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 08-02-2017, 11:38 AM
  #391  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,445
Default

Originally Posted by thisguy2849 View Post
The stock top deck gives more chassis flex with the pivot points
I mean use the presumed stiffer lower aluminum plate but keep the stock top deck. Overall chassis stiffness should be higher vs using both stock plates.

Last edited by DavidNERODease; 08-02-2017 at 02:38 PM.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 11:45 AM
  #392  
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 9
Default

I'd really like to see a race ready weight for one of these cars. They don't LOOK light. It sounds like there's a lot of things that are supported by bearings, which could potentially add extra weight (but could still be beneficial), as well as the beefy front end. I like the looks of this car, but can it get anywhere near the weight limit for the spec racers who don't roll around 50g over like some of the modified drivers like to?
JeanGirard is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 12:21 PM
  #393  
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 7
Default

I'm sure they forgot to think about weight when designing this car......

That's sarcasm by the way.
30Tooth and DavidNERODease like this.
MReggio13 is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 12:27 PM
  #394  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (4)
 
thisguy2849's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Orlando, Fl
Posts: 844
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by JeanGirard View Post
I'd really like to see a race ready weight for one of these cars. They don't LOOK light. It sounds like there's a lot of things that are supported by bearings, which could potentially add extra weight (but could still be beneficial), as well as the beefy front end. I like the looks of this car, but can it get anywhere near the weight limit for the spec racers who don't roll around 50g over like some of the modified drivers like to?
I'm guess you will be surprised by the weight. Being that hard coat aluminum isn't much heavier than molded plastic

Last edited by thisguy2849; 08-02-2017 at 12:51 PM.
thisguy2849 is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 12:35 PM
  #395  
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 9
Default

Originally Posted by MReggio13 View Post
I'm sure they forgot to think about weight when designing this car......

That's sarcasm by the way.
In no way was I implying that it wasn't considered. There are other cars on the market that I watch people struggle to get down to the 1350g limit without some aftermarket parts like titanium and aluminum screws, titanium ball studs, titanium turnbuckles, etc.

All I'm saying is I hope this car doesn't have that issue.
JeanGirard is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 02:39 PM
  #396  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: My house.
Posts: 3,566
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

This car has aluminium ball studs and turnbuckles where others have steel, massive gain there and no need to run lightweight nothing, only a sub 6500mah battery as there's nothing to gain with a heavier battery.
30Tooth is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 02:52 PM
  #397  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,445
Default

Getting down to 1350g with perfect balance and a big battery does require a light car. Obviously the electrics have a big effect - so many options these days especially with the battery. I like a big heavy battery but use pretty light electrics so I'll probably end up adding a lot on the left side to balance the car perfectly and end up over weight.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 02:58 PM
  #398  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,445
Default

Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
This car has aluminium ball studs and turnbuckles where others have steel, massive gain there and no need to run lightweight nothing, only a sub 6500mah battery as there's nothing to gain with a heavier battery.
I'm currently using 7200's - measurably lowers the CG.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 03:07 PM
  #399  
Tech Master
iTrader: (11)
 
b20btec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sugar Land
Posts: 1,179
Trader Rating: 11 (100%+)
Default

Interested to see how this car performs in blinky racing. I'm a little apprehensive about the 34T pulleys. Some will know what I'm talking about, another brand was suffering with 34T and since switched back to 40T. I'm usually quick to dive into getting a new car but i'm going wait for more feedback, mainly in the US market.
tbrymer likes this.
b20btec is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 04:32 PM
  #400  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: My house.
Posts: 3,566
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by DavidNERODease View Post
I'm currently using 7200's - measurably lowers the CG.
Would you kindly define measurably please. CG sits around the middle of the car, a heavier battery wouldn't lower CG, therefore LCG packs have lower height. The motor is also more centred so take into account you can't run a heavy battery (Pietsch was running a 6.4LCG).

About the pulleys, will refrain further comments as less teeth drag and lower CG and inertia were the most important criteria.
30Tooth is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 04:38 PM
  #401  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (4)
 
thisguy2849's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Orlando, Fl
Posts: 844
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
This car has aluminium ball studs and turnbuckles where others have steel, massive gain there and no need to run lightweight nothing, only a sub 6500mah battery as there's nothing to gain with a heavier battery.
In spec racing higher my packs are very advantageous actually.
thisguy2849 is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 04:57 PM
  #402  
Tech Master
iTrader: (10)
 
tbrymer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,432
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

Shop All - On Road Parts - MTC-1 - Page 1 - Mugen Seiki Racing
DavidNERODease and Antimullet like this.
tbrymer is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 04:58 PM
  #403  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: My house.
Posts: 3,566
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by thisguy2849 View Post
In spec racing higher my packs are very advantageous actually.
Only if you can run more mah instead of ballast. For example, my car is running a 6200mAh battery and zero ballast, if I used more lightweight parts I could run more mAh but I wouldn't use a heavier battery and add weight to balance side to side.
30Tooth is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 05:04 PM
  #404  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,445
Default

Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
Would you kindly define measurably please. CG sits around the middle of the car, a heavier battery wouldn't lower CG, therefore LCG packs have lower height. The motor is also more centred so take into account you can't run a heavy battery (Pietsch was running a 6.4LCG).
If the CG of the battery pack is lower than total CG of the car then it lowers the overall CG if the battery increases in weight and it's CG still remains lower than the overall CG. A lot of people underestimate the effect of the body on the overall CG and therefore it's higher than many racers think. It's particularly bad on VTA and USGT cars where the finished bodies are well over 100g and the CG of the body is way above the overall CG. It's such a drastic effect that even the paint and stickers affect it. I have actually done the CG calculations on WGT chassis several years ago when I had traction rolling issues. To define measurable - I was able to the lower the overall CG by 4.13mm (height from grade went from 29.77mm to 25.64mm) mostly by changing the body/paint/stickers/body trimming. Plus a little with added weight (7g of lead on the chassis lowered the overall CG of the WGT car by 0.26mm). Of course the effect of the body is less in TC especially if you are using a lightweight shell. Back to the heavier battery pack in a TC - I'm fairly confident that CG of the battery pack is quite a bit lower the overall CG of the whole car - mostly due to the effect of the body, but also the motor CG which is much higher. And there is still a lot parts with CG's above the CG of the battery: the body posts, shocks, shock towers, diffs, wheel/rims, axles etc. It's very deceptive to look at until you really look at.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Old 08-02-2017, 05:14 PM
  #405  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (2)
 
gigaplex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Posts: 3,281
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
About the pulleys, will refrain further comments as less teeth drag and lower CG and inertia were the most important criteria.
Smaller pulleys means the belt has to have a tighter bend. The flexing of the belt is where most of the energy is lost.
gigaplex 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.