Friday, July 31, 2020

Exotek F1Ultra Build



The new Exotek F1 car has been a source of intrigue for a few months now, having secured the ROAR national championship at the carpet nats.  The car was kept under wraps for quite some time actually.  It has been developed over several years' time.  I saw an early prototype at a race in California a few summers ago, and I have heard about multiple iterations being tested out there.

One of the main design departures from typical F1 cars is the 3 shock pod arrangement, controlled by a panhard rod similar to a NASCAR or sprint car rear axle.  This allows massive travel in comparison to a t-bar or link car with a center pivot.  The entire pod can move up and down, without restraint from the center pivot.  I like this concentration on maximizing travel, as I have felt that most pan car based designs don't have enough travel in the car.  Rubber tires are heavier, and larger than foams.  Greater travel, and also rear traction, should be a strength for a rubber tired F1 car.  Counterintuitive to what you might think, this should be a huge asset for carpet racing.  The dreaded traction roll, and it's little brother, the light inner rear tire, rear their heads when the car runs out of travel.  Once the car can no longer roll in the suspension travel, it will hinge over and flip or at least pick up an inside tire.

The chassis is also different from almost every other car in that the main chassis is a 2 piece hybrid of carbon and aluminum. Different, but I can understand why this was chosen.  I have had an aluminum chassis before, which I felt was too stiff.  It seemed to kill the mid corner steering.  Here the front of the car is allowed some flex without sacrificing too much rigidity in the rear.

The packaging of the kit has tremendous appeal visually, and everything fits nicely in the medium sized box.  Beyond the chassis parts, a front and rear wing are included, leaving only the choice of a body, tires and electronics to the builder.  Note that wing mounting is the standard Tamiya hole pattern, so nearly anything will fit.  Bodies may be a little more restrictive as the links require some clearance.  Most bodies introduced in the last few years should fit, and I think most Tamiya bodies could even work, though the "cut and fit" realistic side pods would probably have to be omitted in most cases.  I chose a Bitty Design body, which fit just fine.



Assembly starts with the front end.  As with any F1 kit, remember thread lock is essential, as the rubber tires will vibrate all the screws loose eventually.  A sparing dab is all that's needed.

I included a picture of my trusty CRC pivot ball tool, which is a must have for any pan car owner.  There are several different brands out there, but this prevents damage to the pivots during assembly.  Using a pliers pretty much guarantees you will smush something eventually.

The pivots are secured in the arms with a large plastic C clip.  It's recommended to add a dab of shoe goo to secure them, and that's wise.  I also much prefer this arrangement to the o-ring securement which seems to be popular with other manufacturers.  I've had the o-rings pop off before which at a minimum makes the suspension get sloppy during the run, if not fail.  This seems very robust.

You may have to hold the grub screw in the bulkhead with a 1.5 mm driver while you spin the ball end down, as pictured.  The grub screw wanted to rotate with the ball end unless I held it in place like this. You can snug it with a nut driver once it's in place.


Once you have the bulkhead and arms set up, the assembly is mounted to the chassis.  You have the option here of two wheelbases.  Long is recommended for large and high speed tracks.  Short for smaller tracks and indoor.  I went with a shorter car.

Just a tip, you can use a hex driver to hold the rear suspension mount as you tighten it...that's what the hole is for...


After you get all the suspension mounts and post for the steering on, the rear link mounts and chassis connections go on.  It did seem like a lot of parts for this part of the car.  

With the chassis bolted together, everything does seem solid.  I was a little concerned there might be some tolerance once everything was built up, but the two parts came together nicely, matching up flush. Also pictured are the turnbuckles and  ball cups, including a molded version of the now famous Exotek front end for full  adjustability of caster and camber.  



Again, the pivot ball tool comes in handy for the upper arm. It turns out the good old Tamiya cross wrench has the perfect size drive for the hex adjusters on the turnbuckles, making threading the ball cups a snap.


When securing the knuckle on the kingpin, be sure to squeeze the assembly together as you tighten the set screw.  This will ensure even ride height and minimal slop.


Both Tuning Haus and Tamiya sell the same style of circlip which I prefer to e-clips for the kingpin.  There is just more surface area and it's easier to pop them off for spring changes and maintenance.



I added some Tamiya hard grease on the kingpins for some dampening.  Adding the grease above and below the arm, then working it in seems to be the best way to ensure it covers the whole area of travel on the kingpin.  You can use any number of silicone lubes for gear diffs, greases, Tamiya Anti Wear grease (THICK) to slow down the action on the front end.  This stuff has been working pretty well for me lately.  Just remember, it has to be redone fairly regularly to be effective.  Once a race day is the minimum in my book. 


This is the front end finished with bellcrank steering.  I found over time that leaving the screw in the upper arm connecting the caster control turnbuckle loose enough that it will still pivot ensures there's no binding.  It's not hanging loose, but it's not locked down.


The rear pod is a little different from most cars, in that the lower plate is a single machined piece of aluminum.  To me, it appears to serve to purposes.  One, the rigidity is much better than most cars, and I hope this means there will be less bent left side pod plates.  Two, it adds weight down low on the rear end, for an increase in traction.  This is a rubber tire car, and it's never bad too have too much rear traction.  "You can't fire a cannon from a canoe..."


This is the assembled pod, sans axle. 51.9 g, which is certainly heftier than the typical carbon lower type pod.  Again, the weight is down low, so I feel it will be beneficial.



You can see the huge amount of travel afforded by the panhard rod arrangement when the shocks are off the car.  Obviously, the car will have much less movement when the shocks limit things, but this is far more than anything I am aware of that out right now.  You could go rock crawling with this setup...



Here's the center shock, which includes an internal limiting spring.  I have never tried anything like this before, but the manual states using a softer spring improves rear traction.  I can only assume that as the shock extends, it keeps an abrupt stop from disrupting the rear end of the car, versus solid shims more typically used to limit shock length.  


The shock goes together pretty easily, and is designed in the Tamiya style.  One thing I did do was to slightly sand the non shouldered guide, as it seemed to be overly compressing the o-ring once the bottom of the shock was assembled.  The guide sands easily with something like 1200 grit paper, and you don't need to take much off.  You might need to test it a couple times, but it's better to go slow and not remove too much material.


I punched a small hole in the top of the shock with a tiny drill bit.  I have run a "dead" shock on my F1 cars for a long time, with almost no rebound.  I think it makes the car more stable.


The rear end has a lot of well thought out features.  The oversize bearings are nice to prevent wall shots from destroying the typical thin 1/4" I.D. bearings used in pan cars.  Some might want an axle carrier that uses shims to set ride height instead of the cam adjusters on this car.  I personally like shim adjustment, but I see the value in an easy to set and strong axle carrier.  With rubber tires it's not as critical to have super fine adjustment, but I do like being able to dial in ride height more precisely when switching brands of tires.  

The wing mount is the best out there in my opinion.  The over the motor design is much better than the perimeter style mounts in that the parts count is vastly reduced, resulting in less weight.  It also allows the body to rest on top, ensuring the body will never interfere with the pod.

A fan can be attached to the left side pod plate, again moving weight down on the pod since most other cars wind up with the fan above the motor.

One thing you may want to do is replace the upper ball studs for the micro shocks with something like Tamiya 42231 Damper Ball Connectors (that's what I used).  There is an internal hex, making it easy to remove the shock without having to pop the top off the ball stud.  This will be important when you set the droop on  the micro shocks, which must be adjusted by shaft length.

Tamiya 42231





That's the main part of assembly.  I chose to use an Xray gear diff in my car instead of the ball diff.  I have not put my ball diff together, but I'm not worried about how it will build, having used Exotek diff parts on Tamiya cars in the past.  




I just wanted to add a tip on wings.  The car does come with what appears to be a Montech front wing, and a rear wing that is a copy of the old Ferrari wing that Tamiya first made, then copied by HPI for the old Super F1, and many others followed suit.  I personally don't like how the Montech looks, but I know a lot of people use it.  One reason it is a good wing is that it is far enough off the ground that it has far less "touch downs" where it contacts the track and disrupts the suspension.  

The Tamiya 2017 wing set looks great and can be made to have a much better ride height very simply.  With a lighter or butane torch, you can carefully heat the inner portion of the wing and make a Z bend with a needle nose pliers.  Once allowed to cool while bent to shape, the wing will hold its form.  The touch down problem is greatly reduced or eliminated.

Here's the car with electronics mounted.  Admittedly, space is tight for the receiver and speed control.  I used a Tekin RS Pro and a Futaba receiver.  Tekin has one of the smaller ESCs out there, and you do need to stick with a small footprint to fit everything in.  The servo is a low profile 9551 Futaba.  Something full size might fit, but low profile is really what the car was designed for.


Setting Caster:  I have found the easiest way to measure caster is just to keep track of the gap on the caster turnbuckle from side to side.  So if your calipers measures 7.5 mm between the plastic rod ends, and both sides are the same, the caster is even.  If you want a rough idea of the amount in degrees, you can line up a camber gauge next to the kingpin to estimate caster, and note it corresponding to the gap measurement.  I just prefer the gap number, since it is much more accurate to track adjustments than eyeballing a camber gauge, and requires no special tools or setup gear.  Caster and camber work together on this car, since adjusting either can change the other adjustment, especially if you make a big change.  Generally, looking at the turnbuckle gap will keep you in the ballpark.




I wanted to show how I measured the micro shock droop on the car.  The manual shows the use of a ride height gauge on the bottom of the chassis to check micro shock droop.  This does work.  I just felt that it was awkward to do the measurement in that way.  I initially set it in that fashion and to ensure the shocks were drooping out, I was holding the car above me.  I guess I could have simply flipped the car over, but I wasn't sure if that would correctly estimate the droop, especially seeing it should be 0.5 - 1 mm total. 

I used a set of sedan droop gauge and droop blocks.  The blocks can be set transverse across the main chassis.  As you can see, the droop gauge can enter under the pod from the side, right where the link attaches.  I repeated the measurement process many times once I found the best spot to ensure it corresponded with the measurement I got using the method recommended in the manual.  This produces the same measurement, but I feel it's much easier to do, and it is consistent.  

I think it's important as just setting the micro shock droop via shock length may cause a different setting side to side if you make both shocks the same length.  I noticed I needed to be 0.3 mm different side to side on length to make droop even.  That may sound miniscule, but the car has no center pivot, so droop imbalance side to side is exaggerated.  Without the difference in shock length, droop was close to 1 mm off side to side.  This is also where the Tamiya ball studs come in on the upper end of the shock.  It's super easy to remove the upper ball still attached to the shock, and just pop the bottom off the pod.  A ball end wrench is the easiest way to get the top off.



Pod droop as most refer to it is separate from the micro shocks.  The center shock length sets the angle of the pod plate as seen from the side of the car as it unweights.  Since there is no pivot, this acts different than a center pivot car (link or t-bar). To be honest, I'm not sure how all this interacts, as the microshock droop sets how far the pod can move down vertically.  Hmmm....



That's the build up on the car.  I'm going to do another post on the car's performance.  This has been pretty long and I'd like to address  what happened the track on it's own.


Part 2:Exotek F1Ultra Performance



Tuesday, March 3, 2020

Toe in for tires

Recently I was racing at a series race on carpet where we had to use the Gravity RC F1 tire.  Normally, with the Pit Shimizu tire (CRC, TCS) I keep front toe out at about 2*.  I have run much more in the past, but I discovered on carpet, the Pit tire can overheat with a large amount of front toe out.  That being the case, I have become a little more conservative with toe out on carpet.

As the day went on, I was getting a bit frustrated with the lack of steering on my car.  There was not a good amount of turn in, among the many bad habits my car displayed.  I went to local CRC driver Mark Sweeney, who mentioned he had been running quite a bit of front toe out on his car.  He gave me several tips which were excellent in getting my car competitive on the Gravity tire, but the toe out was interesting in that he felt that the extra heat generated by the toe out was a plus.  I think he is probably correct, seeing  that the Gravity tire is harder than the Pit.  There is not the same amount of steering with the Gravity tire. 

Adding extra toe out to the front of the car worked out.  I suppose the lesson is to consider the trade offs of the front end set up overall (less vs. more toe), but also to realize you can manipulate tire temps with toe. 

Wednesday, January 15, 2020

Simplicity in a chassis mounted wing

So in the last year a bunch of companies have come up with a way to directly mount the rear wing to the chassis.  This is something the paved oval racing crowd did like 20 years ago, although they mounted directly to the body.  The same effect was achieved.

Some cars, like the Tamiya TRF103, have not had a commercial solution for this style of wing mounting.  I have seen on RcTech a few people re purpose Xray mounts to the Tamiya car.

Last week, I had a sudden revelation while watching tv - why not mount the wing the way the oval guys did? Piano wire and some wing buttons had to be much lighter than the extra fasteners, carbon, and aluminum bits that made up the typical ready made setup.  Wire wire is also cheap and universal.

This was the first try:




So the wing mounted straight to the body, but that was less than solid. After a day or two of thinking and looking, it turned out I could use a wing mount post on the cross brace of the chassis.  There was already a hole there.  All I needed to do was grind a flat onto the wing post to fit into the area allowed by the hole placement.


The wing is mounted to the wire by wing buttons in the side of the wing.  It's very snug, but I may drill a small hole in the plane of the wing to allow the wire to just engage and ensure the wing alignment is good during crashes and other hijinx.

This style mount could be adapted to most cars if you can find a spot for the wing mounting posts.  The posts and buttons should be less than $20 at any hobby retailer who deals with the oval crowd, and .063" piano wire is like $1.50 for 3 feet.

Example of parts for around $12:
http://www.lefthander-rc.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=21&products_id=443

http://www.lefthander-rc.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=21&products_id=100

Good luck and happy wire bending.

EDIT:
Ran this yesterday at the track, and it worked without a problem.  A more refined solution to the mounting of the wing to the wire would be nice, but it does the job as is.


Saturday, June 15, 2019

Access Hobbies 2019 TCS Race

Finals video

So the thing about Access Hobbies this year was the tight, 1/12 style layout they presented the Tamiya TCS racers with.  Before the closing of my local track, I was running my TRF103 with a peg diff tightened into a spool, and the battery lengthwise in the chassis.  This worked really well at home.

Despite the number of cars on the track, traction was not overwhelming.  The spool was hard to drive, especially off the corner.  Reverting to a slowed down ball diff was the way back to stability.  I am beginning to find that the spool must have a massive amount of traction to really be effective.  When the condition is correct, it is unbelievable, but I would say that most track conditions favor a combination peg/ball diff, or even a slightly loose peg only diff (non-TCS races you could use a gear diff as well).

The lengthwise battery did not work as well as a transverse battery, period. I have always favored the transverse battery in almost all situations, but the TRF103 really seems to like the battery lengthwise most of the time.  Not here, the car seemed a bit more planted and rotated better with a transverse set up.  I have to say it was just the tight nature of the layout.

The other factor was the track surface itself.  The traction peaked off on Saturday evening.  Leading up to this, I had shortened the wheelbase on the car, and steering was plentiful.  The last qualifier on Saturday was the fastest for me, and my car did the  fast lap of the weekend as far as I know.  Unfortunately, I had an accident that zipped off most of the spur gear, so the best time to qualify was wasted.  Sunday morning, the track had reverted to a state where the short wheelbase hurt more than it helped, and I returned to the long wheelbase.  I lost some steering, and to be honest, I think that the link setup might have been better at this point, as the link 103 cars looked to have a bit more steering in the lower traction.  Odd, in that most times T bar setups have more traction, and would be better when traction is down.  It may just be that the T bar in high traction allows the short wheelbase to work, and the improvement in corner speed is only available with the T bar's superior traction.  In any case, the car worked well enough on Sunday.  I feel like the other cars might have been a little better in the main, but I had a very good start and built up enough of a lead that I didn't have to push too much.

Other than those big changes, I was able to raise the upper arms at the kingpin, which tells me traction was not too great.  Normally, I run the upper arm pretty flat to avoid traction roll, but I was able to get away with maxing out the spacers under the arm.  I also ran 0.5 or 1 mm under the rear ballstud of the upper arm, just to take away any chance of lifting a tire.  Sometimes in the tight turns, if I had to get on the brakes, it could be hairy without the spacer.






Friday, May 3, 2019

TRF 103 short shock vs. long shock

Just a quick post on the shock length option on the TRF 103.  The local track was closing up shop for good, unfortunately, and they had one last race day.  I brought out the Tamiya as this would be my last chance to race there, and to try a few things out for the up coming May TCS race in Ohio.

I had changed the car around a bit to use the Gravity RC tires for a Motiv RC series race.  I tried the longer shock as part of the package, as the Gravity tires don't produce as much traction as the TCS/Pit Shimizu tire.  The longer shock tends to help rear bite.

Anyway, I was more or less changing everything back to the previous setup for TCS tires as the day went on.  I changed the shock back to a short set up.   It took a run or two to figure out what was going on, but the light bulb went on, and I changed the shock back to the extended configuration.  With the short shock, the car had sort of an abrupt  steering feel.  Going back to the longer shock smoothed the car out, and seemed to make it rotate better.  Most of the time I have felt a longer shock plants the car too much, but this was a perfect feel, and on high traction, too. 

Again, this car surprises me.  It does a lot of things I don't expect, and behaves much differently than most of the other cars I have tried.  The long shock working even in high traction makes some sense in light of the car's abundance of steering.  There seems to be as much front bite as you need, even with a totally planted car.  Locking the rear down just makes the car better to drive.  Worth a try!!

Sunday, February 24, 2019

TRF 103 First Weekend on Carpet

This weekend I had the chance to go racing for the first time in a long time.  My local track was having a leg of the USVTA Series traveling around the middle of the country.  They are also going to have a Tamiya TCS regional in about a month, so I figured this would be  the perfect time to get the TRF 103 set up for carpet.

Not really having too much of an idea beyond a "typical" carpet set up, I initially had the car in a transverse battery configuration.  I was also using the T bar instead of the links, and the short wheelbase, which are both not typical, but worked very well on asphalt.  This is not to say it would be right for high traction carpet as well, but I wanted to give it a go.

Right off the bat, the car got around fairly well.  The main problem became lifting of tires, and a tendency to over rotate out of the corner on power.  The over rotation stems from the tires getting light, since I had pegs in the diff to lock it into a spool.  As a tire comes up, it just rotates the car off the outside wheel.

The car was driveable, but touchy in areas and not stable enough to attack.  I tried changing side dampening and t bar settings at first.  5000, 7000, and 10,000 in the damper tubes provided enough feed back to see that lighter would be better, and really the T bar needed to be tightened.  I settled on 5K in the tubes and moved on to the t plate.

There are a few ways to change the t plate characteristics even without changing the t plate.  I started with an orange o-ring, which is fairly soft.  Going to a stiffer black o-ring, and then even the outer o-ring in combination with the black o-ring, as was used on the F104 T bar cars still was not quite enough.  The t bar needed less tension so it could pivot, but the overall travel was a bit too much.  In this case, I replaced the smaller black o-ring with a similar thickness nylon washer.  The larger o-ring was retained.  Now the t bar could be set with less tension, but the washer reduced the overall travel as it pivoted.  This made the car feel more stable and reduced the tire lifting.

The first qualifying run I made was not bad, but as the race wore on and the tires heated up, the tire lifting came back into play.  There was some time to practice, so I was able to try a longer wheelbase on the car.  Surprisingly, the car did not lose much steering at all, and the tires stayed in contact with the carpet much more consistently.  I tried a few other things, including raising the rear ball stud on the upper arms of the front end.  This usually helps to quell a bit of the tendency to traction roll while taking a little steering away, and indeed, it did help. This car seems to have plenty of steering, so it was  a worthwhile trade off.

By this time, the track was about to close for the night, so any more experimentation would have to wait until morning.  Reflecting on the car's main problems, it seemed an overabundance of weight transfer was happening at the pivot point of the t bar.  There is really no forward/aft movement of the battery in a transverse setup on this car.  This left me with an inline setup as the only alternative to change the weight bias.  I have not been a big fan of the inline battery over the transverse on carpet, though there has been quite a few racers using an inline battery on high traction very successfully over a range of different cars.  On day 2, I decided to test it out.

Arriving at the track the next morning, I ran through a couple quick changes before reconfiguring the battery.  Mostly front and rear width, which was maxed out close to 190mm at the end.

After fighting the wiring and electronics onto into a suitable  configuration, I dropped the battery into the car inline and went out onto the track to test.  In the past, I have found inline cars to be overly aggressive off center, even a bit jittery, so I was apprehensive.  Imagine my surprise as the car was very docile and had to be thrown around to make it want to pick up a tire.  The over rotation problem was gone as well,  and I could drive it hard through the chicane leading onto the straight with fear of having to make a correction and upsetting the car.  A miscue was met with a smooth response instead of a jerky reaction when corrected. My car was now a good .3 seconds a lap better, being able to drive it confidently at all points on the track.

For the final qualifier, I was able to move into P2 for the mains, and lap times were much closer to the TQ driver.  The car handled in traffic very well.

What really capped off all the progress I made was a small change to my tire dope strategy.  I began applying more tire sauce, but wiping it off about 5-6 minutes before the race, as opposed immediately before setting the car down.  The front tires were more or less dry, though they had been sauced for about 10 minutes wet time.  This really settled the car, but still provided enough steering throughout the race.  Starting second in the main, I was also able to be ready to fight and apply pressure immediately, and twice I made a pass on the first or second lap to get into first place at the start of a race. I had one first place and two seconds, for a second place final position.  In the second main, I actually had first place for a bit, but I crashed when a marshall screened my view of a chicane.  I probably should have gave myself a little more room there, but I was going for the win.  For the third race, I did not have quite as good of a start, and made a mistake on the left side of the track, costing a little time.  Ultimately, I was able to close down on the lead car, but never get close enough to try to pass.  The winning car and driver were very good, so congratulations are in order.

Overall, I was really happy with how quickly the car setup came together, and even more, how easy it was to drive the car at race pace.  It's also encouraging as this was outside of the body, a TCS legal setup.  For typical races, you could use an aftermarket spool or gear diff, and also front end pieces that could offer more caster and camber settings than the stock parts.  There are more tenths to be had out of the car, but this was a good weekend.  I plan to also try the link setup as well for comparison, but I have always liked the solid feel of a t bar car.  Don't be afraid to try it if you own the TRF 103.

EDIT: Turns out I also managed hot lap of the weekend!!  Not bad.



Inline car


 Please excuse the somewhat disheveled wiring...lol



 Note the short shock configuration.  Also, 42 g of lead was added to the car to make weight with a standard short pack.  Lead was distributed close to midship.


Electronics were directly in front of the battery.  The lead was tried at more forward positions (on the side of the servo, under the lower arms).  No bueno, mucho oversteer.