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 Tree8Likes

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

Old 10-19-2009, 10:36 AM
  #1291  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,780
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

hippie and all -

Long side links and sidelink ball nut spacers in the rear

I had long side links on the battle axe so I did a little experiment to answer an odd question. What happens if you space just the two rear side link pivots upwards. I expressed my guess above. This is what I noticed with 1/8 inch spacers. First there is some bind that needs to be removed by loosening the center pivot plastic support screws. I did this with chassis and pod flat. Shocks are removed to have a sesitive feel of things. Now up on the tires the center pivot would not settle to the ground. There was a graphite spring action created as the pod tried to flex the center pivot ball forwards. The side links were in compression and tried to flex their pod pivot balls backwards. No significant roll steer or roll friction was observed as I rolled the chassis back and forth. It looks like some ingeneous fellow could create a free rolling graphite flexure suspension using this idea. The front of the pod would be the torsion spring. Side pivot balls oppose center pivot ball. The higher the side spacers on the rear side link pivot balls the softer the springing.
Otherwise it's a don't do. Too much binding. Keep the three pivots on the same plane.

My 3-link pan cars have about 1 degree of roll steer with 1/2 inch total of spacers under the front of the long side links. .1 inch spacers (like installing nerf wings) under the front of the side links will have an effect but quite small in comparison. Carpet guys with the rear too planted should try this.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 10-20-2009, 07:03 AM
  #1292  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dumper's Speed Shop
Posts: 1,058
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by nitrobeast
Thats exactly the problem im having. Someone who was at vegas said our track has "vegas grip"..Here is what i had to do to not have the "stuck" feeling...Green front springs, 5 deg blocks, one caster shim arms front, wide track width, 17.5lb center spring, red tweak springs, thick damper tube fluid,1/4" front sause. I CA'ed the front sidewall. I had white, 10deg block, full caster, middle track width, 17.5lb center spring, red tweak springs, thick damper tube fluid. The car would dive so hard that the rear would lift.

The way the car is now its feels like it needs more on power steering. Should i add some caster back? How about damper tubes or tweak springs?
Thanks for the help.
Try leaving the car wide and going back to your white spring setup. Going from the middle track width to the wide makes a big difference.

The 12th scale front springs do help keep the car flatter, so you might want to try that too.
dumper is offline  
Old 10-20-2009, 07:14 AM
  #1293  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (46)
 
nitrobeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Colonia, NJ
Posts: 2,410
Trader Rating: 46 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by dumper
Try leaving the car wide and going back to your white spring setup. Going from the middle track width to the wide makes a big difference.

The 12th scale front springs do help keep the car flatter, so you might want to try that too.

I might not have explained myself that well...I did try the wider front before changing the spring. It was much better but not good. Thats when i started to go harder on the springs.
nitrobeast is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 05:29 AM
  #1294  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dumper's Speed Shop
Posts: 1,058
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by nitrobeast
I might not have explained myself that well...I did try the wider front before changing the spring. It was much better but not good. Thats when i started to go harder on the springs.

If you want to stay with "side spring" style of front end spring, try Tom Firsching's setup, if you want to try something different use my setup

Find them here

http://www.teamcrc.com/crc/modules.p...showpage&pid=7

If neither of these are to your liking, send me a PM, I have a couple of more things that might do the trick....
dumper is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 02:21 PM
  #1295  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 762
Trader Rating: 20 (100%+)
Default

John

I got my H/D lower plate today . Thank's for the fast shipping . It looks great .
hippie is offline  
Old 10-22-2009, 11:53 AM
  #1296  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,780
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

You are welcome.

Battle Axe 2.0, Offset Pod, 3-link

I have had communication from two sources now on what the next generation of oval car should look like for running one cell. One thing was in agreement. Less down tweak from the right rear spring was desired; solution, the offset Pod. More rear traction to possibly run a harder tire, similar in requirements to a more supple rear suspension desired as the T-plate can only be made so thin. This can be answered in two stages first go to a center pivot side link car as the Battle Axe has always been, Stage two for even better forward and side rear traction go to a 3-link.

OK here are the pics. You have seen it here first. Although other similar prototypes may secretly be under investigation. This is the very fine Battle Axe 2.0 with an offset pod kit, and a 3-link kit. I think the 3-link is going to be ideal for 1 cell as the suspension is the most supple of any pan car rear suspensions. It will have the best forward and side traction. A harder tire may be used. In my previous experiments on the oval the need for the tweak spring was not even there. The 3-link oval car dominated on my local track which had some very experienced racers. The prototype built here on a Battle Axe 2.0 came out beautiful.

Pan Car rear suspension Types
Here are some things to avoid confusion in the pan car types. So far the major players only offer two types, the t-plate and the center pivot side link. Of these two the center pivot side link is going to offer more forward and side traction and more suppleness for 1 cell, Ala the battle Axe 2.0. The one minor player, me, offers the 3-link,(Hatzenbach in Europe offers a multi link rear, but not for the oval).

Doug just received graphite so we may be in the game with a few battle Axe suspension kits soon.

If you have a 3-link, you have eliminated the overburdened center pivot. There is no need for one and the car would not work with one. Similarly you can't use a t-plate with a 3 link.

The 3-links don't tell the whole suspension story, though, as the center pivot or T-plate controls side to side movement of the pod. In a 3-link, the Panhard bar seen right in front of the pod bottom plate controls side to side motion. It moves extremely freely. The pod has extremely low friction in roll.
There is a need to suspend the weight of the chassis. I use two coil over shocks. I have used two stock tweak springs which may work good on short ovals or indoor ovals that are smooth. Quante has used tweak springs as well on his 1/12 3-link with Panhard bar.
In a 3 link the pods motion is more straight up and down relative to the chassis. The chassis in not hinged right in front of the pod plate with a T-plate or center pivot. A lot of wasted motion is eliminated. The motor (a huge weight) does not have to rotate on bumps. The car is not shortened with roll due to long links. Antisquat is supreme. Because wasted motion is eliminated the springs and shocks are no longer overburdened. They don't have to move things back from places the heavy parts should not have moved from in the first place.
A 3 link is used in a Trans Am race car as well as Ford Mustangs latest rear solid axle suspension. If you have a solid axle and a curve this is what you want.

So what is adjustable with this version.
Antisquat by moving either upper link forward pivot up or down, or side link forward pivots up or down.
Roll steer can be reduced, by lowering the forward side link pivots. Some guys like this right rear steer. About 1 degree at full roll, is produced naturally by this link tilt.
Rear steer in either direction in any amount by adjusting side link length.
Adjustments are rock solid from the use of huge threads in the links.
Also available are wheel offset front and back.
You can add a good degree of left down tweak but this time you do it by lowering the left side coil overshock spring collar.
A special upper side shock with separate tweak spring can be added up high if desired. Only one is needed on the right side. I found it unecessary in previous tests and removed it.
Center of gravity is lower. Weight is good.

I am getting my one-cell stuff in possibly today. Tests to come. The last pic is oversized. You can click on it again and possibly scroll around on it.
Attached Thumbnails CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-battle-axe-2-0-offset-pod-3-link-001.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-battle-axe-2-0-offset-pod-3-link-002.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-battle-axe-2-0-offset-pod-3-link-003.jpg   CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-battle-axe-2-0-offset-pod-3-link-rear-002.jpg  

Last edited by John Stranahan; 10-22-2009 at 05:37 PM.
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 10-23-2009, 08:02 PM
  #1297  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (134)
 
2056dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: michigan
Posts: 2,541
Trader Rating: 134 (100%+)
Default gen x 10

hey does anybody know where to get the nerf wings for the gen x 10 thanks for info in advance
2056dennis is offline  
Old 10-24-2009, 12:28 PM
  #1298  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 762
Trader Rating: 20 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by 2056dennis
hey does anybody know where to get the nerf wings for the gen x 10 thanks for info in advance
Ask & you shall recive .

http://www.stranahan-rc.com/Catalog_c362441.html
hippie is offline  
Old 10-24-2009, 04:04 PM
  #1299  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (134)
 
2056dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: michigan
Posts: 2,541
Trader Rating: 134 (100%+)
Default genx 10 nerf wings

thanks Hippie
2056dennis is offline  
Old 10-24-2009, 05:00 PM
  #1300  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 762
Trader Rating: 20 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by 2056dennis
thanks Hippie

Your welcome .
hippie is offline  
Old 10-29-2009, 08:01 AM
  #1301  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,780
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

Battle Axe 2.0

Preparation continues. I received my 1 cell LiPo. Here is a pic. The car is at 37.6 ounces now. I lightened a few things like the body posts.

I gave the car a short test and had another driver drive it as well. I had pretty good luck. We timed some laps and they seemed to be on track of our 13.5/4 cell. There is one stark difference. The 13.5 one cell takes a long time to get up to speed. Once there, speed is similar to 13.5/4 cell. Gearing suggestions are welcome. I could drive a pretty good line with little additional tuning. I'll spend some more time with it when my 1 cell capable charger finally arrives.

Sweet looking ride! Note offset pod, 3-link rear.
Attached Thumbnails CRC Battle Axe, GenXPro 10, 1/10th pan, Brushless, Lipo,4c, Road, Oval,TipsandTricks-battle-axe-2.0-1-cell-lipo-002.jpg  
John Stranahan is offline  
Old 10-29-2009, 09:02 AM
  #1302  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: colorado
Posts: 237
Default

On a short track (125ft RL) 13.5 1 cell is about the same speed as 17.5 4 cell.

Will be doing more testing on the offset pod this weekend. Will be running two 13.5 1 cell cars. will run on a longer track (175 ft) and the short track. Will post on sunday.
slotracer577 is offline  
Old 11-06-2009, 12:03 PM
  #1303  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (10)
 
Capt'N_Slow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 454
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

when I tried to run my genx10 front end on the wide position using the middle ackerman hole on the steering the stock turnbuckles are not long enough.

Is there another vendor turnbuckle that will fit in this case. CRC turnbuckle is approx 1 3/8 inches.
Capt'N_Slow is offline  
Old 11-06-2009, 12:59 PM
  #1304  
Tech Master
 
NiMo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Luton, England
Posts: 1,704
Default

Originally Posted by Capt'N_Slow
when I tried to run my genx10 front end on the wide position using the middle ackerman hole on the steering the stock turnbuckles are not long enough.

Is there another vendor turnbuckle that will fit in this case. CRC turnbuckle is approx 1 3/8 inches.
I've been running the wide front for most of the year, with original steering turnbuckles.
Wide position, longest wheelbase holes, trailing steering kingpings, 1 toe out, 1.5 camber, 5 blocks, 2 spacers behind upper arms.
NiMo is offline  
Old 11-06-2009, 03:49 PM
  #1305  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,780
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

What you need is a pair of two of the longer ball cups. CRC sells them as well as associated and Losi. One pair added one on each side will make up a short difference.
John Stranahan is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.