R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-31-2012, 04:06 PM   #91
Tech Champion
 
AdrianM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,914
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inpuressa View Post
yes, but the general design will not change. They are so confined to a limitation that they only can do minor changes like move some part a mm here and there. There is no out-of-the box ideas to make it exciting. Even if there was one, ROAR will eagerly go and smash the idea.

But honestly, I can't imagine the cars being able to handle any better than it can now. At least using the physical amount of grip available(tires/surface).
That's what people said when the TC3 came out.

Then everyone caught up then the 415MS came out.

Then everyone caught up then the BD7 came out.

Every time the previous cars got left in the dust and everyone else played catch up.

I think that the Associates TC6.1WC is on par with the BD7 and the Xray T4 might be on par with the BD7 and TC6.1 by the next major race.
__________________
Adrian Martinez
What I run: Schumacher Mi5/Associated RC10R5.1/Associated RC12R5.2/Futaba/HobbyWing/Team EA Motorsports/BSR Racing
Where I run: Florida Indoor R/C Complex/Thunder Racing/Florida On Road State Series
AdrianM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 04:51 PM   #92
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Woodinville, WA
Posts: 2,512
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianM View Post
and the Xray T4 might be on par with the BD7 and TC6.1 by the next major race.
What I'm waiting to see is whether it gets on par through setup refinement, or through development parts that we'll see in the box with the T4'14.

-Mike
grippgoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 05:02 PM   #93
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,002
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Seen many types of design in TC. Hara even won with a HB drift car (motor mid front, battery back) in a TC race.

Motor in the front (Ta03), mid (Tao5, Neo, drift designs), and back (414 - 417 etc).

Battery in both stick and saddle pack, in various layouts. Inline (Ta06, Losi), saddle (older designs), long (modern design), across (old design).

Shocks in both traditional, laydown IFS, and rotary (Awesomatix). Even off-road shocks are now used.

Shaft, chain or belt. Single, dual, and triple belt design.

Molded, aluminum, fiberglass or graphite chassis.

Everything adjustable. Camber, caster, weight, height, roll and even color

For me seems manufacturers (and individuals) do have a lot of creativity.
__________________
www.rccartips.com
www.f1rccars.com
www.f1rcclub.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/rccartips/
http://www.facebook.com/RCCarTipsFan
rccartips is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 06:41 PM   #94
Tech Champion
 
AdrianM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,914
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grippgoat View Post
What I'm waiting to see is whether it gets on par through setup refinement, or through development parts that we'll see in the box with the T4'14.

-Mike
I doubt that they'll be very many new parts for this car in the near future. Turning car design is a lot more mature now than it was in the early 2000. Back then Yokomo would release a new car almost every four months. Today things are more stable. The T4 will get a top deck option maybe a chassis in a few months.
__________________
Adrian Martinez
What I run: Schumacher Mi5/Associated RC10R5.1/Associated RC12R5.2/Futaba/HobbyWing/Team EA Motorsports/BSR Racing
Where I run: Florida Indoor R/C Complex/Thunder Racing/Florida On Road State Series
AdrianM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 07:17 PM   #95
Tech Champion
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 7,586
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EAMotorsports View Post
Yep. And technically if you go rear the "Losi 22" ROAR rule your setup would be illegal too as you could not put a normal 2S pack in your car like it sits now withouth removing something and moving stuff around.

EA
You can't have a car that will only accept a shorty pack by chassis design. If you decide to put the speed control behind the battery, that is not a design feature of the car. As long as the car will accept a full sized pack, any equipment arrangement is legal.
__________________
A mutually re-enforcing cascade of failure

"Failior [sic] crowns enterprise." Robert Goddard

I-Lap Scoring Systems http://www.rclapcounter.com/
robk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 07:20 PM   #96
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,904
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccartips View Post
Seen many types of design in TC. Hara even won with a HB drift car (motor mid front, battery back) in a TC race.

Motor in the front (Ta03), mid (Tao5, Neo, drift designs), and back (414 - 417 etc).

Battery in both stick and saddle pack, in various layouts. Inline (Ta06, Losi), saddle (older designs), long (modern design), across (old design).

Shocks in both traditional, laydown IFS, and rotary (Awesomatix). Even off-road shocks are now used.

Shaft, chain or belt. Single, dual, and triple belt design.

Molded, aluminum, fiberglass or graphite chassis.

Everything adjustable. Camber, caster, weight, height, roll and even color

For me seems manufacturers (and individuals) do have a lot of creativity.
There has been many attempts, and I like many of the ideas out there. But there is a reason why only one basic design layout works at the epitome of performance. I would really like to see one day, a totally new design concept start to take podium finishes.
__________________
Lost in RC limbo
inpuressa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 08:17 PM   #97
Tech Elite
 
andrewdoherty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ★Wylie, TX★
Posts: 3,776
Trader Rating: 47 (100%+)
Default

I am happy we're where we are in car design. I think one of the things we need right now is more stability. I can appreciate that new designs are cool looking, and I know advancements wait for no one, but I wouldn't mind seeing us stick with the same motors and battery design for another 5 years. If that means all the cars look the same in the mean time, I figure its a small price to pay for stability that I think will bring more people into racing.
__________________
"Whether you think you can, or think you can't, you're right." -Henry Ford
"[Driving] Genius is 1% inspiration, and 99% perspiration" -T.A. Edison
|◤Hobbywing◢|◤SpeedzoneUSA.com◢|◤Pro-One◢|
|◤ReflexRacing.net◢|◤Protoform◢|◤AVID R/C◢|
andrewdoherty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 08:20 PM   #98
Tech Lord
 
syndr0me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 5280 Raceway
Posts: 13,140
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RCknight View Post
I have to say these design features A++. I see where the BD7 got a lot of their design ideas.

http://www.rctech.net/forum/electric...nt-s411-2.html
So that's why Umino has been hanging around Marc Fischer's pit? Looking for tips on how to make the C main?
syndr0me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 08:51 PM   #99
Tech Elite
 
RCknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,273
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by silvalis View Post
The 411 was made like that for flex. The spur isn't removable without taking off the top deck.

Sort of regret selling my 411s...
No are you sure it looks like the bearing are in a separate brace and you can remove the two screws to remove the bearings. The bearings are not inside the pulley. I swear that's how looks.

Regarding the Awesomatix, I guess my point is, yes, it's difference in many ways, but how much better is it than what is standard design? Just because it's different does that make it better? Unless I see this thing consistently putting down better laps then to me a radical design is meaningless. Unless it has less parts count, easier to adjust, stronger, lighter then I could understand such a design. Unless your just looking for something different, I would rather see companies improve on current design features.

What is the current design is proven, simple, and it work on all track conditions. I think the Yoke may have just found that little tweak to get an edge for a aggressive driving style. The longer chassis design and toe blocks may contribute to it's optimization. idk

I have to say design wise, I feel like the T4 R&D team lacks attention to details or chooses to take productions short cuts at the expense of better design features. The bumper and steering rack just seem slapped together. Speaking only of design features here though.
RCknight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 08:56 PM   #100
Tech Elite
 
RCknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,273
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by syndr0me View Post
So that's why Umino has been hanging around Marc Fischer's pit? Looking for tips on how to make the C main?
Baa...which one came out first? I stand corrected a few design ideas. lol I thought the Kos 411 was? They both have the same motor mount style. Very similar at least. lol Not sure who Marc is but is he an engineer? If he's an engineer I can't fault him for being a C main racer. I don't know of any that can do both.
RCknight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 08:59 PM   #101
Tech Lord
 
syndr0me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 5280 Raceway
Posts: 13,140
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
Default

Umino is actually a pretty damn good driver. He's the designer of the BD7 (and 5, I assume) and was Masami's mechanic. He's now Ronald Volker's mechanic.

I was just kidding about him getting ideas from Fischer. Yokomo has been making sedans for a very long time. The S411 dropped a couple of years ago without anything particularly innovative about its design, though it seems to be a fine car with high quality parts. Martin Crisp always looked good with his at US races before he retired.
syndr0me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 10:15 PM   #102
Tech Elite
 
RCknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,273
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Yeah, I'm a huge fan of Masami and Umino. I've not kept up on the racing scene over the last few years, but Umino seems to be a big part of a the team's setup success. I remember when Hara 1st won the worlds. If my memory is correct, I contributed it to the experience of Masami and Umino. I don't think he's been as dominating since he left their guidance. I've been out of the loop, but I very much respect those guys. I've never met them in person and wish I had the chance. I always thought Hara should have stayed with the team and learned from these guys.

Where's my other favorite racer, Barry Baker? What is he doing these days, got the chance to meet him. Great guy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syndr0me View Post
Umino is actually a pretty damn good driver. He's the designer of the BD7 (and 5, I assume) and was Masami's mechanic. He's now Ronald Volker's mechanic.

I was just kidding about him getting ideas from Fischer. Yokomo has been making sedans for a very long time. The S411 dropped a couple of years ago without anything particularly innovative about its design, though it seems to be a fine car with high quality parts. Martin Crisp always looked good with his at US races before he retired.

Last edited by RCknight; 10-31-2012 at 10:25 PM.
RCknight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 10:24 PM   #103
Tech Master
 
silvalis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,545
Trader Rating: 29 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RCknight View Post
No are you sure it looks like the bearing are in a separate brace and you can remove the two screws to remove the bearings. The bearings are not inside the pulley. I swear that's how looks.
Just checked the pdf manual again, I think you're thinking of the sakura.

The 411 has the two bearing holders held by screws onto the spur bulkhead. You can undo these and slide the holder off and the bearing will usually come with it. The spur has a tube that extends into the bearing. If you pull the bearing holders off, the topdeck still traps the whole spur assembly into the U of the spur bulkhead.

When I had mine, I was under the impression that the idea was to be able to undo the topdeck->spur bulkhead screws for more flex without compromising the spur clamping.

The sakura has a screw holding the bearing onto the spur tube. From what I recall the tube slides out of the spur holder/clamp. Pull these through and the spur assembly is free. (Sort of. You still have to deal with the belts)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RCknight View Post
I have to say design wise, I feel like the T4 R&D team lacks attention to details or chooses to take productions short cuts at the expense of better design features. The bumper and steering rack just seem slapped together. Speaking only of design features here though.
What's wrong with the bumper and the steering rack? Plastic?
__________________
2013 QLD Champion Potato Sack Racer
silvalis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 11:01 PM   #104
Tech Elite
 
RCknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,273
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by silvalis View Post
Just checked the pdf manual again, I think you're thinking of the sakura.

The 411 has the two bearing holders held by screws onto the spur bulkhead. You can undo these and slide the holder off and the bearing will usually come with it. The spur has a tube that extends into the bearing. If you pull the bearing holders off, the topdeck still traps the whole spur assembly into the U of the spur bulkhead.

When I had mine, I was under the impression that the idea was to be able to undo the topdeck->spur bulkhead screws for more flex without compromising the spur clamping.

The sakura has a screw holding the bearing onto the spur tube. From what I recall the tube slides out of the spur holder/clamp. Pull these through and the spur assembly is free. (Sort of. You still have to deal with the belts)



What's wrong with the bumper and the steering rack? Plastic?
It just seems completely butt backwards. In terms of design and added production costs. The rod angle is not optimal as well. The bumper could be better out of the box. I don't like the fact I need to buy another to get it right. Back to the steering, when I think logic design I first would think, mount the heaviest part of the steering components being the optional aluminum steering arms low as possible, thus reducing weight by making the steering posts shorter, putting the rack higher, thus not needing three shims, making easier access to the rack screws from above, and not limiting the steering throw."
RCknight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 11:13 PM   #105
Tech Master
 
Xpress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dirt sucks!
Posts: 1,613
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RCknight View Post
It just seems completely butt backwards. In terms of design and added production costs. The rod angle is not optimal as well. The bumper could be better out of the box. I don't like the fact I need to buy another to get it right. Back to the steering, when I think logic design I first would think, mount the heaviest part of the steering components being the optional aluminum steering arms low as possible, thus reducing weight by making the steering posts shorter, putting the rack higher, thus not needing three shims, making easier access to the rack screws from above, and not limiting the steering throw."
Every car has limited steering throw.
__________________
"Desire is the key to motivation, but it's the determination and commitment to an unrelenting pursuit of laying it down - a commitment to excellence - that will enable you to attain the success you seek to beat ass."

-Espo
Xpress is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
T.R.C.R. ---Pit's Talk--- teambighead Northwest Racers 25141 12-03-2017 10:06 AM
UK Race Talk TryHard Racing Forum 9876 12-05-2010 11:46 AM
NEW TC design....have a look at this! wingman2 Electric On-Road 15 04-16-2009 10:18 AM
HK Talk Version 1.1 fai Hong Kong Racing 18317 05-13-2007 08:22 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 12:45 PM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net