R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-06-2003, 03:01 PM   #1501
Tech Adept
 
paulfitipauldi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: PUERTO RICO
Posts: 213
Default Re: Re: Release

Quote:
Originally posted by herb
That's correct, as we are located near the Serpent HQ's and got our hands on a pretty large number of first kits, we are able to have the S710 as one the first resellers. And ship pre-ordered cars on the 10th. By the way, there are 3 kits left to order...
,, cool,, how many pre-orders you guys have already? , that only left you 3 kits?

I really don't now the conversion from Euro to $$, but 479.00 , looks a little pricy , for a hobby shop that is near by the headquarters of Serpent Co., I live in Puerto Rico in the other side of the world and I only have to pay $389.99 for my kit, that should arrives in the next two weeks..

Ciao!!
paulfitipauldi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 03:47 PM   #1502
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Utrecht (NL)
Posts: 80
Default Re: Re: Re: Release

Quote:
Originally posted by paulfitipauldi
,, cool,, how many pre-orders you guys have already? , that only left you 3 kits?

I really don't now the conversion from Euro to $$, but 479.00 , looks a little pricy , for a hobby shop that is near by the headquarters of Serpent Co., I live in Puerto Rico in the other side of the world and I only have to pay $389.99 for my kit, that should arrives in the next two weeks..

Ciao!!
Reason for this price is the higher reseller- and enduser prices in Europe. And off course the current low value of the USD compared to the Eeuro.
herb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 05:55 PM   #1503
Tech Regular
 
JABRONI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BROKE BACK WYOMING
Posts: 333
Default Not long now !!!

JABRONI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 07:07 PM   #1504
Tech Adept
 
S710_Nut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 229
Default Re: Not long now !!!

Quote:
Originally posted by JABRONI
I hope so, i want it under my tree for Christmas!
S710_Nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 10:11 PM   #1505
Tech Addict
 
CraigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kansas City MO
Posts: 519
Default

So does it accept regular foams or are they still Serpent only style?
CraigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 11:08 PM   #1506
Tech Fanatic
 
Julius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Amsterdam Netherlands
Posts: 977
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by CraigH
So does it accept regular foams or are they still Serpent only style?
If you are referring to the clearance of the rims, that should no longer be an issue. With the steeringblocks used and the new uprights there is ample clearance.

Even offset wheels like the Mugen wheels should be ok as you can easily correct the width change with the pivot balls.
Julius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 11:30 PM   #1507
Tech Adept
 
FAST1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 246
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by CraigH
So does it accept regular foams?
What are "regular foams"?

FAST1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 09:32 AM   #1508
Tech Prophet
 
InitialD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MORDOR
Posts: 19,679
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Julius
If you are referring to the clearance of the rims, that should no longer be an issue. With the steeringblocks used and the new uprights there is ample clearance.
Yes, this is what I noticed when changing to the FC steering blocks (same steering blocks on the 710) on the 705. The FC steering knuckles seem to be tougher too.

Quote:
Originally posted by Julius
Even offset wheels like the Mugen wheels should be ok as you can easily correct the width change with the pivot balls.
Cool. The 705 when used with offset rear rims needed to use the narrower aluminum wheel hex adaptors to keep the trackwidth to 200 mm.
InitialD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 10:17 AM   #1509
Tech Prophet
 
InitialD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MORDOR
Posts: 19,679
Default Lower Internal Ratio Better for Acceleration?

Something that makes interesting reading at the thread at the Electric forum which applies for gas powered cars also. Of particular interest is seaball's post which is in line with what the guys at Serpent are trying to drive at with regards to the low internal ratio of the 710 and the complaints that they have been receiving;

from a physics and theoretical standpoint, the lower ratio should increase overall accelleration based on the fact that the layshaft, in either case, will be rotating less due to the lower internal ratio to produce the same overal vehicle speed.

the importance here is that kinetic energy is a linear function of rotating mass, and a squared function of rotating speed. therefore, the intent with the lower ratio is to minimize the amount of kinetic energy required to accelerate the drivetrain to it's maximum speed.

another benefit of the lower ratio for belt cars comes with the increase in layshaft pulley size that is needed to acheive this lower ratio. this results in a more effecient drivetrain, since the belt won't have to form such a small radius through the wrapping of the layshaft pulley. additionally, the belt can be run even more loosely since it will have more teeth to contact it to prevent what is known as "ratcheting" or skipping of the belt under loads.

realistically, it may be insignificant, because the pulley mass increases due to its larger size, the spur usually needs to increase to get the external ratio high enough to maintain the same FDR.

there are always design compromises that will be made, but i do believe the intent of a low internal ratio is to gain a better spool up time through minimizing the KE required.


I believe on gas cars, it is even more paramount that the drive train rotates less times seeing how many parts rotate.
InitialD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 10:29 AM   #1510
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 277
Send a message via ICQ to lawndoggie Send a message via Yahoo to lawndoggie
Default Re: Lower Internal Ratio Better for Acceleration?

Quote:
Originally posted by InitialD
Something that makes interesting reading at the thread at the Electric forum which applies for gas powered cars also. Of particular interest is seaball's post which is in line with what the guys at Serpent are trying to drive at with regards to the low internal ratio of the 710 and the complaints that they have been receiving;

from a physics and theoretical standpoint, the lower ratio should increase overall accelleration based on the fact that the layshaft, in either case, will be rotating less due to the lower internal ratio to produce the same overal vehicle speed.

the importance here is that kinetic energy is a linear function of rotating mass, and a squared function of rotating speed. therefore, the intent with the lower ratio is to minimize the amount of kinetic energy required to accelerate the drivetrain to it's maximum speed.

another benefit of the lower ratio for belt cars comes with the increase in layshaft pulley size that is needed to acheive this lower ratio. this results in a more effecient drivetrain, since the belt won't have to form such a small radius through the wrapping of the layshaft pulley. additionally, the belt can be run even more loosely since it will have more teeth to contact it to prevent what is known as "ratcheting" or skipping of the belt under loads.

realistically, it may be insignificant, because the pulley mass increases due to its larger size, the spur usually needs to increase to get the external ratio high enough to maintain the same FDR.

there are always design compromises that will be made, but i do believe the intent of a low internal ratio is to gain a better spool up time through minimizing the KE required.


I believe on gas cars, it is even more paramount that the drive train rotates less times seeing how many parts rotate.
Well I don't know about internal ratio, but my 705 with stock ratios accelerate slower than other cars on the track, its VERY smooth I have to say, but it lacks PUNCH at low speed, which I felt on my last outing and thats bad for small track...
Anyway, GREAT time on saturday, managed to run 3 tanks of gas, which is good for me!! Then I broke front shock shaft TWICE!!
That thing is easy to break huh!?
Now at this new track, when running 40 front and 42 rear, the car is sliding at turns... I think I need softer rear tires, and perhaps a little more chamber on the rear...
lawndoggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 10:47 AM   #1511
Tech Prophet
 
InitialD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MORDOR
Posts: 19,679
Default Re: Re: Lower Internal Ratio Better for Acceleration?

Quote:
Originally posted by lawndoggie
Well I don't know about internal ratio, but my 705 with stock ratios accelerate slower than other cars on the track, its VERY smooth I have to say, but it lacks PUNCH at low speed, which I felt on my last outing and thats bad for small track...
Ummm, I think there is a limit to where higher internal drive ratio gives diminishing returns. Many people attribute the sluggish clutch performance due to the lower internal ratio and FDR but it's all about building the Centax clutch right although I would admit that the stock gearing on the 705 is a little too tall for a small track.

I believe the one on the 705 using 15T/50T and with the optional 22T/46T/17T internal pulleys (FDR of 7.12) is about right. I do not have problems competing with the other cars or pulling away from those cars with higher internal drive ratios and higher FDR on smaller tracks. Again, your Centax clutch must be set right.

I think I sent you or wrote some info on how to set the Centax clutch. Basically, set the Centax clutch spring tight. Use smaller end float spacing between the clutch bell and clutch shoe. On the track, loosen the Centax clutch spring in 1/4 turns at a time until you get the best launch or compromise.

Quote:
Originally posted by lawndoggie
Now at this new track, when running 40 front and 42 rear, the car is sliding at turns... I think I need softer rear tires, and perhaps a little more chamber on the rear...
Try to run equal front and rear shores. Perhaps use 40 shore all around or even 42 front and 40 rear if you have too much steering. Stick with -3 or -4 for the rear camber.
InitialD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 09:13 PM   #1512
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 36
Default Re: Re: Lower Internal Ratio Better for Acceleration?

Quote:
Originally posted by lawndoggie
Well I don't know about internal ratio, but my 705 with stock ratios accelerate slower than other cars on the track, its VERY smooth I have to say, but it lacks PUNCH at low speed, which I felt on my last outing and thats bad for small track...
Where did you play last Saturday? I ran my Impulse Pro in PYC last Saturday which accelerated great and the handling was very good. In fact, I have not been there for 2 months. I went to PYC to race with my friend who had a NTC3. The gear ratio at PYC is 15/18 & 44/48 and 42 shore with 61mm dia. at front and 45 shore with 64mm dia. at rear. Unfortunately, I did not notice a person at the track and I hit his foot and my rear lower arm was damaged after running 4 tanks of fuel.
utopian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 09:22 PM   #1513
Tech Prophet
 
InitialD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MORDOR
Posts: 19,679
Default Re: Re: Re: Lower Internal Ratio Better for Acceleration?

Quote:
Originally posted by utopian
The gear ratio at PYC is 15/18 & 44/48 and 42 shore with 61mm dia. at front and 45 shore with 64mm dia. at rear.
You running a 3 mm split with the stock internal pulleys? Wouldn't that create push and an unstable rear during acceleration?

Quote:
Originally posted by utopian
Unfortunately, I did not notice a person at the track and I hit his foot and my rear lower arm was damaged after running 4 tanks of fuel.
I pitty the guy's leg ! I guess it was quite a big hit seeing that the lower rear arm broke.
InitialD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 10:40 PM   #1514
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 277
Send a message via ICQ to lawndoggie Send a message via Yahoo to lawndoggie
Default Re: Re: Re: Lower Internal Ratio Better for Acceleration?

Quote:
Originally posted by utopian
Where did you play last Saturday? I ran my Impulse Pro in PYC last Saturday which accelerated great and the handling was very good. In fact, I have not been there for 2 months. I went to PYC to race with my friend who had a NTC3. The gear ratio at PYC is 15/18 & 44/48 and 42 shore with 61mm dia. at front and 45 shore with 64mm dia. at rear. Unfortunately, I did not notice a person at the track and I hit his foot and my rear lower arm was damaged after running 4 tanks of fuel.
That was you!!!! We actually talked!! I am the guy that ran in the engine the one time, and had lotsa problem???
lawndoggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 10:43 PM   #1515
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 277
Send a message via ICQ to lawndoggie Send a message via Yahoo to lawndoggie
Default Re: Re: Re: Re: Lower Internal Ratio Better for Acceleration?

Quote:
Originally posted by InitialD
You running a 3 mm split with the stock internal pulleys? Wouldn't that create push and an unstable rear during acceleration?



I pitty the guy's leg ! I guess it was quite a big hit seeing that the lower rear arm broke.
Thats the guy who showed me the 24mm front tires... he cut them using tire truer and xacto...
lawndoggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Serpent 705 J_Longbrake Nitro On-Road 4252 02-23-2015 12:34 AM
WTB: NIB Serpent 710 aN4rK1 R/C Items: Wanted to Buy 3 06-16-2006 09:23 PM
Serpent 835 JFCJ R/C Items: Wanted to Buy 3 02-20-2005 09:29 PM
Trade in Your Old Serpent 710 Parts for New Serpent 710 Parts fast_it710 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 0 09-17-2004 12:27 AM
Serpent Impulse w/MT-12 and Serpent Starter box - cheap Solara R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 2 03-07-2003 03:01 PM



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 08:44 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