You must Sign-in or Register to post messages in the Hobby Squawk community
Registration is FREE and only takes a few moments

Register now

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mato M36B1

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #81
    Originally posted by oldwolf View Post

    Assuming a 6mm id brass tube, how much deeper in do they need to be?
    Good question. I am going to expand on it just a little with a long version answer to hep others just starting out to understand the issues and hopefully not cause to much confusion.

    The bulb depth commonly used for stock Tamiya bulbs is 9mm. With high powered (HP) “purple” bulbs this works, but “shot gunning” starts to be common depending on bulb location (mantle vs barrel vs stand alone clap/fixed mount). Changing to a narrower then 6mm internal diameter tube greatly combats the “shot gunning” effect. There is another effect that happens too which is “splash” or IR light energy bouncing off light colors objects and hitting tanks completely out of the normal “safe” beam pattern. The more powerful the bulb the more this happens.

    With the HP “clear” bulbs the depth in a 6mn internal diameter tube needs to be increased to from 9mm to 12+ mm in order to have a spread pattern similar to the “purple” bulbs at 9mm. Because of this increase “hidden” and/or “mechanical” placement becomes more of a problem for those that do not want to install the IR bulb in the barrel.

    Yes the “clear” HP bulbs have more range, but how much more range is really needed considering the “purple” HP bulbs can easily reach a targets (with property installed Tamiya and LegoDEI receivers) well beyond 150ft (50m) in bright sunlight. That’s a long distance and lining up a shot at 150+ ft is challenging regardless of bulb.

    Comment


    • #82
      Originally posted by Rubicon99 View Post

      Good question. I am going to expand on it just a little with a long version answer to hep others just starting out to understand the issues and hopefully not cause to much confusion.

      The bulb depth commonly used for stock Tamiya bulbs is 9mm. With high powered (HP) “purple” bulbs this works, but “shot gunning” starts to be common depending on bulb location (mantle vs barrel vs stand alone clap/fixed mount). Changing to a narrower then 6mm internal diameter tube greatly combats the “shot gunning” effect. There is another effect that happens too which is “splash” or IR light energy bouncing off light colors objects and hitting tanks completely out of the normal “safe” beam pattern. The more powerful the bulb the more this happens.

      With the HP “clear” bulbs the depth in a 6mn internal diameter tube needs to be increased to from 9mm to 12+ mm in order to have a spread pattern similar to the “purple” bulbs at 9mm. Because of this increase “hidden” and/or “mechanical” placement becomes more of a problem for those that do not want to install the IR bulb in the barrel.

      Yes the “clear” HP bulbs have more range, but how much more range is really needed considering the “purple” HP bulbs can easily reach a targets (with property installed Tamiya and LegoDEI receivers) well beyond 150ft (50m) in bright sunlight. That’s a long distance and lining up a shot at 150+ ft is challenging regardless of bulb.
      Thank you for the detailed response.
      One question: When you say to narrow the tube below 6mm id, to what? 5mm ? 4mm?
      I happen to have some 4mm id steel tubing with a 1mm wall thickness, so it should slide into the current 6mm id brass tubing I have been using. I am thinking a clear HP bulb, recessed 10mm, firing through a 4mm tube should work well.

      Comment


      • #83
        Okay, on this subject, is there a source and specifications for the purple bulbs, besides the tanking sites? Amazon, eBay or? I’d like to stock a bunch for future projects.
        Twenty six tanks, and not done yet!

        Comment


        • #84
          https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/720-SFH4545

          Comment


          • #85
            Wow, thanks David! Have you used these already?
            Twenty six tanks, and not done yet!

            Comment


            • #86
              Originally posted by SoCalBobS View Post
              Okay, on this subject, is there a source and specifications for the purple bulbs, besides the tanking sites? Amazon, eBay or? I’d like to stock a bunch for future projects.
              Check your PMs Bob.

              Comment


              • #87
                I bought 60 and used 40 :-)

                Comment


                • #88
                  Originally posted by oldwolf View Post

                  Thank you for the detailed response.
                  One question: When you say to narrow the tube below 6mm id, to what? 5mm ? 4mm?
                  I happen to have some 4mm id steel tubing with a 1mm wall thickness, so it should slide into the current 6mm id brass tubing I have been using. I am thinking a clear HP bulb, recessed 10mm, firing through a 4mm tube should work well.
                  4mm id “blacked out” tube is what I use for the “purple” bulbs set back to ~9mm. When tested in 4mm id tubes the HP clear bulbs had to be set back more then 10mm IF placed anywhere other then in the barrel, like the mantle for example. Set flush in the mantle they would tend to “splash” IR energy off the forward/rear hull of the tank when fired from direct front or towards the rear, especially when used in lighter colored tanks. This can be problematic for friendly nearby tanks.

                  Give the 4mm x 10mm a try and see how it works for you.

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    On its way...more rust, some dust and external stores are next. The canopy acts as the mount for the IR receiver.

                    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3105.jpg
Views:	97
Size:	274.3 KB
ID:	363987

                    Some observations to share. Space is very limited inside. A full length battery sits too high up forward for the top hull to fit. There is a brace it interferes with. I may be able to cut away enough brace to allow the battery to fit. Regarding the track; the teeth are farther apart side to side than the width of the road wheels. The double pin links are flexible side to side. These two things can combine to jam the track in the sprocket. I'm working on fine-tuning the alignment.


                    Twenty six tanks, and not done yet!

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      Nice looking Tank. The rust and dust helps with the realism.
                      Don't just fly--WREAK HAVOC!!!

                      Comment


                      • #91
                        It's a good looking vehicle. I'm always a sucker for less represented stuff.

                        Comment


                        • #92
                          Sound check. A shortie in the sun...



                          (Yes I know the recoil is off. Into the shop it goes)
                          Twenty six tanks, and not done yet!

                          Comment


                          • #93
                            Finally! got a Clark Programmer and fixed the servo elevation function. I used the tank at the SD Battle on 1/22, worked fine as long as I was on flat ground and the barrel horizontal. So now for this rabbit hole...what would be a reasonable configuration for this tank? 90mm main gun, extra sloped armor, but still a Sherman chassis. Also, its a Mato with a 5:1 gear, so it's pretty slow.
                            Twenty six tanks, and not done yet!

                            Comment


                            • #94
                              Originally posted by SoCalBobS View Post
                              Finally! got a Clark Programmer and fixed the servo elevation function. I used the tank at the SD Battle on 1/22, worked fine as long as I was on flat ground and the barrel horizontal. So now for this rabbit hole...what would be a reasonable configuration for this tank? 90mm main gun, extra sloped armor, but still a Sherman chassis. Also, its a Mato with a 5:1 gear, so it's pretty slow.
                              Set it up as a medium tank. 5 hits and 5 seconds between shots would be the most appropriate. It doesn’t have the “armor” to classify it as a heavy tank.

                              You could also give up hits (armor) for a faster rate of fire and go with a light tank setting, 3 hit and 3 seconds between shots. This makes it more then a match against the heavy tank class but is a slight handicap against medium tanks do to the slower 5:1 gearboxes at the start of a battle.

                              You will find that the 5:1 might be slow, but their added torque when damage is a added will keep the tank moving faster vs a tank with a 3:1 or standard Tamiya gearbox after two or three hits.

                              Comment


                              • #95
                                The tank destroyer armor was lighter than a sherman. It didnt have the thick rolled armor plate on the sides it was much thinner thats why they sloped it to help compensate. As well, the turret was very thin, and open. It was like half track armor.
                                Tank destroyers were not supposed to engage in tank on tank battle, they were supposed to ambush enemy tanks and run. They were a bit faster due to the loss of armor weight but the whole tank destroyer doctrine didnt really work out well and they were all dismissed after WWII.
                                Technically it should be a light tank armor class, 3 seconds 3 hits, but most dont care if you use the medium 5 class.
                                Its up to you .

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X