"Question #1. Will the rollers somehow inhibit(screw-up) the "slack" needed in a tank track that has an active suspension? Meaning, that the rollers won't allow enough droop? "
Not necessarily, in a suspended tank with a tight track, lacking any other area to grab track "length", the front and/or rear road wheels will depress under increased track tension. "Question #2. I imagine that these rollers, no matter what tank they are built on, will provide additional friction points, that will affect the speed of the model." Of course, friction is friction but I doubt a well built return roller system would effect ultimate speed all that much. My main issue with return rollers, at this scale, is durability of the return roller mounts and of course smaller wheels limit tracking tab heights. "I guess the bottom line is, with all sincerity, which tank would you build, of the two, keeping in mind all the things outlined above (and any other issues you can fore see)?" I'd suggest you build the Jagdpanther. It's a simpler build, will get you battling sooner, and is a very cool looking tank. You'll find that most battlers don't use a turret to any degree anyway (get it, any degree???). Most battle their turreted tanks as TD's with most shots being taken with the turret facing forward. There have been very few kills resulting from wide angled shots from a sideways facing turret (i.e a drive-by). Only a fool would try something like that! ;-) On your Hetzer comments, I agree. On your Cromwell comments, I agree. Steve On Monday, October 15, 2012 11:20:50 PM UTC-4, LIJagdpanther888 wrote: > > Hey Steve, > > Me again... > > Awhile back I heard some banter about return rollers on tanks, and how you > made the comment that they are every tank builder's nightmare... > > But you did clarify that if one had to build return rollers on a tank, the > JS series of tanks had the best ones, because they are fairly large... > > Question #1. Will the rollers somehow inhibit(screw-up) the "slack" > needed in a tank track that has an active suspension? Meaning, that the > rollers won't allow enough droop? > > Question #2. I imagine that these rollers, no matter what tank they are > built on, will provide additional friction points, that will affect the > speed of the model. > > As you can tell from the line of questioning, I'm still abit up in the air > about what to build, the JS-III (rollers) vs. the Jagdpanther (no rollers, > but limited traverse). Beginning to sound like a beer/tank commercial. > Less rollers, more traverse... > > I'm just trying to look for any advantage that I can grab!! If the > rollers do inhibit speed and bring about droop issues, then the JS-III may > not be a great choice, saying nothing about a cramped turret!! > > Part of me just wants to say *uck-it, and build the Jagdkitty and live > with the limited traverse and the non-ability of tackling a hill slope head > on!! (Gun length issue..LOL) > > I guess the bottom line is, with all sincerity, which tank would you > build, of the two, keeping in mind all the things outlined above (and any > other issues you can fore see)? > > Thanks Steve, I'm looking forward to hearing your wisdom and insight > regarding these matters. > > Dave "I believe, Mr. Tyng, that you've built the ultimate R/C tank (the > Crom)" D. > > Oh yeah... > My list of reasons for stating this; in order of most to least > significance (IMO). > > Relatively compact design and silhouette... > I'm still a big proponent of smaller is better... Had the Hetzer been > rated a four defensively, I'd probably be building that as we speak. > Small, and a relatively simple build. Less gun overhang. Only four road > wheels, although it does have return rollers... WIth only one other one in > the hobby, it would seem like a good choice. > If the Pitellis would just see the light on the sloped armor argument... > the Hetzer would certainly earn a four defensively!! (I calculated 107mm > frontal armor for the Hetzer, if slope of armor is factored in). Could > anyone really believe the Germans would field an anemically armored vehicle > at such a late stage in the war (think Jagdtiger for proof that the Germans > (or at least Hitler) were thinking the BIGGER and MORE ARMORED, the > BETTER!!), especially after they finally grasped the significant lesson > that the Soviets taught them about slope design?!! Yes the Hetzer was > tiny, and doesn't conform to my BIGGER/BETTER side of the argument, but it > certainly was no armor slouch!! And the main reason for the Hetzer's > existance is obvious... The Germans were always at the forefront when it > came to "borrowing" (read using) other countries tanks and chassis. Look > at all the FrancoDeutch anomalies that they frankensteined together!! And > the Czech 38(t) chassis was an absolute winner that the Germans > just couldn't ignore... > > > Getting back to my list of reasons why the Cromwell is such a superb build > choice... > > Boxy turret, no side hit issues when faced head-on against opponent's > tank. > Five large road wheels, relatively simple and straightforward. > No return rollers!! > Compact gun, no overhang worries. > > Actually, this may not be the best "line-up" card, in terms of most-least > significant, as each issue can be argued as being just as important as the > next.. except for maybe the gun overhang one... How often, other > than perhaps at this last battle, do you guys encounter steep hillsides?! > I'm answering my own questions... a good sign! > > I'll state it again for the record, you really did your homework on that > one Steve!! > > Dave > > > -- You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group. To post a message, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat
