Like Tree758Likes

Mugen MTC1

    Hide Wikipost
Old 03-13-2018, 09:34 AM   -   Wikipost
R/C Tech ForumsThread Wiki: Mugen MTC1
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been a member for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: liljohn1064
Mugen MTC1 Wiki:

MTC1 Manual on the Mugen Web Site.

Correction for the manual




The max/min tooth count of the spur and pinion combined.

64p = 127 to 164 total teeth


48p = 95 to 120 total teeth


People who have spare spur gears left over from other cars which they wish to use but can only utilize 2 of the 4 mounting holes, here's neat trick from MKAH to drill 2 more holes precisely in the spur gear:

1.Dismantle the Spur Holder and mount XRAY Spur with two screws.

2.If you have take a 3mm Top Setting Screw

3.Get the Top Screw in the first free thread to the Spur Holder from the other side until it touches the Spur a litle bit.
Make the same with the second free Thread.


4.Dismantle Top set Srew an the two screws witch holds the Spur on the Holder.
Now you see two marks absolutely central.


5. Take an 3mm Driller an Drill the holes at the marked places

6.Mount the Spur with the two old and two new holes on the Spur.


Spur Gears known to fit the gear holder with the correct hole pattern

1. Axon
2. Panaracer


Upper front arm hinge pin set screw tip (or any of the kit set screws):

When installing the set screw run the set screw in until you can see it come into the hinge pin gap. Back the screw out and make sure there is no flashing in the way and then the screw. Now slide the pin in and you should hit the pin and come to a dead stop. It will be a solid feel and not sloppy like it will not tighten which is caused by any loose plastic.

Hara's Setup


Robert Pietsch's Latest Carpet Setup

Print Wikipost

Old 07-27-2017, 02:08 PM
  #301  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (13)
 
CristianTabush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,161
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

I have done it numerous times. I often have 2 cars to try this with. The results are pretty interesting. What I can say is a stiff car with soft springs tends to stay flatter and will not typically generate as much bite as a softer car with stiffer springs. The stiffer car with softer springs is more at home in high bite conditions such as black carpet. On the other hand, to a point the softer car with harder springs is going to be more responsive and is typically better on low to medium bite.

Additionally as with anything, there are ways of making things work in opposite configurations, but often the set up window is much narrower and the cars can be hit or miss. There is also such a thing as too soft and too hard, but these are usually a few standard deviations from the "bell curve" of good tuning.

I leave with saying this. There is no real clear cut way of achieving better or best results with any one type of set up. There are probably infinite possibilities of making a car faster to get around the track and ultimately what matters most is talent, followed by practice, then tires, and then the rest.
tbrymer, snuvet75 and glennhl like this.
CristianTabush is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 03:06 PM
  #302  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: My house.
Posts: 3,567
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Stop triggering me.

Stiff springs with a soft chassis isolates one wheel bump from the other wheels while retaining ride stiffness and suspension frequency, like not using roll bars because that's in reality what you are doing by twisting the suspension mounts in relation to ground (impairing suspension movement because the chassis is taking some part of the force,only when the chassis won't flex any more is from that point the springs start to take part of the load). A stiff chassis with softer springs won't have the same ride stiffness let alone suspension frequency. Incomparable.


What you guys are/should be after is at which suspension frequency the tires work the best (or range) and how much roll bar is needed at that point? Where do the roll centres wander? What's a suitable damping ratio? How much travel is needed?

This is "easily" attained with some math and tire diagnostic. Flex of heavy parts like motor and battery are cool because you are messing with inertias, I don't put them in the same bag as chassis flex.

Race rubber likes suspension frequencies of 2Hz, more if aero dependent. Then you take care of keeping the rubber on the road when going through surface irregularities while at the same time keeping wheel alignment and travel good. The MTC1 doesn't seem to be bad in that regard as the results show.

Last edited by 30Tooth; 07-27-2017 at 03:39 PM.
30Tooth is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 04:03 PM
  #303  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (4)
 
thisguy2849's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Orlando, Fl
Posts: 844
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

So who remembers running foam tire tc at the birds? You made those cars stiff as a brick lol
Marcos.J likes this.
thisguy2849 is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 05:01 PM
  #304  
Tech Master
iTrader: (16)
 
snuvet75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,590
Trader Rating: 16 (94%+)
Default

Originally Posted by CristianTabush View Post
However, in the hierarchy of things I deem important, closely followed in third place is flex characteristics. Material type of the chassis, shape, flex points, arm flex and material type, shock tower thickness, top deck type and shape all play into the flex characteristic of the car and often can make a much bigger difference than tire alignment, droop settings, link length and other adjustments many of us often fiddle with tremendously.
You make some compelling points Cristian. But how would you suggest we change around flex settings when we don't have any numeric values or any sort of graph? I mean I get that all the components in the car affect flex characteristics but we don't know how much flex we need to add/remove and we don't know where exactly we need to change the flex. To pinpoint,
1. Arm flex- for one, I'm not going to buy all different types of plastic just to play with the flex. Not really realistic. And usually there are only 1-2 different hardness only. On top of that, how do I decide what to change when? And I thought arm stiffness changes the responsiveness of the car but not necessarily the "flex on the chassis" per se. Lastly when I tried hard arms, the car may have been a bit more responsive but it didn't make a big difference. Maybe I'm not good enough
2. Shock tower thickness- It's usually given and you can't change it.
3. Top deck type and shape: its thickness may be changed but not the shape. The shape is also given.

What I'm trying to get at is the options of changing flex characteristics are pretty limited for RC racers. And changing other settings such as droops, casters, cambers, toes, etc is, in most of the times, far easier to achieve desired effects. So some including myself thought of having stiff chassis with softer set up. That way, we eliminate the UNKNOWN and play with what we do know. I'm not disagreeing with you on the fact that flex IS important but am disagreeing with you on the hierarchy of importance on setting up the car as the flex options are pretty limited. IMHO, the flex should not put in the hierarchy but it should be something that you base the setting on.

Originally Posted by glennhl View Post
Thanks for the info. I am a retired Professional Engineer that worked Aerospace for 40 years but never worked on cars other than my personal cars. I understand the problems with scaling, we had the same issues trying to scale items at work. You can scale 2 to 1 without a lot of issues, but 10 to 1 would be a disaster. Thank you for trying to explain the benefits of torsional flexing. However, I would love to have someone try some back to back testing of allowing a car to flex versus a stiffer one with softer springs. And I also agree with your priority rating of important things in tuning. Tires are number 1 by far followed by the shock package. I dare to say this holds true for full size race cars. One the guys I race with is also an engineer and is an Associated team driver, we've talked of doing some back to back testing.

Thanks,
Glenn
I'm planning to do the same next time I'm on the track.
snuvet75 is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 05:43 PM
  #305  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,655
Trader Rating: 11 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by thisguy2849 View Post
I'm thinking that sitting 3rd behind 2 guys that won the last 7 ETS championships is saying a lot for the car when the driver is a nitro guy. Can't wait till this car is available.
It's definitely not a negative sign. But it is only practice, and Robert does know this track well (plus had a base setup unlike many others) - so don't count the chickens just yet.
cplus is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 07:56 PM
  #306  
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 20
Default More info

Keep the discussion going. Information center.. I'm enjoy this..
black juice is offline  
Old 07-27-2017, 08:02 PM
  #307  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (13)
 
CristianTabush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,161
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by snuvet75 View Post
You make some compelling points Cristian. But how would you suggest we change around flex settings when we don't have any numeric values or any sort of graph? I mean I get that all the components in the car affect flex characteristics but we don't know how much flex we need to add/remove and we don't know where exactly we need to change the flex. To pinpoint,
1. Arm flex- for one, I'm not going to buy all different types of plastic just to play with the flex. Not really realistic. And usually there are only 1-2 different hardness only. On top of that, how do I decide what to change when? And I thought arm stiffness changes the responsiveness of the car but not necessarily the "flex on the chassis" per se. Lastly when I tried hard arms, the car may have been a bit more responsive but it didn't make a big difference. Maybe I'm not good enough
2. Shock tower thickness- It's usually given and you can't change it.
3. Top deck type and shape: its thickness may be changed but not the shape. The shape is also given.

What I'm trying to get at is the options of changing flex characteristics are pretty limited for RC racers. And changing other settings such as droops, casters, cambers, toes, etc is, in most of the times, far easier to achieve desired effects. So some including myself thought of having stiff chassis with softer set up. That way, we eliminate the UNKNOWN and play with what we do know. I'm not disagreeing with you on the fact that flex IS important but am disagreeing with you on the hierarchy of importance on setting up the car as the flex options are pretty limited. IMHO, the flex should not put in the hierarchy but it should be something that you base the setting on.



I'm planning to do the same next time I'm on the track.
You are right, a lot of these changes are not accessible to the average racer, however adjusting the number of screws is and it is a very simple thing to do. Additionally, as you stated, many manufacturers offer different thickness top decks and different chassis material types that allow to play with these adjustments. What I am trying to get to is that to neglect the effects that these changes can provide, is essentially turning your back on a very important and fundamental element of chassis tuning that often has a massive change in the behavior of the chassis. Simply saying let's make it stiff or soft and then adjust the shocks is not enough to tune a car for a given surface. I think I can speak freely and say this is is not an approach any established professional level racer will endorse either.

Like 30 tooth said, the chassis is an integral part of the frequency damping of your car. As such, I consider it to be part of the tuning program. Of course everyone should develop a setting that they are comfortable as a starting point and tune from there, but it is safe to assume that this is the case with any other setting

As for graphs or diagrams provided, I don't think it needs to go that far to get a basic understanding of how flex will affect a car. It is really easy to make observations and learn a lot by simply playing around with screw locations and jotting down some notes of what that effect can bring to the behavior of your particular chassis. Going further, often you can replace cs or button head screws with set screws as well to change flex without affecting alignment on parts of the car. Those are just a couple of examples.

As for the hierarchy, to each his own. If you are set in your ways and not open minded, it will be hard to convince you otherwise. Disagreement is ok in my book. I will however implore you to explore this avenue because there is far more to discover here than what most would even think about. In the end, as I stated before, all that matters is IF YOU are going faster and I do believe that if you learn to tune with flex you will. With that, for now, I stand by my statement. I am a firm believer in chassis flex tuning (not making the chassis flex more, but rather altering the flex points has a huge impact on car set up. For example, I still believe that changing from a soft 2.25 standard layout chassis to a 2.0 quasi has a bigger effect in my book than say changing the rear droop of the car within "the usable tuning window." The difference may not be as large when removing 4 top deck screws vs some other adjustment, but you can argue that it is far easier to remove 4 screws than adjust droop or camber, given that the condition is that you are using gauges of some sort to make precise adjustments. Additionally with many of the modern TC's available out there, multiple motor mount positions are available to use and these are tremendously quick and effective chassis adjustments that alter the chassis flex characteristic.

On the A Arm Flex. Typically it's very simple. If it is cold or low bite, go with a softer material. If it is hot or high bite, go with a harder material. This can make a huge difference and make your car go from pushing to over steering. This is a setting that is limited to manufacturers that offer the options, but in competitive situations, every little bit can help. When you are somewhere in the middle, it can be a coin flip and it probably won't make much of a difference. You just have to identify when that is. If you are a driver that is hunting for tenths, it will make a difference. If you are a racer that is a second off the pace, probably not.

Shock towers, if your car has 4 screws, try using just 2 with some set screws in the other location. This is often a subtle adjustment that induces a slight bit more bulkhead flex which in turn typically reduces grip at that end of the car from the middle out of the corner. I sometimes do it when the car is too locked in on the rear and I need it to rotate more. Similar to the effect of running less motor mount screws in the middle spots on a car like the XRAY. This is a subtle effect, but sometimes, that's what you are looking for.

Top deck. There are far more options now. You can often cut these, like the AE guys do. Mugen offers 2 types. Awesomatix and serpent offer Vertical ones. The gizmo and schumacher allow to use posts across to stiffen the car drastically. Avid sells adjustable ones for the XRAY, as well as different thicknesses. People raise their top decks and omit the center post, etc, man the combinations are pretty diverse and readily available these days. And swapping them or adjusting them is again, super easy and quick.

I guess I am done hijacking for now. We should probably get back to the Mugen. It looks like it's doing great in the hands of Pietsch. Super exciting if you ask me. If I wasn't involved in the Gizmo Project, it would probably be a car on my short list.
CristianTabush is offline  
Old 07-28-2017, 06:24 AM
  #308  
Tech Elite
 
Skiddins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Windsor, UK
Posts: 4,906
Default

Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
Race rubber likes suspension frequencies of 2Hz, more if aero dependent. Then you take care of keeping the rubber on the road when going through surface irregularities while at the same time keeping wheel alignment and travel good. The MTC1 doesn't seem to be bad in that regard as the results show.
I assume that's full size suspension frequencies?

Watch some slo-mo of an RC car, particularly on an asphalt track and you'll see the suspension doing a lot more work than you think.

I have to say, every few years someone who works on full size cars comes along and tells us that we're doing everything wrong.
The only thing that varies is how long before they stop posting and 'walk away with their tail between their legs'

Had a race engineer on the Xray forum a few years ago telling us how a 1.6mm roll bar would do nothing and that they needed to be 3mm and;
In my opinion they don't currently work due to some short comings in the specification of materials and/or deisgn
After everyone pointing out he should try the car without etc to prove our point, he never commented on the subject again.

Please build your super stiff car and prove us all wrong.
Marcos.J, Bar and DirkW like this.
Skiddins is offline  
Old 07-28-2017, 06:26 AM
  #309  
Tech Adept
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 110
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

Lots of good information on this page...
CaptSlow is offline  
Old 07-28-2017, 06:48 AM
  #310  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,447
Default

Nice to see this thread get a lot healthier. Now where's my MTC1!
DavidNERODease is offline  
Old 07-28-2017, 07:05 AM
  #311  
Tech Elite
 
niznai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,965
Default

Change rubber tires to foams and you won't need flex anymore.

Flex is a compromise due to scale. No spring we could make for our cars could span the range that would allow the car to roll about in corners to generate grip whilst at the same time keeping the car off the ground. Our suspension is mainly keeping the car off the ground whilst flex does the work in the corners (not entirely, but close).

Our cars are also overdamped most of the time, so the spring/shock combo would almost never have enough time to react. The shocks work most of the time in pack regime hence the often discussed importance of pack.

And this is all because rubber tires have nowhere near the grip potential of foam for the loading our cars can put on them and the power we are trying to put on the ground.
niznai is offline  
Old 07-28-2017, 07:21 AM
  #312  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: My house.
Posts: 3,567
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Skiddins View Post
I assume that's full size suspension frequencies?

Watch some slo-mo of an RC car, particularly on an asphalt track and you'll see the suspension doing a lot more work than you think.

I have to say, every few years someone who works on full size cars comes along and tells us that we're doing everything wrong.
The only thing that varies is how long before they stop posting and 'walk away with their tail between their legs'

Had a race engineer on the Xray forum a few years ago telling us how a 1.6mm roll bar would do nothing and that they needed to be 3mm and;


After everyone pointing out he should try the car without etc to prove our point, he never commented on the subject again.

Please build your super stiff car and prove us all wrong.
Yes they derive from full scale but my findings corroborate that it also applies to TC tires. I have plenty of material, watched videos and even have a telemetry unit to give me shock travel and G forces during runs, how cool is that? I have three TC cars to test flex, geometries and other parameters, four 1/8th buggies to test, countless days at the track even more days and nights at the computer running numbers and reading stuff way above my comprehension. I did my own data pooling and for the greater good I'm sharing this all. Did you tried a stiff chassis and tire parameters within range?

Seems directed at me, sorry if it isn't. I have no vendetta against manufacturers or individuals, just sharing my findings and throwing food for thought. My theories can stand by themselves, I don't need to attack any beliefs. As they say, free advice is worth how much you pay for it right?

3mm roll bars wouldn't fix those underground roll centres for a start, but would work wonders keeping wheel alignment at chosen numbers by limiting suspension movement. Doesn't seem something an engineer would advise because advising an increase in roll stiffness without any other change sounds some random guy who bought stiffer roll bars for his [insert econo box] from a flashy Asian brand. Not that I'm an engineer but know lots of them.
30Tooth is offline  
Old 07-28-2017, 07:36 AM
  #313  
Bar
Tech Addict
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 579
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by niznai View Post
Change rubber tires to foams and you won't need flex anymore.

Flex is a compromise due to scale. No spring we could make for our cars could span the range that would allow the car to roll about in corners to generate grip whilst at the same time keeping the car off the ground. Our suspension is mainly keeping the car off the ground whilst flex does the work in the corners (not entirely, but close).

Our cars are also overdamped most of the time, so the spring/shock combo would almost never have enough time to react. The shocks work most of the time in pack regime hence the often discussed importance of pack.

And this is all because rubber tires have nowhere near the grip potential of foam for the loading our cars can put on them and the power we are trying to put on the ground.
Yes but why would we want to go back in time to Foam racing, working well for 1/12th LMP who seem to refuse to move into the present. The best part of touring car racing is the control tyre format, no gluing or truing, leaving you to concentrate on setting up the car up.
jimjav likes this.
Bar is offline  
Old 07-28-2017, 07:39 AM
  #314  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,447
Default

I believe in flex tuning but I'm still listening and appreciate the info 30Tooth. I'm trying to step up my game so I'm not dismissing any potential performance gains even if I scoff at the idea at first.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Old 07-28-2017, 07:40 AM
  #315  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,447
Default

... The TA07 is probably the ultimate flex test bed BTW - endless options to tune flex on this chassis.
DavidNERODease is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.