speedy_w_beans 4272 Posted February 20, 2015 No long introductions or extensive writing this time. Enjoy the pictures as the build progresses! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisRx718 4470 Posted February 20, 2015 Schwing! Nice. I had the TA05R (still have it) and it was my first proper TC. Everything just went together so well, the only hop-ups I fitted consisted of an aluminium motor protector bar (side of the chassis) and the centre aluminium bulkhead. I could never afford the two aluminium bulkheads at either end. Why did the TA series move away from the equal-length drive belt? I assume there was no real positive advantage afterall? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butler 338 Posted February 20, 2015 I think the TA06 is all about getting the battery in the middle of the car. Mass centralization. So they just build the drive train around it. I can see the logic, but the TRF cars haven't gone this way though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisRx718 4470 Posted February 20, 2015 Seems kind of odd given the advances in battery technology mean that it's now quite a light component. So how is it fitted, is it from beneath? Can't download a manual cos my phone is playing up! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyForbes 63 Posted February 20, 2015 The battery is fitted using 4 screws on the bottom of the car. My theory is they put the two heaviest components in the centre of the vehicle to balance the car for 'novice' racers who may not have the technical setup knowledge to use weights to balance the car evenly like you would in a higher end chassis. The FF03 and M06 which are of the same era also share the centre battery setup. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy_w_beans 4272 Posted February 21, 2015 I think the purpose of mass centralization is to make the chassis more responsive to input. As an illustration, take a ruler and tape a heavy fishing weight at each end of it. Grab the ruler in the middle and start twisting it back and forth like a baton. You'll feel some resistance to changes in rotation. Now relocate the weights to the center of the ruler, grab the center again, and twist it back and forth again. The mass of the ruler and weights is the same, and the center of all that mass is the same, but you'll feel less resistance to changes in rotation because the mass is centralized. This is called reducing the moment of inertia along an axis. The battery and the motor are two of the heaviest single components in a car. A 6000 mAh hard case LiPo can weigh about 300 grams, and a 540 brushless motor can weigh about 160 grams. If those two items are located along the roll axis of the car instead of along the sides of the chassis, then the car will respond more quickly in transitions as it rolls from side to side. If those two items are located closer to the yaw axis of the car, then it will steer/rotate more quickly. The basic physics and equations for moments of inertia support this. It's like moving the fishing weights closer to the center of the ruler. As far as why the TRF cars haven't gone in this direction, I have to assume there's extra drivetrain friction with two belts plus a gearbox versus just two belts. Maybe the gain in chassis responsiveness is negated by a loss of top speed, and it just doesn't translate into better results in a world competition setting. For the average club racer, it may very well be that you want a different chassis depending on the track layout and class being run. My hypothesis is: - Low power motor: TB03/TB04, shaft drive for best drivetrain efficiency but loses stability with higher power motors - Higher power motor, flowing track: TA05V2, dual belt drive for good top speed and no torque steer effects since there is no center prop shaft - Higher power motor, technical track: TA06 for steering responsiveness and no torque steer, but sacrifice some top end speed due to the extra gearbox I plan to do some side-by-side testing in a few months when the weather gets warmer to see if this hypothesis really holds true. I need to see if physics theory and engineering design really holds true in real world settings, and if it makes sense to have a palette of chassis to work with. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy_w_beans 4272 Posted February 21, 2015 Note: Light coating of black RTV silicone used to seal both sides of the paper gasket. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy_w_beans 4272 Posted February 21, 2015 Note: "Rock 'n' Roll" Absolute Dry lube used on gears. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cplus 94 Posted February 21, 2015 Have you chosen your motor yet? These things are extremely picky. Anything with bent over tabs (novak, trinity, orion - many others) will be a pain to fit. Best bet is a speed passion with the tabs at the end of the can! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy_w_beans 4272 Posted February 21, 2015 I have a motor preference, and it looks like I'll be using a Dremel and a few files to trim some of the rear gearbox brace for the motor tabs. That's really too bad; I think the same issue is present on the FF03 as well? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
volvotech 101 Posted February 21, 2015 I've been eyeing one of these, it might have to join my fleet soon. I'll be following this build for sure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy_w_beans 4272 Posted February 22, 2015 I have to put this build on pause for about a week due to work; expect more progress next weekend... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy_w_beans 4272 Posted February 28, 2015 Note: Dry graphite used to lube the CVDs front and rear. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tamiya1/10 382 Posted March 1, 2015 Just wondering has any other make considered using 2 motors, say 380 motors, one for front and one for rear to rid the drive shaft or belt altogether. Keeping the battery and motor(s) close to centre of the model would be the best set up. Just look at real world cars from F1, F2, Indy, rally cars and super performance sport cars, all the weight is concentrated in the centre. I think what stopping using of 380 size motor for front and rear seems to be lack of selection for this size motor. So far, i keep seeing rc cars getting more and more complicated vs keeping it simple like those F1 and pan cars. Maybe there is a game changer design currently in the works and will set1:10 rc world on its head, which usually happens every once in a while in all areas. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy_w_beans 4272 Posted March 1, 2015 I've seen some one-off custom projects using dual motors, but nothing made by a brand name manufacturer.. I think it would be cool to add front brakes to a F103GT. Rear direct drive plus front brakes should still be pretty simple, but easier to drive since the rear won't be doing the braking anymore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy_w_beans 4272 Posted March 1, 2015 I picked the wrong ball connectors for the front links, so they were replaced with the correct ones a few steps later. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
