Why no nerf bars?

[Leet TC3]

We've all had it happen to us countless times. No matter how good a driver you are, you WILL break those rear suspension arms. Somebody pushes you coming out of a corner, you slam against the wall and all of a sudden you start doing 360's whenever you throttle.

This is SO preventable. Pan cars have those little nerf bars sticking out of their chassis, and this protects the rear suspension arms just like the front bumper protects the front suspension arms. Those 10L drivers rarely break rear arms.

It really bugs me that kit manufacturers don't include this simple design in all their sedans. The obvious reason in greed; they WANT those arms to break so they can charge us $5 - $10 for a little piece of plastic. They also seem to prevent hop-up manufacturers from offering this simple form of protection. Just about everyone I race with would buy nerf bars if they were ever offered.

Personally, I think they make a mistake by forcing us to continually buy repair parts. Breaking a suspension arm can ruin the race day for some drivers; some can't afford spare parts, other times there may not be a hobby shop nearby. Or how about when you are leading the A main and it breaks? It does take away some of the enjoyment of the hobby, and the frustration leads to drivers giving up on their cars.

Sorry for the rant, I just hope things change in this area.

[maxxxracer]

I agree. but for our cars there are a number of companies that make nerf wings or bars. I have not broken any of my arms on my tc3 yet but if I ever do I will be getting some nerf wings.

[Hairball]

What car are you running? I've hit the wall with my Xpress Pro REALLY HARD and never broken a rear A-Arm. Bent the axle's a few time, but never actually BROKE anything.

Ever thought that maybe you just drive a weak car? :)

[Grizzbob]

Well, I'd guess he's running a TC3(seeing as how TC3 is in his name, :)), & it is true that the TC3's & Yok MR-4 series cars can be suceptible to breakage there, but for me it happens only once in a great while. Now fronts, yeah, they take more abuse(& I do think that BRP's wide front bumper is a great idea), but I've only broken a rear arm once, & it just from a totally stupid mistake on my part. The reason why some of these composite parts seem more fragile is because they're stiffer than most other plastics(only the graphite filled stuff is stiffer), & as with all things, with greater stiffness comes more fragility. However, that's why I like the graphite filled stuff, while they will break too, they can take more abuse & still work perfectly before they break..... :)

[Leet TC3]

I have smacked the wall with near full speed, and barely noticed a scratch. Most of my suspension arm breaks have come when I barely kissed the wall. It's all in the way you hit it, and the angle.

It's only happened to me about 3 times, but others it seems to happen weekly. I race at a track that has very high traction with wide, sweeping banked turns. The cars will carry lots of speed into those turns, and if someone takes a bad line they will generally end up on the wall along with anyone else that was near them.

It doesn't take long to replace the arms, esp. since I could do it blindfolded at this point. :). The only bummer is that it always seems to happen on the last practice lap, and your first heat is in 5 minutes...

My point is mainly to rag at kit makers. They don't supply protection for such obviously vulnerable parts ONLY because they want to make money off the inflated priced parts.

[Hairball]

Well, you do have a point there. But you have to think business, not logically. There more things the consumer breaks, the more money they make on replacement parts... :)

And check this out. Losi just put out there new kick ass XXX-S. Great car. But then like a month later they release a bunch of graphite upgrades for it... Hmm, marking scam anyone? Buy the brand new XXX-S for around $200, then a month later spend another $100+ on graphite upgrades that SHOULD have come with the car in the first place.

Once again, a company playing the "Screw the Consumer" game. Not all companies excersise this policy though. I now the Xpress cars I run pretty much come decked out. There isnt much of a market for upgrades, because the stock car comes with just about everything you'd need. :) And its the same price as most basic kits from other campanys.

[HauntedMyst]

I don't think Losi is playing a screw the consumer game, they just released the car and they haven't called it the "Super deluxe all graphite and titanium Road Killer XXX-s, its just the XXX-s. Besides, an all the upgrades version usually runs in the $300 range, not $200. I am sure whenever one of their sponsored driving chimps wins a big race they will release an all the upgrades version. That is the version I am waiting for. Unlike companies like HPI, at least Losi and Associated tend to release an all the upgrades version for those of us that like all the graphite and shiny aluminum.

(Yes, I am aware of the Japan Edition of the Pro 2, however it was released here in the USA only a month before the Pro 3 came out. While Japan got to enjoy it for quite some time. My guess is they only did it to clear out inventory)

[ 09-02-2001: Message edited by: HauntedMyst ]

[jeepinator]

All you damn conspiricy theorists should start a company. Your entire viewpoint would change dramatically. I am not defending anyone as I actually think some of that may be going on, but pleeeeease ... this type of stuff is normal and (dare I say ?) healthy.

My only complaint is tire and wheel prices :p

[ammoace]

Well I have to agree with Jeep on this one.

Besides why can't you make your own nerf wings? A piece of lexan, plexiglass, or styrine, drill, maybe a rotary tool and time is all it should take. And by the way I own two pan cars and the nerf wings don't stick out past the body so they barely protect the rear axle, no suspension arms on the rear of the RC10L series cars, just a straight axle running through a motor pod. If you break a rear axle on these puppies your car was truly about to lift off and need a Aircraft radio freq. The axles that I have are graphite with aluminum inserts inside so they hold their own against crashes even without the nerf wings. The wings that associated sells are cheap and are just a triangle shaped piece of fiberglass and/or graphite. I also have an oval car with a plastic nerf bar that is only on the passenger side since the chassis is offset to the left. Neither the nerf wings nor the nerf bars have even a scratch on them since the bodies have taken most of the hits. About the best benifit that I have noticed is that they give the side of the body a little more strength.
One final thought, I think that offroad buggies and trucks could benifit more from Nerf wings/bars then the on-road vehicles. With the possible exception of Rally cars which are generally, not all mind you but generally, more on-road then offroad capable.
Just my thoughts,
Jerry

[ 09-03-2001: Message edited by: JerryL ]

[TC3Racer]

for the TC3 i suggest you pick up the wide front bumper and those nerf wings. the wide front bumpers protect the front A-arms and front set-up and the nerf wings protect your rear A-arms and rear set-up. the wide rear bumper is just bogus though... i have raced without my rear bumper entirely and been OK. you should race with the bumped but that wide extension adds weight and really isn't needed. also dont you think it makes the car look ugly? i sure do....

[Leet TC3]

Jerry - I agree with what you say. We all COULD just spend the extra time and money to buy/build parts that SHOULD have been included in the first place. But why should we?

I am not saying I expect every hop-up to be included with every kit. But there are some REAL obvious things that are missing from most kits. Case in point - Nerf wings on the TC3. Or, have you seen some cars that come with a lame, flimsy, too-small front bumper?

These items are excluded NOT because they would make the kit more expensive. Rather, they are excluded because the manufacturer does NOT want the protection they would afford. Lots of money to be made on those spare parts. Sorry if I seem cynical, but I have seen way too many examples of this to think it is isolated to one or two cars or manufacturers.

A well designed and sturdy wing would greatly reduce rear arm breakage on the TC3.

BTW, for all TC3 owners - Integy is about to make available suspension arms made out of Delrin. Much stronger than graphite, and not nearly as brittle.

TC3Racer - I am not aware of any aftermarket nerf wings for the TC3. Who, where, how much? :)

[Nairb]

I'm pretty sure BRP (Bud's Racing Profucts) makes Kydex Nerf Wings for the TC3.

[jeepinator]

With plastics, rigid almost always equals brittle and durable almost always equals flexible.
You can have flex and the ability to take repeat abuse, or you can have no flex and part breakage.
When you hit something, energy is absorbed by the parts of your car. If you build them to not absorb energy (stiff) they break. It is actually that simple.
If you make everything on your car EXTREMELY strong, say solid titanium everything, then whatever you hit will be tasked with absorbing this energy. Plus, the G-forces your car encounters may break electronics, smash batteries, crack servo cases, etc. I know this kind of stuff is possible because it has all happened to me ! I hit something so hard once that I BROKE a battery pack. Yep the battery bar snapped and a cell was dented !
So, I don't give a rip what Integy is releasing. It is all a trade-off. You gain nothing either way, you only shift the characteristics of the part. Delrin is VERY soft stuff. It will flex like mad and wear very poorly, but it probably won't snap easily. So you will have an unbreakable gumby car. Hard to crack a rubber band :p

[ 09-03-2001: Message edited by: jeepinator ]

[Leet TC3]

I disagree. As a long time long distance cyclist and mountain biker, I can tell you that in fact there are many plastics on the market today that are nearly as tough as metal, yet still plenty flexible enough. Some of the best bikes are made of Kevlar.

Delrin has been around awhile, and the new generation can be made quite stiff. The stuff is being used in snowboards, surf boards, ski boots etc. From the Dupont website:

Delrin® bridges the gap between metals and ordinary plastics with a unique combination of strength, stiffness, hardness, dimensional stability, toughness, fatigue resistance, solvent and fuel resistance, abrasion resistance, low wear and low friction.

It may not be as stiff as graphite, but I don't think you can call it a rubber band. :)

I have read reports that Delrin is being considered as a replacement for graphite in higher end kits. The problem of course, is price. It is about twice as expensive as graphite (the A arms will retail for around $17).

[jeepinator]

OK, I will yield to your knowledge of Delrin. The center gears of some trannies are made of it, I just remembered. I think it is used because as it wears the dust acts as a lubricant. But, anyhooo ...
Where do you suppose this accident energy is going to be displaced ? It has to be absorbed somewhere. If not the A-arms, then where ?
My primary point is that if you build the arms flexible, so they don't break, then handling is comnpromised. If you build them stiff (and I guess indesctructible as your are claiming) the something else will break.

BTW, my Microsoft Windows Millenium box states, "The new generation of windows is faster, stronger, bug free, and will make you look younger". Do I believe it ? Well, more to the point; do YOU believe it ?

:p

[Leet TC3]

To be honest, I don't really care how stiff the suspension arms are. In fact, it may be a good thing if they aren't too stiff.

To answer your question as to where that accident energy would go: probably would cause you to spin an extra few degrees. Instead of having the axle or wheel knuckle break, you car would simply spin a little bit more. Probably no big deal.

I do understand your point though. That energy has to go somewhere, unless Einstein was wrong. :)

Regarding Microsoft's claim: Window's ME IS in fact faster and more bug free. They sped it up by about .0005 percent, and eliminated about 5 of the 12,890,260 bugs. So they weren't lying. ;)

[Nairb]

Originally posted by Leet TC3:
That energy has to go somewhere, unless Einstein was wrong.

I'm so sorry, but that wasn't Einstein's original idea. It was Isaac Newton's 3rd law of motion. "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction." Sorry to be picky, but I thought I'd put it here for those taking Physics this year, so they won't get confused. ;) Anyway, it's so true. Jeepinator, you're exactly right. Something has to give somewhere, when a force large enough is exerted to a car. It's such a critical consideration of design. Of the many engineering courses I'm taking this semester, one is "Strength of Materials." I'm so excited to learn about this kind of crap over the next few months, and it'll be on my mind for the rest of my life, I'm sure (because I think like an engineer ;)).

Anyway, I just thought I'd chime in on the topic. Basically, it comes down to strength and resiliency. In a crash, if the materials are all strong enough, some of the force will be absorbed naturally by the materials and mechanical systems of the car, and the car will transfer the rest to its environment (the car will probably end up spinning/rolling/sliding more). If the materials aren't strong enough, or if there is a single component that's too weak, it will break and the energy will be spent there, and the car will likely spin/roll/slide less. Whether the energy is used by breaking something or by car movement, it always goes somewhere (as Jeep stated).

[ 09-04-2001: Message edited by: Nairb ]

[draggerman11]

Brian said it right. Remember in Indy cars when the cars were extremely strong, and the car would hit the wall, and the car had no damage, but the driver was either critically injured, or dead? Wonder why this happened? The car was stronger than the driver, so what happened was all the energy was forced into the driver. This is why they now have crumple zones in them(To absorb the energy so it isnt forced into the driver) Now, remember back at Daytona in Febuary where Tony Stewarts car was flying and flipping etc.. and he walked away from that wreck? But in Earnhardts wreck the car didnt look to damaged? What happened is, the car couldnt absorb the energy from the crash(about 160-170 to 0 in a less than a second) so all of the energy was forced into him. And as we know, that isnt good. Now, on Stewarts car, he came to a stop slowly, meaning there really wasnt much energy going into him. Did this rant make any sense? I hope so...

[jeepinator]

Leet TC3, we are cool. In fact, you are pretty cool. Sorry for the semi hostile post.

Brian seems like he is the man to listen to on this one ;) All that education is going to make him a genius :p

I have a great idea: Whenever we hit something a 1/10 scale airbag should deploy !

Heheh, OK, now I am just being silly. I thinks I am tired.

[draggerman11]

Kyle likes idea, and now goes about forming a company that sells 1/10 scale airbags.... no I'm just kidding :eek: :rolleyes: :p

[Leet TC3]

Nairb - yes, that is Newton's 3rd law. But that is not what I was referring to.

Leet TC3 - "Energy has to go somewhere."

Albert Einstein - "Energy can neither be created, nor destroyed. It can only be transformed."

Personally, I think I said it better, and in fewer words too. :D

Jeep - hey, no problem bud. I didn't look at this as a semi-flame war. U B cool, but you are still a madman.

Takes one to know one. ;)

[Nairb]

Very nice, Leet. That saying definitely stems from Newton's basic laws, though. You were right, but so was I. Sorry I tried to correct you when you weren't wrong.