34 replies to this topic

[Alchemist]

I have read/re-read on different slot car forums, the discussions that compare the advantages/drawbacks of inline vs anglewinder motor drive configurations.

 

Quite interesting to read and the thought came to mind to see if it was possible to "cross-breed" the characteristics of the two motor drives on one chassis.

 

I had wondered about this for a long while, but did not know how to approach such a build.

 

 

The past couple of weeks I had been tinkering away, attempting to configure such a chassis, finally fabricating a couple of prototypes that I call "X-Drive";  which is my abbreviation for "Cross-Drive".

 

I chose the word" Cross" because it is a cross  of inline and anglewinder,  combining the characteristics of the two different motor drives.

 

As I mentioned, I prototyped 2 versions of my X-Drive chassis;  one configuration is a short shaft (SS).

 

 

Here are some pictures of my prototype  X-Drive SS Chassis:

 

 

 

 

Even with the added ballast, it is still fairly light.

 

 

 

 

I always wondered about the possibility of placing a motor mid-chassis or as close as possible to the middle, without having to fabricate a driveshaft.

 

As I was rummaging through my surplus of motors,  I was excited to find an FK-180 motor with a very long shaft length of approximately 3/4" long.

 

This CCW motor helped to inspire the 2nd chassis,  X-Drive Long Shaft (LS) chassis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Test Run

 

NOTE:  Concerning the pinion angle to Crown gear mesh;  just like setting the mesh on an inline drive - it feels smooth!

 

My wife and I went to the track earlier today and had the opportunity to put both chassis on a test run.

 

X-Drive SS:

 

The SS chassis handled very well - surprisingly so!  

 

I ran it for a few minutes, getting acclimated and attempting to push it, and it remained very stable.

 

My wife drove this chassis and she shared the same observation of how well it handled - she liked it!

 

 

X-Drive LS:

 

I did not know what to expect when I placed it on the track.

 

To my amazement, i could see a definitive difference in handling performance - even better than the SS.

 

Perhaps due to the motor being placed mid-chassis?!

 

Tracking around the hairpins, I noticed the "grip" was so tenacious with the rear tires I had on, that the tires would "chatter" with no fishtailing.

 

This reminded me of Mike Swiss test driving the Direct Drive prototype chassis, where he mentioned the grip of the rear was such that you did not need that wide of a rear tire; at least that is what I recall.  

 

I stand corrected if I had misread what Mike mentioned on that thread.

 

I'll put on narrower rear tires for the next test run to see if there is a difference in handling performance.

 

 

The only distraction for me was that the new gears were noisy and I need to break them in, but I was very pleased that my efforts to fabricate the chassis were rewarded with positive results.

 

There is plenty of fine-tuning to be done, but for the maiden voyage, I felt it was a good test run.

 

 

 

Thank you for looking.

 

Ernie

[Bill from NH]

Ernie, this is something new to me! What do you think placing the motors at an angle has over placing the motors 90 degrees to the rear axle? Wouldn't weight distribution be similar to both motor layouts? What a I missing? Angled 48P pinions would reduce your gear noise, but at a higher cost than the straight cut ones. Do you intend to test this chassis design further?  Unless you have tires you can cut, you could also try harder tires than what you're now using.

[Eddie Fleming]

The way these are setup the angled pinion would probably work better put on the motor reversed (big end out).

[Alchemist]

Hi Billl,

 

 

 

What do you think placing the motors at an angle has over placing the motors 90 degrees to the rear axle? Wouldn't weight distribution be similar to both motor layouts? What a I missing? 

 

That is a great question and "thanks" for asking.

 

This is the thread that inspired the build and should answer (plenty of them) your question:   http://slotblog.net/...nder-vs-inline/

 

Very interesting to read, and I always enjoy reading this particular thread, no matter how many times I do so;  I find it inspirational!

 

 

 

 

Do you intend to test this chassis design further?  Unless you have tires you can cut, you could also try harder tires than what you're now using.

 

Yes!  I really liked the way the chassis handled, so I intend to make an attempt to further develop it.

 

Besides, it gives me something to experiment with.

(A mentor of mine gave me the nickname of "Alchemist" because he said I'm always brewing/experimenting with something unusual - just trying to live up to my nickname/handle - LOL!!)

 

I'll just narrow the tires that I already employed on the LS chassis, but I'd like to try the harder tires that you suggest . . . any brand/type suggestions for that please?  

 

 

 

Bill said:  Angled 48P pinions would reduce your gear noise           Eddie said:  The way these are setup the angled pinion would probably work better put on the motor reversed (big end out).

 

 

I've made my own 48P brass angled pinions, which did not seem to make a noise difference, but I'll try the ARP since they are made in steel.

 

Thanks for looking Bill/Eddie - your comments and suggestions are always appreciated.

 

Ernie

[Ramcatlarry]

Nice Test Chassis set-up.

 

Long use expectations (I predict) -  crown gear will wear out sooner than later and higher power motors will make it much sooner.  The 'inline torque steer' effect is not really reduced much - and again more power will show that.

[Alchemist]

Hi Larry,

 

 

Long use expectations (I predict) -  crown gear will wear out sooner than later and higher power motors will make it much sooner.  

 

 

I suspected that could be an issue - thanks for the clarification;  I'll be sure to keep a mental log on the attrition rate of the crown gear.

 

 

 

The 'inline torque steer' effect is not really reduced much - and again more power will show that.

 

That is interesting you mention that Larry.

 

If it does little to reduce the torque steer, it was enough for me to immediately notice the difference in handling.

 

My LS (long shaft) chassis motor has a substantial amount of torque as well as high rpm capability, but I hadn't noticed anything but how much better it handled.

 

I'm not trying to debate your statement, and I'm not qualified to do so, I'm just sharing my experience from my initial test run.

 

I do appreciate your comments Larry - it gives me more information to keep in mind and cogitate while I further develop my X-drives. 

 

 

 

 

The last post of this particular thread, Post #14, made by Mike Steube, was very influential to me:

 

http://slotblog.net/...nder-or-inline/

 

 

Mike Steube said:  

 

That's the first thing that impressed me back in the day when I built my first anglewinder. The torque no longer tried to turn my car over in turns. Dad used to wind the arms to turn in the direction that would cause the motor's torque to help in the most difficult turns on the track. The motor basically helped hold the car down going thru either right or left turns depending on the direction it turned.

[MSwiss]

Ernie,
I just spotted the DD project reference.

IIRC, I would of mentioned tire width, in reference to a way to reduce heat.

But the motor, directly in line with the rear tires, probably does produce a lot of ballast related traction.

That said, if you have a car that hops, it most likely has too much traction, and narrowing the tires should help.

But sometimes, some cars/designs, just seem to want to hop.

You'll just have to experiment.

As I've said before, I'm glad you're having fun with slot cars

This thread gives me a chance to post a back-and-forth that I had with local ace racer, engineer, fabricator/machinist, and chassis designer, Chuck Gambo.

He was marvelling at the atmosphere, all the stuff available, and the sheer size of a train show, that he had attended, an hour and a half away, in Milwaukee.

My reply was "That's because they don't race. We could have nice stuff, too, but we always F it up, when we turn on the lap counter".

He agreed.

It's hardly a 100% accurate statement, as of course, racing is part of slotcar racing, but we both still got a chuckle from it. Lol

[Bill from NH]

Ernie, I recall a small British slot car mag. having a build article for a 1/32 F1 car with an angled inline motor. I'll have to reread it in order to remember what it says. They used a 16D "can-in-a-can" & other Mura parts for the motor.

[MSwiss]

There is a picture of a rolling chassis, that is making the rounds of the 'net, recently, that has 2 angled motors.

 

I'm not sure if I spotted it on FB or Pinterest.

[Pablo]

Ernie, I found this motor while walking the dog. It has a 2mm shaft and it runs. Even has anti-vibration foam surrounding it. I wondered, if this little pancake could be made to work somehow, the CG would be nice n low. No doubt in my mind, Ernie, you could be the man to make it a reality. If you want to give it a go, I'll send it    (No, I'm not kidding)

 

[Geary Carrier]

That baby will cook for sure...

[Alchemist]

Hi Paul,

 

 

Ernie, I found this motor while walking the dog. It has a 2mm shaft and it runs. Even has anti-vibration foam surrounding it. I wondered, if this little pancake could be made to work somehow, the CG would be nice n low. No doubt in my mind, Ernie, you could be the man to make it a reality. If you want to give it a go, I'll send it     (No, I'm not kidding)

 

 

The items you find are exciting to see - LOL!

 

You let the "cat of the bag" my slot car buddy you!  hahaha

 

I already have a few of these pancake motors waiting in line to see how well it could adapt/work on a slot car chassis - but thank you for the gesture and the vote of confidence!  It sure is appreciated!

 

Imagine it propeller powered instead or gears;  similar to those air boats used in Florida swamps - except it would have wheels - LOL!

 

Wont' use a wing car body 'cause it might take off?!?!?!

 

Thanks again Paul!

 

Ernie

[Pablo]

That baby will cook for sure...

 

Not if we send it to the H man first for mag shim/rewind/balance/blueprint. Or maybe Geary C? 

[Rob Voska]

Do you think the "chatter" is really the long shaft flexing. 

[Geary Carrier]

 

Not if we send it to the H man first for mag shim/rewind/balance/blueprint. Or maybe Geary C? 

 

Pablo, I bet that Ernie could make this motor fly all on his own...

[Jay Guard]

Ernie:

I wonder if the chatter is being caused by chassis flex at the forward most point of the aluminum rear axle carrier?  It appears that there isn't much main chassis material at this point which might produce some chatter under cornering and/or acceleration loads.  I would have brought the forward ears on the axle carrier a good bit further onto the main chassis plate to eliminate the possibility of this happening.

 

Nonetheless I really like your forward thinking designs!  You always have to try new things if you want to move ahead.

[Alchemist]

Hi Jay,

 

Thanks for the observation!

 

 

 

It appears that there isn't much main chassis material at this point which might produce some chatter under cornering and/or acceleration loads. I would have brought the forward ears on the axle carrier a good bit further onto the main chassis plate eliminate the possibility of this happening.

 

I realize that I hadn't posted a picture of prototype chassis.

 

The composite material I employ for the chassis is 1/16" thick and the rear axle bracket sits on top of the rear portion of the chassis, that accommodates the rear bracket.

 

The material in this thickness is fairly rigid, and with the 1/16" thick aluminum bracket placed on top of that section, acts as a doubler, making it even more rigid.

 

So, I'm deducing that flex in that specific area is non-existent.

 

Here is a picture of the rough cut chassis prototype after I cut it.

 

 

 

I appreciate the input Jay, and thanks for looking!

 

Ernie

 

p.s. I wanted to mention that the wheel chattering occurs only with the LS chassis.  The SS chassis drives well without tire chatter.  Baffling?!

[Alchemist]

Hi Geary!

 

"Pablo, I bet that Ernie could make this motor fly all on his own..."

 

 

 

I was serious when I made that comment about employing a propeller on a pancake motor, mounting it at the very back of a chassis.

 

As I had mentioned:  I wanted to see if it could actually propel itself around the track; with no gears, only by air movement from the prop;  similar to hydrofoils like those used in the Florida swamps, but with wheels!

 

The only concern would be if I was allowed to use it on the track - LOL

 

Here is a prototype bracket I saved from another project, and was planning on using it for a pancake motor.  It needs mounting hole reconfiguration though!

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you gentlemen!

 

Ernie

[Rob Voska]

Hi Geary!

 

 

 

I was serious when I made that comment about employing a propeller on a pancake motor, mounting it at the very back of a chassis.

 

As I had mentioned:  I wanted to see if it could actually propel itself around the track; with no gears, only by air movement from the prop;  similar to hydrofoils like those used in the Florida swamps, but with wheels!

 

The only concern would be if I was allowed to use it on the track - LOL

 

Here is a prototype bracket I saved from another project, and was planning on using it for a pancake motor.  It needs mounting hole reconfiguration though!

 

 Pancake Motor Mount_1.jpg

 

Pancake Motor Mount_2.jpg

 

 

Thank you gentlemen!

 

Ernie

 

It will move forward but brakes will be ZERO!

[Geary Carrier]

A brake could be fashioned, but I'm sure Ernie already has this figured out...

[Martin]

Brakes could be be reverse thrust or redirected thrust, as on commercial jet liners etc.

Ducted fan(s) will keep it safe.

Would be fun to see in 1/24.

[Alchemist]

HI Martin,

 

Thanks for sharing that video!  The magnets do a good job of keeping it on the track.

 

Awesome and inspiring!

 

My project idea was to use the Chapparral 2J Race Car body, since it was designed with rear fans - but that is just an idea for now.

 

The fan project is waaaay down the path.

 

"Now back to your regularly scheduled program!"  LOL

 

Thank you.

 

Ernie

[Martin]

I understand about project management.

I was supersized by how fast that HO car accelerated. 

[Alchemist]

Martin,

 

It is amazing how fast the HO cars move these days!

 

I don't recall my HO cars ever going that fast - but then they never stayed on the track - LOL!

 

If the HO motors were able to produce more than enough torque for our 1/24 - 1/28 scale cars, I would have fabricated a mount to put them to use.    I did make the attempt a while back!

 

Thanks Martin - have a wonderful Thanksgiving everyone!!!!!!

 

Ernie

[Eddie Fleming]

How about 4 HO motors on a 4WD 1/24 car?

 

Just a crazy thought.