Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

I, for one, would vote for a longer verison of these nifty rails that doesn't result in the wheels being outside of the frame boundry. That would make attaching bumpers easier. I guess the wheels would stay where they are and the rail would extend another 3" front and back. Teams could always cut them off if they didn't need that extra material.

Ideally, without concern for AndyMark's SKUs, it would be great to have rails optimized for 4", 6" and 8" wheels at FRC lengths.

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

Yeah, will AM be selling some bracketry to attach bumpers legally once we all know the rules?

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

If you though AM's new introductions weren't enough, then ......


Tri-Lambda Drive Platform am-0666

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

This must be expected to be used for off-season activity.
Unless the rules change drastically this is over the $$$ limit for a single purchase.

It looks like fun though...

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

I don't know guys, I was much more interested in this...


http://www.andymark.biz/am-0654.html

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

There is only so much money to be made from FIRST, and I know AndyMark has been venturing into other product lines. I imagine this is geared as a general purpose mobility platform and not specifically for FRC use.

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

With regard to bumper mounting and longer Nano Tubes, I emailed Andy Baker about this and got this reply:

Thank you for this note. We are working on a bumper attachment design that is efficient, simple, and effective. If we can't come up with a good solution for this, then we will offer a longer version of the same tube, as you are requesting.

Sincerely,
Andy

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

I'm interested in the weight of the Toughbox Mini versus the Toughbox before getting super duper excited about it. :P

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

Toughbox Mini weight: 1.94 pounds
Toughbox weight: 2.38 pounds

So, if 2 gearboxes are used on the robot, then 0.88 pounds are saved if Toughbox Minis are used. This weight savings is the main reason why we are calling it "mini".

Sincerely,
Andy

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

I can't clearly see from the pictures there, but what is the purpose of the finned housing?

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

Very cool testing video, too. Perhaps a little excessive, but that Mark seems to be a sadist when it comes to machinery...;)

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

These look much like cooling fins, but as you know, they are obviously not. We have gotten this question often.

I wanted to support the motor fully AND provide strength to the motor mounting screws. The side of the housing (without the fins) is as close to the CIM motor mounting screws and CIM Gear as they can be. Then, the fins are present to provide the full face of the CIM motor with support, so it does not wiggle any. So, with the CIM motor securely mounted and supported, it is a nice setup.

Thanks for asking,
Andy

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

Ah, that's good to know. Not much weight added either I imagine.

Do you think Andymark will look more into housing such as this for the future?

How does it compare in terms of weight to a regular toughbox with standoffs instead of the extrusion? It seems like there would be a strength advantage in the new design that would justify it being heavier if so.

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

Are the front bolt patterns the same as on the regular toughbox, or have those been shrunk as well?

Also, I couldn't tell from the videos, but can we use two cims with this?

Re: AndyMark alert! Interesting new stuff
 

The Toughbox Mini should be in the KOP.
Many teams have many regular Toughboxes so it will be freshing the KOP.
it cost 2 more $ so it won't be a problem or it will be??:ahh: