torque steer

[rcluke]

do prop driven chassis get bad torque steer with high powered motors ?

[sosidge]

You'll never dial it out completely, tweak the car well and you won't notice, but there will always be a pull in one direction either on or off power.

[rcluke]

so i'd be better off getting another belt driven ?

[sosidge]

I suppose so. I personally wouldn't go back to shafts now, belt cars are that little bit more balanced in handling terms.

[Spr0k3t]

I've got both shaft and belt. The belt is a little more solid... but the shaft is quicker to put down the power when you need it. The split second difference does not really account for much though. The shaft drive will give you a solid accel curve which can be very nice in the flat stuff... but the belt will give you the variance which is a little more forgiving to the animal drivers. With the right setup, you can't tell which is which unless you know the car.

Personal preference: Belt

[chickentikka25]

My TC3 = nearly undriveable (on our low grip track) with a BL. My TC5 = bloomin lovely with a 10.5!

The difference is that the shaft drive immediately transfers (minus minor mechanical losses) the torque from the shaft of the motor to the wheels. So, either god-like thumbs or electronic wizardry need to be employed to tame some of that torque. If you push the stick just 2mm too far, the wheels will break traction and you'll lose time.

Whereas, a belt will tighten and stretch slightly, making for a more forgiving drive and the car will track straighter because there's no torque steer.

On the other hand, if I wanted to do some high speed runs, it would be shaft drive all the way as rolling losses tend to be lower.