RC10Talk - The Net's Largest Vintage R/C Community

YES jwscab

And AYKBOBCAT I know exactly what you mean, when you say you do this for FUN
I welcome your fun

looks great the only thing I would add is that you may be better off using the 6061 if you plan on anodizing the chassis cause the 7075 does not anodize as well as the 6061 and the 7075 also tends to get water stained very easily

SnoopMaxx wrote:YES jwscab

And AYKBOBCAT I know exactly what you mean, when you say you do this for FUN
I welcome your fun

It is indeed very fun... I have no machining or drawing skills whatsoever... So making it that far is already a success for me... But it's not over

By the way we both appreciat all constructive comments. If you guys have anything to suggest to improve our prototype please let us know.

So should we keep the rows of holes or not?

murphy3428 wrote:looks great the only thing I would add is that you may be better off using the 6061 if you plan on anodizing the chassis cause the 7075 does not anodize as well as the 6061 and the 7075 also tends to get water stained very easily

OK good to know. I guess my buddy already knows that but I'll tell him. Thanks

the added holes are added cost, I would assume, so I say leave 'em off.

I also would say the 6061 is probably cheaper, and will anodize better, so it's probably a better choice, but may not be as stiff.

if you decide to go the route of the short wheelbase/truck bulkhead up front, you'll also want to consider adding holes for the nose tube supports for the gas truck. I can't find it right now, but they are 2 plastic bulkheads that attach to the chassis and connect the nose to the chassis to provide additional support. I'm adding here not to push you before you even get the first chassis built, but so that it's written down while I'm thinking about it. Ten minutes from now I'll forget.

Just talked to my friend... We'll use the 6061 aluminum. From what I understand that's the aircraft grade and it is less brittle than the other which tend to rip instead of bending.

The row of holes on the sides is not the costliest part so taking them off would not change the price. We were planning on not having them unless you guys ask for them. Just for look, I personally think they should be moved back (removing the first one in the front and adding one in the back). But of course they are useless except for mounting an antenna with a modified antenna mount cut with an angle....

What about color? I personnaly want black to fit with the newer parts but we could do other colors. However batches have to be anodized together, we can't do piece per piece... Any suggestions?

jwscab wrote:the added holes are added cost, I would assume, so I say leave 'em off.

I also would say the 6061 is probably cheaper, and will anodize better, so it's probably a better choice, but may not be as stiff.

if you decide to go the route of the short wheelbase/truck bulkhead up front, you'll also want to consider adding holes for the nose tube supports for the gas truck. I can't find it right now, but they are 2 plastic bulkheads that attach to the chassis and connect the nose to the chassis to provide additional support. I'm adding here not to push you before you even get the first chassis built, but so that it's written down while I'm thinking about it. Ten minutes from now I'll forget.

I have tought about this but as you can see on our chassis there will be no nose tubes and I don't think they would be needed on the other chassis either. We made some virtual tests on the chassis and you need A LOT of pressure to bend it. It would have to jump really high and fall very hard to bend. But of course who would have tought in the 80s that people could do backflip with their RC trucks!

I was going to say the holes on either side would look even better if moved back one hole like you stated but you beat me to it.

I might be alone on this but I think it would make it look too plain without them. You can even use them to mount things to such as the electronics.

Plus they lighten the chassis! Speed holes!

+1 On the holes staying
Black and perhaps Gold

hi i was reading the posts for the chassies theres alot of aircraft grade aluminum being clad or unclad witch normally marked bare. the claded is the way to go for corrosion. but iwould still prime and paint becouse the clad is about as thin as human hair. now for the types of alumuinim theres 2024 7075 and 6061 the the number to look for is the last which for airplanes it TO being extremally flexable witch is normally used for fab then sent for heat treat the next is T3 which is harder and can still be bent but can crack. T6 is the hardedest and does not bend easlly you can get away with the bend for the front nose of a rc10 just do not bend with the grain. sorry just could not help shedding lite on the aluminum im have heavy structure mechanic at a mro in wa im getting some money together to make rc10tsc with a custom tub proply going to use 7075t6 .080 to .090

Ok guys... a little update on our project

I just received a few pictures of our chassis assembled with the rest of the parts. It looks very good but we have a few problems to fix as the rear holes do not align properly. We'll fix that of course.

The steering parts will have to be shimed a little to clear the chassis as the original front plate is a bit lower. We'll probably supply shim tubes or something like that with the chassis. It has to be a cheap and simple solution. Here are a few pictures...


Don't pay attention to the orientation of the rear wheels. My friend used the wrong holes on the suspension mounts before taking the picture.

For the final version we will reposition the row of holes back by one hole and anodize the thing (likely black).

Now I need to find a rear bumbper for the graphite chassis to test the position of the two rear holes. If someone has one to spare let me know. Condition doesn't matter it's for testing...

The ball strut should be on the upper side ..Right ?

The Chassis looks great

Looks Great Shouda saved soms bulkheads Johnny

I know you are well into the development of the chassis and it looks really good but what about this idea? Make the front of the chassis 1/2"-3/4" longer and bend it up like the OG gold pan nose plate. This would allow the use of nose tubes with the GT mounts. It would really stiffen up the front end. You'd be surprised how one good lick will bent the front of that chassis.

Otherwise it looks great!

looks to me like using the sassy chassis as a template for hole placement has kinda bit you in the a$$ again.............

the sassy chassis has 3 degrees of toe in already built into it. because of that, the sides of the chassis by the arm mounts taper towards the bulkhead. that way, the holes will line up with the arm mounts. you used the sassy hole placement, then cut the chassis straight (like a normal chassis), so now you can't attach the arm mount to the chassis.