have led to the classes demise.

Front full size graphite bumpers broke regularly-Spares were a week + 1 day away so no bumper for the next week either.

Rear CRC axles went through a teething phase where the threaded axle ends pulled out. This happened on every single car at our track requiring a new axle.

Rear pod plates broke at the link mounting holes by tearout of the screw.

Screws were lost on each run making the car undrivable.

There was a Lack of rear cornering and forward traction even on medium high traction days.

I have tried to rectify all of these problems in my line of cars with

A shortie bumper to complen-ment the stiff foam bumper
more material around the screw holes at the front of the pod
steel screws with loctite where needed
More rear traction from the 3-link

The cars are still harder to drive than touring cars but make up for it in speed. If you take the speed away then it is just different.
Our problem very different.
Class was looking great when we had the 2s LiPo cars with HPI 20T Saturn motors running with 4cell 10.5 cars, but .......
the BRCA made the National rules that stipulated cars must ONLY run 1s 3.7v, with GT2 for 10.5 motors and GT1 for Modified.
It is the 1s issue that made many pack their cars away or sell them, as most wanted to use the same 2s LiPo's they have for their Touring cars.
I have tried to get the 2s classes back to run along side the 1s classes, but they are not interested as it is not BRCA recognised rules.
I have been running 1s 10.5 outdoors and have had many reliability issues, like I now have to recharge the RX pack every run (don't even go there with a booster cos I still have the wrecked cars) and the 1s packs take up to 90 minutes to recharge after a 5 minute race @ 6amps (2s only takes around 50 minutes on same setting) and temperatures are very high but not so much on the can, it is the wires and esc getting hot, so much so that I often find the solder joints (internal and external) melted.
1s has killed the class at our track, but it works for those clubs running indoors on small tight tracks.
Until the BRCA makes rules for 2s set ups I doubt you'd find many clubs here running pan cars or F1 cars outdoors.

Now to start build on my new Mi4LP
NiMo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.