Mantisworx F1 chassis!! sneek peek
11-18-2010, 10:25 AM
#46
"run circles"is a relative term I believe that in the right hands my chassis is good for at least two tenths in most situations.of course tis is not going to apply to everyone inn all situations.i have no access to carpet so I haver no ideas yet what it will do on variety but on asphalt with foams and rubber it is good.at any rate I will make it to cali sometime soonwith one of my test drivers! But I'm tellin you now I'm not messin with a turtle 21.5, by that time I will probably have 13.5 turbo !!
Maybe one of your "test drivers" would like to race on a level playing field with some real competition and see how the car compares. Unless you can show results on a level playing field like Mike has with his Exotek setups your going to have a tough sell.
11-18-2010, 10:54 AM
#47
Here is what I have been working on. (my f109)
Having no luck with the durability of the f109 center shock, I decided to
go the crc route.
The result was a .25 weight savings and a MUCH more stable car.
That being said..On high grip carpet with silver can motors and the same driver (me).
My f103 "old school" t-bar is a constant 3 to 4 tenths faster per lap.
Sometimes simple really is better.
I have not done back to back on asphalt or with faster more
powerful motors.So if there was going to be an advantage I would say that is where it would be.
Not to discourage you at all.
I say prove the naysayers (such as myself) wrong .
Just be aware that some of us have tried that setup with marginal results at best.
Keep pluging away and keep us posted.
Good luck.
Having no luck with the durability of the f109 center shock, I decided to
go the crc route.
The result was a .25 weight savings and a MUCH more stable car.
That being said..On high grip carpet with silver can motors and the same driver (me).
My f103 "old school" t-bar is a constant 3 to 4 tenths faster per lap.
Sometimes simple really is better.
I have not done back to back on asphalt or with faster more
powerful motors.So if there was going to be an advantage I would say that is where it would be.
Not to discourage you at all.
I say prove the naysayers (such as myself) wrong .
Just be aware that some of us have tried that setup with marginal results at best.
Keep pluging away and keep us posted.
Good luck.
11-18-2010, 12:09 PM
#48
conception : not impressed at all ( same comments as before about one end of the side pivots having to be aligned with the center pivot ) The angled side links might work OK though.
Manufacturing : not impressed at all, the CF plate edges seem delaminated all around. BTW do I see not countersunk holes ? I hope not.
Handling : waiting to see a video/ try one. But I honestly don't see how anyone could go faster than even a less than average F103/104- with one of these cars.
Anyone who thinks that decent pan car F1 manufacturers are lacking imagination , either has no RC culture at all, or doesn't understand what a pan car is, or both.
Manufacturing : not impressed at all, the CF plate edges seem delaminated all around. BTW do I see not countersunk holes ? I hope not.
Handling : waiting to see a video/ try one. But I honestly don't see how anyone could go faster than even a less than average F103/104- with one of these cars.
Anyone who thinks that decent pan car F1 manufacturers are lacking imagination , either has no RC culture at all, or doesn't understand what a pan car is, or both.
This is the family business www.wwmachine.net Been at this a long time!
Jetta I have no problem putting my chassis up against anyone on any surface with any motor, my point was that its not hard to make a 21.5 hook up and that's the reason why the lap times with that motor are so close, take all of those cars and put a faster motor in them and watch what happens!
Look guys we can argue all day long and I cant force anyone to agree with what I say but do you think the current chassis will be the same in twenty years? Probably not, this chassis is only the beginning!
i have talked to a few track operators today and i am scheduling the tracks i am going to visit soon, so by february some of you will have first hand experience with the Mantisworx chassis!
Last edited by MantisWorx; 11-18-2010 at 12:49 PM.
11-18-2010, 12:56 PM
#50
Marcus sorry if though I said your chassis would not work, that is not what I meant. What I was saying is that I think the offset link pivots from the center ball pivot would not help the handling.
I strongly disagree with you that you think roll center does not exist on pan cars, this is the problem with many designs in that they do not take it into consideration. It is also possible to use a vertical trapezium to move the roll center below ground as you would expect on most cars. This would allow for increased avarage cornering force and reduce sudden break on the limit.
As far as I'm aware the uk rules state that 1/12th must have a solid rear axel, that was true of the old pro10 rule I raced under years ago.
I strongly disagree with you that you think roll center does not exist on pan cars, this is the problem with many designs in that they do not take it into consideration. It is also possible to use a vertical trapezium to move the roll center below ground as you would expect on most cars. This would allow for increased avarage cornering force and reduce sudden break on the limit.
As far as I'm aware the uk rules state that 1/12th must have a solid rear axel, that was true of the old pro10 rule I raced under years ago.
Last edited by JevUK; 11-18-2010 at 02:02 PM. Reason: typo
11-18-2010, 01:23 PM
#51
Marcus sorry if though I said your chassis would not work, that is not what I meant. What I was saying is that I think the offset link pivots from the center ball pivot would not help the handling.
I strongly disagree with you that you think roll center does not exist on pan cars, this is the problem with many designs in that they do not take it into consideration. It is also possible to use a vertical trapezium to move the roll center below ground as you would expect on most cars. This would allow for increased avarage cornering force and reduce sudden break on the limit.
As far as I'm away the uk rules state that 1/12th must have a solid rear axel, that was true of the old pro10 rule I raced under years ago.
I strongly disagree with you that you think roll center does not exist on pan cars, this is the problem with many designs in that they do not take it into consideration. It is also possible to use a vertical trapezium to move the roll center below ground as you would expect on most cars. This would allow for increased avarage cornering force and reduce sudden break on the limit.
As far as I'm away the uk rules state that 1/12th must have a solid rear axel, that was true of the old pro10 rule I raced under years ago.
11-18-2010, 02:01 PM
#52
Check the brca site and there are almost no 12th construction rules at all, doesn't even insist direct drive or even ban traction control
11-18-2010, 05:40 PM
#53
Seriously, I think it's cool to explore ideas and try to go faster. It's just a "horses for courses" thing. Is change X going to help the car go faster, or just add more complexity to say "look at this cool thing"? Look at the Losi Hydra drive from years ago. It worked when the tires were hard as rocks, and the tracks were real "offroad". But the tires got way better and the tracks a lot smoother, and nobody is looking for a Hydradrive unless they are restoring a JRX Pro...now it's just the good old slipper clutch
11-18-2010, 09:09 PM
#54
Serpent Ten-Force 1990
manual
http://www.retromodelisme.com/pdf/ma...t/tenforce.pdf
These are the only crappy pics I could get...Nobody is afraid of change. On the contrary, most people like something better. The thing is all this stuff usually has been tried before, and what works catches hold. Full travel independent front ends, sort of like what is on this Serpent, really only were used on velodrome oval cars, where they needed the travel due to the track conditions and the high speeds. It's a niche segment. This Serpent car came out around 1990, when 1/10 pan was huge. This car was illegal due to the IRS, at least in the USA. At the same time, it seemed to enjoy a very short lifespan. I don't know if it was legal anywhere else.
Put it this way, cars like this-
and this-
were overshadowed by these-
which became the dominant design. It's not that these things haven't been tried, it just turns out simple is usually better.
manual
http://www.retromodelisme.com/pdf/ma...t/tenforce.pdf
These are the only crappy pics I could get...Nobody is afraid of change. On the contrary, most people like something better. The thing is all this stuff usually has been tried before, and what works catches hold. Full travel independent front ends, sort of like what is on this Serpent, really only were used on velodrome oval cars, where they needed the travel due to the track conditions and the high speeds. It's a niche segment. This Serpent car came out around 1990, when 1/10 pan was huge. This car was illegal due to the IRS, at least in the USA. At the same time, it seemed to enjoy a very short lifespan. I don't know if it was legal anywhere else.
Put it this way, cars like this-
and this-
were overshadowed by these-
which became the dominant design. It's not that these things haven't been tried, it just turns out simple is usually better.
11-18-2010, 09:12 PM
#55
I for one look forward to Marcus's car! Good luck and keep up the good work.
11-19-2010, 02:56 AM
#56
In my understanding, the rear RC on a pan can is basically the center of the center pivot ball isn't it ? I don't see how it could be any lower than that...
LaJe from sweden had a car with lowered side links and center pivot, to lower it as much as possible. The molded black art chassis also allowed something similar if I remember well.
BTW I recommend the reading of Allan Staniforth "Competition car suspension", I found it very instructive, and it's findable on the net in .pdf if you look hard enough .
LaJe from sweden had a car with lowered side links and center pivot, to lower it as much as possible. The molded black art chassis also allowed something similar if I remember well.
BTW I recommend the reading of Allan Staniforth "Competition car suspension", I found it very instructive, and it's findable on the net in .pdf if you look hard enough .
11-19-2010, 03:00 AM
#57
The LaJe car as seen in 2006 at collegno.
http://www.overrc.com/courses/course...rnerthief4.jpg
The aforementioned Black art chassis. I would sell my mom to have one.
http://www.rctech.net/forum/attachme...rtcarbon-4.jpg
http://www.overrc.com/courses/course...rnerthief4.jpg
The aforementioned Black art chassis. I would sell my mom to have one.
http://www.rctech.net/forum/attachme...rtcarbon-4.jpg
11-19-2010, 03:27 AM
#58
Tech Adept
In my understanding, the rear RC on a pan can is basically the center of the center pivot ball isn't it ? I don't see how it could be any lower than that...
BTW I recommend the reading of Allan Staniforth "Competition car suspension", I found it very instructive, and it's findable on the net in .pdf if you look hard enough .
11-19-2010, 03:41 AM
#59
Err... to me both raising the front pivot ball of a tbar or the front pivot bal in a decently designed link car are different from each other and also different from just lowering the roll center.
Angled side link would give rear steer, in one direction or the other.
Angled t-bar or angled pivot balls axle... you might lower the RC a little bit, but then again this induces so many other unwanted effects that I can't see it used , except may be with a very thin shim, if you're a setup guru. I can remember that richard Chang's 1/12 cheat sheet mentions it, but can't remember what it's supposed to do.
I'm from Geneva. Have we ever met ?
Angled side link would give rear steer, in one direction or the other.
Angled t-bar or angled pivot balls axle... you might lower the RC a little bit, but then again this induces so many other unwanted effects that I can't see it used , except may be with a very thin shim, if you're a setup guru. I can remember that richard Chang's 1/12 cheat sheet mentions it, but can't remember what it's supposed to do.
I'm from Geneva. Have we ever met ?
11-19-2010, 06:34 AM
#60
testing went well last night, last week my best time was 11.27 and last night 1 squeezed out consistant 11.07's and a handful of 10.91's high speed push is what im trying to get rid of but chris and i (exotec) were having the same issue his was slightly worse than mine but he also had brand new ride soft fronts . the stock tamiya's are what i got the 10.9's with but before we shut the track down i tried pit's in the front and it seemed better. i will chime in later on the setup and what changed as i am intalling my new motor in my real car!! i put in oversized pistons, sleeved the block and bumped up the compression slightly! i LOOOOOVE POWER, should be able to get 600 to the wheels with the sleeved block on e85.
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=1948755
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=1948755