Not Your Fathers Crawler - The Kyosho Paradigm

[dkingston]

I have been following this site for about a year and a half and been a member for about a year. I know what I am going to suggest might sound a little foreign to some of you but I would appreciate it if you at least keep an open mind as to my opinions on the Rock Force.

The first thing you need to understand is that the engineers at Kyosho have spent nearly 3 years developing this product. By the time some of you saw the Super "prototype" over a year ago, there had been well over a year in development. As they watched the market change, the emphasis was made on developing a competitive 2.2 crawler that would work extremely well, right out-of-the-box.

When I say the engineers have been working for 3 years, I mean that they have hand built prototypes, much as the pioneers on rccrawler have for many years as well. They took what they learned and made improvements. What you see today is the evolution of their findings.

While there are things that may seem a bit "odd" to most of you, I assure you they have been thoroughly tested, revamped, improved, rinsed and repeated. Examples:

- Wheelbase and track width, while I know and understand that the conventional wisdom up until now has been to maximize the wheelbase to meet the USRCCA standards, thy Kyosho stock wheelbase and track width has been tested in virtually every conceivable combination and what is stock in the kit is what they felt the most optimum starting setup should be. Wheelbase, track width and ride height are three aspects that need to work well together to make sure that a rig that crawls well, sidehills well and vice versa. The super class has proven that longer wheelbase isn't always best. There is a point where a particular vehicle performs better, even if it isn't the longest possible wheelbase.

- Wheel speed a la gearing, It is true that wheelspeed has been a very important factor for most in rc crawling, take a moment to consider the trade-off between wheel speed and torque at the wheels. Example, when high-centered and rocking the rig, it isn't the wheels speed that helps get you free, it is the torque generated at the wheels. The worm gear setup that Kyosho has used provides the maximum torque at the wheels and the least possible torque in the chassis. I know there will be several who will cite examples where wheel speed it important and I won't try to claim you are wrong. This is just the opinion of the engineers.

I know that the expectation of any new rig is that you must tweak, fiddle and modify things to make them fit the paradigm you are used to. Please understand, while some of the individual components came from other Kyosho vehicles (wheels from DBX, etc..) the major components and the crawler as a whole were completely designed for the specific use of rock crawling. This is a first in the rc crawling market.

So, what I am asking for you guys who are currently building or have built your rigs; try them as stock as possible and give them a shot that way. The gearing is that way on purpose, the width is where it is at to match the wheelbase in generally a optimal of a configuration as possible. Is everything going to be perfect for every driver? No. Is the kit, out-of-the-box a great starting point? Yes. Please resist arbitrarily modifying things because that is what you are used to doing. I think you will be pleasantly surprised and your overall satisfaction will be much greater.

This was not a kit thrown together to exploit a market. It is a thoughtfully designed, carefully engineered, precision crawling machine.


- David

[roborg5000]

Did you get that thing built yet Dave

Great write up buddy. Hope to see the rig soon. Uhh I mean you

[JohnRobHolmes]

If I had one, I would change the gearing right away. I know how much wheelspeed I need, and how fast my crawler will go with a certain setup. If nothing else, the axles will allow a minimum of weight on the chassis- merely a motor with two gears and a shaft is all it needs.

[Harley]

Seems like a great place for discussion.

Originally Posted by dkingston

- Wheelbase and track width, while I know and understand that the conventional wisdom up until now has been to maximize the wheelbase to meet the USRCCA standards, thy Kyosho stock wheelbase and track width has been tested in virtually every conceivable combination and what is stock in the kit is what they felt the most optimum starting setup should be. Wheelbase, track width and ride height are three aspects that need to work well together to make sure that a rig that crawls well, sidehills well and vice versa. The super class has proven that longer wheelbase isn't always best. There is a point where a particular vehicle performs better, even if it isn't the longest possible wheelbase.

I would like to hear why they thought that the shorter wheelbase was an advantage. Super is really a whole different story, you are talking about significatly different wheelbase lengths that has no maximum. Not saying it was just a completely wrong choice to go to with what they have but I would be interested in finding many people who would agree that 12.5" was not the way to go.

Originally Posted by dkingston

- Wheel speed a la gearing, It is true that wheelspeed has been a very important factor for most in rc crawling, take a moment to consider the trade-off between wheel speed and torque at the wheels. Example, when high-centered and rocking the rig, it isn't the wheels speed that helps get you free, it is the torque generated at the wheels. The worm gear setup that Kyosho has used provides the maximum torque at the wheels and the least possible torque in the chassis.

Having so much reduction at the axles is awesome! However the gearing is really was to low. I see on the Kyosho FAQ section it says that with the low gear there is "No need for an expensive motor". I don't quite understand what they are talking about, they could have went with a much more reasonable 60:1 - 80:1 range and used "standard issue" 55t lathe motors, had at least a little wheel speed (because it has NONE now) and still have plenty of torque.

Originally Posted by dkingston

I know that the expectation of any new rig is that you must tweak, fiddle and modify things to make them fit the paradigm you are used to. Please understand, while some of the individual components came from other Kyosho vehicles (wheels from DBX, etc..) the major components and the crawler as a whole were completely designed for the specific use of rock crawling. This is a first in the rc crawling market.

The kit does seem decent out of the box, but even after my initial impressions it still does need quite a bit of tuning like every other kit that has been released. Even though the parts were completely designed for this kit there are still things that people can already immediatley see need changing for this thing to perform well. Tweaking right out of the box is still needed.

Originally Posted by dkingston

So, what I am asking for you guys who are currently building or have built your rigs; try them as stock as possible and give them a shot that way. The gearing is that way on purpose, the width is where it is at to match the wheelbase in generally a optimal of a configuration as possible.

I still think they should have rethought the trackwidth and wheelbase. The people on this board have tried countless setups. More than 10 engineers could try in 3 years, there is a consistency to peoples truck not just because it is what everyone runs but because it has proved itself over and over. Watch nationals every year, I am guessing you won't see too many 11" wide 2.2's competeing with wheelbases under 12".

Originally Posted by dkingston

Is everything going to be perfect for every driver? No. Is the kit, out-of-the-box a great starting point? Yes. Please resist arbitrarily modifying things because that is what you are used to doing. I think you will be pleasantly surprised and your overall satisfaction will be much greater..

It does seem like a great kit, and a great starting point. With a good bit of tweaking it will hold its own with the most popular of the 2.2 comp rigs out there. Probably the 2nd best crawling kit I have ever seen.

I am willing to bet that soon these will be much like Axials you see at comps, obvious what they are based on but far from looking like the original. It is just too hard for major manufactures to keep up with advancements of such a fast evolving section of the hubby.



There is my $.02

[JohnRobHolmes]

Originally Posted by Harley0706

t I would be interested in finding many people who would agree that 12.5" was not the way to go.

I run mine a bit under 12.5"

I don't quite understand what they are talking about, they could have went with a much more reasonable 60:1 - 80:1 range and used "standard issue" 55t lathe motors, had at least a little wheel speed (because it has NONE now) and still have plenty of torque.

I agree here. At least in the US, it is cheap and easy to find 55 to 35t motors that have been proven to have plenty of power. Unless you buy a 27t cheapie Johnson type, there are no cheaper motors to use.

Tweaking right out of the box is still needed.

As there always will be with any kit, surely. Every driver will want a different setup for there driving pleasure

I am guessing you won't see too many 11" wide 2.2's competeing with wheelbases under 12".

I agree here. TW is totally wide as compared to what top competitors currently run. I will say one thing, the super wide axle will have the least scrub steer of anything out there, and be the strongest too. A new offset of wheel fixes the issue (yay, one more offset to choose from)




Axles. I just want the axles. And maybe the tranny plates.

[BILLYGOAT]

i dont think it was "thrown together to exploit the market". it seems like alot of time and thought went into this kit . but you must understand eveyone has a setup they like and tweeking and tinkering is part of our hobby. i have never seen two builds that where exactly the same even with the same parts . its just part of the hobby not ment as disrespect to kyosho or the engineers. just my .02

[megacabcummins]

Originally Posted by JohnRobHolmes

Axles. I just want the axles. And maybe the tranny plates.

Yea those things are huge... I want a set to go with my Widow chassis and Crawlmaster

I can't see any kit not needing tuning... no offense but what works one place may not work in another.

[Harley]

Originally Posted by BILLYGOAT

i dont think it was "thrown together to exploit the market". it seems like alot of time and thought went into this kit . but you must understand eveyone has a setup they like and tweeking and tinkering is part of our hobby. i have never seen two builds that where exactly the same even with the same parts . its just part of the hobby not ment as disrespect to kyosho or the engineers. just my .02

I am sure they expect people to make tweaks, but it almost sounds like they think it is comp ready (competitive) out of the box, and I would disagree with that.

I still like the truck and look forward to putting in a bunch of hours on it over the long weekend.

[crawldad91]

how is the parts and screw bags laid out? im a red army guy too, and one thing i have learned about kyosho is they are proud of thier stuff and the price's show this!nothin kyosho sells is cheap nor cheaply made.

im a nitro racer as well as a crawler and on the 1/8 scale scene, kyosho's are IMO the fastest trucks out there with plenty of R&D behind them!i run thier newest truck<st-rr> and its a nightmare to put together cause of the way the packaging was. difficult but damn fast!

[Harley]

Originally Posted by dkingston

major components and the crawler as a whole were completely designed for the specific use of rock crawling. This is a first in the rc crawling market.

I guess this statment kind of seems like a stretch to me too. I mean the axial used what appears to be some HPI parts (diff cup and ring gear), but for the most parts seemed to be designed for this specific market too.

Am I wrong?

[HiloDB1]

The parts a packaged by components. Axle parts are in 1 bag knuckles and associated parts are in another and so forth. Its not that hard to figure out with a little help from the instructions

[killjoyken]

Well, Harley and John pretty much covered my thoughts, so I think I'll stay out of this one, especially since my RF is completely torn down and I've been making new parts and mocking up a new chassis.

I've got one question for you David: Have you driven a stock RF side by side with another comp crawler?

[stampedeproject]

All good points and fair enough... they did thier homework.

One thing Kyosho has to realize is that this, the RCCrawler National Network, LIVE to modify. In fact, I think if God himself came down and delivered a perfect crawler, you would still hear things like, "yeah it's too perfect there is no challange... so I went back to Rock Lizards and changed all the links to plastic."

One thing for sure, no one is bitch'en about the drivetrain not being strong enough, geez it's HUGE.

To the Gear reduction point I think Kyosho wanted you to be able to use some pretty weak motors and still get the torque - good idea, however I tend to agree with Holmes that a a blip on the throttle can get you out of a number of jams.

I think you left out the front end geometry. As I posted in a previous post - I am a little surprised to here people already complaining already about the front link setup. From an engineering perspective this is a superior link setup and so good that only the most expensive and advanced 1:1 Formula 1 off road Rock Racers (crawlers) use this setup. http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showt...pbell+buggy%22 and is one reason that even with a 4.5R Novak Brushless system I had zero chassis torque twist... it was dead flat. Perhaps with the chassis running dead flat and the shorter wheelbase, maybe it will run a little better. In theory a shorter wheelbase should lessen high centering issues.


Time will tell. I am committed to beating this rig in stock state to see how smart those guy in Japan are. ;)

At any rate Kyosho did some really good work that everyone will have a blast "tweaking" to thier own needs.

[dezfan]

The Rock Force SP2 should be cool.

[Dewmerz]

Originally Posted by JohnRobHolmes

I agree here. At least in the US, it is cheap and easy to find 55 to 35t motors that have been proven to have plenty of power. Unless you buy a 27t cheapie Johnson type, there are no cheaper motors to use.

The other downside related to this is those of us with FXR's are limited to 35T on 3S based on Mfg recommendations. I really don't want to buy a FXR Pro just to run these axles out of the box.

[dkingston]

Guys relax...

I wasn't trying to claim that the Rock Force was going to go out beat everyone right out-of-the-box. If you re-read my post, I was just asking for people to try it in (relative) stock form before dismantling it, part and parcel. Feel free to modify what you wish. That is why the other worm gears are available, that is why there are more option parts coming. Nobody will ever claim it is "the best" out-of-the-box

The guys who designed this crawler came from the same place most of you have. They scratch built crawlers (for fun and work) over several years. They are more familiar with how you guys want to build and tweak than you would ever imagine.


....and yes, I have driven it side-by-side with my comp OCM/Berg.


- David

[stampedeproject]

Originally Posted by dezfan

The Rock Force SP2 should be cool.

Oh God, now the rumors will fly... hmmmm. LOL LOL

Poor David... just trying make a point and as always someone (throat clear,- Holmes throat clear..) has hijacked a post. LOL...

Brother David we are with you in spirit. All us arm chair engineers (a whole forum full) picked apart the AX10 the same way at first.

[dezfan]

Originally Posted by stampedeproject

Arm chair engineers (a whole forum full) picked apart the AX10 the same way at first.

And look at 99% of the Axial, Berg, and TLT comp rigs now.

The Kyosho will be no different. The axles will be used to build some sweet rigs. The rest will be made better by the "armchair" engineers as they are the ones who actually have first hand experience and an understanding of real word needs.

[OGmicromonster]

Even Kyosho's 1/8-scale buggy/truggy and all their other race kits need tweaking out of the box to get them to perform at their best. Everyone drives differently and on different terrain. So tweaking is needed. Even at the 1/8-scale worlds (and other similar events) the box setup isn't run, or if it is then rarely.

Originally Posted by dkingston

- Wheel speed a la gearing, It is true that wheelspeed has been a very important factor for most in rc crawling, take a moment to consider the trade-off between wheel speed and torque at the wheels. Example, when high-centered and rocking the rig, it isn't the wheels speed that helps get you free, it is the torque generated at the wheels. The worm gear setup that Kyosho has used provides the maximum torque at the wheels and the least possible torque in the chassis. I know there will be several who will cite examples where wheel speed it important and I won't try to claim you are wrong. This is just the opinion of the engineer.

Wheel speed does play an important roll to get your rig moving if stuck. The momentum and sudden stop of the wheels is what rocks the rig back and forth, not just torque. So I agree that the gearing is too low in my opinion. Because like others have said, if the purpose of the gearing was to make it so you wouldn't have to buy a more expensive motor then that doesn't sound right to me. You could buy good inexpensive motors that would work with a higher gearing. Like the ones we've used.

[HiloDB1]

I actually like having all the gear reduction in the axles. I am running a 35t pinion and a 72t spur for a final ratio of around 60:1. I dont think thats all that bad. Like posted many times already just have to tweek it to where your happy with it. I have no doubt out of the box it will performe fairly well but that doesnt make it the end all be all kit.