oOple.com Forums

oOple.com Forums (http://www.oople.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Car Talk (http://www.oople.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   Why so slim? (http://www.oople.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3249)

loose 19-04-2007 11:25 AM

Why so slim?
 
I know I'm new to the r/c scene but can anyone tell me why lots of new cars seem to be infactuated with getting slimmer?

Are there any huge improvements to handling by keeping the weight as narrow as possible? I only ask cos whilst its great having new cars like the Aero (which undoubtedly looks like its the real deal) I cant help thinking the thin bodies look a bit pants! I saw a Boss Cat at one of the vintage meetings and that looked the dogs! Loved it!

I suppose its the old Kate Moss or Kate Winslet debate. I like a few curves personally!

;)

Lee Martin 19-04-2007 11:28 AM

hey....

its all about the weight distribution.........

a slimmer car has all the weight together, making the car alot more nimble...allowing the weight to transfer quicker and in effect change direction faster.

i have also found having the weight down the centre reduced grip roll and allows the car to be a little more forgiving due to not wanting to roll.....going round the track like a 'spider' lol.

i also think the slimbodies look cool!

but thats jut me!

Lee 19-04-2007 11:28 AM

A narrower chassis will provide greater ground clearance as the car rolls, so it will not bottom out.

they dont look as nice but thats just flavour of the month for now

Lee Martin 19-04-2007 11:37 AM

wait to you seemine all Tel Shelled up...then u will say it looks nice

BenG 19-04-2007 11:38 AM

For some reason I don't see slim cars as Kate moss. She is f'ugly. Plus she is a crack head. If had to race a [notso]supermodel I'd choose her, as she is aerodynamic, and slim :D:D:D

Wraggy 19-04-2007 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pidge (Post 34180)
wait to you seemine all Tel Shelled up...then u will say it looks nice

dont you do you your own shell painting now then lee ???

Chris Doughty 19-04-2007 11:44 AM

Pidge is spot on.

I have also found as mensioned before that a narrow chassis ground out less, and when they do ground out (running the face of a jump) they drag less speed off the car (think of a ski)

slim is the way!

the S4 chassis is moulded carbon fibre with a lovely rounded edge to it, if any extremem bump does managed to touch the chassis its a nice glide over the bump thanks to the rounded edges

Lee Martin 19-04-2007 11:52 AM

the aero is also has rear kick up......

stoping the rear end frm ever slapping down or catching going up a jump....

BenG 19-04-2007 11:58 AM

Calm down lads, dont start a comparison battle.

Or a 'plug-my-car-hijack' :D

Lee Martin 19-04-2007 12:00 PM

nope...just explaining things to someone who is asking...................

wraggy....

no i stop painting to concerntrate on racing....

OldTimer 19-04-2007 12:22 PM

If you look on the corners of the chassis of fatter cars just in front of the rear wishbones, you can see the wear from hitting the ground. And if the chassis is hitting the ground the suspension is not working at its optimum.

Chris Doughty 19-04-2007 12:25 PM

don't worry, we are not scoring off each other.

both our cars are narrow, both our cars went quick at tivvy.

Big E 19-04-2007 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoughtyUK.net (Post 34195)
don't worry, we are not scoring off each other.

both our cars are narrow, both our cars went quick at tivvy.

Mine's old skool width and went quick!!

You saying you chassis never hit the ground as well Jonathon :eh?: ;)

Trouble with thin is it spreads it all out too far in length....not that I'm trying to start anything here, it's hard to have the ideal with such small cars when you have so much to get in them!

OldTimer 19-04-2007 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big E (Post 34200)
You saying you chassis never hit the ground as well Jonathon :eh?: ;)

No not at all :cool: just pointing out one of the differences between a fat and slim chassis, if it gains you 2 sec's during a race this could be the difference between the top of one final and the middle of the following final, as sunday @ Tivvy showed how close everyone is.

MK999 19-04-2007 11:11 PM

The perfect car has a small black hole in the middle where all it's components are and 4 weightless wheels on the longest suspension links possible, car wise anyway, driver wise it'd probably 'handle' too fast for anyone to drive. :p

It's pretty much the same thing as trying to spin a rock on a piece of string in a big circle and a little circle in terms of roll and also steering response, closer it all is to the middle, of either the roll centre or the point the car steers around the better it handles :) Also longer suspension links mean the wheels camber less for the amount of suspension travel you get, for those that were wondering. ;)

Chris Doughty 20-04-2007 06:39 AM

sometimes camber change is a good thing, I have found that there is an 'optimum' lenght for suspension arms and that is less than 'longest'

sim 20-04-2007 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MK999 (Post 34397)
Also longer suspension links mean the wheels camber less for the amount of suspension travel you get, for those that were wondering. ;)

If both top (link) and lower (arm) are of equal length, you can have short arms and zero camber rise.

Chris Doughty 20-04-2007 08:18 AM

but lots of tire scrub....

jimmy 20-04-2007 08:19 AM

Is that where the tyres move in / out as the suspension moves?

Chris Doughty 20-04-2007 08:24 AM

thats the one Jimmy!

it can be a good thing, and also a bad thing,


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
oOple.com