# tc5 what do u think



## chopper8984 (Apr 24, 2007)

from what a have read the car has done well so far in testing but the only thing i dont understand is why did they go back to belt drive. this is my basic understanding of belt drive vs shaft drive is shaft driven cars allow you to roll thur the center of a corner better and belt drive has more drag and brakes better. someone plz correct me if im wrong but thats just the only thing i see wrong with the car


----------



## Roger Horowitz (May 17, 2004)

They went back to belts due to all the favorable characteristics that they provide. Those are, in no particular order

- Easier weight balance (L/R)
- Quieter operation
- Balanced motor torque
- Better/simpler steering geometry
- Easier motor/spur access
- More repeatable drivetrain assembly

There is nothing to be said for the transmission efficiency of a well built shaft system in this application. It just doesn't matter, not even in stock. 

The handling characteristics in the corners are more a function of the setup/suspension geometry than the drivetrain. The new car will roll through the corners just as well as all the other cars that Associated has been chasing for the last two to three years.


----------



## b4wizard (Sep 27, 2003)

People have told me that the car was more favorable to foam tires.
I was really wanting to try one, but if it is, may go with the "cyclone". 
We only run takeoffs.


----------



## Mike Peterson (Mar 28, 2005)

Horwitz???? It's been a while,


----------



## EAMotorsports (Sep 25, 2001)

b4wizard said:


> People have told me that the car was more favorable to foam tires.
> I was really wanting to try one, but if it is, may go with the "cyclone".
> We only run takeoffs.


Ive ran my car for a few weeks now and found that it seems to generate a LOT of traction both front and rear. I think it will be every bit as good on rubber tires as it is on foam. If you look at the results while in it's prototype stage it did better on rubber tires than foam at the big races. A main at the worlds, multiple guys in the A main at the Asphalt Nats last year, etc. 

Either way you can bet Associated is going to do what it takes to make the car competitive on all surfaces.

EA


----------



## b4wizard (Sep 27, 2003)

EAMotorsports said:


> Ive ran my car for a few weeks now and found that it seems to generate a LOT of traction both front and rear. I think it will be every bit as good on rubber tires as it is on foam. If you look at the results while in it's prototype stage it did better on rubber tires than foam at the big races. A main at the worlds, multiple guys in the A main at the Asphalt Nats last year, etc.
> 
> Either way you can bet Associated is going to do what it takes to make the car competitive on all surfaces.
> 
> EA


That sounds good. I haven't heard much good replys. Most of the folks 
around here have X-Rays or Cyclones. 
I'm really wanting one now to try.
Thanks


----------



## silky (Aug 9, 2005)

Tommy,

With the batteries and motors getting stronger its easier to put the power down with a belt drive car.

I'm running a FT TC4 in stock and a RDX in 19-turn/open mod.

The more motor you put in the shaft car the harder it is to drive because of the quick spool up, which isn't that bad in stock. But the belt drive seems to absorb some of that torque generated by the mod motors making it easier to drive.

You can also play with belt tension which is something not found on shaft drive cars. :thumbsup:

Terry Vaughn


----------



## b4wizard (Sep 27, 2003)

I've noticed a lot of people saying that.


----------



## tcian (Jul 20, 2006)

The tc5s looked good at the gate today EA is holding it Down


----------

