2008.12.28, 01:11 PM
|
#16
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 80
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenontap
Hello Color0,
I also designed and built an awd chassie 2 years ago. i have tried just about every batt and motor cofiguration and the final design looks similar to what you have created. the hardest part has been coming up wtih a decent tie rod, bearing holder, servo saver combo. Im very interested to see what you come up with to solve that problem. It really makes you appreciate what kyosho has created and how they have crammed so much in such a small space. looking forwarded to your final design.
|
Very interesting design. Who made the diff housings? PN-racing? Would it be possible to make a conversion kit so we can use our own electronics such as spinner esc?
|
|
|
2008.12.28, 02:08 PM
|
#17
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 103
|
Mrunlimited, yes pn made the diff housing. but you can use any aftermarket rear diff housing on the car. I'm only making the chassie top and bottom plates, motor mount, centershaft bearing holders and servo saver mounts. I started like color0 drawing and cutting all the parts but that eats up to much time. so i tried to use as many stock parts as i could. The conversion kit seemed to make the most sense and is the direction i'm going. The goal was to keep it as cheap as possible and fix all the problems i was having with the awd car. The spinner esc and spektrum micro reciever was the 1st thing i tested in the car. I only took it out because i can't run lipos on it.
|
|
|
2008.12.28, 02:39 PM
|
#18
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles (Pasadena), CA, USA
Posts: 2,809
|
Hey kenontap, good that you posted, I was literally just looking at pics of your chassis for inspiration.
For my chassis though I require a double-deck design, because of the way I plan to mount the center shaft bearings (to the top deck). Perhaps I can use PN's lower bulkheads like you have, but the upper bulkheads will have to be replaced by G10/CF parts. I'll have to counterbore the holes on the upper deck to get it to fit on the bulkheads properly. But you're absolutely right that it would save time and costs.
Servo saver is a tough one, and I'm really impressed with how you implemented yours. One way I've thought of at the moment is go 1/12 style and run a ball linkage from the servo saver to each knuckle. But with the MA010 tierod that doesn't seem possible. I might have to mirror my current layout to make more space for the steering assembly.
Last edited by color01; 2008.12.28 at 02:48 PM.
|
|
|
2008.12.28, 03:07 PM
|
#19
|
Old Crow Racing
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: N.E. Pennsylvania
Posts: 619
|
Keep it up guys, would like to see a AWD platform like this.
|
|
|
2008.12.28, 06:47 PM
|
#20
|
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
Hi everyone,
As I mentioned in another thread, I got my MA010 so the MRCG AWD is back on the drawing board.
Firsty, I think I have figured out a tierod! I've drawn a modified center shaft bearing holder that leaves room under it for the front tierod (just like the MA010), so you can actually use MA010 tierods! No more complaining about lack of toe options.
Secondly, I am redesigning the upper arms in the name of cost. It will be a simple upper bar across the knuckles, no more fancy machined upper arms. I'll make sure they sweep back far enough for clearance underneath the bodies.
And finally, I would like to know how important the SAS Pro or SAS Pro II are to a current, up-to-date MA010 setup. For simplicity I'd like to keep my current rear end, but if the SAS makes the MA010 insanely faster, then I have no choice but to design the decks to be SAS-Pro-compatible.
Let me know what you think guys!
|
Hi Brian
OH YEAH!!! I personally will certainly 100% go with the SAS.
About front end, I don’t mind if the regular upper plate is used, but an upper arm & lower arm would be nice, if you are considering on creating different wide and optional camber angle, which will have to include longer dog-bones and steering rod. I really don’t mind about the front end too much, I am more concern about weight distribution, fit autoscale body, 94/98 WB adjustability Material quality CF & CNC, lower CG to fit Pan shells, hobby servo for steering and definitely regular & SAS rear end for the preference of the buyer (many like reg- rear and many others SAS). Perhaps ball & link steering system.
Cheers
|
|
|
2008.12.28, 10:13 PM
|
#21
|
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
|
Brian,
Perhaps a small platform (Tray) made of Composite G10/FR-4 Exposy on top of the motor and servo, were the electronic unit PCB would rest on, could be good, in line to prevent the motor heat to transfer to the PCB, as well as electric noise, plus it will add the bit of extra weight you need, in order to balance weight distribution.
Cheers
|
|
|
2008.12.29, 01:21 AM
|
#22
|
The Galliant Dude
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 920
|
Have you considered taking some ideas from the design posted in this thread- http://www.minizracer.com/forums/sho...1&postcount=39
Check the pictures in post 39 and 40 from samy.
__________________
In need of a FET upgrade? PM me!
Concerned about sending off your precious Mini-Z? Don't be!
|
|
|
2008.12.29, 02:47 PM
|
#23
|
Do you want to go fasst??
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami FL./ Sto Dgo, Dom Rep.(The Jungle)
Posts: 1,867
|
Sorry to cut in Action B
Btw, wish ya a very happy new year.
I bet that Brian definitely, will come up with something much better than that modified MA-010, which by the way is far to wide and still the same old quality junk Mini-z offers
Trust this guy, he is an natural ingenious in the field, I haven’t read the 1st issue on his 1st design the MR-CG, to me a great design but 2wd.
The actual chassis on blueprint here, seems a good platform to begin with, and the idea of coming up with an chassis in which you have the option to choose between regular rear end and SAS, will be perfect to satisfied our needs of rear-end preferences, as well as, the possibilities of using the parts already available in the market.
NO WORRY , perhaps Brian will evolutionize this design while in its course of development.
We have to be aware of Color0 questions, to provide him with our needs and demands, so that he can move on with it, while revising our input.
Thx for your time.
Cheers
|
|
|
2008.12.29, 02:52 PM
|
#24
|
Type less Drive More
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: santa clara, ca
Posts: 96
|
Brian,
Looking forward to seeing the awd come along like your 2wd did.
You have time for this and being in school ?
|
|
|
2008.12.29, 06:26 PM
|
#25
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles (Pasadena), CA, USA
Posts: 2,809
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by atallfunguy
You have time for this and being in school ?
|
No, not really. But I do have enough spare time in a day to do some CAD work, and then I can either machine my own prototype when I come back home again, or ask PN to make me one while I'm down in LA.
Judging on Richard's and TJ's feedback, it looks like I'll have to make accomodations for both stock/PN and SAS rear ends, which means I have to copy the stock MA010 mounting points. To do this I have to use nerf wings and then add adapter pieces to them somewhat like PN's 98mm extension kit, so the current design as it stands will have to be scrapped. That's fine, I scrapped 8 previous MRCG designs so this I'm used to.
The hack-and-stick MA010 design won't work because of the battery layout. Perhaps I could do that with battery clips, but I don't have any and so it's more user-friendly to have a pack on one side of the car. Although I agree, their idea was good (my first pic in this thread, now broken, had 3 AAA on one side and 1 AAA on the other).
Anyways, let me get some measurements from the 010, and transfer my CAD software to my new computer, and we'll get started.
Last edited by color01; 2008.12.29 at 06:29 PM.
|
|
|
2009.01.03, 09:00 PM
|
#26
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 71
|
Looks great and Lipo ready.
|
|
|
2009.01.03, 09:48 PM
|
#27
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 101
|
Looks great , I do have one odd thought. How hard would it be to do an SAS system on the front end? That my 2 cents
__________________
MR1.5
MR1.5,i
MR2,2.4
MA010
|
|
|
2009.01.05, 01:13 PM
|
#28
|
finally has an mr02
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 19
|
it'd be pretty hard. you'd have to design upper/lower arms, a new steering system, tierod, and front bodyclip mounting point.
basically, it'd be a total pain to do. results would be good though, so that the front suspension can keep up with the rear suspension.
but then think of all the redesigning that color01 would have to do.
meh, there's always a second version later.
|
|
|
2009.01.05, 03:23 PM
|
#29
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles (Pasadena), CA, USA
Posts: 2,809
|
I'm probably not going to go that all-out with this chassis, as the AWD chassis has been pretty well sorted out already and it wouldn't be cost-effective. What I am planning to do, as of a few days ago:
Front end:
Custom lower bulkheads with attachment points for upper deck
Compatible with MA010 upper bulkhead
Custom tierod, hopefully 1/12 style
Center:
Battery/motor layout as shown earlier in thread, mirrored if necessary
Center shaft mounted to upper deck
Nerf wings off to the side, body clips just in front of the nerf wings
MA010-style rear end mounts, mounted on nerf wings, reaching back inwards
94 and 98mm mount holes
MRCG-style motor mount
What I need to ask about is the possibility of an MR02-offset front end (+2.5mm). We would need a new upper bulkhead and longer CVD's, but it would be extremely worth it from a handling standpoint. It also frees up more room for the servo and tierod(s). Let me know guys!
Last edited by color01; 2009.01.05 at 03:29 PM.
|
|
|
2009.01.05, 03:48 PM
|
#30
|
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
What I need to ask about is the possibility of an MR02-offset front end (+2.5mm). We would need a new upper bulkhead and longer CVD's, but it would be extremely worth it from a handling standpoint. It also frees up more room for the servo and tierod(s). Let me know guys!
|
HI Brian, nice to see your back.
I would go with the Mini-z regular off set to save $ and to have the possibilities of using any of the optional front ends parts all ready in the market. Perhaps according to the # of chassis sold, and based on those owners demand, you can come up later with an optional wide front end kit. I’m totally been objective with this comment.
Cheers
|
|
|
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 08:47 AM.
|
|