2015.10.18, 08:48 AM
|
#16
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 35,480
|
When will PN post instructions so we can see what's involved in the build? Very little to go by on the website.
|
|
|
2015.10.18, 09:25 AM
|
#17
|
Curmudgeon & Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kannapolis, NC
Posts: 2,549
|
Curious as to weight of chassis as well. Nice that everything is positioned very low but at what overall penalty to gross weight.
|
|
|
2015.10.18, 10:06 AM
|
#18
|
PN RacingTEAM Driver
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: southern calfornia
Posts: 1,530
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mleemor60
Curious as to weight of chassis as well. Nice that everything is positioned very low but at what overall penalty to gross weight.
|
1.2 get heavier
|
|
|
2015.10.18, 10:08 AM
|
#19
|
PN RacingTEAM Driver
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: southern calfornia
Posts: 1,530
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by arch2b
When will PN post instructions so we can see what's involved in the build? Very little to go by on the website.
|
Edit... Instructions are being made...
It is a direct chassis swap from the 03 aside from needing to solder in the bridge wire to your liking
|
|
|
2015.10.18, 10:51 AM
|
#20
|
Curmudgeon & Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kannapolis, NC
Posts: 2,549
|
So, using an appropriate length of PN motor wire as a guideline and a dab or two of solder it will add an additional .5g to the overall weight of the package. How is the weight distribution front to rear with electronics(Kyosho board and servo installed) but less front suspension and rear pod/suspension?
Will the battery clips be available separately or will you have to purchase a complete new chassis unit?
|
|
|
2015.10.18, 06:02 PM
|
#21
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 876
|
Testing at MC3
Our results have confirmed this chassis is faster than the stock Kyosho chassis. For us, contrary to other comments, it's not a straight swap. There is some work to do. Specifically if you want to use the current iteration of the double a-arm front suspension, you have to do some cutting. Also, for the servo cover, it had to be sanded in order to make the Kyosho mr03 board fit (it's longer than the pn board). Also some other small tweaks. I'm sure, if you don't have a thorough and detailed guy building it, this may not be concerns. Like I said, it was built and tested by our fastest racer. For us, testing yielded a faster lap time of about .5 sec. Where our fastest lap right now is around 7.5 sec.
We would recommend this chassis at this time.
__________________
Mini-Car Club of Canada (MC3)
Premier Mini-Z Race Track & dNaNo Sales in Toronto, ON Canada
www minicarclubofcanada com
|
|
|
2015.10.19, 11:28 AM
|
#22
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Reading Pa.
Posts: 4,124
|
So my next logical line of thought would be...
All PN RTR 1/28th car release will be on ??/??/????.
|
|
|
2015.10.19, 11:35 AM
|
#23
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 582
|
I doubt they would sell an rtr chassis. With the state of Mini-z it is much safer to sell individual products and work with better margins. I thought the same thing but if they were going to offer an rtr than they probably would have released that first just from a business perspective.
__________________
ATOMIC RC TEAM DRIVER
rcatomic.com
demracing.net
DMR MPC 1/27th Aftermarket Pan Chassis
|
|
|
2015.10.19, 01:11 PM
|
#24
|
PN RacingTEAM Driver
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: southern calfornia
Posts: 1,530
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinister_Y
Our results have confirmed this chassis is faster than the stock Kyosho chassis. For us, contrary to other comments, it's not a straight swap. There is some work to do. Specifically if you want to use the current iteration of the double a-arm front suspension, you have to do some cutting. Also, for the servo cover, it had to be sanded in order to make the Kyosho mr03 board fit (it's longer than the pn board). Also some other small tweaks. I'm sure, if you don't have a thorough and detailed guy building it, this may not be concerns. Like I said, it was built and tested by our fastest racer. For us, testing yielded a faster lap time of about .5 sec. Where our fastest lap right now is around 7.5 sec.
We would recommend this chassis at this time.
|
The cutting of the chassis and servo cover is a given as this will need to be done on any chassis the AA a arm is installed on
If u run the stock front end then it is a direct swap....
If installing the brushless board... the servo motor holder has a bung on top and will need to be cut off to allow clearance for the longer board
|
|
|
2015.10.19, 03:09 PM
|
#25
|
Curmudgeon & Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kannapolis, NC
Posts: 2,549
|
No response to my request for information on balance front to rear less kibble?
|
|
|
2015.10.19, 03:28 PM
|
#26
|
PN RacingTEAM Driver
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: southern calfornia
Posts: 1,530
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mleemor60
No response to my request for information on balance front to rear less kibble?
|
The weight gain was measured from my total car I will need to measure front to rear balance as I have not done this... Hahaha however... The front clip servo cage servo motor and board is in the same locations as the 03 chassis... The battery's are Lowe and wider than the 03 chassis but are in the same location in reference to the front and rear of the chassis
|
|
|
2015.10.19, 04:56 PM
|
#27
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Reading Pa.
Posts: 4,124
|
Weight moved outboard for stability?
Also, any plans for a lion or lipo configuration in the future?
|
|
|
2015.10.19, 05:16 PM
|
#28
|
Curmudgeon & Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kannapolis, NC
Posts: 2,549
|
That's good. However, how does the additional 1.2g plus the additional .5g for wire and solder(positioned high in the rear of the chassis) affect the front to rear percentage? Seems like the additional weight even down low will have an effect on roll couple. Maybe positive. Increasing the width will raise the polar moment of inertia which could add some transitional stability.
Also, how about the battery clip question. Available separate or do you have to spring for another chassis assembly?
Keep up the good work I really like the new batteries.
Last edited by mleemor60; 2015.10.19 at 05:19 PM.
|
|
|
2015.11.11, 04:00 PM
|
#29
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 74
|
PNR2.5W at the world's
wondering how did it perform at the world's (last weekend)...
Lots of top drivers using both kyosho original and new pnr2.5 chassis.
|
|
|
2015.11.11, 04:17 PM
|
#30
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 582
|
From the looks of the gt mod results the shapeways chassis by JesseT did very well and the PN team did not do as well. There may be more info but based on the A-Main results that seems to be what happened.
On a seperate note, at my local track a few guys were running these chassis both with Nimh and Lipo (in AAA form) and they did not seem to be that impresive. They were probably just as good as an std Mr-03 chassis with the AAA lipo batteries but they were not head and shoulders better. It seems their main advantage is it will be easier to use aftermarket esc and reciever and the plastic should hold up much better than the std kyosho chassis. I think if you break you std chassis this would be a viable replacement but I don't think it is as important an upgrade as an A-Arm and cannot be directly compared to the other aftermarket chassis like that of JesseT or the MRX.
__________________
ATOMIC RC TEAM DRIVER
rcatomic.com
demracing.net
DMR MPC 1/27th Aftermarket Pan Chassis
|
|
|
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 11:16 AM.
|
|