Originally Posted by
AdrianM
Bob Stellflue is a smart guy but his explanation about belts being inefficient doesn't pan out. In the heyday of the TC3, belt cars won just as many or more racers than the TC3 did with the same "old" batteries.
In testing we at Schumacher found that due to harmonic occilation shafts were less efficient at high speed than belts and the shaft advantage on power exiting corners was so marginal it could not be seen on the track.
At the 2004 Worlds Hara told me that prior to the Worlds he tested his proven HPI Pro4 vs the new HB Cyclone back to back with the same equipment and the Cyclone was 8mph faster on a long straight than the Pro 4 was with identical final drive ratios. He also finished EVERY test run with more battery left in the Cyclone.
Shafts were just a gimmick that was marketed very well and that gimmick sold a lot of TC3's and TC3 copies.
I don't know how you came to the conclusion that AE just marketed a gimmick when you said your self that the TC3 was the first sedan with a well thought out suspension. I find it hard to beleive that a company that spent that much time developing a car would compromise the design for what you call a gimmick. As for 7 turn motors there was nobody running a 7 turn in sedan when the car was designed and if they did they would have not come close to making run time.....