|
|
Post by Young Guns on Apr 22, 2007 16:55:08 GMT -7
We just got done with our dis. and council race. One thing winning cars always seem to have was the fastest starts. What are some thing's I can do to have better starts? We can not run lighten wheels.
|
|
|
|
Post by Quillen Racing on Apr 22, 2007 18:50:39 GMT -7
We just got done with our dis. and council race. One thing winning cars always seem to have was the fastest starts. What are some thing's I can do to have better starts? We can not run lighten wheels.
If you take lightened wheels out of the equation, then it's pretty much axle/wheel prep, and lube. |
|
|
|
Post by JOKER on Apr 22, 2007 21:08:21 GMT -7
We just got done with our dis. and council race. One thing winning cars always seem to have was the fastest starts. What are some thing's I can do to have better starts? We can not run lighten wheels. Moving the COM (weight) forward will make you quicker off the peg. There is a tradeoff........this car will have less PE (juice) for the flat......it will depend on the length of the flat & type of slope whether or not a car with COM farther back will catch up. |
|
|
|
Post by Tye Racing on Apr 23, 2007 8:12:28 GMT -7
YOung, i noticed that in the March and APril videos, my cars would get down the slope, usually first, then get caught in the flat. i was making my COM at 1-1.25". for May we have moved everything back to 0.50-0.75 and hope this makes a difference. my sons new Stock car for May has the COM at 0.25", this will be new for us since we have never ventured that far back. Of course, i always need better axle/wheel prep but there are only 24hours in a day and i have to work sometime.. wait, im at work right now!!  |
|
|
|
Post by derbydoc on Apr 24, 2007 15:34:48 GMT -7
Im also looking to move the COM back a little.
|
|
|
|
Post by 94 GT Laser RC on Apr 24, 2007 17:12:17 GMT -7
Could be grooved axles? With less contact of the inner hub against the axle, there will definitely be less friction and easier turning off the peg.
Also, once you have matched the axle and wheel, and you feel the wheels are 'ready', you can sit down while watching a TV show and just keep spinning the wheels in the direction they will turn on the car, with the lube on it, to "break in" the wheel/axle combo..
Hope this helps some, along with the other replies!
RC
|
|
|
|
Post by JOKER on Apr 24, 2007 19:37:24 GMT -7
Could be grooved axles? With less contact of the inner hub against the axle, there will definitely be less friction and easier turning off the peg.
..........the main advantage a grooved axle gives you is a graphite reservoir.
................any other opinions? |
|
|
|
Post by Quillen Racing on Apr 24, 2007 19:59:18 GMT -7
I think we should send this one to Myth-Busters! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Tye Racing on Apr 24, 2007 20:10:11 GMT -7
the groove gives less chance for error when preparing the axle since less is contacting the wheel.
also, the physics part Joker mentioned is true. you see all the ebay ads that say 'less friction' but that is not correct. sounds good though.
|
|
|
|
Post by JOKER on Apr 24, 2007 20:15:18 GMT -7
any help here seems to need 1 key element to take into consideration.
the type of track???
best track vs. wood
So if all other variables are the same between two cars:
The length of the flat will determine the winner between two cars with different weight placements. |
|
|
|
Post by 94 GT Laser RC on Apr 25, 2007 6:18:26 GMT -7
the groove gives less chance for error when preparing the axle since less is contacting the wheel. also, the physics part Joker mentioned is true. you see all the ebay ads that say 'less friction' but that is not correct. sounds good though. The only part of that whole thing I would question is this: If the car is completely at rest, then the argument of the " end points of the grooves are supporting more weight" seems more logical. However, put the wheels in motion, and the force leaves the downward directions and swings outward. Then it "seems" to make sense that less contact would be less friction. Havings said that, I have NO physics equations that show or prove this... just what appears to be logical. I have spun the same wheels over a set of polished axles and polished grooved axles, both withOUT graphite, and the grooved ones do spin better. If anyone has any scientific proof that shows what is said is completely off the wall, I will be glad to take a look at it. It's what we are here to do...learn!! Thanks for the counter-points! RC |
|
|
|
Post by F.A.S.T Racing on Apr 25, 2007 7:03:22 GMT -7
the groove gives less chance for error when preparing the axle since less is contacting the wheel. also, the physics part Joker mentioned is true. you see all the ebay ads that say 'less friction' but that is not correct. sounds good though. The only part of that whole thing I would question is this: If the car is completely at rest, then the argument of the " end points of the grooves are supporting more weight" seems more logical. However, put the wheels in motion, and the force leaves the downward directions and swings outward. [/size] Then it "seems" to make sense that less contact would be less friction. Havings said that, I have NO physics equations that show or prove this... just what appears to be logical. I have spun the same wheels over a set of polished axles and polished grooved axles, both withOUT graphite, and the grooved ones do spin better. If anyone has any scientific proof that shows what is said is completely off the wall, I will be glad to take a look at it. It's what we are here to do...learn!! Thanks for the counter-points! RC[/quote]  SAY WHAT
I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but gravity always pulls
toward the center of the Earth.
The weight of the car body is still being pulled toward the Earth.
The car body is not "spinning", or exerting centrifugal force.
Depending upon angle,on the start ramp for example,
the contact point of the axle changes compared to when it's on the flat.
The weight is constant & must be divided by the contact points.
Now RC, If you've come up with a new 'anti-gravity' paint.......
please send me some in Hemi Orange LOL
Now my Brainpan hurts................ |
|
|
|
Post by 94 GT Laser RC on Apr 25, 2007 7:16:45 GMT -7
When I read your reply and try to read mine with a different perspective, I can see how what I wrote caused the confusion. If you ride in one of those spinning carnival rides, and as it goes faster, your weight becomes LESS on the seat you are in and more towards that sides. The gravity is still there, yes, but the weight is not all "down" onto the seat.. it is outward. Now, whether this is wrong or not, hopefully it at least clarifies a little more of how Im looking at it. As far as "anti gravity" paint....HEMI ORANGE??  RC |
|
|
|
Post by F.A.S.T Racing on Apr 25, 2007 7:48:10 GMT -7
If you ride in one of those spinning carnival rides, and as it goes faster, your weight becomes LESS on the seat you are in and more towards that sides.[/b] The gravity is still there, yes, but the weight is not all "down" onto the seat.. it is outward. RC[/quote] Actually RC when a 5oz Derby car goes through the curve of a Best Track it's pulling 3g's ! That 5oz car momentarily weighs 15 oz  (almost a pound!) That far out strips any centrifugal force of 3 gram wheels. |
|
|
|
Post by 94 GT Laser RC on Apr 25, 2007 17:59:45 GMT -7
Makes sense, but as I said, I have NO facts or scientific proof to back up my comment...I was bringing it up as what may seem logical in some sense.
If this is true though, why are "H-tread" wheels supposedly faster than stock, and the claims are "less surface contact" when the same theory should be true.... the outer H-treads are supporting the extra weight and really dont reduce friction?
Thanks
RC
(Changed my sig to something more important than a Mustang)
|
|
SAY WHAT 
(almost a pound!)
