Chassis weight comparison

General info, Q&A.

Moderators: scr8p, klavy69

User avatar
59burst
Approved Member
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:52 am
Location: Bothell, WA

Chassis weight comparison

Post by 59burst »

There were no significant differences between chassis' weight
have a look

Image

Image

Image

Image

Graphite rules!
Image

Milled chassis dosen't loose weight much, but the V shape nose plate does.
Image

Image

User avatar
Mr. ED
Approved Member
Posts: 5478
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:30 am
Location: Back @ home: Belgium
Has thanked: 58 times
Been thanked: 56 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by Mr. ED »

LOL the first 2 are true marketing-killers.
Good post

User avatar
Halgar
Approved Member
Posts: 3319
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 12:34 pm
Location: USA
Has thanked: 148 times
Been thanked: 191 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by Halgar »

Pardon the silly question, but why is a 6 gram difference on the nose plate significant, but 7 to 10 grams between the top two chassis and the next two isn't?
klavy69 wrote:... when I give you s&#t its a loan...I want it back!

User avatar
RichieRich
Approved Member
Posts: 2352
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Has thanked: 34 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by RichieRich »

Halgar wrote:Pardon the silly question, but why is a 6 gram difference on the nose plate significant, but 7 to 10 grams between the top two chassis and the next two isn't?

It's about percentages. The milled chassis isn't even 2% lighter while the "V" nose plate is nearly 17% lighter.
Image

User avatar
Halgar
Approved Member
Posts: 3319
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 12:34 pm
Location: USA
Has thanked: 148 times
Been thanked: 191 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by Halgar »

RichieRich wrote:
Halgar wrote:Pardon the silly question, but why is a 6 gram difference on the nose plate significant, but 7 to 10 grams between the top two chassis and the next two isn't?

It's about percentages. The milled chassis isn't even 2% lighter while the "V" nose plate is nearly 17% lighter.
Ok, but aren't the effects of weight cumulative, making every gram saved an improvement?
klavy69 wrote:... when I give you s&#t its a loan...I want it back!

User avatar
RichieRich
Approved Member
Posts: 2352
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:42 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Has thanked: 34 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by RichieRich »

Halgar wrote:
RichieRich wrote:
Halgar wrote:Pardon the silly question, but why is a 6 gram difference on the nose plate significant, but 7 to 10 grams between the top two chassis and the next two isn't?

It's about percentages. The milled chassis isn't even 2% lighter while the "V" nose plate is nearly 17% lighter.
Ok, but aren't the effects of weight cumulative, making every gram saved an improvement?
Right! :) But, if you had to pick and if you're on a budget, saving 2% with a worlds chassis doesn't maximize value.
Image

User avatar
Halgar
Approved Member
Posts: 3319
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 12:34 pm
Location: USA
Has thanked: 148 times
Been thanked: 191 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by Halgar »

RichieRich wrote:Right! :) But, if you had to pick and if you're on a budget, saving 2% with a worlds chassis doesn't maximize value.
Got it! Hence the reasoning behind Swiss cheesing the chassis. :mrgreen:
klavy69 wrote:... when I give you s&#t its a loan...I want it back!

User avatar
aeiou
Approved Member
Posts: 1071
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 4:04 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by aeiou »

Thanks for the interesting post, gatlin.

What surprises me is the difference between the black and gold chassis. I can understand why the powder coated green chassis is heavier than the anodized ones, but I wonder why the gold is heavier/black lighter?

User avatar
Brandon G
Approved Member
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:23 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by Brandon G »

Nice post.

Just goes to show what little the BS "milling" really did for the weight. Obviously just something to claim on the latest and greatest version.

I imagine the black one is lighter because lighter/thinner/cheaper aluminum was used. Corporations have a way of cutting costs in ways you wouldn't imagine.

I'm sure I probably pissed a few off with that but oh well.

I've had a few beers in me too. :?

User avatar
mrlexan
Approved Member
Posts: 6251
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 6:49 pm
Location: Upstate SC
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by mrlexan »

Don't forget time in the anodizing tank will effect it as well. You are in essence electronically transferring metal to another metal (before anyone throws it at me, I know aluminum isn't a metal, but you know what I mean :D ). Back at Roush anything automotive that was anodized, we had to specificy the thickness on the component drawings.... I can remember slip fit parts not fitting correctly due to too much material build up.
I am not here cause I am playing photographer and on my mountain bike.
www.gojammedia.com

User avatar
ROH73
Approved Member
Posts: 623
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:07 am
Location: State College, PA
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by ROH73 »

bngiles wrote:Nice post.

Just goes to show what little the BS "milling" really did for the weight. Obviously just something to claim on the latest and greatest version.

I imagine the black one is lighter because lighter/thinner/cheaper aluminum was used. Corporations have a way of cutting costs in ways you wouldn't imagine.

I'm sure I probably pissed a few off with that but oh well.

I've had a few beers in me too. :?
I've read somewhere (probably an old RCCA) that the reason for the milled pockets on the sides was to help direct dirt out of the chassis through the slightly larger holes. The 'H' pocket is probably just for show. The World's chassis main claim to fame is its hard anodizing, which makes it stiffer.

The weight differences between the black and gold chassis could be deliberate, but not to cut costs; 6000 series aluminum alloy sheets pretty much all cost the same. Perhaps Associated spec'd a different grade of aluminum to simply lighten things up a bit and increase performance.

But, in the end, to put things in perspective, 7 grams is a whopping 0.25 oz :D.

Robert

User avatar
markt311
Approved Member
Posts: 1037
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: nashville TN

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by markt311 »

now weigh a swiss cheese chassis and discuss the weight savings versus bending the chassis in half if you case a jump theory :shock:

Mark
Mark

Aaaaahhhh crap! I'm about to get passed by that orange truck!

User avatar
59burst
Approved Member
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:52 am
Location: Bothell, WA

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by 59burst »

aeiou wrote:Thanks for the interesting post, gatlin.

What surprises me is the difference between the black and gold chassis. I can understand why the powder coated green chassis is heavier than the anodized ones, but I wonder why the gold is heavier/black lighter?
Good point, Paul

my early RC10's chassis has stamped "A" on it. my team car has "B".
and, these new gold and milled ones have "C".

I got same question when I finished this silly weighting job. and, found A,B,C on the chassis.
so, I tried digital caliper. it's 6 bucks cheap and nasty caliper. and it's a still caliper.
the thickness of early gold and black chassis was 1.58 to 1.62mm(0.062")
and, 1.60 to 1.66mm(0.064") on milled and the new gold chassis.
I don't think I got correct value. these chassis made by some pressing and cutting processes. so, the values couldn't be regualr.

anyway, the milling job did work somehow.
the milled chassis is "slightly thicker" than old black one. and, "slightly lighter" than old one.
if these milled and late gold chassis have "C" were made out of same process. milling job saved 10 grams.
but it's TINY differece. I'll take graphite chassis if I need light one.

my conclusion is "Milled chassis looks cool."

User avatar
59burst
Approved Member
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:52 am
Location: Bothell, WA

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by 59burst »

mrlexan wrote:Don't forget time in the anodizing tank will effect it as well. You are in essence electronically transferring metal to another metal (before anyone throws it at me, I know aluminum isn't a metal, but you know what I mean :D ). Back at Roush anything automotive that was anodized, we had to specificy the thickness on the component drawings.... I can remember slip fit parts not fitting correctly due to too much material build up.
Yes, absolutely right.

User avatar
Brandon G
Approved Member
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:23 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Chassis weight comparison

Post by Brandon G »

ROH73 wrote:
bngiles wrote:Nice post.

Just goes to show what little the BS "milling" really did for the weight. Obviously just something to claim on the latest and greatest version.

I imagine the black one is lighter because lighter/thinner/cheaper aluminum was used. Corporations have a way of cutting costs in ways you wouldn't imagine.

I'm sure I probably pissed a few off with that but oh well.

I've had a few beers in me too. :?
I've read somewhere (probably an old RCCA) that the reason for the milled pockets on the sides was to help direct dirt out of the chassis through the slightly larger holes. The 'H' pocket is probably just for show. The World's chassis main claim to fame is its hard anodizing, which makes it stiffer.

The weight differences between the black and gold chassis could be deliberate, but not to cut costs; 6000 series aluminum alloy sheets pretty much all cost the same. Perhaps Associated spec'd a different grade of aluminum to simply lighten things up a bit and increase performance.

But, in the end, to put things in perspective, 7 grams is a whopping 0.25 oz :D.

Robert
Yeah, I forgot about the hard anodizing..

I never understood the slots getting rid of dirt easier. ?? :) :)

Post Reply

Create an account or sign in to join the discussion

You need to be a member in order to post a reply

Create an account

Not a member? register to join our community
Members can start their own topics & subscribe to topics
It’s free and only takes a minute

Register

Sign in

  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
  • The Ferrari comparison...
    by fordtransman » » in Off-Topic / Chit-Chat
    26 Replies
    1972 Views
    Last post by tizeye
  • Full-Option 235mm comparison...
    by rooster » » in Associated On-Road Forum
    15 Replies
    3031 Views
    Last post by rooster
  • Alloy gear case comparison
    by cooltoys » » in RC10 Buggy Forum
    16 Replies
    1490 Views
    Last post by klavy69
  • Holiday Buggy: Tamiya vs Extratoy Comparison
    by morrisey0 » » in Tamiya Forum
    3 Replies
    701 Views
    Last post by Dadio
  • Shootout Comparison: RC10 vs RC10WC vs RC10B4 vs RC10B7D?
    by TokyoProf » » in R/C Off-Topic / Chit-Chat
    0 Replies
    89 Views
    Last post by TokyoProf
  • 91 Masami Stealth replica (Photo Comparison Uploaded)
    by Seabass » » in RC10 Buggy Forum
    551 Replies
    66383 Views
    Last post by LusBus
  • Tamiya Tamtech 935 GT01 Body Comparison
    by mrlexan » » in Tamiya Forum
    6 Replies
    1125 Views
    Last post by mrlexan
  • CAT 2000 '98 Battery Comparison via ESC Data Logging
    by Typpo » » in Schumacher Forum
    0 Replies
    921 Views
    Last post by Typpo

Return to “Temple's RC10 Tech Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No User AvatarGoogle Adsense [Bot] and 6 guests