Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric Off-Road
Tekno RC EB48.3 Thread >

Tekno RC EB48.3 Thread

Community
Wiki Posts
Search
Old 12-31-1969, 04:00 PM
R/C Tech Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by:
Print Wikipost
Like Tree22Likes

Tekno RC EB48.3 Thread

Old 12-31-1969, 04:00 PM
R/C Tech Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by:
Print Wikipost
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-11-2016 | 09:47 AM
  #2056  
goehm's Avatar
Tech Elite
iTrader: (45)
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,765
From: Northern VA
Default

Originally Posted by Bob Barry
either way, we use the PTRC oils because that's what the rest of the team uses. It just makes it easier. I will say that my PT oils stay cleaner much longer.
Gotcha. Yea, I can see that. Thanks for the clarification. TLR and AE are WT based and while AE labels their bottles with CST close equivalents that's all they are.

I wish more (any) local hobby stores sold PTRC. I'd be a regular customer. However since I have to mail order everything anyway I ended up going with a non-PTRC brand but have been using mostly the same CSTs and have been happy. Cleaner, longer though? That seems attributable to shock rings and boots. But I digress - back to Tekno!
goehm is offline  
Old 08-11-2016 | 09:52 AM
  #2057  
Cain's Avatar
Tech Legend
iTrader: (304)
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 35,029
From: West Fargo, North Dakota
Default

I like the PT Racing stuff, if I didn't have a bunch of AE diff oils here I would go with PT Racing stuff all across the board. Be nice if they offered the big bottles for the diff fluid too.

Hopefully they do another special for black friday.
Cain is offline  
Old 08-11-2016 | 10:01 AM
  #2058  
Tech Master
iTrader: (33)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,486
From: Greenville, SC
Default

Originally Posted by goehm
Hey Bob, why is this? CST is supposed to be an industry standard measure. It seems PTRC should remove their CST ratings if they really aren't using that scale, or perhaps adjust their ratings so that it aligns with their actual CST viscosity.
It think it's the opposite. PT is one of the only companies that claims to have reliability from batch to batch due to full certification/testing.

http://www.ptrcracing.com/Technical-Data.html

PT RC Racing is one of the most accurate and consistent silicone oils in the radio control industry, trusted and race proven by many pro drivers at the highest level of rc racing. Each and every one of our viscosity numbers are carefully made and certified. We are dedicated to manufacturing, distributing and retailing of shock and differential oils for the Remote Control Car Racing Industry and enthusiast.
RokleM is offline  
Old 08-11-2016 | 10:18 AM
  #2059  
goehm's Avatar
Tech Elite
iTrader: (45)
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,765
From: Northern VA
Default

Originally Posted by RokleM
It think it's the opposite. PT is one of the only companies that claims to have reliability from batch to batch due to full certification/testing.

http://www.ptrcracing.com/Technical-Data.html

PT RC Racing is one of the most accurate and consistent silicone oils in the radio control industry, trusted and race proven by many pro drivers at the highest level of rc racing. Each and every one of our viscosity numbers are carefully made and certified. We are dedicated to manufacturing, distributing and retailing of shock and differential oils for the Remote Control Car Racing Industry and enthusiast.
I agree, that's what I thought. PTRC is the company that got me wanting to shift from WT to CST (specifically using PTRC, based on the consistency and accuracy). I think what was confusing (to me) is the way it was worded by saying 'PTRC is thinner than most others'. I think more accurately is the other oils don't have accurate CST ratings, and are usually thicker than quoted.
goehm is offline  
Old 08-11-2016 | 11:07 AM
  #2060  
Tech Regular
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 365
Default

Anyone use max wheelbase in the back? I run on a bumpy rutted track. May max out wheelbase in hopes of gaining stability and more steering. In theory it should help but everyone uses pretty much the standard 3/2 mm setup
Dragonfueled is offline  
Old 08-11-2016 | 11:44 AM
  #2061  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,808
From: Texas
Default

Originally Posted by Dragonfueled
Anyone use max wheelbase in the back? I run on a bumpy rutted track. May max out wheelbase in hopes of gaining stability and more steering. In theory it should help but everyone uses pretty much the standard 3/2 mm setup
I tried it, but found it was less stable. Especially exiting corners.
MX304 is offline  
Old 08-11-2016 | 12:03 PM
  #2062  
Tech Regular
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 365
Default

Wow I wouldn't of expected that.
Dragonfueled is offline  
Old 08-11-2016 | 03:29 PM
  #2063  
mkl
Tech Master
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,017
Default

I think that moving the wheels forward affects the dogbone angle helping with rough tracks. Also, moving the rear wheels forward will also allow more weight off the very back of the vehicle allowing for better traction. If you were only changing the wheelbase(by lengthen the chassis), then yes longer wheelbase might be better but when you only move the wheels it affects other aspects of the car.
mkl is offline  
Old 08-11-2016 | 03:46 PM
  #2064  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,808
From: Texas
Default

Originally Posted by mkl
I think that moving the wheels forward affects the dogbone angle helping with rough tracks. Also, moving the rear wheels forward will also allow more weight off the very back of the vehicle allowing for better traction. If you were only changing the wheelbase(by lengthen the chassis), then yes longer wheelbase might be better but when you only move the wheels it affects other aspects of the car.
That's exactly what I was thinking after I tried it.
MX304 is offline  
Old 08-13-2016 | 04:43 AM
  #2065  
Suspended
iTrader: (-1)
 
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 272
From: Daytona, FL
Default

Originally Posted by Cain
Sounds like a 4S lipo in the 6500mah range balances the car well.
What C battery should I aim for with 1/8th? In SCT I have 70c's, but 4s are way expensive hah, so what's a good range to go with?
deceit is offline  
Old 08-13-2016 | 05:05 AM
  #2066  
mkl
Tech Master
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,017
Default

Look into SMC batteries. They have very good packs that not expensive and perform very well. $70 for a 6500 60c battery. Lots of guys that are way faster than me run them so I figure they are good enough for me.
I don't think you need as high c rating when you go up in cell count. It is be beneficial to have really high c rating in low cell count, high stress applications like SCT but not as necessary with higher cell counts.
Hope this helps.
mkl is offline  
Old 08-13-2016 | 05:28 AM
  #2067  
Cain's Avatar
Tech Legend
iTrader: (304)
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 35,029
From: West Fargo, North Dakota
Default

Originally Posted by deceit
What C battery should I aim for with 1/8th? In SCT I have 70c's, but 4s are way expensive hah, so what's a good range to go with?
mkl's info is good. SMC and Promatch are brands I give a look for packs for a reasonable price. Promatch also offers a warranty on there packs as well.

For C rating I usually go 50C or above. But heck back in the old days when 1/8 E buggy first got started we were running helicopter motors with pretty high Kvs (3000kv or more were common to see people do on 4S) with 6000mah 20C backs and modified castle creations Mamba Max escs.

Ah the good ol days ...
Cain is offline  
Old 08-13-2016 | 08:21 AM
  #2068  
Suspended
iTrader: (-1)
 
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 272
From: Daytona, FL
Default

Thanks guys, I'll go look for some 50-60c's. Wish I could just link my 2s together haha. But I'm excited to jump into the ebuggy scene finally. Just hate buying all new stuff, but that's part of the game. Lol.


I was getting my batts off eBay, but didn't really see good deals on 4s.but on SMC's site I see the 6500 4s 60c for $70. Awesome! Even their 2s are priced well on their site.. 6500 2s 60c for $37... Nice

Last edited by deceit; 08-13-2016 at 08:36 AM.
deceit is offline  
Old 08-13-2016 | 11:19 AM
  #2069  
Cain's Avatar
Tech Legend
iTrader: (304)
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 35,029
From: West Fargo, North Dakota
Default

Originally Posted by deceit
Thanks guys, I'll go look for some 50-60c's. Wish I could just link my 2s together haha. But I'm excited to jump into the ebuggy scene finally. Just hate buying all new stuff, but that's part of the game. Lol.


I was getting my batts off eBay, but didn't really see good deals on 4s.but on SMC's site I see the 6500 4s 60c for $70. Awesome! Even their 2s are priced well on their site.. 6500 2s 60c for $37... Nice
yeah that have good prices and the packs do perform well. I usually do them or Promatch since they have a warranty and prices for some of there packs can be pretty close.

Promatchs 5200mah 4S I really like as its pretty light if thats your thing, though the Teknos balance better with the 6500s from what I am reading.
Cain is offline  
Old 08-13-2016 | 11:22 PM
  #2070  
Tech Adept
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 111
From: Mill Creek, WA
Default

Originally Posted by deceit
Thanks guys, I'll go look for some 50-60c's. Wish I could just link my 2s together haha. But I'm excited to jump into the ebuggy scene finally. Just hate buying all new stuff, but that's part of the game. Lol.


I was getting my batts off eBay, but didn't really see good deals on 4s.but on SMC's site I see the 6500 4s 60c for $70. Awesome! Even their 2s are priced well on their site.. 6500 2s 60c for $37... Nice
FYI you can link your 2s batteries together but it raises the cg of your car aND I wouldn't recommend it. Also the rule of thumb to determine minimum c rating is esc amp rating devided by battery capacity devided by 1000. Ex: 210 amps (peak amps on rx8) / 6000 mah / 1000 = 35c.
crash n go is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.