2009.01.08, 04:22 AM
|
#46
|
at the Bleeding Edge
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: england
Posts: 1,724
|
and also toe...
__________________
Team B.E.R.T
MR02/3 eating MA010
MR-03
HFAY S9 F1 Winner
Sinister V1
MRCG Prototype
MRCG 1.0
The uk's premier shop for mini-z
Bleeding Edge Racing UK
|
|
|
2009.01.08, 09:39 AM
|
#47
|
Do you want to go fasst??
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami FL./ Sto Dgo, Dom Rep.(The Jungle)
Posts: 1,867
|
Hello
SAS Is camber and toe active.
Brian I think there is good interest in a 4WD design by you here, and lots of good ideas too.
I guess rear end & main chassis are figured out by now, right? I’ll definitely go with front springs on a 4WD.
My question. Why complicate so much about front-end design, the min-z 4wd front works fine. Is there a problem with it???
I would
1. Go simple.
2. Good quality material.
3. Good weight distribution & balance.
4. Rear end to accept regular K rear-end and SAS.
5. As much low CG so we can fit most auto scale shells.
6. Auto scale mounting clips.
7. Front end based on the Mini-z so we can fit the available parts in the market or similar to your previous MR-CG 2WD.
Hey MK2 long time, don’t hear from you, hi!!!
Cheers
|
|
|
2009.01.08, 09:01 PM
|
#48
|
finally has an mr02
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by eztuner12
Hello
SAS Is camber and toe active.
Brian I think there is good interest in a 4WD design by you here, and lots of good ideas too.
I guess rear end & main chassis are figured out by now, right? I’ll definitely go with front springs on a 4WD.
My question. Why complicate so much about front-end design, the min-z 4wd front works fine. Is there a problem with it???
I would
1. Go simple.
2. Good quality material.
3. Good weight distribution & balance.
4. Rear end to accept regular K rear-end and SAS.
5. As much low CG so we can fit most auto scale shells.
6. Auto scale mounting clips.
7. Front end based on the Mini-z so we can fit the available parts in the market or similar to your previous MR-CG 2WD.
Hey MK2 long time, don’t hear from you, hi!!!
Cheers
|
SAS doesn't have active camber or toe. you have to set it. the camber/toe/caster does not change according to compression of the suspension since it is a double a-arm setup. now if the a arms are different lengths and it was built as a unequal length double a-arm suspension system, we'd see some camber, toe and caster change as the suspension compresses.
he already has most of what you suggested
the fps would be a direct drop in on the chassis.
and color01, how about a small damper that runs across the chassis from 1 tip of the flex plate to the other? it could provide the damping that an fps system would need.
also, an fps system is very simple. it's like the corvette. it uses a traverse leaf spring. only 1 spring that takes the role of 2 springs. and also acts as anti-roll as well
all you need is some way to damper it
__________________
In Slide We Trust
SR-Werks
Last edited by XMDrifter; 2009.01.08 at 09:08 PM.
|
|
|
2009.01.08, 09:34 PM
|
#49
|
Do you want to go fasst??
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami FL./ Sto Dgo, Dom Rep.(The Jungle)
Posts: 1,867
|
Hi XMDrifter
SAS is an unequal length double a-arm suspension system. Lower arm is @2mm longer than the upper arm. Lower arm is positioned @1.5mm further out than the upper arm too, from the pivot that holds it to the main frame. If you place the SAS over a flat surface and compress it down you will note the camber change to higher negative degree.
Use a camber gauge and do the exercise, you will appreciate the negative degree increase very clear.
Cheers
Last edited by eztuner12; 2009.01.08 at 09:46 PM.
|
|
|
2009.01.09, 10:10 AM
|
#50
|
finally has an mr02
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 19
|
my bad. i've never actually owned an SAS, so i assumed it would be equal length a-arms.
but the front of the ma10 would need some way to keep up with the rear SAS's performance.
for simplicity's sake, i'd just use flex plates in the front and find some way to incorporate damping
__________________
In Slide We Trust
SR-Werks
|
|
|
2009.01.09, 01:56 PM
|
#51
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles (Pasadena), CA, USA
Posts: 2,809
|
Actually, for simplicity's sake, I'd rather wait for Reflex to come out with their MA010 WTF system, then I can take advantage of it.
There's no major problem with the Kyosho front end, I've just always been trying to find better ones. However, after struggling with the design even on the RWD MRCG, it now seems that it's not worth the effort.
I'm still waiting on PN to reply to my email so admittedly I haven't designed much of the new car yet.
|
|
|
2009.01.09, 11:35 PM
|
#52
|
Do you want to go fasst??
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami FL./ Sto Dgo, Dom Rep.(The Jungle)
Posts: 1,867
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by color01
Actually, for simplicity's sake, I'd rather wait for Reflex to come out with their MA010 WTF system, then I can take advantage of it.
There's no major problem with the Kyosho front end, I've just always been trying to find better ones. However, after struggling with the design even on the RWD MRCG, it now seems that it's not worth the effort.
I'm still waiting on PN to reply to my email so admittedly I haven't designed much of the new car yet.
|
Yes lets wait for reflex’s wide front bars.
Perhaps some nice CNC part to hold down the front diff to the lower main chassis, in which the front upper plates can be attached to.
No problem It will give the time to save $ in line to buy it when its done hehehe.
Cheers
|
|
|
2009.01.11, 03:04 AM
|
#53
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles (Pasadena), CA, USA
Posts: 2,809
|
Well, talked to PN today in person about this, and we came to a conclusion that the current MRCG AWD design, even the new one I'm working on, is not radical enough and doesn't promise enough potential to be worth producing.
So knowing that the parts for a better suspension are way too expensive to produce, it looks like I will have to scrap this design like I did all my other AWD designs years ago.
For the MA010 junkies that had high hopes for this project: this doesn't mean that I can't design hop-ups for the standard MA010 though. Already looking into a few ideas.
|
|
|
2009.01.11, 03:25 AM
|
#54
|
EMUracing
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 7,417
|
The adjustable gear mesh, better battery balance, lower CG, isnt radical enough
I guess PN has some stuff that he may be working on himself... I asked PN about an aftermarket chassis at the PNWC in 2006, with a lower CG and fine tuned gear mesh... Ive been waiting for a long time for something like this.
I do understand where he is coming from, he is rather conservative with his production. Although he has a lot of breakthrough parts, he rarely has a part that flops on its face. If you look at GPM, they have a lot of parts dating back the MR01 that were completely useless.
I do think that this chassis is an enthusiast chassis, as is the MRCG 2wd. Mainly geared towards the junkies in this hobby that just cant satisfy themselves with the standard chassis...
__________________
EMUracing
Micro RC Syndicate /DG Designs /GSR /Reflex Racing /Fast By Faqish /MurderTown Racing
|
|
|
2009.01.11, 09:10 AM
|
#55
|
Do you want to go fasst??
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami FL./ Sto Dgo, Dom Rep.(The Jungle)
Posts: 1,867
|
I totally.... agree with EMU.
Man what kind of advice they give you at PN. Sorry for he who ever said that your design is not drastic , perhaps “ the absolutely not radical is the disproportionate, extremely low quality min-z AWD "little plastic TOY r/c car”
I guess that your 4WD chassis will be even less production costly than your 2WD. You won’t have to spend on a rear end nor front end. Considering your design will use any of the al ready rear & upper front end parts in the market. You practically only need to invest in the
1. CF Main chassis, body mounting clips& accessories
2. CNC Motor mount.
3. Composite G10/FR-4 Exposy PCB tray.
4. CNC Center shaft mounts.
5. CNC Font end diff mounts.
6. Composite plastic or CNC Servo mount.
7. Steering system.
8. Rear end CNC mounts. If you decide not going with the existent ATM or PN 98 extension, which can be installed forward or backward on the main chassis to accomplish 94-98 w/b.
Un less you decide to go full on the chassis design you posted in this thread.
Cheers
|
|
|
2009.01.11, 12:54 PM
|
#56
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,683
|
The reason behind Philip's lack of interest in the AWD is that the parts are more expensive and complex to produce over the MR-02 and they sell a lot less. The market currently is about 4 to 1 in terms of MR-02 vs. AWD. AWD parts just don't sell as much and there is a ton of options out there already that really show no improvement over the stock and Kyosho parts, therefore tying up valuable capital makes little sense on a project like this.
|
|
|
2009.01.11, 02:29 PM
|
#57
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles (Pasadena), CA, USA
Posts: 2,809
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CristianTabush
The reason behind Philip's lack of interest in the AWD is that the parts are more expensive and complex to produce over the MR-02 and they sell a lot less. The market currently is about 4 to 1 in terms of MR-02 vs. AWD. AWD parts just don't sell as much and there is a ton of options out there already that really show no improvement over the stock and Kyosho parts, therefore tying up valuable capital makes little sense on a project like this.
|
^ I think you put it best, Cristian. I also don't feel like looking elsewhere for production because while I have some time, it's not enough to deal with another PITA like I had with MRCG production.
Richard-- 8 items is not "just" the following, lol, it's a pretty big investment. I hope you don't take this personally against PN because I do (albeit reluctantly) agree with his decision. It probably won't stop me from making a few prototype G10/Delrin cars for myself, but if Philip thinks it's not worth the effort then I'm not going to push it.
|
|
|
2009.01.11, 02:57 PM
|
#58
|
Honda Insight Racer!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Colorado, USA!
Posts: 6,399
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Team
I think you're talking about http://www.carbo6cell.ch/ , it's a suisse site but it's offline since long time !
Awesome stuff you could see there...carbon and alloy only on some very interesting and smart design chassis for all types of small scale cars, on & off road !
|
I can't recall the companies name, but I can't find it either. I think Carbon-Technuiqes was the name of that 1/32 scale kit, not the 1/28 scale guy's.
Wish I could find their site, but I think their out of buisness or no longer making them selves public. Perhaps they were too expensive and didn't make any money off their products. Wish I was able to get'em while they were around as they were the best looking chassis around!
|
|
|
2009.01.11, 03:28 PM
|
#59
|
Do you want to go fasst??
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami FL./ Sto Dgo, Dom Rep.(The Jungle)
Posts: 1,867
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by color01
^ I think you put it best, Cristian. I also don't feel like looking elsewhere for production because while I have some time, it's not enough to deal with another PITA like I had with MRCG production.
Richard-- 8 items is not "just" the following, lol, it's a pretty big investment. I hope you don't take this personally against PN because I do (albeit reluctantly) agree with his decision. It probably won't stop me from making a few prototype G10/Delrin cars for myself, but if Philip thinks it's not worth the effort then I'm not going to push it.
|
No problem Brian, Perhaps a prototype could be much better than the Mini-z I have now.
Hey Delrin parts no problem to me, much better than the actual plastic chassis I have. Delrin parts is not a bad idea, if the platform is solid firm as CF chassis plate; only a cnc motor mounts for heat dissipation & resistant maters, but not necessary it could be delrin too. Man 1/8 and 1/5 cars are made 90 of composite plastic and they take much, much more punishment than 1/28 right? They go thru forces that an 1/28 won’t even dream of.
So I will be looking forward for your prototype.
About taking it personal, never man, this is just a hobby to me no more no less.
Thx
Cheers
Last edited by eztuner12; 2009.01.11 at 03:50 PM.
|
|
|
2009.01.12, 05:58 AM
|
#60
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Spain is different....
Posts: 102
|
Hi , I admire your work with the MRCG...
In my modest opinion I feel the need of a better damping system in the front of our AWD , do you think a new front configuration would be so hard to develop ..?
I see the 1:10 RC chassis and I dream my AWD could have a front SAS like system... Ok its only a wish but why not? what is the problem with that..?
I think it would improve a lot the function and the settings.
Maybe this could inspire you a bit... this is a man who handcrafted its own 1:24 awd design...
http://xemet.altervista.org/
Take a look at this smart front design..:
Last edited by danieluki; 2009.01.12 at 08:13 AM.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:30 AM.
|
|