|
Post by chrisguyw on Oct 12, 2017 9:16:17 GMT -5
Hi Guys, Before the cars were tested/qualified, I gave each one a good look over (bodies remained on), taking notes of any issues. During qualifying any on track issues were also recorded.
While the cars as a group were very good indeed, I did find some things that limited the performance of some of the cars on my track..........so, I hope to illustrate a few things that you can incorporate into future builds. (I have not adjusted/repaired any of the cars)
So..............in completely random order........
Car #2...Davids' Ferrari
To my eye, the most gorgeous of the bunch...(I am still pondering not sending it on). There are two issues with the car that hampered performance...
1/Very limited guide rotation...... The guide barely rotates 15/20 degrees in either direction which means that the car must be driven with very small slip angles before it does a "tankslapper"............so, be careful not to slide too much or the guide will hit its stop, and really unsettle (deslot) the car. Like any car, going forward gives quicker lap times than sliding sideways but, in this case, the lack of rotation is enough that it does not inspire confidence....likely worth a half a tenth per lap.
2/ Significant wobble in the left front wheel....While the wheel/tire unit is trued well, it wobbles (a lot) as a unit on the axle, as a result of a relatively small bearing surface on these narrow wheels. This causes the front end to oscillate slightly, reducing straight line speed, and, produces less than consistent cornering. While an independent front end has some advantages, (assuming no wheel wobble), any wobble more than offsets these advantages, and hurts lap times. Our club members have resorted to a "solid" front end if they have found this "wobble", with faster lap times resulting.
Both the above are easy fixes (you could easily lock the set screw on the offending left front wheel), and fixing both issues would easily contribute a tenth or two.
Car #69...Marek's Ferrari
A very solid performer, (it finished second) and it had by far the fastest terminal straight line speed (a 25K motor geared 9/23 will certainly provide that), however, that speed came at a price....No Brakes !!. While the car circulated very quickly it had to be "flowed" around the track, and I believe an 8T pinion would certainly help matters, by letting it be driven a touch more aggressively. The one piece PP chassis does have some torsional flex, but, It does not have enough to compensate for the amount of vertical front axle travel that the chassis in stock form possess. An axle tube/bushings on the front end would eliminate this travel and would make for a more stable car......an easy 1/2 tenths to be found.
Car # 23.....Bob's Honda
I think that this is your first F1 proxy??.......thanks for participating and a good first build...
Another PP chassis, which would also benefit from a front axle tube/bushings. (see above) Bob, your car does have some fairly worn rear axle bushings (a lot of rear axle slop) which did cause some "chatter", and over time will likely cause some gear woes. Additionally, by using axle spacers on only one side of the rear axle, you only control lash in one direction. As you currently have it set up, in left hand corners, the axle is free to shift and let the crown run hard against the pinion, causing friction/gear wear issues. I can see that you left the motor shaft long enough to run in the Crown trough, but, being 1.5mm it is too thin to alleviate this situation.
Time to walk the doggies..........I will continue this afternoon
Cheers Chris Walker
PS If anyone needs any more specifics, or,has questions/comments please let me know
|
|
|
Post by chrisguyw on Oct 12, 2017 11:34:18 GMT -5
On to the next batch.............
Car #19...Marc's McLaren
A really nicely detailed car (as expected), and your chassis design/build is very well thought out and executed........ looks factory........applause!!
As previously illustrated, (in the General car observations thread) your right front wheel sits off the track by 20/30 thou., coupled with a fairly stiff torsionally flexing chassis, allows the car to tip (both entering and exiting corners) allowing the left rear to lift off the track....reducing traction, and giving less than consistent cornering. (This instability can also be seen on the straights. Additionally, you have assembled the car with the narrowest track in the field (4mm less than average on both the front and rear) which magnifies the issue. These remedied, you car would be much further up the finishing order.
As far as your guide lead, while you could certainly extend this by 5/6 mm (and it would further help stabilize the car), there are 4/5 cars currently running in the proxy with similar guide lead dimensions. Guide lead is not the guides relative position to the front axle...it is the distance from the centerline of the guide post to the centerline of the rear axle that is the defining performance measure. (Guide lead needs a thread of its own as it is complicated, depending on tire grip, track grip, chassis flex, track configuration, etc. etc.)
So, while lengthening the guide lead will certainly help, ensuring both tires are in contact with the track, and maximizing the track on these relatively narrow cars will pay the biggest dividends. Until these are addressed it is hard to evaluate the remaining chassis bits, but , fixing these would be worth a couple of tenths. That said, good job!!
Car # 47....Terry's Honda
For a car that has won 2 of the first 3 rounds, there is little fault to be found, with the NSR rubber the only slightly limiting factor on my track....and, only slightly limiting as the car was only 20 feet ( 2 seconds) out of a second place overall finish. Both front wheels are very slightly off the track, and with a stiffer chassis this would be an issue, but, Terry has built in enough torsional flex into his "Flexi Board" design chassis that this potential issue has been negated.
The only nitpicking issue is that the front axle does do spin as freely as it could (maybe a bit of stuff in the axle tube), but with the fronts tires just a hair off the track, this is not really problematic.
The car is a delight to dive, with the performance of the NSR's, still the only question on the remaining wood tracks......well done Terry!!
Car #6.....Dale's Eagle
Clearly, a basically stock Scaley can be made to run very well, and with a few binding issues resolved, this car would be much more competitive.
The front axle does not turn freely, and I strongly suspect (I have not opened the car) that the thicker than stock lead wires are fouling the front axle......this is common, and some thinner wires with some careful routing will rectify this.
Secondly, the rear axle is bound up robbing acceleration/top speed. Without opening the car, I suspect that the back side of the Slot-it Crown is rubbing the chassis/body sides and forcing the crown against the pinion. There is no gear lash which also suggests this situation to be the case. While the mesh is still smooth (and I would not anticipate any transmission issues in the remaining rounds) the friction does rob speed , and , I did notice that the motor ran a tad warm, again, as a result of the binding.
Dale, I have built several of these cars for the guys at the local track, and in all cases I have had to grind/re profile the back side any aftermarket Crown, and in some cases, reduce its diameter, in order to eliminate binding. As well I have often had to grind the chassis/body to achieve this. The Eagle is the Scaley car that has proven to be the most problematic........more work than the others but, very doable......and lots more speed to come!!
My two typing fingers now need a rest!!
Cheers Chris Walker
|
|
|
Post by chrisguyw on Oct 12, 2017 14:18:10 GMT -5
Onwards.......... Car #5......Peter's Lotus As with all the Scaley Classic F1 cars, the chassis/body/front suspension bits are easy to twist out of alignment when tightening the body/chassis screws, and this one falls into that category, with the left front running roughly 25 thou. off the track. With a Scaley chassis that has little if no torsional flex, the front end easily tips to the left, lifting the right rear off the track in any right hand corner making the car unstable, and reducing traction. This is also apparent exiting right hand corners, and, the car is still trying to find its feet part way down the straights. The thick aftermarket lead wires are, I suspect, slightly rubbing the front axle, leaving it turning less freely than is ideal. Both are easy fixes, that would transform the car. Car #13.......Brian's BRM A really nicely turned out car all round, with no particular vices, and a very well engineered/constructed chassis......nice job!! Nothing really stands out as an issue, but, if I was looking for a little more speed, I would reduce the weight by 5/10 grams (from its current 75 gms)...........the car is flat/square/true enough to not need the excess baggage to keep it on the track, and , this 10% reduction in weight, will certainly liven up the car. Although the lengths of brass tubing you have used for the rear bushings are OK, oilites will provide more precision and a tad less rolling resistance.....again well done! Car #11...Andi's Eagle Another gorgeous car that I would really like not to have to send on to the next track. Two issues Andi...one small, one larger, (especially for wood tracks) The small one first....The inside edges of your rear tires are very square, and putting a small radius on these will eliminate some corner chatter and will let the car transition more smoothly. This issue is minor, and takes seconds to fix, but it is magnified by the effects of the second more important issue. The pod section of your car is loose, free to float torsionally, and is therefore uncontrolled...................while this goes largely unnoticed on the relatively low grip and bumpy plastic tracks (the car spends a bunch of time with the rear wheels off the track) it is not the hot tip for smooth grippy wood tracks. This uncontrolled movement or "slop" is akin to driving you road car with no or faulty dampers.......you no doubt have seen these on the roads with the tires bouncing all over the place (not ideal in a slot car either). If you can't control the position of the tires you lose traction, and have erratic handling..........manifested on wood tracks as chatter. If the chassis has controlled flex, (not flop/slop) when cornering, the car will progressively load (and unload) the outside rear tire and this load keeps the tire on the track surface......grip consistency and no chatter This is the reason that all the top plastic car racers are now (and have been for a while) using tape across the chassis/pod to dampen this "free" movement, some have even (finally) found the merits of gluing in the pods, and letting the chassis flex a a whole. Again, this free movement is passable on plastic due to its bumpy nature, but it not the fast way around a smooth high grip surface. I am dead certain that a car with "controlled flex" will be much faster around the sweeping corners of Presto Park....
|
|
|
Post by chrisguyw on Oct 12, 2017 15:51:46 GMT -5
Car #36.....Al's Eagle
A solid car, with no particular vices, and a nice Flexi board chassis with good flex characteristics.
This is the second heaviest car in the series, and as with Brian's BRM, its smoothness would easily allow it to run 10gms lighter, which would no doubt liven up its performance.
Al, There are no spacers on the "face" side of your Crown (inboard or outboard), which allows the axle to move laterally on left hand corners, and push the crown against the pinion, eliminating any lash and adding friction......as you know, your 64P gears are not overly happy with anything less than perfect mesh, and some wear, and noise is evident..........and them there Voki's shur nuff ain't cheap !!
Car # 14.....Val's McLaren
Another competitive Scaley, with none of the chassis twist often found on these, and a nicely done livery conversion.
Both front wheels sit squarely on the track, but, there is significant axle movement both fore/aft and vertically to make the front end feel less than precise...a small styrene/brass/alu. axle tube would certainly aid the overall handling.
There is considerable lateral rear axle movement, and gear noise was louder than most, nothing a few spacers would not fix, and, although I do not think that you will suffer any gear issues, without opening it up, it is hard to be certain
Car #7......Thomas' Lola
Great job Thomas......both on building a really nice looking/unique body shell, and for coming up with a neat 3d/wire chassis
Both your front tires run a hair off the track, and with the noticeable vertical front axle movement, and a fairly stiff torsionally flexing chassis, this car has a tendency to lift a rear tire in both left and right hand corners.........a front axle tube positioned so that both front tires touch the track, and, that eliminates the vertical axle travel, will do wonders.
There is a small "hitch"/"click" when I move your rear axle laterally, and despite a perfect amount of gear lash, I can feel a few snug spots as the rear axle is turned. This strongly suggests misalignment in the rear bushings, and although in this case it is not severe, and will do no real harm, it certainly will not make your car go faster.
And as with all the cars running 25K motors, I really think you would be much better off with a ratio of closer to (or above) 3:1....so a switch to an 8T pinion would help.
|
|
|
Post by chrisguyw on Oct 12, 2017 16:59:32 GMT -5
And then there were two..................
Car #17.....Richard's Cooper
A lovely job of replicating Mr. Love's little Cooper!!.......and a solid runner.
Richard, Your rear tires have not been glued onto these wheels, and as is often the case, truing/removing/reinstalling can result in a less than perfect finished product. They are by no means bad, but, there is some chatter/vibration as a result, and, the car would certainly benefit from having the tires glued, then trued.
The body is quite snuggly mounted to the chassis, which is also quite quite stiff torsionally,.......loosening the body would reduce some of the vibrations/ noise, and softening the chassis would improve overall grip and make it more lively in transitions.
And finally the Boss's car......
Car #1.........Stewart's Brabham
On the podium at this round, this car does everything well, and after its grip issues on the Ninco track, it should fare very well in the remaining rounds. That said, I believe that it could be even better with the following mods............First, it is a beefy little bugger, the heaviest of all entrants at 81 grams, and a 10 gm. diet would make a noticeable difference, and secondly, the chassis could do with more torsional flex.........soldering the main chassis plate to the frame rails from front to back, likely stiffened the chassis a tad too much.
Well folks, all the entrants have now been covered, I hope some of this was of interest/helped, and if there are any questions/comments please shout.
Cheers Chris Walker
|
|
GT6
Boy Racer Hasn't Got Licence Yet
Posts: 1
|
Post by GT6 on Oct 12, 2017 23:08:20 GMT -5
[Lurk mode off] Have been watching this series with interest and have been especially anticipating your build comments for this round, Chris. Excellent stuff!
Am feeling twinges of withdrawal during my proxy hiatus (basement rebuild is finished but still need to construct a test track) - enough that I went digging through the bits bin to discover if I have most of the requisite parts needed for one of these beasties. Sure hope this runs again next year Stewart. I just need to decide between going with my usual Honda (I know, I know, they were big and overweight and not as elegant as an Eagle or Lotus but for some reason I'm drawn to them) or try my hand a fabbing up a 3D printed version on an MS7 Matra. Ah well, carry on gentlemen, it's a great series with great builds, you should all be proud.
cheers Scott
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Rowland on Oct 13, 2017 1:29:35 GMT -5
Dear Chris Thank you for all your insights, most people aren't good at sharing tips so good to see you happy to do so. Onto my car then.... Obviously your insights are based on the kind of track and the kind of racing you do but given that is also the racing i'm doing I'd better sit up and listen! So, I wondered if you would do me a favour if you haven't already posted the cars on.... you did say you were still looking at David's Ferrari . Can you tighten the three pod screws and give it another run? See if in your opinion on your track at 10.5v that is a better car. Afterwards, to ensure no cheating please return the screws to where they were so we remain in a level playing field..... What i'm trying to test is whether under your circumstances that is a better car or not. For the first time I carried out copious testing on my own track and arrived at the set up you have in your hands but of course my track is very different: MDF yes, but with sandtex paint giving it a similar grip as Ninco which is what I was born and bred on in Italy, and of course at 12v! One of my difficulties in set up is that I design and race at the very limit at 12v. That is why the Policar set up is a major advantage, at 10.5v there is unlikely to really be an advantage of the gear reduction as braking does not offer such a challenge. At that voltage and on a rough surface I have followed the plastic car brigade in the sort of set up which purposely allows some chatter in order to ensure the tyres break free rather than dig in. Now I could be so wrong but that is what I believe is happening to those rtr cars. Essentially like a built in rattle plate. Your observation on taping the pod is interesting, as such things are not allowed in the class racing I am used to, I was unaware of that. However it is true that people do sometimes use suspension kits to dampen the movement where permissable. I do know that the idea is to have fore and aft movement but not side to side which was why the original Policar pod has two front in line screws to prevent 'steering'. My car had to dispense with the front most screw so may allow too much sidewards movment. Tightening the screws will remove that possibility. The chassis design in the Eagle should allow some torsional flex but is unlikely to be as flexibke as the torsion bar designs. I'm not sure how much the body will then be able to float either. Certainly it would be much stiffer once the pod is tightened AND it may be that a front tyre then raises! Well here's hoping that you haven't posted the box off yet and are prepared to give the car another run. Best wishes Andi
|
|
|
Post by glasshorse on Oct 13, 2017 6:18:13 GMT -5
Very interesting commentary! I guess I will be stocking up on spacers and be taking a third look at my 2018 entries in other venues. I certainly would like to see more F1 racing events such as this one. I feel like I may have started my involvement here a little late with no VRAA being run this year and this series seemingly being a one off. This proxy is a delight to participate in with the colorful descriptions of the racing action and the in-depth evaluations of each entry. Thank you... my privilege to be here...
Val
|
|
|
Post by David Mitcham on Oct 13, 2017 7:37:05 GMT -5
Hi Chris
Many, many thanks for taking the trouble to provide us all with such valuable and informative feedback. For me its especially useful as I do not belong to a club and have no other cars to compare with my own - other than picking up tips from the members of this marvellous Forum.
I took a chance with the guide movement although I thought it might be problematic - mainly because I didn't want to spoil the profile of the nose of the car - concours vanity!!
Maybe i need to get away from the independent front wheel concept as its difficult to avoid wheel wobble unless the tube inserts in the front wheels are long (half the inner axle length) - again I do it partially for looks; if I could build a front end strong enough I would just use stub axles but that would make the wobble problem much worse. If anyone at a future round feels like locking the left front wheel feel free to do so - the tyre isn't glued to the wheel so it should be easy to do.
I guess shedding a bit of weight wouldn't hurt either.
Best Regards
David
|
|
|
Post by chrisguyw on Oct 13, 2017 10:07:20 GMT -5
Hello Andi, Firstly, Thank you for your response/question/comments.....it did take a fair bit of time to go through and do a write up on each car, so , your acknowledgement is appreciated......especially as my goal was simply to try and pass on some suggestion/tips that would yield better running cars. Our little cars do have some peculiar set up requirements, but, there are many setup/chassis design commonalities shared by all electric cars that are guided around by a slot. You are in luck, I luckily read your post prior to packing so the test has just been completed. Below is a picture of what I have done............. I have not tightened any of the screws, as while this would certainly remove the "float" in the pod, it could twist the chassis, and it would tighten the body/chassis interface which ( a tight body acts as a resonance chamber) would magnify any vibrations, both of which introduce a whole new set of issues. Rather, I have used some fiber reinforced packing tape to dampen the "float" in the chassis......the chassis still has torsional flex, but, it is now somewhat controlled. This does a much better job of keeping the rear tires on the track (eliminating chatter while free movement does not), and it lets the outside rear tire load progressively. While this taping method is very widely used (around the world) by the folks who race podded plastic cars, it is not ideal (nor my preferred method) as the tape will fatigue over time. Better methods are using thin urethane washers between the pod/chassis plate, or using some pliable glue (silicone/rubber cement) to still allow torsional chassis movement, but, provide controlled movement. "Sprung" suspension systems are certainly available and used, but these are favoured among the plastic track folks, as they tend to smooth out some of the track joint issues (and help keep the rear tires on the track), but are still generally too soft for most wood track applications. The magnet racers really don't care either way, as the magnets just "bolt" the rear end to the track.......torsional chassis flex not an issue. In Europe, the predominant use of treated rubber tires (which are relatively soft in comparison to urethane/silicone) do let the racers get away with a little more movement, but , over time more are realizing the benefits of controlled movement, not "slop" In the quicker forms of slot racing......Wing, ISRRA, IMCA, BSCRA, D3, etc. not one car has a rear end that allows any "free" torsional movement......different to our type of racing ?? Yes certainly, but the principles/outcome are identical. As far as differing track voltages, increasing the voltage will only increase the power the motor produces, and, it will react more quickly to controller inputs, the forces transmitted to the chassis will be more violent, and, will happen quicker..............so...........more power needs an even stiffer more controlled chassis. On to the part you were waiting for........bear in mind the this is a different day and track conditions do change. I ran the car at both 10.5 (race voltage) and 12.0...................At 10.5 the car was just over a 1/10th quicker with tape vs. without, and exhibited significantly less chatter.........the car was more confidence inspiring, and therefore would be a much better race car for most drivers. At 12 volts, the car was a full 2/10ths quicker with the tape, and considerably smoother/easier to drive. The car with tape was quicker at 10.5 that without at 12.0. Bear in mind that I did not have the time to play around with tape location......I believe that these times could be improved upon. As far as the remaining tracks.......to be honest, I have only drive on one, and am convinced that a similar set up would be just as effective there. There are a dozen wood tracks in the area that I have run on, and I am more than confident that the results would be the same. I know I missed a lot in this dissertation, so if you want to send a private massage with your phone #, I will be happy to call, and we can discuss further. Cheers Chris Walker PS Andi, I just got off the phone with the boys at Pendle, and the clear consensus is that the quicker cars do not run with "free" movement in the pod.....they do not use tape, but use other methods described above to control flex.
|
|
|
Post by chrisguyw on Oct 13, 2017 11:18:03 GMT -5
Hi Chris I took a chance with the guide movement although I thought it might be problematic - mainly because I didn't want to spoil the profile of the nose of the car - concours vanity!! Maybe i need to get away from the independent front wheel concept as its difficult to avoid wheel wobble unless the tube inserts in the front wheels are long (half the inner axle length) - again I do it partially for looks; if I could build a front end strong enough I would just use stub axles but that would make the wobble problem much worse. If anyone at a future round feels like locking the left front wheel feel free to do so - the tyre isn't glued to the wheel so it should be easy to do. Best Regards David Hi David, I think you could open the width of the underside of the nose a 1/16 on either side without even noticing it,..... you can also narrow the width of the guide (particularly the outside of the moulded in tabs that hold the lead wire eyelets. A combination of both would give you considerably more guide rotation, which would help a ton. (I just drove the car again to test the "wobbly wheel" fix, and was reminded again how carefully this car must be driven (very very little sliding) to avoid the guide hitting its stop and causing a de slot. As a simple fix (although not as effective) you could trim the guide blade length from front to back......this will help a touch, but, in my opinion you need more than a touch!! As an aside, the length of the guide blade is completely irrelevant (as long as the trailing edge keeps the braid from touching/shorting)........for years cars utilized "pin" guides which handled every bit as well, and were far quicker to marshall!!. The advantage of the blade, is that it prevents the braid from twisting in a crash, touching, and shorting.......its overall length is unimportant. On to the front end, I just did a quick test, and as anticipated, with the set screw tightened, it is much better. However, I was worried that the amount of slop in the left front would slightly shift the whole wheel assembly away from the axle centerline when snugged up, causing it to be out of round.......unfortunately, this is the case, so, now a new issue arises. That said, the new issue is not as bad as the "wobble", and tightening the set screw is the lesser of two evils, so , if Stewart is agreeable I will be happy to secure the "bad" front.............Hold the press, I am speaking with Stewart as I type, and, I have permission to execute. David, It is now better, but still not ideal!! Cheers Chris Walker
|
|
|
Post by EM on Oct 13, 2017 12:15:32 GMT -5
Thanks Chris - I really appreciate your comments and observations. In my case, lacking routine access to a test track for tuning, they are particularly valuable. I have printed out all of your general and car specific comments to be used as a "check list" for future builds.
Interesting how things change - #36 is, indeed, a bit of a "porker" by today's standards. When it was built, it was a light car. I might be able to find 10g by combination of some drilling of chassis bits - the brass front and rear brackets are, from a strength standpoint, overkill and by building a new shell. I have had some success in pouring a very thin resin shell and, while still in the mold, laminating in a single layer of carbon fibre mat set in a low viscosity epoxy resin but I have never tried it in something as tight as the Eagle.
On the gears - I simply ran out of eyesight, hand steadiness and patience! One of the things I have learned about these 64 and 80DP gears is that, while there may be some loss associated with intermittent mesh 'tightening" due to lack of internal (gear tooth side) spacers, there tends to be little adverse effect on the gears per se. Too loose a mesh, on the other hand, is a recipe for almost instant destruction.
Al
|
|
duke7777
Boy Racer Hasn't Got Licence Yet
Posts: 7
|
Post by duke7777 on Oct 13, 2017 13:23:58 GMT -5
Really useful information here - thanks Chris! This is the first proxy I've entered, other than our local Targa proxy last year. I do most of my testing on Luf's track, and I now realise that his track surface (flat latex) provides more grip for urethane tires than most other wood tracks. I suspect that a car set up to be very fast on this sort of track surface will in general have too low a CG and/or too much front roll stiffness for other tracks. I wouldn't have thought that a car with both front wheels slightly off the track would be very successful, but I can see how this sort of set-up might be a good compromise if there is a varying amount of grip on the different tracks in a proxy series.
|
|
|
Post by chrisguyw on Oct 13, 2017 14:38:12 GMT -5
Really useful information here - thanks Chris! I wouldn't have thought that a car with both front wheels slightly off the track would be very successful, but I can see how this sort of set-up might be a good compromise if there is a varying amount of grip on the different tracks in a proxy series. Hi Brian, Most often than not a car with both front wheels off the track is not the hot ticket for the type of cars/tracks/tires we are racing on, but, the car in question had some design elements that let it get away with this normally less than ideal set up. Firstly, the front tires were only a couple of thou. off (almost touching) the track, and as the chassis was built squarely there was no difference left to right. While it is generally beneficial to have both fronts touching, the following things allowed this car to successfully run this way. 1/ The chassis was considerably more flexible torsionally than your chassis, so rather than tilt, the chassis could flex, allowing both rear tires to remain planted on the track. 2/ This was the only car with NSR rubber, which is softer (compresses more readily) than the urethanes, further compensating for the front end set up. While this set up does not really present any issues (it has worked so far !!), I believe that with the fronts touching it would work even better. The surfaces on the first 2 tracks, particularly the Ninco, favour the NSR rubber, and the remaining wood tracks (which see mostly urethane, like mine), will tell a different (hopefully ) story. As I personally believe that overall the urethanes would be a better choice (again, I am hoping), a set up to accommodate a "harder" tire was needed. For your west coast tracks, which run predominantly urethane , I would highly recommend leaving the front tires on the track. Hope this helps Cheers Chris Walker
|
|
|
Post by richardh on Oct 13, 2017 15:04:52 GMT -5
Chris Must add my appreciation for the time you spent writing up about all the cars. I have learned a lot from what you have said - many thanks. Still unsure about "float" and I am glad you have prodded me on glueing the tires - have been considering this but recently had a tire start splitting and did not want that happening on a proxy! I will be re-reading all your notes again when I have more time but again really appreciate your guidance on technical matters!
Regards Richard
|
|