Mid-Motored TC3?
05-21-2004, 04:31 PM
#17
Looks like a great twist... Hope your not sending AE back to the drawing board....
05-21-2004, 04:56 PM
#18
Regional Moderator
very cool. Kinda reminds me of Losi's street weapon but this is definately nicer. Great job
05-21-2004, 06:10 PM
#20
Originally posted by R/C Anonymous
any date on the first production run?
any date on the first production run?
05-21-2004, 06:16 PM
#21
Integy had a similar design, but it wasn't shaft, it was belt. The motor was mid mounted with the batts near the rear diffs similar to this design. The problem they had was too much weight at the rear wheels and they had problems with the car cornering fast, and understeering. If you guys build a prototype, I hope your design works better.
05-21-2004, 06:17 PM
#22
Originally posted by Neil Rabara
Integy had a similar design, but it wasn't shaft, it was belt. The motor was mid mounted with the batts near the rear diffs similar to this design. The problem they had was too much weight at the rear wheels and they had problems with the car cornering fast, and understeering. If you guys build a prototype, I hope your design works better.
Integy had a similar design, but it wasn't shaft, it was belt. The motor was mid mounted with the batts near the rear diffs similar to this design. The problem they had was too much weight at the rear wheels and they had problems with the car cornering fast, and understeering. If you guys build a prototype, I hope your design works better.
05-21-2004, 06:22 PM
#24
Originally posted by JDXray
true racing do you know if Xray is coming out with a shaft-driven car?
I already had T1R, and i think i am going to upgrade to a FK.
true racing do you know if Xray is coming out with a shaft-driven car?
I already had T1R, and i think i am going to upgrade to a FK.
. If i was you but Im not, Get a t1r used cheap. Buy a BMI 80$ chassis, Comes wtih topdeck and Chassis. The New Bulkheads... After all you will have a 3mm chassis(bling bling), Bulkheads, And a Good car for under 300$. 
05-21-2004, 06:24 PM
#26
Tech Regular
I hate to be the only negative comment here, but what are the real advantages to this design? What are you offering other then the 'wow' factor?
The way I see it, there are MANY shortcomings with the TC3, of which the chassis is NOT the most major.
I DO like the fact that you address the motor mounting scheme as I feel that is one of the major mechanical deficiencies of the car (along with the part tolerances - especially diff cases), and even the steering setup (I think the classica bell crank is a much better design) however, I just don't see the point.
On a positive note, that's some really good modeling. Did you do it in Pro/E?
The way I see it, there are MANY shortcomings with the TC3, of which the chassis is NOT the most major.
I DO like the fact that you address the motor mounting scheme as I feel that is one of the major mechanical deficiencies of the car (along with the part tolerances - especially diff cases), and even the steering setup (I think the classica bell crank is a much better design) however, I just don't see the point.
On a positive note, that's some really good modeling. Did you do it in Pro/E?
05-21-2004, 06:24 PM
#27
Originally posted by JDXray
thanks true, but i just sold my T1R, and got some cash on my hands now. I will try the FK, and if it doesnt work out, i will take my bros, lol
thanks true, but i just sold my T1R, and got some cash on my hands now. I will try the FK, and if it doesnt work out, i will take my bros, lol
05-21-2004, 06:26 PM
#28
Originally posted by Griffin
I hate to be the only negative comment here, but what are the real advantages to this design? What are you offering other then the 'wow' factor?
The way I see it, there are MANY shortcomings with the TC3, of which the chassis is NOT the most major.
I DO like the fact that you address the motor mounting scheme as I feel that is one of the major mechanical deficiencies of the car (along with the part tolerances - especially diff cases), and even the steering setup (I think the classica bell crank is a much better design) however, I just don't see the point.
On a positive note, that's some really good modeling. Did you do it in Pro/E?
I hate to be the only negative comment here, but what are the real advantages to this design? What are you offering other then the 'wow' factor?
The way I see it, there are MANY shortcomings with the TC3, of which the chassis is NOT the most major.
I DO like the fact that you address the motor mounting scheme as I feel that is one of the major mechanical deficiencies of the car (along with the part tolerances - especially diff cases), and even the steering setup (I think the classica bell crank is a much better design) however, I just don't see the point.
On a positive note, that's some really good modeling. Did you do it in Pro/E?
05-21-2004, 06:30 PM
#30
Originally posted by JDXray
True, why dont they put the batteries in front? i think it might be better because than your going to have more weight to the front, helping suspension, in my opinion. Just a thought.
True, why dont they put the batteries in front? i think it might be better because than your going to have more weight to the front, helping suspension, in my opinion. Just a thought.
