Team Associated TC6/TC6.1 Thread
 

TC6 (Released December 2010)

Red R/C TC6 Photos

http://events.redrc.net/wp-content/u...-AssoTC6-8.jpg

TC6.1 (Eta December 2011)

TC6.1 Factory Team

http://www.redrc.net/wp-content/uplo...ssoTC6-1-3.jpg

Tech:
Racer Log Wiki TC6
Ask Keven Hebert
TC6 on RedRC
TC6.1 new parts

Discuss (Peacefully)

Nice looking car,good to see Associated keep devloping their sedan.

I just wish there was an on road track near me. Closest one is 30 mins away and only runs 1/8 nitros which I don't really want to buy...

This car looks really nice and if a track opens up near me this will definitely be something to look at when I buy a new touring car.

If the rumors are true about us getting some rug I may take a closer look

maybe it's time to thin the herd a bit

Can anyone confirm they plan on an October release?

The only thing the car needs is a carbon fiber motor guard?:sneaky:

Mike, the king of starting threads on cars he will never run ;) :)

It would look good all black......

I've been told by some long time Associated fans that in the past they have not been good about hitting the projected release date. They said until it's in their hands they don't get too excited.

Hopefully AE launches with a fully race prepped version and not a lower end model followed by the team version a few months later.

Nice that they're re-using the arms and C-hubs as these are items I tend to go through the most so have a good supply of spares since I don't have any hobby stores in the country I live in.

Definitely looking forward to the launch and will be picking one up soon after launch (once it's a full race version) :D

Since the last thread dissapeared into the firey abiss along with said troll... :lol::lol: I'll re-post my qestion :D

Rick, is there any chance of AE releasing a spool with replaceable plastic outdrives?

Yea, I just quit my stupid job so im not getting one for sure :lol:. Good thing I already have my new car. :lol:

Wouldn't they break/rip in a hard crash if one wheel jams and the other one still has power applied to it?

I'd love a hardened set of outdrives. It would weigh more but in my neck of the woods slightly slower acceleration is better than having to change parts so often. I'm amazed at how much the Aluminum outdrives get worn away by the plastic axle blades if the diff is run in a lowered position with the optional cam holders.

Interesting! Just as I was about to start looking into the TC5 I see this. I'm gonna wait until a FT kit is released before I get too excited. I'm currently running a TC3 FT kit chassis in Vintage Trans-Am. Any idea on cost?

TC6
 

I'd bet it will be in that $369 to $389 range don't you think?

The TC6 will probably only be a "Factory Team kit". The TC5 was only available as a Factory Team model. I can't wait for this kit to be released! They mentioned different shocks in the RedRC article, has anyone seen the different shocks?

Wonder if there will be Rubber and Foam versions or just Rubber.

Rubber only!

This is not planned. If you want plastic outdrives you could use the plastic diff halves set up as a slipper spool.

The car will only be released as a Factory Team version.

It should not be much different than the TC5 although I am not sure what the price will be.

The shocks will be similar to the new AE off-road shocks. The internals load from the outside rather than the inside.

There will just be a TC6 Factory Team. It works equally well on carpet, asphalt, rubber, or foam.

Rick, When will AE post pics on the site to? I want to get a closer look at the steering bell crank.

Hi Rick!

Can you tell me, if new tc6 slipper spool or solid axle are the same
dimmensions like tc5? Or it is new part and from tc5 my solid axle (own build) will not fit?

Regards and wish you good luck!
m

I would think, that if it works equally well on low traction asphault and high traction carpet, that just means that performance will be compromised on both, as both conditions really require vastly different amounts of chassis flex... am i wrong?

Excellent! Vertical inner ballstud mounts, PLEASE. :sweat:

:nod:

Some questions I asked in the last thread but never got answered;

What advantage does running the same bulkheads front and rear have? I think that it must be something for equal or optimized front to rear flex. I would imagine that that equal front rear flex would create a balanced car that would become a lot easier to create a good balanced set up for track to track. But I could be wrong. With motor mounts and such items I am not sure how you can get decent flex balance anyway.

Not to bring back in the troll topic, but will a gear diff be brought out for this car from Associated? Will they see the light of gear diffs and have one in the kit, or ready when it comes out?

To bad we cant see the likes of Ryan Cavalieri and other top Associated drivers do more on road with the new car. Be cool to see the big names.

in addition to your point......maybe identical bulkheads are cheaper to manufacture and they'll pass some of that savings onto to the racer? carrying spares would be easier also. :nod: :nod:

True! But I know that Yokomo uses the same deal, I really think that it may be a performance deal.

Kentech explanation Reading this gave me the initial thought of what must make the same bulkheads better. He does go on to drive the car in another blog post and say it is different handling 416 than a stock one. Interesting.

Photos are in process.

The diff out drives are narrower so what fits in the TC5 will not fit in the TC6

The cost of the car is reduced plus the racers and retailers can stock fewer parts.

There will be no gear diff for the kit but the idea is being looked at for after market sales. The big name Associated drivers already race on-road - Levanen, Andersson, Hebert, Jeffries, Abbott. :D

With the right setup the car is fast on both.

Yes....FORGET chassis flex as the major factor. Work on the suspension the way its supposed to be used, and you can make the car fast from track to track/surface to surface.

I don't believe the hype......I don't want a wet noodle & I don't want a brick. Give me something in the middle, and I'll use the suspension in its entirety to get the car where it needs to be.

Just my $.02 ;)

I've been skeptical of this chassis flex idea for some time. Seems like it would be "better" to tune with suspension as opposed to chassis flex. I bought the ITF chassis for my FT TC5 way back when because that is what everyone said was faster for rubber, but I never saw any gains, and I sometimes like the "feel" of the thicker chassis better even on asfault. Maybe when I get more skills I will see a difference in lap times. My ITF has since chipped and the "foam" chassis is back on my car, and it will probably stay there until I get a TC6 in the next year or two. Looks like a winner.

In my absence from RC for the past few years a lot has changed. One of the many things i have noticed, is an apparent difference in rubber tire compounds for TC.

I still have sets of Sorex and RP tires from 4+ years ago that clearly outperform their newer counterparts. The newer compounds feel inconsistent, and do not seem to handle heat as well as the previous compounds did.

With that said, a little chassis flex isnt a bad thing as it will help negate tire inconsistency and make the car feel smooth and easy to drive. I just want a car thats tunable, durable, and a 'Jack of all Surfaces'. Ill wheel the rest... :nod:

coming from our day to day use of full sized cars, this would seem to make the most sense.. but practical results on the race track with a TC, says otherwise.

To be honest I can see both sides of the coin here.

I agree that almost all of the tuning for turn in, rear grip, etc should be done using the suspension only, but the way the car acts when first introduced to steering I would think would be dependant on the torsional strength of the chassis. A flexible chassis making it feel on edge, and a stiffer one making it feel more neutral.

The oil shock can only react as fast as the oil viscosity will let it, so some initial cornering load must be transferred through the upper and lower decks.

Just my view on things.

The old tires were better. One of the chemicals used in the tires was banned, so everything has changed....

I completely understand the logic Brandon....but those are just words. I wanna SEE heat to heat laptime differences. I was never able to prove it to myself on the track; and I've played the 'chassis flex game'. I would rather fine tune my suspension components. But to each his own.

The main issue I see with these flexible chassis and top decks is side to side/ fore and aft flex characteristics. The repetitious movement the carbon fiber layers have in either direction weakens (splinters) the layers over time, rendering the advantage useless and introducing inconsistencies that the naked eye can't see.

Oh im with ya on all that.... I fine tune my suspension as much as anybody else I know at the track, but at the same time, I run a very loose chassis that flexes quite a bit to try and maximise traction on our low traction asphault layout. In other words, the flex I have is kind of a fixed setting I use,.. its the base. I tune everything else I have on the car to get the desired affect... and my car seems to drive extremelly well.

It would be pretty difficult to get an actual laptime comparrison between a car with lots of flex, and one with none. It would require the same electronics, same basic car, same driver, same tires, and driven on the same track at roughly the same time.

I first started learning about this stuff back in 2003 ish, when I used to race at SoCal raceway down near Los Angeles. It was an indoor, cool and smooth asphault surface, with very very little traction. You could tune the tail off your car down there, but regardless of what other changes you made, the stiffer you made the car, the less natural grip you had through the track. Losen the car up, and natural grip would come right back.

so.. who knows! Maybe it isn't as important with today's modern TCs.

so true, and so few know or realize this

TC6
 

I run strictly foams so the first thing I would have to do after buying the kit is to purchase a complete front diff and then start to look at how I could stiffen the chassis. I believe a great rubber car does not make a great foam car. This is why in the past there is a rubber and foam version. However I know foam is dead so I can understand the logic in just one car. I believe Xray may be the last company that will make a new foam car in the future as Associated, T.O.P, and others are now releasing only rubber cars.

Yeah i heard about that, but didnt know the details to know if that would be a major player in the difference. All i know is i can tell a handling and longevity difference with the newer rubber of the same brands. :(

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1:1 cars have flex too. Its a major element that helps a car handle as well as it can. Heck, you can install a roll cage and ruin a cars performance, if it wasnt meant to work with the chassis design. A lot factors into chassis/suspension design... IMO its even more important on the smaller scales, because there is less room for error.

Go Karts are a good example of chassis flex, but then, no suspension.

The TC5r comes with enough parts to build a front diff or slipper spool. The TC6 will probably do the same. It's not that expensive to throw in some extra diff balls and diff rings.

karts... these do not have a differential. chassis flex is critically built into its design to allow the inside rear tire to "lift" and get the kart to turn in / rotate. different reason to TC chassis flex. TC flex is to gain "mechanical" grip. thats why foam on carpet we run stiff stuff... we dont need the extra grip.