Team Losi JRXS
09-29-2005, 04:26 PM
#8011
PS- my guess as to why you would move the motor back in the chassis is to effectively give the front wheels more leverage over the gyroscopic effect of motor at high rpm. But, I am probably wrong. 
09-29-2005, 04:46 PM
#8012
Originally Posted by POOKYT
My only argument with your comments is the statement you make about it being harder to work on. On this I completely disagree. Ever change a spur or a belt or the diff on the XXXSG+? How bout making camber link adjustments on the G+? ... BUT, you need to remember that Losi did not just add short arms to the G+ or put an inline battery chassis on the old Street Weapon they built a totaly neew car from the ground up. The FK05 is a progression from X-Ray that can be traced back several years. The same can be said for others like Tamiya, Yokomo, et all.
Brant
Brant
Yes, the latest FK05, 415MS/X, FT TC4etc. were the latest evolutions of past designs (+ some borrowing), but all still very competitive on track. Though the TC4 might have been a temporary step back. Not sure what the geometry changes were TC4 -> FT TC4. I agree that the JRXS is more revolutionary. Hence, my question, why such changes so quickly? Not bashing Losi, just trying to understand car geometry and setup. For example, can anyone say why the BK brackets made it better?
Too bad we prob won't hear what the team driver's are really learning with their testing, especially those that have driven other makes. For example, Easton seemed to be a frequent podium/A-main with AE/Yokomo. I wonder what his thoughts on the JRXS are.
09-29-2005, 06:25 PM
#8014
Tech Adept
Yeah I forgot about changing a belt on the xxx-s. My complaint about working on the car and it is not really a big one is soldering the battery in. I ran the xray with saddle packs and it seemed easier to get the battery in and out. Im not trying to start arguments but that is my one gripe. Im always afraid of melting a belt right before I go out to race. If Losi did come out with a conversion or a new car I would be the first in line to get it regardless of how hard the battery goes in.
One thing interesting on the prototype car is the new front upper camber links. They are almost an arm similar to a nitro car setup. They seem like they would hold caster settings better. Anyone have a good pic of it?
One thing interesting on the prototype car is the new front upper camber links. They are almost an arm similar to a nitro car setup. They seem like they would hold caster settings better. Anyone have a good pic of it?
09-29-2005, 06:59 PM
#8015
Originally Posted by RED-LINE M03
Anybody have the part #'s for the rear hubs, front hubs, and sterring knuckles?
Thanks,
E
Thanks,
E
Rear Hubs..........................[LOSA9847]
Hope thats what your needing.
Brant
09-29-2005, 07:01 PM
#8016
Originally Posted by rainblows
Yes, I have. Belt change is on the XXXS is no where a pain as arse the on the SW. Still a fair bit of work. I think the spur gear change is not so bad on the XXXS. But I put in/take out the battery and solder way more often than belt (changed, but haven't broken one yet) or spur changes. Does the motor-back JRXS have the same solder points as on JRXS? I think one Vegas pic had a batt tabs on adjacent cells? Don't get me wrong, if a car is obviously faster than anything else, we all will put up with a lot of hassles.
Yes, the latest FK05, 415MS/X, FT TC4etc. were the latest evolutions of past designs (+ some borrowing), but all still very competitive on track. Though the TC4 might have been a temporary step back. Not sure what the geometry changes were TC4 -> FT TC4. I agree that the JRXS is more revolutionary. Hence, my question, why such changes so quickly? Not bashing Losi, just trying to understand car geometry and setup. For example, can anyone say why the BK brackets made it better?
Too bad we prob won't hear what the team driver's are really learning with their testing, especially those that have driven other makes. For example, Easton seemed to be a frequent podium/A-main with AE/Yokomo. I wonder what his thoughts on the JRXS are.
Yes, the latest FK05, 415MS/X, FT TC4etc. were the latest evolutions of past designs (+ some borrowing), but all still very competitive on track. Though the TC4 might have been a temporary step back. Not sure what the geometry changes were TC4 -> FT TC4. I agree that the JRXS is more revolutionary. Hence, my question, why such changes so quickly? Not bashing Losi, just trying to understand car geometry and setup. For example, can anyone say why the BK brackets made it better?
Too bad we prob won't hear what the team driver's are really learning with their testing, especially those that have driven other makes. For example, Easton seemed to be a frequent podium/A-main with AE/Yokomo. I wonder what his thoughts on the JRXS are.
Ditto on the battery soldering. It is a small pain. As for the team drivers opinions...........I would like to hear it as well.
Brant
09-29-2005, 07:02 PM
#8018
Originally Posted by beerbarron
PS- my guess as to why you would move the motor back in the chassis is to effectively give the front wheels more leverage over the gyroscopic effect of motor at high rpm. But, I am probably wrong.
Brant
09-29-2005, 07:07 PM
#8019
Originally Posted by RED-LINE M03
THANKS POOKYT !!!!
P.S. Guys last race day I used the 6 deg. front carriers and the car had a ton more speed through the middle of my slow speed and high speed corners. You might want to give them a try and see if you like them. I just picked up the 8 deg. this week and I plan on using them this Sunday and see if it gives even more corner speed. Let cha know next week.
Brant
09-29-2005, 07:16 PM
#8020
Originally Posted by rainblows
Too bad we prob won't hear what the team driver's are really learning with their testing, especially those that have driven other makes. For example, Easton seemed to be a frequent podium/A-main with AE/Yokomo. I wonder what his thoughts on the JRXS are.
09-29-2005, 09:21 PM
#8021
In regard to moving the motor back just a bit, has anyone tried using the 118T spur gear?
09-29-2005, 09:29 PM
#8022
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (10)
Thanks for the help in finding the bearings guys, As for the 118t spur I have tried a 120t spur but it is hard to get the right stock motor rollout with decent sized tires because the motor won't get close enough to the spur. If your tires are very small it will work for stock. I use the 126 kevlar....nice.
09-29-2005, 09:49 PM
#8023
A couple weeks ago, my car suffered a significant collision on one side of the front end. I replaced a front arm and noticed small pieces of metal coming out of one outdrive. It was material from the 3/32x3/16x3/32 bearings I had mounted on the pins of the dogbones (ala BK style). All four bearings had failed on the front end during that one run.
Not sure why the impact affected both sides so severly; except, it may have something to do with the fact that I was using a spool setup.
Any ideas?
Not sure why the impact affected both sides so severly; except, it may have something to do with the fact that I was using a spool setup.
Any ideas?
09-29-2005, 10:19 PM
#8024
Originally Posted by JRX-S Bill
In regard to moving the motor back just a bit, has anyone tried using the 118T spur gear?
Brant
09-29-2005, 10:22 PM
#8025
Originally Posted by JRX-S Bill
A couple weeks ago, my car suffered a significant collision on one side of the front end. I replaced a front arm and noticed small pieces of metal coming out of one outdrive. It was material from the 3/32x3/16x3/32 bearings I had mounted on the pins of the dogbones (ala BK style). All four bearings had failed on the front end during that one run.
Not sure why the impact affected both sides so severly; except, it may have something to do with the fact that I was using a spool setup.
Any ideas?
Not sure why the impact affected both sides so severly; except, it may have something to do with the fact that I was using a spool setup.
Any ideas?
Oh well sounds like a good screw up on my part.Brant