R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-01-2013, 03:15 AM   #31
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by niznai View Post

I try to regard my TC cars as rigid and rely on suspension to fine tune handling.
I prefer to drive with a very soft setup and as little chassis flex as possible too but even running the car like this when i ran a small camera inside the car chassis flex was surprisingly a lot. Twisting it by hand to achieve the same level of flex i was really surprised how much force i had to use.
YZFAndy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2013, 11:12 PM   #32
Tech Regular
 
Wazza22's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 288
Trader Rating: 25 (100%+)
Default

Thought it might be a good time to start this conversation up again!

I must agree with the opinion that the chassis should be stiff to enable the suspension to do its job properly (and stiff suspension components also)

The idea of a soft flex chassis has been thought of some time ago, back in the late 1990's Yokomo released the YR4 M2J variant which for the old racers amongst us will remember had a very slim top deck with a spring shock absorber! I ran many Yokomo YR4 variants during this period and this one was quite a change from the normal thinking at the time. I had a one-way front diff fitted to mine and the chassis was so soft the inside front wheel would tramp massively under power!

Losi had very stiff cars with both the Street Weapon and XXXS and were successful too.

I guess what I am saying is that what's old is new again to a point but I still believe the reason for the current move to quite flexible cars (Schumacher Mi5 for example) is because the spring and shock absorber technology we need for the current level of performance is not readily available miniaturised!

Cheers
Wazza22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2013, 11:12 PM   #33
Tech Regular
 
Wazza22's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 288
Trader Rating: 25 (100%+)
Default

Thought it might be a good time to start this conversation up again!

I must agree with the opinion that the chassis should be stiff to enable the suspension to do its job properly (and stiff suspension components also)

The idea of a soft flex chassis has been thought of some time ago, back in the late 1990's Yokomo released the YR4 M2J variant which for the old racers amongst us will remember had a very slim top deck with a spring shock absorber! I ran many Yokomo YR4 variants during this period and this one was quite a change from the normal thinking at the time. I had a one-way front diff fitted to mine and the chassis was so soft the inside front wheel would tramp massively under power!

Losi had very stiff cars with both the Street Weapon and XXXS and were successful too.

I guess what I am saying is that what's old is new again to a point but I still believe the reason for the current move to quite flexible cars (Schumacher Mi5 for example) is because the spring and shock absorber technology we need for the current level of performance is not readily available miniaturised!

Cheers
Wazza22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2014, 03:11 PM   #34
Tech Regular
 
theclutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 292
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

I'm all confused... In full scale racing, you want the chassis as stiff as possible with zero flex (which is unachievable). You want the shocks at all four corners to be responsible for the hardness or softness of the suspension. In TC racing, it seems that chassis stiffness or softness comes to play. I'm almost thinking that it's easier to loosen up the chassis than it is to change shock oil/spring/piston combination as to why this comes to play!
__________________
XRAY XB2 2018, XRAY XB4 2017, Durango DEST210R, XRAY XB4 2014, Vaterra Slick Rock, Durango DEX210, SpeedMerchant REV4, HB TCX, Traxxas EMaxx, HPI RS4 Pro, Tamiya TA02, Yokomo YZ10, Associated RC10 Team Car, Bolink Eliminator 10, Kyosho Optima, Tamiya HotShot, Tamiya Grasshopper
theclutch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2014, 04:35 PM   #35
Tech Champion
 
RedBullFiXX's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Intergalactic Planetary
Posts: 6,542
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Cool

Perhaps flex functions as a wider tuning aid window, which has something to do with the fact that we are not seated in our toy cars, thus have no direct connection, or feel ?
__________________
--> 12th scale Information Source <--

"Men do not quit playing because they grow old; they grow old because they quit playing."
― Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
RedBullFiXX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2014, 04:38 PM   #36
Tech Fanatic
 
daleburr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wazza22 View Post

I guess what I am saying is that what's old is new again to a point but I still believe the reason for the current move to quite flexible cars (Schumacher Mi5 for example) is because the spring and shock absorber technology we need for the current level of performance is not readily available miniaturised!

Cheers
I think that sums it up. We're doing 60mph with crude tyres and simple dampers, with tiny cars weighing just over 1kg. And we have to cope with curbs and bumps that would cause issues for a full scale car!

Oh, and all that while observing it from a distance rather than being strapped into the car and feeling what's going on.

So we need a little help, and thats where the chassis flex comes in. It widens the setup window, makes the cars easier to drive, and allows for a fairly stiff shock setup to control the roll and pitch, while still having compliance for bumps.
__________________
Team Xray
RC-Timing Software - http://www.rc-timing.com
Mercedes AMG F1 - http://www.mercedes-amg-f1.com/
daleburr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2014, 07:00 PM   #37
Tech Champion
 
CraigM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 7,009
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

I'm not sure if flex gives more grip but it certainly gives more compliance. In the low grip I race in it's difficult to put down mod power with a super stiff chassis. It can be possible to tune the suspension so the car is driveable on power but that usually compromises the car elsewhere on the track, so a chassis with a reasonable amount flex is best. I've found the same thing with the stiffness of the suspension arms, particularly in the colder months.
__________________
www.facebook.com/mcpheerc
CraigM is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



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 01:07 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net