|
||
|
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
#1
24-05-2013
|
||||
|
||||
AC210FF, Front Wheel Drive Buggy
For those who haven't seen it before... I've been developing a front wheel driven buggy for the last one and a half years:
> FF Buggy Development Topic < Today I can anounce to you the arrival of the second prototype, the AC210FF!     > FULL PHOTO ALBUM < These are the key features and updates of the car: 1. The DEX210 Gearbox allows for 3 vs. 4-Gear and Ball vs. Ball Diff testing. 2. The upright front shocks allow for easier adjustability of the setup (compared to the first prototype's inboard suspension). 3. The wide mounted shorty LiPo and high mounted steering rack move the weight balance further forward (10mm further forward than the first prototype). 4. The parallel driveshafts seriously reduce chatter and inconsistent drive (as experienced on the first prototype). 5. Tapping screws into the material instead of using nuts (as on the first prototype) makes maintainance and accessability much better. 6. The chassis layout is compact but has sufficient room for all electronics (unlike the first prototype). This set of features comes from the idea that some major parts of the setup should be easy to test and change. Others are from the experience I got from using the first prototype. The first prototype showed an FF layout has potential. However, early on it became clear the car was not easy to work on, and the front suspension and drivetrain showed a lot of room for improvement. This second prototype is an entirely new car. This car has the purpose to test how big the leap in performance is with all these changes. This will also give the opportunity to find more points to make the car better and better  and important thing as the knowledge base on FF RC cars (and in particular buggies) is quite limited. I also want to emphasize this car is still a prototype!
|
|
#5
28-05-2013
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thanks guys!
 If all goes well I'll be trying it out soon on the track - and I'm sure there will be people with cameras around to make some footage of it.As for making it to sale... It's the ultimate dream and goal of course! Whether it's realistic depends on a lot of factors, varying from the fun factor and pace to the demand for it and the price it could be offered for. The first thing, fun... It's covered, believe me! The last car was good fun, this one is an absolute blast! The driving experience is very dynamic and alive, and paritcularly working on the car is very easy and rewarding!The other things... I can only tell when I've done more testing  I'm really eager to find out and when I know more I'll share the news!
|
|
#9
28-05-2013
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The smoke screen works particularly well with the punch turned up to the maximum... though I have concerns the shorty packs don't take that too well in the long term...  Anyway, a less valid reason that may still be viewed as being more logical is that a 6.5T gives spare power on jumps and keeps your landing approach adjustable: Powerful motor = Effective nose-dive prevention. I've experienced already on the last car that mid-air throttle allowed you to play a lot with how the buggy flew It's the same principle that allows you to make backflips after take-off... but applied here to a slightly less serious degree (so far) Also, I'm running exactly the same Motor/ESC combo as my RWD buggy, so it's easier for me to adjust and one car does not outperform the other because of a smoother brushless set.
|
|
#10
02-06-2013
|
||||
|
||||
|
Ok, I've seen it a couple of times now. Even got to drive a few times also. Untill this point it was a nice novelty project, but now it's really starting to come together.
It was entered into a vintage race today driven by the designer Paul Dijkstra ( as a really bad replica of a Kyosho Maxxum FF  ) and it was pretty quick to start with, and Paul was messing around with a few things during the day. Some worked, some did not. But by the time the qualifications were over it was keeping up with the fastest of the Losi XX's and RC10's. It was just that Paul was sometimes in the wrong place at the wrong time. But the last main he had a bit of luck and had a clear track, just look a his best time and the best time of the winning car ( ARRC10, was entered as a car since it was driven by muliple drivers ). The AC210FF also had a fastest lap that was about 0,7 faster than anyone else. Granted it was on the surface it was made to live on, really low grip dusty clay, but still it's starting to get onto the same pace as the normal buggies. It will be interesting to see if it will get even better with a bit more tinkering Keep up the good work Paul
__________________
|
|
#11
03-06-2013
|
||||
|
||||
|
What can I add to this?
Ok, it was a vintage class, but keeping in mind it's the first time I tried it on clay I think it's a pretty mad result!  The car didn't feel right yet at the start of the day, and it seemed as if the damping was too soft: It bottomed out on the front, and when I fixed that a lot on the rear. Once I solved that and locked the servo saver the car's balance felt good with regard to grip. One thing I haven't tested yersterday which I think would've really helped the pace is adding weight to it. The car didn't weigh much more than the usual minimum of 1474g, and the track was quite bumpy. The forward traction was already decent but may've been better still. More importantly, I expect the car would've pretty much ignored the bumps that way. There is plenty of testing to go though, I'm confident I'll get the opportunity to test that later on A nice result by the way I haven't mentioned: I jumped the car and made a few errors here and there... I'll admit they were not the type of crash where the car heads into a fence or wall, but some were still pretty scary moments. All carbon and 3D printed stuff still seems perfectly fine! It's funny though, things did break down: A (home-made) 3mm thick polycarbonate front bumper, I lost a driveshaft pin and pretty much wrecked the rear wing!
|
|
#13
03-06-2013
|
||||
|
||||
|
Fair enough. I've got here two test videos (thanks to Tom Raymakers) of the car early on the test day: Video 1 Video 2 Later on the day I was confident enough to jump the double, and as I got more used to the car I jumped flatter and more consistently There was a guy with a slowmotion camera and he said he had footage of the car... with a bit of luck I can hold of this. I also shot some pictures of the car in action (and someone else with my camera and me at the wheel). I'll post these soon. In the video I think it's pretty clear to see the tight turning radius, high cornering speed and decent acceleration. On the short run-up to the double it has more than enough traction to clear it. You occasionally hear the car tapping or clicking: it's the front end bottoming out. Also you might spot a few times that the rear end slides away too much (19 seconds in video 1 - that type of slide is one that's not easily corrected by the driver alone and cost a lot of time as the car goes out of shape and with that off the racing line you want). These two issues were solved by tweaking the damping.
|
|
#15
18-10-2013
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
http://www.oople.com/forums/showthre...=86091&page=17
|
|
#16
18-10-2013
|
||||
|
||||
|
Minimini, all updates are indeed posted in the topic K-Brewer posted - from Page 13 onward are all updates and discussions on the current car.
In summary, the car is working quite well, but it's performance has to increase to become production ready. The project is a lot of fun and I'll continue development - whether I can make it as quick as a production car is not clear yet, but my ambitions are to make an FWD (conversion) kit... one that leaves the RWDs biting dust of course!
|
 |
|
|
Atomic Carbon
Linear Mode
