3LikesTLR 22 Racing Buggy Thread
12-02-2010 | 11:14 AM
#212
I think this is what Ryan was refering to.
"European, high-bite Astroturf style tracks often favour the mid-motor configuration whereby the mass of the motor is placed inboard and where its rotation is optimised by a 4-gear transmission to aid drive and traction whereas clay and traditional dirt style tracks can require the more traditional 3-gear rear-motor configuration. The TLR 22 is the first production car in the world to encompass the dramatic differences and design challenges of combining both concepts into the one buggy."
The mid motor takes weight off the rear tires. This allows the rear to rotate more and gives the car more steering. When running on grass and astroturf (or extreme traction clay "aka slicks") the mid motor is a great tuning option to take excessive rear grip out of the car and give it more steering. For most US style dirt tracks the rear motor option to give the car a little more rear traction will be the best option but you get both with the 22. According the Dyno interview on RC tech. with about 30-40 min of work you can see if you like it yourself. All parts for both configurations are included in the kit!
"European, high-bite Astroturf style tracks often favour the mid-motor configuration whereby the mass of the motor is placed inboard and where its rotation is optimised by a 4-gear transmission to aid drive and traction whereas clay and traditional dirt style tracks can require the more traditional 3-gear rear-motor configuration. The TLR 22 is the first production car in the world to encompass the dramatic differences and design challenges of combining both concepts into the one buggy."
The mid motor takes weight off the rear tires. This allows the rear to rotate more and gives the car more steering. When running on grass and astroturf (or extreme traction clay "aka slicks") the mid motor is a great tuning option to take excessive rear grip out of the car and give it more steering. For most US style dirt tracks the rear motor option to give the car a little more rear traction will be the best option but you get both with the 22. According the Dyno interview on RC tech. with about 30-40 min of work you can see if you like it yourself. All parts for both configurations are included in the kit!
The rear motor acts as a pendulum and causes rotation (controlled loss of sidebite), this can be demonstrated by moving the battery back in the tray. Rear end steering is caused by overwhealming the tire's side bite lateral load with mass.
Mid motor cars are actually very difficult to get the same rotation effect out of because there is not significant weight behind the rear axles to overwhealm the wide rear tire's sidebite. Mid-motors tend to have less forward bite because overall there is less weight on the rear tires (caused by the lever effect of the motor behind them).
Until modern tires and higher grip track prep the only way to overcome it was driving the front wheels too.
12-02-2010 | 11:17 AM
#214
12-02-2010 | 11:18 AM
#215
what i meant was not if but when i buy one of these i will try the mid motor setup with a saddle pack, but if i like the rear mounted motor better would the saddle pack work just as well as a saddle pack
Last edited by hlb14; 12-02-2010 at 11:21 AM. Reason: .
12-02-2010 | 11:19 AM
#216
Tech Initiate
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 38
Mid motor also helps keep the front wheels down when accelerating and stops the car handling like a pendulum with all the weight out back. It also keeps all of the electronics inside the bodyshell which protects all of the wiring etc. Kinwald seems to be doing ok with his mid-motor Xfactory so I don't thing its anything to be concerned about.
I can't remember the last time a rear motored car won a national in the UK. This looks like a beast and I can't wait to get hold of one
I can't remember the last time a rear motored car won a national in the UK. This looks like a beast and I can't wait to get hold of one
12-02-2010 | 11:21 AM
#217
haha I thought so. 
So let me ask all the experts on this thread. So you went with an aluminum chassis and that helps keep the weight close to the ground. However, you then went ahead and added weight to the top portion of the car with the speed control stuck up there. How much of the gain of the chassis weight did you lose by sticking the speed control where it is? Just curious.
So let me ask all the experts on this thread. So you went with an aluminum chassis and that helps keep the weight close to the ground. However, you then went ahead and added weight to the top portion of the car with the speed control stuck up there. How much of the gain of the chassis weight did you lose by sticking the speed control where it is? Just curious.
12-02-2010 | 11:27 AM
#218
www.rcinsider.com will have updates on the car all weekend from factory Losi drivers Dustin Evans and Matt Chambers....
12-02-2010 | 11:27 AM
#219
You do loose some advantage doing this. How much depends on how much the ESC weighs of course. The benefit to putting the speedo where it is though is the fact that everything is placed on the center line of the car. No weight in the "wings". Car is balanced L/R and with all the weight close to the center the car transitions from L to R faster. A little give and take but I think the benefits of this config well outweigh the small increase in CG for the ESC being higher. It really is the only thing up high.
12-02-2010 | 11:27 AM
#220
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,558
There are a couple options for mounting the esc. In the rear motor version, you could theoretically run a short servo and fit a smaller esc between the servo and the battery stop. There is an added benefit to keeping the weight all inline as the car will switch directions easier so that is why the vehicle is so narrow and the esc up a bit versus adding wings was what we decided to go with and its worked very well.
12-02-2010 | 11:39 AM
#224
12-02-2010 | 11:39 AM
#225
