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 10-07-2009, 07:15 PM
  #1231  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

Quante-Sweet!!! CAD to prototype, exciting times. You need a view that shows the panhard bar. Maybe from the back quarter view with the motor out.

hippie-I'll leave you in Shawn's capable hands.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 10-07-2009, 08:29 PM
  #1232  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (16)
 
Still Bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 7,379
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by hippie View Post
I was looking at the FR end of my GEN x 10 & noticed there are 3 possible width adjustment's i can make . The car was set up in the middle postion when i got it . I would like to know what the advantages or dis adavantages of going wider or narrower ?. This car will be raced on carpet only .
I have good feedback that it should basically be:

Low traction carpet track = narrow (raw track, no line in groove)

Medium traction carpet track = middle (average traction, gray line in groove)

High traction carpet track = wide (IIC level traction, black lines in groove). Also use stiffener braces.

Watch front wheelwell body clearances when using the wide position.

Bill
Still Bill is offline  
Old 10-07-2009, 11:46 PM
  #1233  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

Thanks for the posts guys.


Battle Axe 2.0, Offset Pod Conversion Experiments

I posted previously that I did not think I needed an offset pod when running 2S LiPo on the Battle Axe 2.0. It has come to my attention from a friend down under, that when running 1 cell with its 2 ounce lighter minimum weight that it may be a problem getting sufficient left rear preload with mod motors. We are looking into the situation. An offset pod may be possible. It would consists of a new bottom plate and top plate plus the relevant axle and hubs. Anyway if you are having a similar problem give us a post. The goal here would be more left rear preload without using as much left rear downtweak from the right rear spring. Excess right front tire loading would be avoided.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 10-08-2009, 01:48 PM
  #1234  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 542
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Idd John, nice to see a CAD design come together without a hitch.
(when you do something for yourself its allways "first time right"; at work its the same motto but not allways the same result )

Here's some pictures of the panhard bar, for me to take out the motor I need to disassemble the rear because of the old CRC plates. I'll work on that in the future.
Attached Thumbnails CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-p1010970.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-p1010971.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-p1010973.jpg  
Quante is offline  
Old 10-08-2009, 04:40 PM
  #1235  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 706
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by hippie View Post
thank's for the repliy shawn.

I will be running this in WGT 200mm class. this will be my first time with the car . The first race is in november . were would you recomend starting ?.

If the body you are going to run clears the wheels properly, then I would leave the car setup the way the previous owner had it. Get some laps under your belt, then you can start playing with the setup.

Shawn.
Shawn68z is offline  
Old 10-09-2009, 02:48 PM
  #1236  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 762
Trader Rating: 20 (100%+)
Default

Are these new CRC parts worth getting or not really ?.

http://www.amainhobbies.com/product_...e-Side-Links-2

http://www.amainhobbies.com/product_...ng-Retainers-2

http://www.amainhobbies.com/product_...d-Center-Pivot
hippie is offline  
Old 10-09-2009, 03:12 PM
  #1237  
Tech Master
 
NiMo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Luton, England
Posts: 1,704
Default

I put all 3 items on my car at the same time, it changed the fairly stable rear end in to a solid feel rear end, and allowed me to dial some front end back in to the car. It also allows you to use a slightly harder compound rear for the same grip as it previously had. And this is running with the PF Corvette shell outdoors.
It is also much more stable over the bumps with the longer side arms (less rear hop out).
NiMo is offline  
Old 10-09-2009, 04:49 PM
  #1238  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 762
Trader Rating: 20 (100%+)
Default

John

Are your nerf wings desinged to allow the use of these ?.

http://www.amainhobbies.com/product_...e-Side-Links-2
hippie is offline  
Old 10-09-2009, 06:42 PM
  #1239  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (16)
 
Still Bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 7,379
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Default

I currently use the first and third items. Both deemed as improvements by me. Wouldn't change back to the originals. Will eventually get to putting on the side spring retainers...lazy!

Bill
Still Bill is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 05:56 AM
  #1240  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

The Nerf wings do not allow the use of the long side links. I found pod durability problems when I used the stiff new side links. They ripped out the front corner of the holes. I designed the nerf wings to use the original side links. My rebuttal is that I like long links generally. They reduce unwanted movement of the pod. One is the fact the pod is sucked toward the frame when the car rolls. Usually there is enough slack to prevent any binding. My 3-links suspensions use long links for these reasons.

I like the center pivot as it tidies up the car over a hand sanded football. Performance is the same.

Dirk-Thanks for the Panhard Bar views. I wanted others to know it was there.

Battle Axe 2.0 Buildup tips
My recent posts on the Battle Axe 2.0 buildup are assembled into one page here.

http://www.stranahan-rc.com/BattleAxe.html

Last edited by John Stranahan; 10-10-2009 at 06:44 AM.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 12:43 PM
  #1241  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 762
Trader Rating: 20 (100%+)
Default

thank's BILL

John so what would be better, your nerf wing or the longer link's ?.
hippie is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 12:47 PM
  #1242  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

so what would be best is to add the Nerf wings first, then add the 3-link at a later date when its available. The links are longer still on the 3-link, and there is no "short" highly stressed, center ball to limit the car. The freeness of the 3-link pod is hard to describe. When you assemble one and get it to the point just before you add the shocks you will really feel the difference in suppleness even in your hands.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 10-11-2009, 05:24 AM
  #1243  
Tech Master
 
2wdrive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,316
Default

anyone have an idea how to fix a bigger ballcup to the original (longer) crc damper tube?

I want to use ball studs with a longer thread as the original has very shorth thread lenght and it barely comes out underneath. I can't put a nut onto it. The problem is that the ballstuds which are longer are also a little bigger (the head is 4.1mm instead of 3.9mm) and have a thicker neck.

So i want to put some bigger ballcups unto the old style dampertubes but i can't do that cause it has a 2-56 set screw to hold the ballcup and the new ballcup needs 4-40 screws .


Anyone some ideas or know a product that has a 2-56 threads but has a bigger ballcup?
2wdrive is offline  
Old 10-11-2009, 07:13 AM
  #1244  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

Not quite what you asked for, but you could try this. Losi Mini T ball cups (they are long enough) and Losi Mini T ball studs. The short ballstuds are long enough but come in a package of 10 or so. The fit of the cup on the allen screw is good.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 10-11-2009, 07:34 AM
  #1245  
Tech Master
 
2wdrive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,316
Default

thanks!!

You mean these?
http://www.losi.com/Products/Feature...rodId=LOSB1049

and
http://www.losi.com/Products/Feature...rodId=LOSB1052


edit:
Do you know if the threads are 4mm long or so?
i need ball studs that are roughly 4 mm or longer as the carbon where they go through is 2.5mm. I need the extra lenght to get the nut on.

edit 2:
I tried a short cup of the losi mini t shocks and they fit the 2-56 set screw so will get the longer ones. Only searching for longer threaded ball studs now.

Last edited by 2wdrive; 10-11-2009 at 08:31 AM.
2wdrive 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.