R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-10-2003, 10:22 AM   #16
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Posts: 761
Trader Rating: 56 (100%+)
Default

Cool...looks like the easiest way out of milling and all that jazz is by using 2.5mm chassis plate

Makes sense to me now. I have never had the chance to race in serious competitions due to work and a newborn...how do they measure the ride height at a race? DO they measure the main chassis, or the batteries? On some of my chassis on my other cars, the batteries are exposed by about 1mm due to over zealous chamfering.
dynamic_e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2003, 11:41 AM   #17
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne/Australia
Posts: 131
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Hi dynamic_e,

From my understanding. 0.5mm have to be mill out for suspension arm blocks and gearbox area for 3mm chassis is base on the ride height measure affect on roll center location. As far as I know, the standard chassis bottom thickness is 2.5mm, if making 3mm chassis for it and have to remain the same ride height as standard chassic, those suspension arm blocks and gearbox + shock tower will be mounting 0.5mm higher, and the most important thing is the central gravity will mount 0.5mm higher as well.

From my point of view, CG height is the first piority to decide before chassis stiffness and suspension gemotry. We always looking for lower CG but those roll center is being able to change if we want to, such as putting some shims under suspension arm blocks to give higher roll center...etc.

2.5mm chassis base combine with top deck and side brace should be stiff enough and no scratching the head for remain on suspension gemotry.

The only things might possible to improve is try to push all the batteries and electric stuffs closer to the center so all our TC3 owner might have a better responsive car than normal chassis.

Once you finish the project, will there be a chance for me to purchase one copy of you?? good luck with it.


DanDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2003, 11:05 PM   #18
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Posts: 761
Trader Rating: 56 (100%+)
Default Cool

Great feedback and comments...I'm gonna pick up a XXX Main book to learn some more...
dynamic_e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2003, 01:43 AM   #19
Tech Master
 
Xpress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dirt sucks!
Posts: 1,614
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

I would not rely on just that book as a source of information, it is full of errors. Invest in the books from C. Smith.
Xpress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2003, 07:45 AM   #20
Tech Elite
 
BigDogRacing's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 2,955
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Send a message via MSN to BigDogRacing
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Herminator
if the chassis is milled for all the bulkheads then the motor will sit lower since it mounts to a bulkhead
Oh ok Herminator- I guess they came out with a new TC3 because the 3 I owned had the motor mounting to the chassis via a clamp/heatsink where the nuts went into a small hex hole in the bottom of the chassis.
BigDogRacing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2003, 09:15 AM   #21
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Newville,Pa
Posts: 2,152
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

No Big dog you are right, I believe hermanator forgot ya'll was talking TC3.... LOL ... what they do is once the releif for the gearcases has been milled out they then would mill the .5mm off of the bottom of the motor mount/ shaft mount which would allow the drive train to remain in a level plane.... otherwise the 0.5mm shift in the input shafts would destroy the drivetrain....

Xpress--- WHAT are you talking about?? The XXX-Main book is a valuable tuning aid.... please elaborate on some of the "mistakes" you are talking about.... you can do it privately by e-mailing me at My e-mail so you don't risk publically embarassing yourself......
__________________
G's RC Raceway- Best off-road track on the east coast...period!!!

Pitman for Team Dallas Austin...
IMPACTPLAYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2003, 09:48 AM   #22
Tech Elite
 
BigDogRacing's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 2,955
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Send a message via MSN to BigDogRacing
Default

Impactplayer- I thought of that too, but realized that milling .5mm off the bottom of the motor mount without milling a relief for the motor will put the motor against the chassis or highly reduce the size pinion you can use. Of course, they could mill a hole for motor cooling that is large enough for the motor to sit down and be open to the bottom of the chassis, which is probably the best bet.
BigDogRacing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2003, 09:52 AM   #23
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Posts: 761
Trader Rating: 56 (100%+)
Default Well

Well, the chassis is designed with an oversized hole for the motor, so that is not an issue. The motor mount it unique tot he design and makes the motor sit in a traditional motor mount layout, not the cam style layout of the TC3. I'm still leaning towards the 2.5mm lower deck and 3mm upper supports.
dynamic_e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2003, 11:04 AM   #24
Registered User
 
OB42TC3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 417
Default

From my perspective it is not that big of a deal(.5mm change) because I run foam and the changing tire diameter does effectively the same thing. So guys start tires at 60 mm and go down to 57 mm; there's 1.5 mm of RC change right there. I'm sure there is some variation with rubber as well; like how much the actual rolling radius changes with different inserts. The angle of the lower arms is the big factor in the static RC starting point the length and angle of the upper arms completes the instant center and how it moves(dynamic RC) as the body rolls. Remember HPI's roll-center plates? those were like 1.5 mm apiece (use 1 or 2). Also I think higher in general is the better 'handling' if you had to choose between going lower or higher; it's one of the reasons small tires are fast. In this case however the sweet spot be at an extra mm of tire, so you get more useful tire life.
OB42TC3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
help, where`s my rollcenter ?? duhh Electric On-Road 12 04-30-2006 06:35 PM
M-chassis discussion diha Singapore R/C Racers 51 09-19-2005 06:57 AM
Image Dynamics ID8 dual voice coil ahsikes Other Items: For Sale/Trade or Wanted to Buy 1 05-17-2005 11:01 AM
NTC3 chassis options/discussion wayne Nitro On-Road 9 02-21-2005 05:27 AM
Setting up a car for vehicle dynamics research AUengineer Rookie Zone 8 01-14-2005 06:28 PM



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 06:42 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net