2002.01.31, 12:51 PM
|
#1
|
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Goodrich MI
Posts: 6,164
|
My custom mini chassis design...
I have a chassis design I have been working on for a while... since around the time I got my Z, a year ago. It will be a chassis with the works... it so far has everything... and its a PAIN IN THE BUTT to fit everything under a 1/28 or 1/24 scale body shell!!
I have seen others do this on the RC aircraft forum with plane designs, telling the progress with out actualy showing the model for intelecual property issues... and aquireing input etc. to make it better as its being designed rather then AFTER.
I have redesigned it like 20 or so times already, and currently altering it yet again to fit more stuff in.
While its still in the design stage, I wish to ask this, what would any of racers like to be adjustable on a chassis? So far I have a lot that can be adjusted in the current design... and all of it can be adjusted with out buying extra parts. Unfortunatly for those that wish to keep sinking more money into a chassis, this will come with 90% of the mods possible no upgrading will realy be needed... even if you use a model body .
So far the current alterations possible are numorous, and some that just dont realy need to be there and are just there cuz it fits.
With out buying more parts its drive train possibilities are FWD - RWD - 4WD.
It is steering capabilities are FWS - RWS - 4WS (the part thats not realy needed
I have toe in and camber, I have length adjustability for various bodies, upto a 1/25 scale pickup, and a bit bigger, almost enough that it can be used as a 1/18 scale chassis. Its width is also adjustable, but only in 3 or 4 settings with out installing more parts.
Its suspension is four wheel independent, based on the A arm style all the way around.
Its ride hieght can be adjusted for realy high jeeps and trucks, or realy low for 1mm low riders.
It will come with full ball bearings installed every were it would need them, so far its upto 20 bearings, for the axles differentials etc. The differentials are ball based, no room for bulky plastic gears.
It will be able to accept the Autoscale Mini-Z parts, the rims and bodies. It will also if i can get it to fit, allow the Mini-Z ESC/RX board, but not the servo, I am designing it for a standard sub-micro or micro servo.
When I finish the diagrams and send in the patent papers I will have 3D cad renders, and with any luck a photo of a proto type. But that could take me a year at the rate I keep redoing it all...
Its week spots are some axles and shafts screws etc.. are a very small 1.75mm diameter.. close to the Mini-Z screws etc.. but I was hoping to use slightly larger ones, but this will have to do to save space. If these hold up, it will be able to take a dive off of a table at full speed and keep going.
Based on only this info, would any one even remotely want such an animal? -- And would it be worth the 150-300$ range (lots of expensive parts, but I plan to sell it as cheap as I can)? for just the chassis alone, no electronics or body etc... Concider it slightly better then a FULLY upgraded Mini-Z or RS4...
My goal is not to make the Mini-Z obsolete, but maybe promote Kyosho and the others to build someting better in the durrability category, or maybe they will just buy my design-pattent, and to prove it can be done.
Last edited by Draconious; 2002.01.31 at 12:54 PM.
|
|
|
2002.01.31, 01:14 PM
|
#2
|
2-Z or not 2-Z...
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Open Road
Posts: 2,678
|
Draco,
It sounds like a great kit and I think many people would love to have something like that but it's all just smoke and mirrors until we atleast see a real prototype.
I like the idea of using standard sized hardware, bearings, ball diffs, dampers and rims/tires.
The main issue for me would be replacement parts.
|
|
|
2002.01.31, 02:29 PM
|
#3
|
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 8,497
|
Drac, sounds cool, but is there anything you can show us?
|
|
|
2002.02.01, 01:39 AM
|
#4
|
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Goodrich MI
Posts: 6,164
|
The design is actualy too up in the air to actualy show any thing... but I dont realy want too either, hey im paranoid, i've had ideas stolen before. And mini-z I once asked for access to your CnC shop, wich I obviously cant do , this is why.. you would have seen the prototypes birth, although not for upto a year... I guess I need to get a job at a place that has a metal based laser printer thingamabob, then just sneek my file into the print queue hehe.
|
|
|
2002.02.04, 02:28 AM
|
#5
|
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Goodrich MI
Posts: 6,164
|
Ok... as of today I am redoing it YET AGAIn!! gota make more room for the control arms and servo... unless I stick with a sub micro servo, not sure how strong those are, they should do just fine compared to the stock servo gears in the Mini-Z though.
From what I can tell the Mini-Z's tires turn about 32 degrees from straight on, and turn in parallel. My chassis, with current dimensions, but not actualy implemented into the design yet, is about 40 degrees, and might be able to turn a bit more, but I am using 40 as the design, and turns the inside tire a bit more then the outside tire...
Right now the current control set I am shoving in it, starts with the front tires parralel while going straight, but when they turn they develope toe out... I am asuming this is a good thing and Might just leave it in the design... but I am trying to figure out how much toe out I should leave as the default setting... trying to figure out were the CENTER point of the cars turning radius should be.. if the point should be inline with the rear tires or forward of it.. I can see inline being ok for slow wide turns, and forward of it like middle of the car, better for drifting maybe? allowing the front tires to stay in line with the turning circumfrance and rears slipping out an inch or so... I guess I will just find a MID POINT some were and let the racer adjust it...
Does any one have some silly formulas or something to figure simlar things out? Kart racers etc might use them or larger scale RC, some one might have info handy .
I guess for now I will aim for a mid point some were for the turn radius.
And what are the smallest ball joints servo arm type things I can get? I need to use smaller ones then larger RC cars to get more control throw room for the servo etc.... egad its cramped under the body shell with 4wd and tripple ball diffs - but using MICRO electronics it will fit perfectly, larger ones will need plastic casings removed...
With any luck I will actualy make a car better then the RS4, but I kinda doubt it.. seeing as I never designed a RC chassis before .
Current down side I forgot to mention, or maybe I did up there and just dont wana find it again... is alot of the proto type I am going to make will be machined aluminum or similar metals... its going to WEIGH A LOT! hehehe... I will have to put large tires on it and climb over mini-Zs... after I make it out of metals, I will pick and choose wich parts will be OK and safe to make out of plastic...
Last edited by Draconious; 2002.02.04 at 02:31 AM.
|
|
|
2002.02.04, 11:16 AM
|
#6
|
2-Z or not 2-Z...
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Open Road
Posts: 2,678
|
History 101
It's called ackerman steering discovered by Ackerman. I think he was a buggy/wagon maker.
"Conventional Ackerman Steering was developed around 1800 AD. Yes, 1800, not 1900. The Ackerman concept is to have all four wheels rolling around a common point during a turn."
This is suppose to be the optimum set up and fine for drifting, because when drifting you can have 2 to 4 separate turning axis' nullifying ackerman.
|
|
|
2002.02.04, 08:15 PM
|
#7
|
Zen_gineer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Border, SC
Posts: 1,363
|
Draconius,
Are you using a bellcrank steering arrangement or a direct link like the original mini-z?
With a bellcrank arrangement, the ackerman can be adjusted by changing the pivot point on the individual bell cranks.
Too much ackerman can make the car somewhat unpredictable in the corners and scrub off speed due to the varied wheel angles. Some ackerman is almost always used because it is hard to engineer out of typical steering connections in R/C and it can be beneficial if more aggressive steering is demanded.
__________________
Racing is a state of mind....and I've lost it
|
|
|
2002.02.05, 06:13 AM
|
#8
|
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Goodrich MI
Posts: 6,164
|
I have a few arms controlling the steering its simlar to an RC10 right now.. but the way I change things it could wind up being controlled by ESP... --- how much is too much? How many differing degrees would be OK, and how much is too much? It LOOKS right to me now, but that dont mean any thing . I think the way I have it its easily adjusted from below 0 degrees to 14 degrees... and maybe more if you go crazy hehe.
I will go and redo it if I have too... I think I have it set up so its possible to adjust it with some know how, to a parralell turn... since all 3 points will be adjustable, tie rod, and left and right buckle arms.
It has to be adjustable since I have the ride height adjustable. -- current ride hieght changes are now at 0 to 8mm ground clearance... but I have the body with dual mount possistions a high and low place to snap it on, to raise it up another 5mm for 4x4 truck bodies etc hehe... (not monster just offroad).
|
|
|
2002.02.05, 08:19 PM
|
#9
|
Zen_gineer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Border, SC
Posts: 1,363
|
Drac,
Sorry, never actually measured it so I won´t be any help.
My experience comes from racing the 1/10 scale buggies for 20+ years.
It has only really come to my attention with the advent of computer aided design work in the off-road buggies. Losi, in particular, has done extensive testing with different ackerman settings and how it affects the handling characteristics of the car.
They make their XXX with a stock setting and an optional more aggressive setting that increases the ackerman. Tried both but the stock setting was plenty aggressive to me. Maybe a post on the Trinity Tech Talk forum would net you answer. Good Luck!
__________________
Racing is a state of mind....and I've lost it
|
|
|
2003.08.10, 10:26 PM
|
#10
|
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Goodrich MI
Posts: 6,164
|
A thread from the dead...
I gave up a lot of features due to reality... I think im on my 60th or so revision, and this one might be the one to go into "production" of a prototype... Ironicly one of the few parts I have yet to do on this current design is the stearing linkages
Along with the steering linkages, I have to come up with some custom way of mounting the nose of the body.. since I needed the space around were the nose plates would ordinarily screw in.. the good part I guess is, that I have an idea to make one group of parts adjustable to fit all the body noses there is.
Current major flaw in the design is the motor is on top of the batteries... It was a nessessary comprimise for space.. and getting the heavier batteries lower. Although if one puts a larger RS4 motor in it its gona get extra top heavy... (yes some of them will fit, the big block will require different motor mount though)... the motor might still be low enough and centered enough to not realy effect it that much...
I have been very tempted to upload shade-renders of the chassis, but I will continue to wait till I actualy have a proto type chassis to take a photo off... if I ever find a place to make me the complex parts some very small alloy parts and plastic/nylon will be needed, along with custom gears...
I managed to retain all 3 differentials etc.. its still got 2 drive belts.
The length should fit Racer Racer 2.0 and Overland bodies... 86 to 111mm wheel base adjustable in 1mm increments, so should fit any model body in that range fairly decently... The exception would be the stratos, fit, vitz, and beetle, bodies, the rear end is jsut too long and i cant shorten it enough to let them fit... filing of the chassis or body might allow them to cram in there though... the pugot cooper and RSI should still fit since they are longer bodies... the speed racer will also not fit due to the motor location.. with out opening the ****pit up.. but then again It might fit...
I did sacrifice the WIDTH adjustment, before I let the chassis get wider... this will have to be an add on kit for those who wish to use model bodies... a set of custom A arms that are longer or someting... along with longer dogbones.
Too save space I did make it so a certain part needs to be glued together... but it shouldnt be so bad, since the parts that mount to it sort of hold it together, might find out I dont even need the glue when I make a prototype.
|
|
|
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 10:14 AM.
|
|