Subject:
|
Re: motorized tank questions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.build.military
|
Date:
|
Wed, 5 Jul 2006 20:30:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3041 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.build.military, Steve Lane wrote:
> I think I've fully explored tracked chassis building and it's a dead end. The
> tracks always snap. And when adding plates to the track they always come off.
> You just need an a nice angle at the front to climb things. Rubber tracks would
> be good but as you say, they're too short.
While this is not my primary area of building, I have noticed that the rubber
tracks that came with the Cybermaster kits are relatively long and have
sufficient grip to at least clear some obstacles. The downside of this is, that
the rubber tracks create significantly more friction that the motor(s) have to
overcome. Using anything but the "power" motors is certainly a no-go, but even
then you will want some transmission to increase power - unfortunately
decreasing top speed at the same rate.
Then again, the "old" technic chain tracks are not that bad. Agreed, you can't
clear tiled slopes, but running on carpet, grass or any other reasonably rough
ground should work fine, provided the vehicle also increases ground friction by
sheer weight. A lightweight vehicle without any ground friction will never go
anywhere.
Jerry
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: motorized tank questions
|
| (...) I think I've fully explored tracked chassis building and it's a dead end. The tracks always snap. And when adding plates to the track they always come off. You just need an a nice angle at the front to climb things. Rubber tracks would be good (...) (18 years ago, 5-Jul-06, to lugnet.build.military)
|
12 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
