Belt conversion for factory team TC4
12-07-2005, 10:31 AM
#61
Tech Adept
Originally Posted by Soviet
I heard it directly from a Corally team driver. He said the geometry (angles) was based off of a TC3. I simply took his word for it.
12-07-2005, 12:03 PM
#62
[QUOTE=koabich]
"a TC3 with a milled chassis is much more of an approvement over a regular TC3 that there will be with the FK '05 and the T2."
see the problem is from the tc3 to the tc4 is less of an improovment ,that just milling a tc3 was, and with a fk05,corrally,hotbodies, etc etc, theres prolly 5x the improovment the milling did on the tc3,and the t2 IS that much better than on 05......wait till people get em...
Originally Posted by PitCrew
I remember having to mill my chassis on the TC3 to get the batts close to centerline. Then getting 4 scales to balance the car properly and still having to add 1.5oz of weight next to the motor. Then it handled OK. But it was heavy, and bearings and things wear out too fast.
Still in mod, the car wanted to tweak or "torqu-steer" or whatever you want to call it.
The belt drive cars don't have this problem because of the way the motor is mounted. That is probably why they are "easier" to drive, cause they don't do WEIRD things.
QUOTE]
Ok, this one is funny. I know milling was a pain in the butt but I don't understand the problem or why it's even being mentioned. To me that was part of the fun in making an incredible car even better. What about the 2 years where the car was raced and the chassis were not milled and this car was still beating everything on the track. At least Associated didn't feel the need to launch an entirely new car for this simple upgrade and dare I say it but a TC3 with a milled chassis is much more of an approvement over a regular TC3 that there will be with the FK '05 and the T2.
Second, the TC3 was one of the lighest touring cars out. How can you say it was heavier is way beyond me. This thing was a feather compared to all the other chassis that were full of aluminum...do me a favor and name me a lighter 1/10 touring car of the same time frame...you would be a liar if you did!
Third, the only reason drivers would have a problem with bearings on this car would be becuase they were using the good old $10.00 for a complete set of bearings or more likely because drivers could keep it off the walls!
Fourth, Torque steer was not as big of a problem as everyone thinks. One person says it is, so others think the same. While the car did exibit some when using extrememly wild winds, the majority of time the car exibited torque steer was because it was poorly setup and/or because most of the bone heads that milled that chassis did it wrong and tweaked their chassis then complained that it was the cars fault.
Still in mod, the car wanted to tweak or "torqu-steer" or whatever you want to call it.
The belt drive cars don't have this problem because of the way the motor is mounted. That is probably why they are "easier" to drive, cause they don't do WEIRD things.
QUOTE]
Ok, this one is funny. I know milling was a pain in the butt but I don't understand the problem or why it's even being mentioned. To me that was part of the fun in making an incredible car even better. What about the 2 years where the car was raced and the chassis were not milled and this car was still beating everything on the track. At least Associated didn't feel the need to launch an entirely new car for this simple upgrade and dare I say it but a TC3 with a milled chassis is much more of an approvement over a regular TC3 that there will be with the FK '05 and the T2.
Second, the TC3 was one of the lighest touring cars out. How can you say it was heavier is way beyond me. This thing was a feather compared to all the other chassis that were full of aluminum...do me a favor and name me a lighter 1/10 touring car of the same time frame...you would be a liar if you did!
Third, the only reason drivers would have a problem with bearings on this car would be becuase they were using the good old $10.00 for a complete set of bearings or more likely because drivers could keep it off the walls!
Fourth, Torque steer was not as big of a problem as everyone thinks. One person says it is, so others think the same. While the car did exibit some when using extrememly wild winds, the majority of time the car exibited torque steer was because it was poorly setup and/or because most of the bone heads that milled that chassis did it wrong and tweaked their chassis then complained that it was the cars fault.
see the problem is from the tc3 to the tc4 is less of an improovment ,that just milling a tc3 was, and with a fk05,corrally,hotbodies, etc etc, theres prolly 5x the improovment the milling did on the tc3,and the t2 IS that much better than on 05......wait till people get em...
12-07-2005, 12:17 PM
#64
[QUOTE=BiggAlz]
RIIIIIGHT! Sure!
Originally Posted by koabich
"a TC3 with a milled chassis is much more of an approvement over a regular TC3 that there will be with the FK '05 and the T2."
see the problem is from the tc3 to the tc4 is less of an improovment ,that just milling a tc3 was, and with a fk05,corrally,hotbodies, etc etc, theres prolly 5x the improovment the milling did on the tc3,and the t2 IS that much better than on 05......wait till people get em...
see the problem is from the tc3 to the tc4 is less of an improovment ,that just milling a tc3 was, and with a fk05,corrally,hotbodies, etc etc, theres prolly 5x the improovment the milling did on the tc3,and the t2 IS that much better than on 05......wait till people get em...
12-07-2005, 12:20 PM
#65
Originally Posted by Mdoc
when was the last time xray came out with a new car that wasnt better than the one befor it, and the quality has always been top notch.....
What was said was the the performance gained in simply milling a FT TC3 Chassis over a FT TC3 will be greater than the performance that is gained from going from an FK'05 to the T2.
12-07-2005, 12:23 PM
#66
Originally Posted by Bobby J
like the camber and shock positions , dont think so...the RDX is the only car that you can change the roll centers up , down out and in , and still have your camber positions ,.most cars when you change the roll centers like raising a ball stud or lower the link on the shock tower you lose all you settings ,,,the most important thing it touring is finding the right camber gain for the tires or foams , this will be the most important tuning element on your ride...27s like less camber gain to gain the most traction ,,,36r like lots of camber gain cause of the air gap that is needed to run that tire,,the more you run in out door pavement tracks the more you will learn from you car...
And by the way, chainging the camber link locations also changes the cars rool center!
12-07-2005, 12:25 PM
#67
Originally Posted by koabich
Please do not misread posts. No one ever said the T2 wouldn't be better than the FK '05.
What was said was the the performance gained in simply milling a FT TC3 Chassis over a FT TC3 will be greater than the performance that is gained from going from an FK'05 to the T2.
What was said was the the performance gained in simply milling a FT TC3 Chassis over a FT TC3 will be greater than the performance that is gained from going from an FK'05 to the T2.
12-07-2005, 12:31 PM
#68
Originally Posted by BiggAlz
and thats incorrect....
12-07-2005, 01:42 PM
#70
Originally Posted by Mdoc
I dont know of any way you can be so sure of that unless you have run, or been with someone that ran them both......and I am definatly a believer in xray.....
12-07-2005, 01:56 PM
#71
Originally Posted by Soviet
Come to think of it...if Associated was out to bilk ( <--- Real word) their customers like XRay, we'd be driving TC8s!!! 
Whoa, TC8??? When's that coming out? Will it be belt drive? Or how about switchable between belt and shaft? Will it be out for Christmas? This is great this is all I need to make the A!
12-07-2005, 05:23 PM
#72
Tech Rookie
Originally Posted by TimXLB
John Tortorice:
Hi,
I'm not sure if your the guy who skyed the 1-12th scale at Cleveland this year. but if you are DUDE that was AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!
Hi,
I'm not sure if your the guy who skyed the 1-12th scale at Cleveland this year. but if you are DUDE that was AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!
I think I can honestly say I TQ'd the third dimension on that one,
The only one to come close was Frank Calandra JR, and he was still about a couple feet short of my jump I'd say (but it was still stellar!). I probably should've strived to do better in mod, but after the 2nd round tq in stock (which felt just as good as the launch!) at that point, I decided mod 12th was going to be a "fun run" class, and boy was it!
12-07-2005, 05:45 PM
#73
Corally had atleast 20 guys of different sponsorship levels in stock TC and the on-road nats. They put 7 guys in the A, and there were corally team drivers even in the C-main. The probably had more in the 19turn class.
12-07-2005, 06:01 PM
#74
Tech Legend
iTrader: (51)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Castle Mamba Max Pro. Feel its power!!!!!!!!!!
Posts: 21,220
Trader Rating: 51 (100%+)
Originally Posted by ChadCapece
Corally had atleast 20 guys of different sponsorship levels in stock TC and the on-road nats. They put 7 guys in the A, and there were corally team drivers even in the C-main. The probably had more in the 19turn class.