R/C Tech Forums

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

Like Tree27Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-30-2015, 02:10 PM   #1741
Tech Regular
 
Simmi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 305
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stein Tumert View Post
Christian Donath's setup from last ETS (#7 in the 13.5T class)

http://www.petitrc.com/reglages/tami...cin2015062628/


...
The setup is for high-speed tracks.

Not for smaller layout.

Please note
__________________
Tamiya Racing Factory: TRF 419X
Team Yokomo YZ2 CA
Simmi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2015, 02:11 PM   #1742
Tech Regular
 
Simmi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 305
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stein Tumert View Post
Christian Donath's setup from last ETS (#7 in the 13.5T class)

http://www.petitrc.com/reglages/tami...cin2015062628/


...
The setup is for high-speed tracks.

not for smaller layout.

Please note
__________________
Tamiya Racing Factory: TRF 419X
Team Yokomo YZ2 CA
Simmi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2015, 12:00 PM   #1743
Tech Regular
 
daveaustin5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 464
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

What would be a good starting point for FDR for this track?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTDho-mhHr4

I'll be running 13.5 boosted.

Cheers.
daveaustin5 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2015, 04:50 PM   #1744
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: santa monica / manchester
Posts: 1,273
Default

Personally I would start out around the 6.5-7 mark, just ask at the club others will give you a good starting value. Good luck tomorrow and have fun
Qatmix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2015, 10:10 PM   #1745
Tech Regular
 
daveaustin5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 464
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Qatmix View Post
Personally I would start out around the 6.5-7 mark, just ask at the club others will give you a good starting value. Good luck tomorrow and have fun
Thanks.
daveaustin5 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 01:12 PM   #1746
Tech Adept
 
Marcika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Hungary
Posts: 153
Default

Final ratio from Chris set up sheet is 4.5 (73/30). Was ets limited to 5.0?

Other question:
How do you set - based on what situation- size of spur/pinion if final ratio fixed to 4.5? Other words what is the difference (benefit vs disadvantage) having 73/30 vs 105/43 for instance. I understand it is like a bycicle...which is preferred on open track (speed) vs smaller&tight and on which part of the track (corner) has the benefit.

Thanks
Marton


Quote:
Originally Posted by Simmi View Post
The setup is for high-speed tracks.

Not for smaller layout.

Please note
Marcika is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 01:35 PM   #1747
Tech Elite
 
Raman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,299
Trader Rating: 56 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcika View Post
Final ratio from Chris set up sheet is 4.5 (73/30). Was ets limited to 5.0?

Other question:
How do you set - based on what situation- size of spur/pinion if final ratio fixed to 4.5? Other words what is the difference (benefit vs disadvantage) having 73/30 vs 105/43 for instance. I understand it is like a bycicle...which is preferred on open track (speed) vs smaller&tight and on which part of the track (corner) has the benefit.

Thanks
Marton

The smaller pinion will require less torque from the motor.. So it would be favoured in my opinion.

However you also have to keep in mind the motor mount. You have limited amount of sliding room for mesh. Therefore some combos will not work
Raman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 07:19 PM   #1748
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,306
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default 6+ months down, how is your chassis going?

So, bit of a discussion start!

Most of us who have a 419 are 6 or more months down (and it doesn't matter if you're not) and I'm sure you raced, stripped down, replaced parts, loves some bits and got frustrated by others etc a few times by now so what changes would you like to see for the next car - whether a 419X or a 420 (surely not again!)

For me, one of my biggest gripes of the ARB mounting - and there is a fix on the market in a couple of weeks - so I'll save opinion on that one. Although it definitely won't be as nice as the X-ray method appears to be, still will be an improvement.

But, what I would like to see;

- spare arms come in packs of front or rear - not one of each. This annoys me, you rarely break both or for that matter need to replace due to wear at the same time. A pair of front or pair of rear would be so much better. But it's a big tooling change, so unlikely, unless...

- change the mounting for the front ARB to arm. This little ball cup is an oddity being a smaller size and also doesn't thread as deep. It's also not as smooth as a metal ballstud/hex ball. This means a re-tool, so could be a 2 for one! They could also re-work the arm ends slightly to stop the need to chamfer for majority of wheels out there.

- chubs need some minor work. I personally don't have an issue with strength like many people seem to, but they are too sloppy in my opinion. Comparing to other brands on the bench, this is an issue.

- Gear Diff. Too easy to build so they do leak, too hard to build so they don't. I think they either need to reconsider the gasket solution (add an oring) and look at the out drive shim/oring again OR release a video explaining what the team drivers do including what greases they use and where (and be honest when it's not a tamiya product!), what weight/mass/volume of oil is considered "full" and how to prep the cases, gasket and gears.

- shocks. Just kidding. No problems here. The fact they can also be built with 1 or 2 orings using simple factory parts is a bonus.

- belt rub. It's minor, but it happens on the motor mount and the servo mount. It will result in premature belt wear and failure - not just removal of the pretty anodising.

- shock towers. Being picky here. But why on earth do we have 8 odd mounting holes. Consolidate and strengthen. No one (not that I've seen) uses anything other than 2,3,4,5. I'd be happy if that is all we had. The extra ones just mean a extra fail point.

- But, fix this when they release the thicker tower that is floating around.

- steering posts. They need a flat edge or a hex bottom. Once done up tight they are close to impossible to remove without damage. If you don't do them tight enough (so they are an PITA to remove) they will come loose - in your final, when you're leading (no doubt). All well and good for the team guys who would no doubt replace them everytime they get a new chassis or do a rebuild - not so good for us lot.

- turnbuckle ball cups. Give us ones with a hole to access the ballstud! Please!! They appear to be prototyping a new material for these, so maybe it's a chance.

- make the belt tension part a 5 digit number so those of us that want to use it as a lipo stopper can order it easily! The standard ones are an "okay" solution and light weight, but they are a bit of a hack special. TRF cars deserve dedicated parts, not adapted parts bin stuff.

- motor mount. Currently, where the motor sits with the new mount geometry is actually further outward than the 418. This means it is very finicky with motor/pinion choice. Motors such as LRP X20 pretty much don't fit at all without modification. Most motors don't have a shaft long enough to mount pinions "nose out" as normal and when mounting nose in, often you need to modify the shaft by increasing the flat section to get acceptable grub screw hold.

- online presence. This is an odd one. I think since Jilles has been gone, the amount of online interaction has dropped. In the past he has participated here on rctech, produced instruction videos and made his setup sheets freely available for petitrc or simply on Facebook. Marc Rheinard is improving here, but it still could be better. He posts information, but the interaction is largely one way. He doesn't really respond much. Hey, he/they are busy, yes, but they are also paid brand ambassadors and online presence, in particular social media, is king for brand awareness and interaction these days. The load could also be shared amongst the team. Jilles online information was actually a big influence on me jumping onto Tamiya when I got back into RC a short while ago.

For what it is worth, I plan to actually send all my constructive feedback above to tamiya and the team members (I have someone lined up to translate it for me into Japanese) If you want to add to it - excellent - I'll either modify my comments above or add your new ones as appropriate. Just remember best kind of feedback or criticism is that which comes with explanation why and Breyer yet a positive solution or atleast an idea for direction to follow. Simply saying something is crap with no backup isn't helpful.

The response I get (hopefully not lack of) will actually be a deciding factor for me whether or not I continue with the brand past this year.

Cheers.

Clive.
cplus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 08:03 PM   #1749
Tech Elite
 
EDWARD2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 2,004
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Over the past weekend I spoke with a recently signed Tamiya factory driver. I decided to ask him a few questions about the 419 and what he thought about the cars handling.

He said he really likes the car, however, it has too much steering and is too twitchy to drive consistently. He went on by saying that the Yokomo BD7 has a slight understeer which made it easier and consistent to drive. After hearing this I prodded him about why this might be. He went on by saying that it's the materials used in the 419 kits. The aluminum components and suspension arms are too soft. Also the lower chassis is too stiff which is causing handling issues. He's trying to persuade the designers to change this issues. Personally, I thought the suspension arms were pretty darn stiff. I guess not. lol.

Now, he did mention the Yokomo BD7 and X-ray15' (test drove Bruno's car) aluminum and suspension arms are extremely stiff. He also mentioned that both lower decks were softer. I asked him why Tamiya hasn't followed this route. He simply said, it's too expensive.

Yokomo and X-ray run super stiff aluminum and suspension components with a soft chassis.

Tamiya soft aluminum and suspension components with a hard chassis.

Now you know.
__________________
Check out my YouTube channel for 1/12th scale and 1/10th Touring maintenance tips!
YouTube Search https://www.youtube.com/c/EdwardPickering?gvnc=1
                 VBC 12M - D08 - FX
EDWARD2003 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 10:30 PM   #1750
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,306
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

I assume comparing to the graphite versions of the competitors? They both come with plastic standard and the harder arms are options.

I'm changing to the 2mm bottom deck this week. More flex in theory. I wonder how this also compares.

The alloy being soft is a worry!
cplus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 10:32 PM   #1751
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,306
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

Oh, and I assume this factory driver didn't need to borrow someone else's BD7 to know how it drove? Possibly has quite a bit of experience with them??
cplus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 11:20 PM   #1752
Tech Elite
 
EDWARD2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 2,004
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

He's the current 1/10th touring car world champion.
__________________
Check out my YouTube channel for 1/12th scale and 1/10th Touring maintenance tips!
YouTube Search https://www.youtube.com/c/EdwardPickering?gvnc=1
                 VBC 12M - D08 - FX
EDWARD2003 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2015, 12:33 AM   #1753
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,306
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

That'd be who I was thinking of

Your Japanese must be pretty good then as I understand his English is quite rubbish
cplus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2015, 12:39 AM   #1754
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,306
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

Also, if tamiya wanted to do a run of super hard suspension arms and charge double (which would still be less than Xray, and be about on par with Yokomo) I'm sure racers would buy them if there was a handling benefit.

The 419 is significantly cheaper than competitors at the moment - $400 USD is not an uncommon asking price - especially when you factor in the things the others are missing such as DCJs and floating servo mounts. Surely it can't be that much more to up the spec on the crucial items.
cplus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2015, 01:35 AM   #1755
Tech Regular
 
Simmi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 305
Default

Very good idea Cplus

The new 419X must necessarily have new Chubs, which are indestructible by TA05. Also the diff should be revised or the damper. I use the damper from TRF 418 at the moment.
Outdrive should be made of steel in the Diff.

Also no holes in axes and Chubs should be drilled to secure Shaft. The Rear Axles and steering levers wear out too fast to fix the ball head screw.

New ball cups and new ball head screws should come. I use the ball head screws and ball sockets from T4 2014th

Also a decent battery attachment should be there at 419X. I use the Roche ones but which are intended for BD7.

The chassis should a tick be softer. This one has more possibilities.

The screw for the Centre Shaft has to be replaced. Here I am using the 2mm diameter screws from TB06.

Have a race on the weekend again, post a few pictures from the car. Are simply too many things that I have now changed.

So see you soon
__________________
Tamiya Racing Factory: TRF 419X
Team Yokomo YZ2 CA
Simmi 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 02:59 PM.


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