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 09-14-2017, 08:01 AM
  #721  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,445
Default

I think the bumper will have to be ruled illegal by all sanctioning bodies because reasons and stuff - too bad because it's super cool
DavidNERODease is offline  
Old 09-14-2017, 10:26 AM
  #722  
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: spain
Posts: 60
Default

Red RC ? RC Car News Ľ RC Prostyle MTC1 carbon battery mount & fan mounts
txili is offline  
Old 09-14-2017, 01:49 PM
  #723  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (9)
 
bighurt98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Anderson, SC
Posts: 521
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default Bumper?

Originally Posted by gigaplex View Post
I think it's legal under EFRA rules too, I couldn't find anything regarding aerodynamics in their rulesets.
If you look at 1/8 scale at worlds as we speak, several bumper are regular and flat underneath and several have curved with opens and flow channels. Also on the WTX, It looks like it has a rear airflow "bumper" added to chassis. like a diffuser, but probably more for flow of air.

Not sure what will be decided, but companies are doing more with each new version of their car. And each year, each sanctioning body will continually have to evaluate these new innovations and determine if they are legal or not.

At some point, a decision will be made, but for the slower drivers, the bumper won't help much. Just keep working on those driving skills. That is where your speed will come from IMAO!
bighurt98 is offline  
Old 09-14-2017, 02:27 PM
  #724  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,445
Default

Originally Posted by lbckevin View Post
I had the opportunity to run my Mugen last night at Cal Raceway an asphalt track. I had a fun night shaking down the car. I had my friend with me with a Mugen as well. Lots of guys stopping by the pit to check out the car. Lots of questions and ohhhhh's and awwww"s. The car was a little loose in rear at first. The track is sprayed with soda and it seemed it did not get a chance to heat up and get sticky right away. The traction got better as guys ran on the track. When the grip came up, the car worked great. I am running a box stock 17.5 setup for asphalt. I will try a couple of things this weekend at the Tamiya USA track for the next race. I might try 5k in the rear diff and/or go to 3.5 rear toe for Tamiya as it is not sprayed with anything. The steering was good and handling was great. The rear diff did not leak a drop. I look forward to running it again.
I'm wondering if the pitch stiffener is having too significant of an effect on the car - it's much stiffer by default than what the other manufactures are using.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Old 09-14-2017, 02:30 PM
  #725  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: My house.
Posts: 3,566
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by WagwanBumba View Post
This is interesting - could argue what the chassis is. Does the front bumper constitute part of the chassis? Or would we be actually talking about the carbon part.

Does the same IFMAR rule apply to 1/8th on-road? Because the front bumpers there have aero in them and have done at least in the last gen
Originally Posted by daveaustin5 View Post
The BRCA in the UK have already asked racers to put tape over the bumper as it could contravene a rule about aerodynamic aids under the body.

I'd imagine Mugen will make a new bumper for countries where it's against the rules.
Originally Posted by dan_vector View Post
It does seem strange that Mugen have overlooked the bumper aero issue! It seems everywhere bar ROAR it is illegal.... The BRCA have made a very good and sensible call in allowing the holes to be simply taped up for now until a longer term solution is found.

Iím not far off pulling the trigger on the MTC1 as Iím intrigued how this compares to a traditional design - particularly that front end.
Originally Posted by cplus View Post
Been having this chat in Aussie in various locations - interested to hear what this thread thinks

IFMAR RULE 5.0.5: The chassis must not be shaped to gain an aerodynamic advantage. In principle, the underside of the chassis must be flat and parallel to the ground along the entire length of the body shell. Aerodynamic shaped parts (splitters/diffusers/tunnels/etc.) may not be fitted to the chassis.
That bumper isn't shaped for an aerodynamic advantage. If the description was about strength/lightweight no one would care about it.
30Tooth is offline  
Old 09-14-2017, 02:42 PM
  #726  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,655
Trader Rating: 11 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
That bumper isn't shaped for an aerodynamic advantage. If the description was about strength/lightweight no one would care about it.
And that's why the Aussie regulation committee have decided to allow it. We don't believe it's actually going to offer any advantage of note.

Mugen saying it is for aero is a bit of a pain though!
G-rem likes this.
cplus is offline  
Old 09-14-2017, 04:39 PM
  #727  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: My house.
Posts: 3,566
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by cplus View Post
And that's why the Aussie regulation committee have decided to allow it. We don't believe it's actually going to offer any advantage of note.

Mugen saying it is for aero is a bit of a pain though!
Good call by the Aussie committee and agreed with the claim bit,hope Mugen realizes it's a mistake.
30Tooth is offline  
Old 09-14-2017, 08:34 PM
  #728  
R/C Tech Elite Member
iTrader: (315)
 
nexxus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 8,813
Trader Rating: 315 (100%+)
Default

While I respect that AARCMCC have made the call and allow it, I still think it's an aero aid, and almost every bit of company information on the car is pushing it as an "Aerodynamic front bumper" it's obviously the intent rather than an oversight. That said, the calls been made, so we will race in accordance with that.
nexxus is offline  
Old 09-14-2017, 09:34 PM
  #729  
Tech Elite
 
niznai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,965
Default

Yeah, I would put that bit of company beat up in the same category as the claims made by Xray that everything is "optimised" (yet again) every year. Even when they're actually reverting back to something that was proven to work better than last year's "optimisation" (which I see as a de facto admission of stuff up).

The point made by AARCMCC was that the regulation is not designed to create difficulties in using mainstream market products but prevent the use of home brewed (and unproven and/or potentially dangerous) add-ons.

I think the aero effect of the Mugen bumper is insignificant at best (I actually suspect it will have detrimental effects at certain speeds at least), and I think the AARCMCC decision in the spirit rather than the letter of the law is in line with a better philosophy (try to make it easy for people to join and stay in the sport rather than difficult).

Imagine we would want to enforce the law to the letter. That would mean no less than bench testing each and every chassis on the market today and disqualifying any chassis that might have some advantage even if by some fluke (say the unused battery holder or some other random holes in the bottom chassis turn out to be exactly in some low pressure spots). Would you say such an approach makes any sense at all?

In the interest of disclosure, I will have a Mugen shortly at the track and we'll be able to see what's what and test if you like.

Aside from that, the 1/8e cars (see April's new car, I think a WRC) have diffusers built into the trailing edge of the bumper. I bought one such bumper as well, and will see if it makes any difference, but don't hold your breath.

And, by the way that is not unique to that car. A lot of manufacturers have introduced that kind of thing (Serpent, Capricorn, etc). Whether or not it makes any difference, who knows? I think it is just a fad, and no manufacturer would like to be seen as falling behind the others, right? Especially when something sounds plausible.

In that context, I think the MTC1 design is the result of Pietsch's/Mugen's background in 1/8 bias rather than serious flow bench testing.
niznai is offline  
Old 09-14-2017, 09:43 PM
  #730  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (16)
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 340
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Default

Just mounted a body on my mugen. Its not a areo aide. The bottom of the bumper is above the body. A aero aid needs to stick out past the body to even work correctly to truly grap air. If u want that bumper to be a scoop. You need jack the front ur body up which means ur body wont even work correctly for racing. In a fluid dyamtic view not a lot of air being push up into body in that area to get into the "aero bumper" vents.
kingfish83 is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 02:36 AM
  #731  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 887
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by kingfish83 View Post
Just mounted a body on my mugen. Its not a areo aide. The bottom of the bumper is above the body. A aero aid needs to stick out past the body to even work correctly to truly grap air. If u want that bumper to be a scoop. You need jack the front ur body up which means ur body wont even work correctly for racing. In a fluid dyamtic view not a lot of air being push up into body in that area to get into the "aero bumper" vents.
Does your body not scrape the ground if you've mounted it down that low??
WagwanBumba is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 06:20 AM
  #732  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (16)
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 340
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Default

No its mounted normal. The lowest bottom part of the so-called aero bumper part is 2mm higher the bottom of the chassis. Basical there's a wall in front of the bumper which defeats the logic/purpose of how a aero aid works.

Think most people that are complaining probably don't have a mtc 1 or stuck on the marketing use of the word aero. Do some true investing instead of just talking about something without the true understanding of the issue.

Let's move away this subject finally.




Last edited by kingfish83; 09-15-2017 at 07:20 AM.
kingfish83 is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 07:23 AM
  #733  
Tech Master
 
mac853's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dirty place
Posts: 1,919
Default

Why MTC1 has not released yet alu chassis?
Don't tell me this project would be ended badly as Durango DETC410?
mac853 is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 08:16 AM
  #734  
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chatham Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,445
Default

Originally Posted by mac853 View Post
Why MTC1 has not released yet alu chassis?
Don't tell me this project would be ended badly as Durango DETC410?
It's too bad about the Durango, but the Mugen is a much more serious entry into the TC scene. After all the crazy talk in this thread, it's pretty well understood now that the MTC1 is fug'n awesome. I pick up mine today
Antimullet and Ggrant like this.
DavidNERODease is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:26 AM
  #735  
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 607
Default

Lucky you. Mines sitting about a hundred miles away and due to "Irma", don't know when it will be delivered. Even though my zip code is not an affected area.

Dave
dave 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.