R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-18-2004, 12:10 AM   #31
The Evicerator
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 4,142
Default

Like pretty much everyone else, when the TC3 came out I sprung for one and ditched my car that I had been running at that point... but not too much later I went back to my old trusty MR4TC (still had the backbone in those days).

Will there be anything as hyped up as the TC3 was again? Probably not.

Not to say that cars haven't improved or will continue to improve... I'm just saying that at that point in time, things were just right for a major event... Nearly every sedan you could buy was from overseas and nearly all of them relied on pretty much the same layout. Any sedan you could buy suffered from the JATC (Just Another Touring Car) syndrome.

Had the predator car been made by a domestic company with a bit more support we might be asking now "when is the next predator coming out?" instead of the next TC3...

The TC3 was and still is a very competitive car... but I think it got more lucky than anything by being released in the right place, at the right time by a company that hadn't released a TC because they had an arrangement with yokomo for that class....
__________________
Steve Weiss
TEAM ASSOCIATED -- REEDY -- SANWA -- PROTOFORM -- 1UP Racing -- ActivRC -- P1 BRAND -- TEAM KINWALD -- TEAM STEVE INTERNATIONAL
Steve Weiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 12:34 AM   #32
Tech Champion
 
RCGaryK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 7,331
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
I can't see the Pro 4's chassis, which looks to be 2mm c/f, being as stiff
it's 2.5mm, and there are 3mm chassis in the works. it will be interesting to see what effect that has on the handling.
__________________
Site Content Specialist- Surface
HorizonHobby.Com

Horizon Hobby is on YouTube with hundreds of different videos! Visit us at
http://www.youtube.com/HorizonRCdotCom
RCGaryK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 01:21 AM   #33
Tech Master
 
johnbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Malta. G.C.
Posts: 1,762
Default

Hi friends. Greetings from Malta.

Agreed. The TC3 is the most successful touring car of all time, despite it's age. It was also the most revolutionary, 5 years ago.

Agreed also that apart from a few subtle improvements the TC3 could go on winning for the next 5 years.

So why should AE give us a TC4.

My answer is marketing. AE are presently loosing customers because RC enthusiasts want a new toy. They can't get one from their favorite manufacturer, so they go elsewhere. Just think of the number of people you know that have had TC3s and now race something else, simply because they wanted a change. I know many.

What AE need to do is make a few subtle changes and updates, and market the new car as a TC4. Then they'll start selling them like hot cakes again.

Until they do that they are simply going to keep giving X Ray, Yokomo and HPI business.

Regards

Joe from sunny Malta.
johnbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 02:12 AM   #34
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Iceland
Posts: 588
Default

What I think AE should do is update the chassis, move the batterys closer to center with option of taping them. Redesign the suspension components mostly for more strength and adjustment. Redesign the steering so small pebbles don't end your main. Including extra rear shock tower in the package and losi hubs. No aluminium, that only adds weight. Basically I'd like to see them sell the car with all the mods the team drivers are doing to theirs. Whether they call it TC4 or TC3.1 is up to them, I know I'd buy it.

I think Pro4 shold be renamed The Twister. Sorry, couldn't resist.
andsetinn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 07:57 AM   #35
Tech Legend
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Fargo, North Dakota
Posts: 29,531
Trader Rating: 240 (100%+)
Default

They could call it : TC3v2 ( for version 2 )

For upgrades, I don't see too much to change. Better material or the parts so they don't wear so hard would be nice. They could also look into doing an IRS style upgrade to the car since alot fo them coming out now are graphite plate chassis based.

I currently have a TC3, basically a used RTR that was upgraded with some graphite components like the chassis and shock towers.

It runs really well. I had a TC3 before I got out of touring, before ran a XXX-S for a LONG TIME and put money into upgrading it and I never could get it to work for me no matter what I tried.

Our top TC driver used to whip up on us with a TC3, he now runs X-Ray ( sponsored ) and alot of guys do, but honestly I think the TC3 is still an excellent vehicle and that is why I went with one instead of an X-Ray or Pro 4.

Last night my first touring race in quite a while, I managed to put down some decent runs once I got the tires figured out and my TC3 had shot ball diffs ( my fault, grabbed the wrong cleaner ).

The Bearings on the TC3 are really free, I did the roll test and the Top TC Driver said it was pretty free drivetrain.

With alittle more TLC I think this thing should be very competitive! Actually come to think of it I may have been the only TC3 driver last night!
Cain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 08:19 AM   #36
Tech Elite
 
CypressMidWest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 4,618
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

I think the biggest thing that enabled the TC-3 to establish its dominance was the timeframe in which it was released. TC racing was still in it's infancy at that point, and the only company that was REALLY pushing the performance envelope was Yokomo. The HPI Pro 2 was really just a logical evolution of the PRO, which was nothing more than an evolution of the RS4. Losi merely skinnied up and shortened their offroad car.

Enter AE: the company that has consistently dropped the BOMB at virtually every major jumping point in RC history. They did it with the RC10, then the 12L, then the 10T, and most recently the TC3 series. TC's had barely graduated from the TAO1/2 era when AE came out with a completely revolutionary car. Then the other manufacturers were forced to step up, or lose out. There will NEVER be another leap forward of that magnitude. What AE did was make TC racing a serious, respectable class, rather than just a bunch of guys driving "okay" cars in dusty parking lots. And that cemented the TC3's reputation as the dominant chassis.

I only wish AE had done it with F-1 rather than TC's.
__________________
Team CRC, PowerPush, Access Race Place, US Indoor Champs, CD SUPERPRO, RK Designs, TxDSkingraphix, Cypress, Founder and lead instructor of the Ian Ruggles Negative Reinforcement Driver Training Program, enroll now.....
CypressMidWest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 09:20 AM   #37
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 1,499
Trader Rating: 35 (100%+)
Default

I think that the next chassis revolution will have to begin with the acceptance and advances in rechargable battery and electronics technology. The batteries we are currently using go back a long way. They are basically rechargable power tool batteries. When someone fits a flat cell phone like battery to an R/C car, we will see changes in chassis layout, lower CG's and improved suspension and drivetrain advances. I also think that brushless motors will play a big part in the next revolution.
Geppetto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 09:43 AM   #38
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 737
Send a message via ICQ to Cobra81li200
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by AMGRacer
There are plenty of innovations still to be made in RC, but a good number of them may not or will not happen due to cost restrictions. Right now to sell well a kit has to be priced around $300. The second large consideration is the packaging of the support equipment. ESCs, receivers motors and definately batteries all limit chassis design. So do IFMAR rules.

Some things which would definately benefit electric Racing:

1. Flat batteries similar to the OFNA "brick" batteries used for gas car receiver packs. Mount them UNDER centre belts for example.
2. Ground effects similar to those somewhat begun by Yokomo in their old car (i forget the chassis name).
3. Redesigned motors with much lower rotating mass. Some small slot cars motors can pull 120,000 rpm with tiny armatures.
4. A different lighter diff design rather than the ball diff.
5. Wireless servos and ESCs, "bluetooth" style connection to the RX unit.
6. A total move away from the traditional bulkhead and flat chassis style of car with ladder and I-beam style centre support and using the motor/motor mount as a stressed member.
7. And the BIGGEST limiting factor right now, tire grip.

What do you think.............

I think most of your "ideas" are not that good. Example : stressing the motor has been tried by Serpent in their VeteC and have rapidly been abandonned, as it was causing problems with the motors. Also, why move from the bulkhead and flat chassis when it's mostly comparable to an I-Beam strut ?

Wireless connection would show a big step back, as manufacturers try to have faster response components and these are known for being slow.

Anyway, some are good, but not sure if we have enough money to do that.
Cobra81li200 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 10:15 AM   #39
Tech Regular
 
MartinSorlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Oslo, Norway!
Posts: 307
Default

Have anyone here compared the TC3 to the Pro4, TRF 415 and the Xray?

All of the last named cars have lots of parts almost taken straight off the tc3, and modded a bit to look like a new part for the other manufacturer...

Like the new short Xray arms... Their length is just about the same as on the TC3... And both the Pro4 and the TRF 415's suspension geometry is almost exactly the same as on the TC3...

The biggest difference is actually the tub chassis on the TC3, and the fact that the TC3 makes more noise

Does that mean that a more noisy car with the ability to work like a boat makes it faster???
__________________
Martin Sørlie, 1985, R/C since 1995.
TLR - Spektrum
www.teamsmallsize.com
MartinSorlie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 11:12 PM   #40
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 396
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rob Hochberg
[B]
Quote:
Originally posted by AMGRacer
There are plenty of innovations still to be made in RC, but a good number of them may not or will not happen due to cost restrictions. Right now to sell well a kit has to be priced around $300. The second large consideration is the packaging of the support equipment. ESCs, receivers motors and definately batteries all limit chassis design. So do IFMAR rules.

Some things which would definately benefit electric Racing:

1. Flat batteries similar to the OFNA "brick" batteries used for gas car receiver packs. Mount them UNDER centre belts for example.
2. Ground effects similar to those somewhat begun by Yokomo in their old car (i forget the chassis name).
3. Redesigned motors with much lower rotating mass. Some small slot cars motors can pull 120,000 rpm with tiny armatures.
4. A different lighter diff design rather than the ball diff.
5. Wireless servos and ESCs, "bluetooth" style connection to the RX unit.
6. A total move away from the traditional bulkhead and flat chassis style of car with ladder and I-beam style centre support and using the motor/motor mount as a stressed member.

all are good ideas, but number 5 is not theoretically possible. You can have a signal transmitted wirelessly, but not current/voltage. If that were possible, people would just be standing around, then BAM you get electrocuted by a flying bolt of voltage! But anyways, it was a good thought. They do make a bluetooth radio, BTW, it is made by a small company around here, but it is basically a waste of time, the unit sucks. The range sucks, and it lacks lots of features, dual rates, expos, etc. If you're really interested, PM me, and I can give you their email address.
Well theoretically, you can actually "transmit" power, but, not enough to be anywhere near practical.
Li-poly packs are already available, all someone has to do is design a car to take advantage of their dimensions (and make them legal for racing)
Why design a motor with lower rotating mass when there is already brushless motors ??
Full size car dampening systems are far more advanced, but it probably would not be worth the time and money to scale these systems down. (with the possible exception of the kinetic passive system)

I think in time, you could reduce the weight limit on TCs to take advantage of lighter batteries and smaller (brushless) motors, or maybe we will all be racing 1/18th scale in the future.
sleek the elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2004, 11:21 PM   #41
Tech Elite
 
AMGRacer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,939
Default

OK before anybody else wants to tell me why my ideas suck let me just post this:

1. I was tossing out "out there" wacky ideas as areas of possible advancements in 1/10th TCs in response to the thread starters question. This is not the "AMGs ideas are crap thread" there is another thread already for that.
2. I thought about them for like 2 minutes.

I am not marketing them so feel free to say that they suck but I would be more interested to hear what YOU GUYS think are some areas for advancement which is after all the point of this thread.........
AMGRacer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2004, 01:15 AM   #42
Tom
Tech Regular
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Australia-mate
Posts: 349
Default

I think the weight limit in TC is to high. We would have faster better cars if they cut 100g of the limit. I know people who strap 120 grams of lead to there cars when racing on foams to make the weight limit.

There are more advances to come in shaft technologie yet...
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2004, 02:24 AM   #43
Tech Addict
 
Andrew_XXXs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 501
Default

Yeah I think that the weight limit will eventually come down but this has to be done really slowly so as not to immediately disadvantage guys with cars that are only 12months old etc.
Andrew_XXXs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2004, 02:38 AM   #44
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Iceland
Posts: 588
Default

I know of cars (especially the least expensive ones) that are up to and over 100 grams overweight. Lowering the limit will only help those with the most epensive cars. 2Cents.


I like the idea of Li-Poly. I've seen 4100 mah Li-Poly cell strapped to tc3 with the center brace removed completely, it fit perfectly under the driveshaft, long runtime, but not quite enough punch, it could have done with a power capacitor.
andsetinn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2004, 03:05 AM   #45
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 177
Default

One thing with associated is that there seem to be no development on released cars. They develop it until it is finished and then they sell it for 5 years. What have they changed on the tc 3 since it came out, just about nothing.

but there are several mods that even the factory drivers are making to the tc3 and have done for a long time like battery moved in in, rear shock tower in front... but associated haven't managed to mould a new chassis and a new front tower.
That is just unbelivable to me, racingcars are about continious development.

If you think about all the money that car has earned it is a mystery they didn't make a new chassis.

But I think this is somewhat typical to us manufacturers that they don't develop and improve the cars I dont know why it is like this but just compare with Xray, they are improwing their car all the time.
moonman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



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 05:59 AM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net