R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-02-2005, 07:28 PM   #31
Tech Prophet
 
InitialD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MORDOR
Posts: 19,679
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by JLock
In my opinion, it is a toss-up between belt and shaft drive. However, here is one thing that the shaft-drive racers can't do: fine tune their cars for speed via varying the sizes of the pulleys. You can change front/rear drive ratios to suit the track or track surfaces by changing the pulley sizes whereas the shaft cars are pretty much stuck with the gears size of the shaft gears and diff gears that come with the kit with little to no variation. I have and run both and don't see much difference between the two layouts.
For varying internal drive ratios on a shaft car, try the FW05R. Although not documented, you could use different crown gears in the front and at the back the same way you would on a belt driven car with different pulleys...
InitialD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2005, 07:30 PM   #32
Tech Prophet
 
InitialD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MORDOR
Posts: 19,679
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by JLock
There is one thing I can say about the shaft car, it is more balanced than the belt car (speaking of the NTC3 in particular).
Balanced? I think that's the last thing you would want to say about a shaft driven car... No?
InitialD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2005, 11:21 PM   #33
Super Moderator
 
Marcos.J's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Semper Fi
Posts: 27,191
Trader Rating: 182 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by InitialD
For varying internal drive ratios on a shaft car, try the FW05R. Although not documented, you could use different crown gears in the front and at the back the same way you would on a belt driven car with different pulleys...
Marcos.J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2005, 04:40 AM   #34
Tech Elite
 
ntc3freak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 3,308
Default NEITHER ONE IS BETTER THAN THE OTHER ONE

so..........just pick what seems rite for u(doesn't make sense)
ntc3freak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 09:54 AM   #35
Tech Champion
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago Illinois USA
Posts: 9,106
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Send a message via ICQ to Solara Send a message via AIM to Solara
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by InitialD
Balanced? I think that's the last thing you would want to say about a shaft driven car... No?
Well....I have to agree that, NTC3 is FAR from well balanced....it is MUCH better then Kysoho Super Ten or FW series....but compare to any belt car, no comparison....

However, shaft does seperate things much CLEAR (radio on left engine, tank, pipe on right) and NTC3 does have everything in super low CG compare to others RC.
Solara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 05:36 PM   #36
Tech Prophet
 
InitialD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MORDOR
Posts: 19,679
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rookie Solara
However, shaft does seperate things much CLEAR (radio on left engine, tank, pipe on right) and NTC3 does have everything in super low CG compare to others RC.
But does that really constitute to a well balanced car as per the original claim?
InitialD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2005, 05:15 PM   #37
Tech Fanatic
 
AndyT 's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 862
Default

I have both a shaft and a belt car and one major advantage i find in the belt car is how well the weight is centred. With the engine being mounted across the chassis and the fuel tank (with battery mounted underneath) being in the centre of the car, the belt drive (RRR) has noticeably less weight shift when cornering hard.
One other "nice" point in the belt drive, is that there seems to be a much wider choice of pipe available.
Cheers
AndyT  is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2005, 06:33 AM   #38
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,059
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by AndyT
I have both a shaft and a belt car and one major advantage i find in the belt car is how well the weight is centred. With the engine being mounted across the chassis and the fuel tank (with battery mounted underneath) being in the centre of the car, the belt drive (RRR) has noticeably less weight shift when cornering hard.
One other "nice" point in the belt drive, is that there seems to be a much wider choice of pipe available.
Cheers
Depends on the car..

The ZT1 has a engine configuration which allows you to use any pipe that is avaliable that would suite the v one series


As to the balance I have a shaft and belt drive cars and a good car is a good car wheather is is shaft or belt.

I do like the additional acceleration of shaft and the free roll. You can drive the car much more smoothly and consistantly than with a belt drive.
frozenpod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2005, 09:03 AM   #39
Tech Fanatic
 
ttso's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 900
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by InitialD
But does that really constitute to a well balanced car as per the original claim?
I think it's all about how you define "balanced", no fuel or with fuel?

If it's empty car, NTC3 is 100% more balanced than all other car "IF you balance it right". My NTC3 archive almost 50-50 on front/rear left/right when there is no fuel (and no balance weight, see later), which you never see on belt car (rear heavy always).

However, if you count the fuel in. Shaft car do have huge problem on balance because the fuel tank just not on CG. For NTC3 with full fuel, it's like 60g heavier on front left because of fuel. I have to add some balance weight on counter direction so it will still archive near 50-50 balance when there are about 50% of fuel. Otherwise driving with 60g FL heavier will cause lots of problem (side slide while break, torque steering while throttle)

Belt car, if you see RRR and 710, the fuel tank seat right on (or very close to) CG so the fuel won't affect the balance. But the general problem of belt car on balance issue is rear-heavy, because the heaviest part, engine, is seat way back from center point. For belt car it's almost impossible to archive 50-50 balance, with fuel or without fuel.

So, just like I said, it's all about how you define "balanced".


The shaft car's major problem is "Torque steering", which has no solution no matter what you do, and it will be even worth when we got 2hp engine.
ttso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2005, 09:09 AM   #40
Tech Fanatic
 
ttso's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 900
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Rookie Solara
Well....I have to agree that, NTC3 is FAR from well balanced....it is MUCH better then Kysoho Super Ten or FW series....but compare to any belt car, no comparison....

However, shaft does seperate things much CLEAR (radio on left engine, tank, pipe on right) and NTC3 does have everything in super low CG compare to others RC.
When it comes to CG height, no car can bet NTC3 except MY NTC3...

ttso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2005, 07:04 PM   #41
Tech Prophet
 
InitialD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MORDOR
Posts: 19,679
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ttso
When it comes to CG height, no car can bet NTC3 except MY NTC3...

The mods look sweet ttso.
InitialD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2005, 07:05 PM   #42
Tech Prophet
 
InitialD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: MORDOR
Posts: 19,679
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ttso
I think it's all about how you define "balanced", no fuel or with fuel?
You are right. I was just trying to caution the original poster about making sweeping statements...

Quote:
Originally posted by ttso
If it's empty car, NTC3 is 100% more balanced than all other car "IF you balance it right". My NTC3 archive almost 50-50 on front/rear left/right when there is no fuel (and no balance weight, see later), which you never see on belt car (rear heavy always).

However, if you count the fuel in. Shaft car do have huge problem on balance because the fuel tank just not on CG. For NTC3 with full fuel, it's like 60g heavier on front left because of fuel. I have to add some balance weight on counter direction so it will still archive near 50-50 balance when there are about 50% of fuel. Otherwise driving with 60g FL heavier will cause lots of problem (side slide while break, torque steering while throttle)
How can you claim "more balanced" when you can only balance it statically like what you mentioned above? Balancing it with 50% fuel still does not solve the problem. In a race when the car is on the road, everything changes. So how can you claim "more balanced" when the fuel level changes all the time?

Wouldn't it be better having a car not balanced left to right out of the box, fix it with some weights for ballast to balance it out and have it still remain balanced throughout the race regardless empty or full tank?

Quote:
Originally posted by ttso
Belt car, if you see RRR and 710, the fuel tank seat right on (or very close to) CG so the fuel won't affect the balance. But the general problem of belt car on balance issue is rear-heavy, because the heaviest part, engine, is seat way back from center point. For belt car it's almost impossible to archive 50-50 balance, with fuel or without fuel.
So now you claim that front to back of a belted car is not balanced? I would think that differs from one car to another and your point is only valid if you consider unequal front to rear tire wear and understeer / oversteer of the car...

Even then if your claim were to be true, then all belted cars would suffer understeer off power like mad which on the contrary I don't think belt cars have this.

Quote:
Originally posted by ttso
So, just like I said, it's all about how you define "balanced".


Quote:
Originally posted by ttso
The shaft car's major problem is "Torque steering", which has no solution no matter what you do, and it will be even worth when we got 2hp engine.
Josh Cyrul had a solution if I'm not mistaken when he was driving the electric TC3. Don't know if it worked for high powered gas cars though but he had unequal droop in the front side if I'm not mistaken.
InitialD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2005, 08:37 PM   #43
Tech Fanatic
 
ttso's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 900
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by InitialD
So now you claim that front to back of a belted car is not balanced? I would think that differs from one car to another and your point is only valid if you consider unequal front to rear tire wear and understeer / oversteer of the car...

Even then if your claim were to be true, then all belted cars would suffer understeer off power like mad which on the contrary I don't think belt cars have this.

Just telling the physic phenomenon..

In fact, I don't think we need to archive 100% 50-50 front/rear balanced since we got 4 wheels independence suspension. Virtually all belt car's setup has a stiffer suspension on rear than front to counter the rear heavy nature, transfer more weight to front than rear. I don't think it's a problem as long as it's not heavily rear heavy, or you got a wrong setup. Well, even F1 was not 50-50 front/rear balanced..

Quote:
Josh Cyrul had a solution if I'm not mistaken when he was driving the electric TC3. Don't know if it worked for high powered gas cars though but he had unequal droop in the front side if I'm not mistaken.
Indeed suspension can compromise torque steering effect (if it's not heavy). But torque steering is still there. It's just the nature of physic (unless you got all your crankshaft, gear, drivetrain, to have a 0 mess...). At one point we will have a torque steering effect which is too great, unable to compromise by suspension.


I do think the belt car is the way to go for RC. I think there is still a long way to go for Belt GP, but Belt EP seems got a very good layout already (415/T1FK05/Mi2/MY02 style)
ttso is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
belt vs shaft keavze Nitro On-Road 3 07-09-2007 03:57 PM
Shaft vs. Belt... Mini Toink Electric Off-Road 14 05-20-2007 04:55 PM
Belt vs. Shaft axel Chat Lounge 27 04-08-2005 06:59 PM
Belt or Shaft? ? ZER01 Electric On-Road 67 05-25-2004 10:18 PM
Shaft vs. Belt again was ist los? Electric On-Road 55 10-10-2003 12:41 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 03:30 PM.


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