Mid-Motored TC3?
#32

The spur gear is there wont fit.....


#34

Also JayP(rctech) Also gave me some info too.

#35

Hi Guys,
Afraid you are too late
Got one in prototype over here, will be ready to run in 2-3 weeks.
V. similar but not identical. came to the same conclusion about a few things.
Picked up a few more parts today.
Hopefully post pics when ready to test.
Code name Project Moon Shot
Ross
Afraid you are too late

Got one in prototype over here, will be ready to run in 2-3 weeks.
V. similar but not identical. came to the same conclusion about a few things.
Picked up a few more parts today.
Hopefully post pics when ready to test.
Code name Project Moon Shot

Ross
#36

Originally posted by b3buggy
Hi Guys,
Afraid you are too late
Got one in prototype over here, will be ready to run in 2-3 weeks.
V. similar but not identical. came to the same conclusion about a few things.
Picked up a few more parts today.
Hopefully post pics when ready to test.
Code name Project Moon Shot
Ross
Hi Guys,
Afraid you are too late

Got one in prototype over here, will be ready to run in 2-3 weeks.
V. similar but not identical. came to the same conclusion about a few things.
Picked up a few more parts today.
Hopefully post pics when ready to test.
Code name Project Moon Shot

Ross

#37

Originally posted by b3buggy
Hi Guys,
Afraid you are too late
Got one in prototype over here, will be ready to run in 2-3 weeks.
V. similar but not identical. came to the same conclusion about a few things.
Picked up a few more parts today.
Hopefully post pics when ready to test.
Code name Project Moon Shot
Ross
Hi Guys,
Afraid you are too late

Got one in prototype over here, will be ready to run in 2-3 weeks.
V. similar but not identical. came to the same conclusion about a few things.
Picked up a few more parts today.
Hopefully post pics when ready to test.
Code name Project Moon Shot

Ross

#38

What do yall think.........dual motor capability, 8 cell slots, direct steering, (capability to mount motor, batts, servo and electronics on either side like the EVO 2)
#39

Originally posted by tc3stocker
What do yall think.........dual motor capability, 8 cell slots, direct steering, (capability to mount motor, batts, servo and electronics on either side like the EVO 2)
What do yall think.........dual motor capability, 8 cell slots, direct steering, (capability to mount motor, batts, servo and electronics on either side like the EVO 2)
#40

Nice. Very very nice.
So when is production going to start?
How come i feel it got something to do wit Xray???
So when is production going to start?



How come i feel it got something to do wit Xray???



#41

Hi guys,
True R/c-Not Trying to say anything apart from in a certain configurations you are limited to positoning items.
The servo had to be there really- if you want the standard rack.
Tere is no room then for batterys down that side at the fornt so they have to go to the rear. Etc Etc.
There will of course be differences between the designs, but the basics are the same, it is just the way the design is implemented.
tc3stocker- Only possible if there is more room in the chassis, this configuration only just hs enough room for the electrics, let along another two cell cutouts. also dual motors would mean dual cutouts,limiting space for everything else to be positioned, you cannot stick electronics to the air
Are you guys going ahead with the project? We are very limited to machine shops over here, so the initial prototype is using modified off the shelf parts.
Thanks
Ross
True R/c-Not Trying to say anything apart from in a certain configurations you are limited to positoning items.
The servo had to be there really- if you want the standard rack.
Tere is no room then for batterys down that side at the fornt so they have to go to the rear. Etc Etc.
There will of course be differences between the designs, but the basics are the same, it is just the way the design is implemented.
tc3stocker- Only possible if there is more room in the chassis, this configuration only just hs enough room for the electrics, let along another two cell cutouts. also dual motors would mean dual cutouts,limiting space for everything else to be positioned, you cannot stick electronics to the air

Are you guys going ahead with the project? We are very limited to machine shops over here, so the initial prototype is using modified off the shelf parts.
Thanks
Ross
#42

Originally posted by b3buggy
Hi guys,
True R/c-Not Trying to say anything apart from in a certain configurations you are limited to positoning items.
The servo had to be there really- if you want the standard rack.
Tere is no room then for batterys down that side at the fornt so they have to go to the rear. Etc Etc.
There will of course be differences between the designs, but the basics are the same, it is just the way the design is implemented.
tc3stocker- Only possible if there is more room in the chassis, this configuration only just hs enough room for the electrics, let along another two cell cutouts. also dual motors would mean dual cutouts,limiting space for everything else to be positioned, you cannot stick electronics to the air
Are you guys going ahead with the project? We are very limited to machine shops over here, so the initial prototype is using modified off the shelf parts.
Thanks
Ross
Hi guys,
True R/c-Not Trying to say anything apart from in a certain configurations you are limited to positoning items.
The servo had to be there really- if you want the standard rack.
Tere is no room then for batterys down that side at the fornt so they have to go to the rear. Etc Etc.
There will of course be differences between the designs, but the basics are the same, it is just the way the design is implemented.
tc3stocker- Only possible if there is more room in the chassis, this configuration only just hs enough room for the electrics, let along another two cell cutouts. also dual motors would mean dual cutouts,limiting space for everything else to be positioned, you cannot stick electronics to the air

Are you guys going ahead with the project? We are very limited to machine shops over here, so the initial prototype is using modified off the shelf parts.
Thanks
Ross

#43

this project kind of looks like the Hot Bodies Lightning 1/7, and also the Losi Street Weapon
#44
Tech Regular
Thread Starter

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?
But you have to admit the "wow" factor is a pretty powerful marketing tool. Admit it, a huge part of the reason most of us are into RC at all is for that wow factor.
That said, this design isn't all fluff. It does have some merits and warrants some further testing. I'm excited about seeing the results of the prototype that Ross is constructing. Everyone need not worry - I am not looking to compete with anyone else or "steal" anyone else's show. I'm just a Design Engineer with some resources on my hands that I thought I'd put to work for something I love.
By the way - as Ariel mentioned, I am using Unigraphics NX2 (Although I also have access to Pro/Engineer). Thanks for the compliments on the modeling work. It definitely took quite a bit of time. Especialy tweaking the part material properties to closely simulate real world weight distribution.
Speaking of weight distribution, this design is not rear-heavy at all. It actually has about the same rear weight bias (47/53 - F/R) as the factory chassis with the batteries in the forward position. I can share the centroid data with you if you like. A definite downside to this design is lack of adjustability. If one were to desire more rear weigh bias (simulating the factory six cells rearward position), this design does not accomodate it at this time (pending further review).
Sorry to be so long winded. I get pretty excited discussing this stuff. As for a production date - no such thing is planned at this time. I am considering approaching one or more existing aftermarket chassis manufacturers, though, so keep your eyes peeled.
#45

Originally posted by SammyXp
Speaking of weight distribution, this design is not rear-heavy at all. It actually has about the same rear weight bias (47/53 - F/R) as the factory chassis with the batteries in the forward position. I can share the centroid data with you if you like. A definite downside to this design is lack of adjustability. If one were to desire more rear weigh bias (simulating the factory six cells rearward position), this design does not accomodate it at this time (pending further review).
Speaking of weight distribution, this design is not rear-heavy at all. It actually has about the same rear weight bias (47/53 - F/R) as the factory chassis with the batteries in the forward position. I can share the centroid data with you if you like. A definite downside to this design is lack of adjustability. If one were to desire more rear weigh bias (simulating the factory six cells rearward position), this design does not accomodate it at this time (pending further review).
Cheers
Crashmaster