R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-13-2002, 07:26 PM   #2686
Tech Master
 
patelladragger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,638
Send a message via AIM to patelladragger
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by IMPACTPLAYR
Well Darkseid, after dealing with lowsy HPI pulley fences I have learned that before assembling the drivetrain you need to "test" the strenght of the fences first. I to origioanlly placed the fences on backwards, but when I looked at the pulley it looked wrong, so I began to take it apart and when it came apart quite easily I knew it was wrong. Why the manual has the discrepency I don't know, I can only assume that the diagram was to make sure people didn't try to use the wrong part, and they also assumed that most builders would take one look at the fence and see the rounded edge should go in. Actually if the pulley was molded with the fence on the opposite side they wouldn't even need a fence on the resultingly (is that a word????) empty side.
Not to beat a dead horse, but I haven't an idea where you're coming from. Intuitively if you look at the fence it "looks" like the ridges are there on the inside of the fence and meant to go in facing the pulley. It doesn't look wrong when you assemble this way - it looks right because the smooth edge is on the outside. It looks like the other lip of the pulley without the fence looks.

I don't see what the point of having those ridges on the outside of the fence are for if they are not going to interface with the pulley.

Also - I tried putting the fence on "backwards", the right way, with the smooth edge in, and Darkseid is right, it's very easy to crack the fence. I used vice grips but when the fence nearly cracked I backed off and just put it back on the other way. If I have a problem and it comes off I'll CA it. If I hadn't read this thread there would have been no reason for me to think the fence goes on with the ridges facing out.

Much ado about nothing really - first time it comes off it gets a permanent bond.

Last edited by patelladragger; 08-13-2002 at 07:28 PM.
patelladragger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2002, 09:27 PM   #2687
Tech Elite
 
seaball's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,303
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Send a message via Yahoo to seaball
Default

hey dark,
what hole do you install the top ball in on the front hubs the farther, or closer to the tire? i'm running the outside one and that's probably my problem. but i like the way the car feels.
seaball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2002, 08:20 AM   #2688
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Newville,Pa
Posts: 2,152
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

On my pulleys the molded in fence is smooth and rounded, just like the "outside" of your sna on fence..... maybe I got a weird kit.
__________________
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 08-14-2002, 08:55 AM   #2689
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: SLC
Posts: 104
Default

seaball,
I run the inside hole in front and the outside in the rear. I run 1 degree of camber all the way around and 8.5 (middle) castor.
What inside hole do you use, upper or lower? I am currently using the upper hole. When I use the lower hole, I use 0 camber.
What spings are you running? Can you go softer? Adrian will attest, the harder the spring the faster the tire wear.
What temp is your track?
I run the CS-27 in the morning and change to Sorex 36R when the temp comes up. Last year I ran the 27s all day and they wore prematurely on the inside edge. Now that I only use them in their recommended temp range they wear fine.

I hope that this has helped,
racerdave
racerdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2002, 09:48 AM   #2690
Regional Moderator
 
Darkseid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: At my computer, duh...
Posts: 9,033
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

seaball: I run the kit stock hole both front and rear. I don't know if your calling this the inside, so I'll just refer to it as the kit stock hole. The other hole is refered to as the in-line king pin hole. I haven't tried those because I don't want to stretch my turnbuckles out that far, and I think you have to file down the stock hole on the hub, just to give the suspension room to work. And I didn't want to do that either. I might try running without the sway bars this weekend and see if that will reduce the scrubing on my tires. So I'll see what the effect is.

patelladragger: Bad news though, the CA option isn't as 'permanent' as you might think. If it were, I wouldn't even be discussing this. Even with CA, they will eventually come off. I've found that taking corners tight and driving over corner dots, does wonders to undo the CA bond!

AdrianM told me that the reason the pulleys crack is if you all ready tried applying CA to them. So they can no longer strecth to go on properly. I'm going to get new pulleys and new pulley fences(a near $20 investment total) and start over fresh. I'll try putting them on the 'correct' way just as AdrianM laid it out for me. I'm even going to get a mini vise from the hardware store to put them on with a nice and steady pressure. If the pulley fences crack still, I'll call Schumacher up again, because at $8.99 a pop, trial and error isn't how I plan to get this done!hehehe

From what he said though. Using a vise or channel lock pliers, with fresh pulleys and fences will result in the 'correct' coupling between the two. And no more falling off.
__________________
TLR 22...Tamiya F104...
Darkseid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2002, 01:25 PM   #2691
Tech Elite
 
seaball's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,303
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Send a message via Yahoo to seaball
Default

thanks darkseid. yeah, stock and inline are good terms. i've been running the inline style for a while now and i like it. the stock hole actually compensates for the active camber that heavy castor produces. maybe just not enough. i for one don't like the new take offs with the blue insert in them. i think the insert is ok material, but seems to be a thiner profile and leaves me with a huge gap. they grip well, but i can't get the wear i want. my older take offs were the bomb. 22's and 27's. i think i'm gonna try the orion/jb stuff now. i got a set in a trade, and they are super nice. the wheels are a bit soft though. we'll see. thanks.
seaball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2002, 02:08 PM   #2692
Regional Moderator
 
Darkseid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: At my computer, duh...
Posts: 9,033
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Well in our area, the premounted Takeoffs are the beggining and the end of tire choice. Period!

The tire wear seems to be totally dependent on driving style or setup. Again, thats what I'm trying to determine. Some people's tires last longer than others, but the Takeoffs themselves seem to be the best on the market right now. At least around here.
__________________
TLR 22...Tamiya F104...
Darkseid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2002, 02:07 AM   #2693
Tech Regular
 
rcdougie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 489
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

What is everyone running for rear droop? With the rear shocks in the #3 shock mount, I had to unscrew the ball cup on the shock shaft 2 turns to get 2 on my assoicated droop gauge. Is that too much droop?
rcdougie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2002, 04:51 PM   #2694
Tech Champion
 
Kevin K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: In a land of mini-mighty mental giants
Posts: 8,833
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to Kevin K Send a message via Yahoo to Kevin K
Default

Rcdougie.......Thats not too much droop but you might want to check the overall length of the shocks. They should be about 66 to 67mm long and you should have no problems getting enough droop. If they are shorter then that then you will not get enough droop. Also the rear shock tower is about 1 to 2mm taller then the front so if both sets of shocks are the same length but you cant get enough droop in the rear it might be beasue they are too short. I personally run the front tower all the way around so the shocks can be the same length and can get the same amount of droop at both ends of the car. Hope this helps.....also if the shocks are too long the piston will hit the top of the body, when the lower arm moves to max up travel and can lead to bending the shock shaft so keep an eye out for that aswell.
__________________
2013 USVTA World Champion of the World
MOTIV RC presents the Midwest All-Star Carpet Series....15th year running 2017/18!!!
USVTA National Championship....check it out!!!
Im only responsible for what I say NOT what you understand.

Last edited by Kevin K; 08-15-2002 at 04:59 PM.
Kevin K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2002, 09:21 PM   #2695
Tech Regular
 
rcdougie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 489
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Thanks Kevin for the informative help. Im going to try the shock tower deal.
rcdougie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2002, 06:57 PM   #2696
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 78
Default

According to Paul W., both towers are the same. But there is an optional low profile front tower for running the body lower. Got this info from him whle attending the Snowbird. Have they been change since then?
Stika525 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2002, 11:18 AM   #2697
Tech Regular
 
TeamPRP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 406
Default Shock Towers

Check your towers by removing them from the car, taking all the hardware off of them and then bolt them together using the outer shock mount holes- you can see that the rear tower has the 3 center mounting holes drilled slightly lower than the front, and the bottom of the tower also has slightly more material which hangs lower than the front tower- the 3 center mounting holes drilled lower means it would sit slightly higher on the bulkhead. I haven't done a totally accurate measurement yet, but it looks to be just a touch under 1mm, perhaps .5mm. Not too much of a difference, but they are not the same.
TeamPRP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2002, 01:24 PM   #2698
Regional Moderator
 
Darkseid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: At my computer, duh...
Posts: 9,033
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Schumacher went through the trouble of putting two divots in one of the shock towers so we could tell them apart. So I can't imagine they would do that if the two were the same.
__________________
TLR 22...Tamiya F104...
Darkseid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2002, 05:46 PM   #2699
PW
Tech Elite
 
PW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Groveland, FL
Posts: 4,395
Send a message via AIM to PW
Default

Let me clarify the tower issue. The front tower is 2mm lower because the front A-arms are monted 2mm lower than the rear arms (stock) and this allows you to keep the front & rear shocks the same length. When you do the front roll-center mod, you should also change the tower too. It is up to you which tower you would like to go with. If you go with the rear tower in the front, that is the most straight forward way and allows for no changes on the shock length. If you go with the front tower on the rear (shorter shocks), you will have to due some more changes to make everything work properly. You will have to shorten the ball-cups on the shock 2mm and this lowers the spring retainers and allows for shorter shocks (lower cg).....Remember, this is stuff that some people do for their personal preference and is not always better. Please try the car in stock form first.
PW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2002, 06:45 PM   #2700
Tech Fanatic
 
King-G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 837
Send a message via ICQ to King-G
Default

Hey guys, how was everyones weekend?..hope you all had good results!

it was an off weekend for us, so a chance to finally test teh roll centre mod.

I Instantly noticed the improved mid corner speed, and a reduction in the aggressivness of the initial steering, but much greater Mid through exit. Although it felt like the initial aggressivness was removed, it had more steering overall!

Overall I dont feel It improved the laptimes greatly, but it certainly did change the feel of the car. I would like to test it some more before making my mind up.

What other changes apart from the front tower did you guys make?..anything else I should try, as I felt it caused the front to dip a little more off power.
I stood the front shocks up to hole 2 and this was improved.

On another note, has anyone found an insert which works better for them with the new Takeoff 22's - 27's..Im looking for something with some more support for the sidewalls, and perhaps a fraction firmer than the Included insert, with less airgap.
King-G is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Corner Dots anyone? RCGaryK Electric On-Road 19 07-04-2006 12:12 AM
On the Corner RC-HPI R/C Photography 0 08-02-2005 11:53 PM
Snowbirds Around the Corner scarecrow Florida Racing 20 01-27-2005 11:43 AM
1/12th Corner GT Racer Singapore R/C Racers 26 03-04-2004 07:59 AM
Shumacher Corner in Aus jamesbaxter_81 Australian Racing 6 01-08-2004 03:36 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 10:22 AM.


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