This is interesting because it shows that testing these for failure is no trivial task and being able to determine how, when and why these fail requires very specific and repetitive tasks. The fact that so many QR1's failed and took out bases and wheels with them and you couldn't get one to break shows that there is something happening while using it in real-life conditions that differs drastically from a simple pressure test. Cool though! Thanks for sacrificing a QR1!
In use u get way harsher movement in both directions, i think that might be the main reason. Over many 1000s of rotations and harsh hits it might be more taxing on the QR then if you apply slowly force in 1 direction. Just my 2 cents, i might be wrong.
Ron did a detailed tear down of the Extreme wheel and the QR2 Lite to show what Fanatec thinks safe implementation of QR2 Lite for 15nm. It's fairly interesting and seems to make sense. But breaking stuff is fun too! You could maybe machine an inset like the Extreme has and break stuff again! BTW. you see failure for the first time at 10:35. Far left side. You see the crack next to QR2 Wheel Side. And if it had 6 bolts and and inset. It would likely have failed from that first wee crack. And i commented while watching lol. You covered it.
Nice one Danny, i also had the same thought when seeing the clubsport DD+ extreme wheel with a QR2 lite on it. The only reason I can think is fanatec limit the lite on other wheel i.e the CSL wheels ( expect the McLaren gt3) is that the wheel itself wouldn't hold up to the forces of bigger wheel bases.
Very interesting video. Good job! I am not an engineer (and native speaker), but my remark would be that except from rotation force in this method you also have applied strong pulling force in one direction.
What you're essentially testing is static strength of the interface which is a single force application. The other test is a fatigue test which is repetitive load application .. A given part can fail at a lower applied load that is repeated on and off several times .. aka fatigue failure
It does have its flaws, I gotta emphasize that - I call upon someone with the skills and knowledge to do a better test that more closely simulates the stresses and strains caused by force feedback
I had different issue with QR1 lite - it was jamming. It was great but you have to know that you won't be removing the wheel at all. After year and a bit I felt that QR1 started to overtightening on its own which resulted in issue with removing the wheel after. Upgraded to metal QR1, and that issue is gone
Strength doesn’t matter. It’s longevity and micro fractures to failure over time that does. Something can take 100nm of force but crack after a month on 10nm… but a quality product could snap at 40nm but last years at 10nm.
Great point - same thing that brings down trees in high winds. It's not one big gust that does it all on its own, it's hundreds/thousands of them that weaken it over time
You can remove the torque limitation by cutting the plastic "pin" protruding at the back of the QR2 wheel side so it does not engage the microswitch inside the wheel. As it is just a dumb plastic part that is the only way the wheel knows that it should set everything to limited mode. I have DD2 and typically run 10-13Nm max with my wheels and with the lite no issues whatsoever.
Hi very interesting, but I think is not so easy I am afraid. I am not a mechanical or materials engineer (I am electrical one), but for what I know about these issues the specified torque ratings of this kind of materials, not for sim racing but for general industrial uses, before arriving to a "limit" breakpoint you need to consider fatigue of the material and this will arrive at much more lower levels of Nm. I mean when Fanatec says the max. torque is X Nm, I think they mean if you operate it above this X Nm frequently and repetitively over time the material will get fatigue and may not support this repetitive effort above the rated Nm over time, it will not break instantly like in your test, but the fatigue of the material will cause to lose its mechanical properties with time and at the end to break even at much more less than X Nm. In short, you tested the maximum peak Nm supported in one moment, but I do not think this is what Fanatec means with this Nm limit, I understand this figure as the one that will cause the break by fatigue of the material over time. As said not an expert in the field, but for my maintenance experience in industrial sites, this is how I understand it.
That's exactly what I think is the real story - It's a lot easier to break something with 1000 little wiggles back and forth than it is with 1 strong push
Yes that is how I understand it, if you surpass this Nm level indicated by Fanatec only a few times should be OK, but if you do it many times it could break because the material lost its internal mechanical properties over time, is what the mechanical guys call breakdown by fatigue of the material
Please note, that you must use these torque wrenches in a certain way (see respective manual)! You must grab exactly on the handle and only on the handle. Otherwise, the applied torque differs from what you adjusted to. Many people think, torque is torque and that's true for some wrenches (clicking mechanism coaxial to the nut) but the wrenches that you use (clicking mechanism ~30 mm from the nut) rely on that certain ratio of handle to nut and handle to clicking mechanism. Anyway, interesting test! Thanks.
I would have used a podium hub to see if the pins were damaged after all that flex, and then attach the wrench to that podiom hub("cheap" test pins). I think that flex is what's limiting the forces it can withstand. Great video btw, it was interesting.
Good test. Even if you had a 20nm base like the dd1, if you assume that a lock to lock rotation direction change is likely to be 40nm or there or there abouts. I think that it would safely manage a dd1 let alone a 15nm base. Provided it's not abused and used as intended obviously.
I wonder if the torque rating is more about delivered torque quality without flex dampening the feedback than outright quantity. I also wonder how much damage is caused by apes like me pulling on the wheel under braking and skewing it while leaning during cornering, as leaning in your seat while cornering does improve lateral grip, as does a white knuckle grip 😂 Interesting and fun video 👍🏻
One last thing. My points are based on impacts right? Well the reason the GT wheel with QR2 lite can do 15nm is all down to just that - impact. That wheel has more flex in it itself, which allows that impact to be absorbed at the point of grip, before it is transferred back to the base. The more flex the wheel has, the less impact the base takes
The scary point about this, is will QR1 and QR2 be available what with all the issues going on at Fanatec, I was lucky to get my order, but I still wished I went with Moza even though I love the kit that I now have, I dont have any confidence in the company.
I spent all evening yesterday cutting and editing and never saw it - it was only today that I woke up with fresh eyes and noticed it! Good job I moved the camera for that one particular turn!
@@dannyleeracing probably the sound you thought may not have been the torque wrench earlier. Still amazing to think either of the QRs could handle that load, even if slow and one off.
Honestly I thought these where strong, Iv'e had mine a couple of weeks now and was super impressed by how good they are vs the qr1. A lot of people of reddit etc are worried about buying this over the normal qr2 and Iv'e been trying to reasure people that these are way over engineered for 8nm bases.
I think the qr2 fails at the moment when the twist becomes visible. Keep in mind that in real use there are connecting pins between the steering wheel and the wheelbase which would probably be bent or sheared off at that moment.
A good point - if I tried it with a wheel, it might be the case that the pins would be damaged much earlier than the QR2 itself. It might also be the point that any flex might cause the pins to fatigue and break quicker than in a standard metal QR2. Until time has it's say, it's all speculation.
This is the kinda test that i feel like youd need to do if you weren't just gonna do a power steering delete but a straight up steering rack delete and literally steer the cars with your arms alone
There's a plastic tab which pushes a switch inside the steering wheel. If the tab is pressed in, it knows it's got a QR lite on it. It's complicated to explain but there's no chip or RFID involved, just a small physical tab
@@dannyleeracing Just cut the tab off. So far all is good with qr2 lites on all of my wheels. I saved some money too. Plastic can be strong and lite. Theres no cracks on my lites on 4 rims.
It's not the one sided max torque that is critical, it's the alternating for thousands and thousands of times that gets you. And btw it's not force, it's torque (N=force, Nm=torque).
The QR1 Lite does not brake so easy. The spikes a torgue limited wheelbase can produce (although limited to 9nm but spikes to about 12nm under certain circumstances) can wear it down in a few hours to a point that you get disconnects. I wouldnt recomment a QR1 Lite with wheelbases that can go beyond 8nm. The Quickrelease will just wear down over time and you wont notice it until its to late to save the QR1 lite.
There's a difference between slow torque and sudden jolting impact. Think of a drill vs an impact driver. Both might make similar turning torque, but the nut busting torque of the impact driver will be higher, because of the hammer effect. When a wheel suddenly jolts and is suddenly impacted by your grip, then the power increases significantly! For example, look at the impact of jumping. Just by landing, your bones may be subjected to upto double your body weight on impact. Power is a result of torque multiplied by revs, then devided by 5252. And even that isn't able to account for impacts
Having said all that, this is absolutely scientific. Because it's repeatable and the same on each test. But it doesn't tell us what NM base the quick release can handle is all I'm saying
In fact this test shows us exactly the kinds of forces that are actually applied when a QR does break. It's power not torque, but taking away speed/revs, it's still a way of showing the resistance of the part
Failure in my opinion is not when it brakes but when it starts flexing. This the point where the experience gets compromised. QR1 showed flex, even at 10Nm. Don't know about QR2 since it wasn't tested in the torque range where it's going to be used....I don't know about you guys, but if I spend that kind of money on equipment, I like to have (see and feel) materials that I can associate with the hobby. Those things are important too. Others manage to do it for less money, so why can't fanatec do the same.
I think if Fanatec had just opted for a standard QR2 with the DD extreme, then this question wouldn't even need to be asked. Surely someone must have anticipated this question when they used the QR2 Lite for a wheelbase that is almost double the strength of the previous limit they imposed. Time will tell...
Should have just gotten a torque meter. It records the highest torque sustained. And these tests really don't show anything because the real test is repeated fast shock loads. Hitting it with an impact wrench on low pressure would show their strength better than a slow steady torque application.
I could imagine that the electronic pins from the wheel might shear away due to the high torsion even before the QR breaks. Perhaps that's one reason, why Fanatac rates the QR much lower than your test result.
I think you missed the point here..... You want to add torque until you see a clear twist movement between the 2 parts, not so much when it fails, whole point of DD is to get a 100% feel of what the motor is doing, if you have a sloppy joint you will lose some FFB feeling, Even 20 Torque would be enough to break fingers, you're not going to hold a wheel with 100 Torque going through it.
They've righted a few wrongs with the QR2 Lite, that's for sure. Even to hold and handle it's clearly a better solution, and I haven't yet seen any real world examples of it failing or cracking under regular use - doesn't mean it hasn't happened, but you'd definitely expect to have seen something on socials by now if it was problematic.
No wonder the QR1 had such a low rating. I mean, look how much torsional flex there was at just 10Nm even. Pretty awful amount of hysteresis already vs metal QR. So the high safety factor fanatec have gone with is mainly just to minimise this because from a failure point of view, it's not an explosive failure so it's reasonably safe.
That’s equivalent to around 180 foot pound, and would have went way further. That’s a lot more force than you’re going to put on it sitting in a chair.
You're totally right, but I do make a point that it doesn't matter what my test says, it's what happens in the real world that'll matter. I do reiterate that the QR1 Lite did have issues for sure
This was an interesting video although, as you disclaim yourself at the start, this doesn't give much of a representative info. What you're doing is only interesting but you can draw next to none practical information from it. For me on the QR1 lite the biggest issue was that it was noticeable flexing a lot which can't be good for the pins. Even the QR1 (rigid) had play in its key without the additional retaining bolt, which again, can not be good for the electrical pins and having load shifts on them on a crazy rate over the course of even a single lap. I recently updated to QR2 and, its just rigid. No flex. Finally something 'trustworthy'.
You can see how much more flex the QR1 has compared to the QR2 - the QR2 took 100nm like it was nothing whereas the QR1 felt like it was about to go noodle mode. Hopefully it's really clear that I'm self-aware about how unrepresentative this is of the actual, real world results that may yet come to pass. The best I could hope for is 'interesting' if not 'informative'.
That's true - the QR1 Lite suffered over time especially. The QR2 Lite looks like it'll fair much better just by way of it's design, but time will be the judge
@@dannyleeracing there is one problem with this test tho at qr2, it does move kind off allot, lets say qr2 can survive but does the steering wheel pins can self survive ?
Was debating on going QR2 lite or regular. This seals it, I'm going lite. I have 4 wheels. I'm about to shell out nearly 300 dollars for an upgrade not really needed but I stripped retaining screw out on my OEM CSL DD wheel shaft. a small upgrade costing half as much as the entire new wheel base!?! Shame on you Fanatec I'm sorry. There should be a pre owner discount or an upgrade discount of sort. 100 dollars for a quick release is just ignorant in my opinion...but I'm just one guy with one voice.
This is interesting because it shows that testing these for failure is no trivial task and being able to determine how, when and why these fail requires very specific and repetitive tasks. The fact that so many QR1's failed and took out bases and wheels with them and you couldn't get one to break shows that there is something happening while using it in real-life conditions that differs drastically from a simple pressure test. Cool though! Thanks for sacrificing a QR1!
In use u get way harsher movement in both directions, i think that might be the main reason. Over many 1000s of rotations and harsh hits it might be more taxing on the QR then if you apply slowly force in 1 direction. Just my 2 cents, i might be wrong.
I salute you - you've given us the destructive testing we never thought we wanted, but we need. Nice one.
10:46 it breaks under the locking ring first
yeah it does actually but 225 nw is impressive
But how many Nm can a frozen pizza take?
Depends on the toppings...
I´ve been waiting for a post like this for a while. if the other streamers dont want to do it, you are the lucky one. thank you
This is what we need! Please also do the test on QR1 VS QR2
Moza as well!!
Ron did a detailed tear down of the Extreme wheel and the QR2 Lite to show what Fanatec thinks safe implementation of QR2 Lite for 15nm. It's fairly interesting and seems to make sense. But breaking stuff is fun too! You could maybe machine an inset like the Extreme has and break stuff again! BTW. you see failure for the first time at 10:35. Far left side. You see the crack next to QR2 Wheel Side. And if it had 6 bolts and and inset. It would likely have failed from that first wee crack. And i commented while watching lol. You covered it.
Do you have a link to that? I've never seen it!
ua-cam.com/video/ASX04inDPi8/v-deo.html of course! Auto Translate is not awesome, but this channel is pretty good. @@dannyleeracing
Thanks for the video!
Great video Danny, good example of the sort of loads the QR lites can take!
Thanks very much! It could be better planned, but this crude test alone is pretty telling
Great experiment! Nice
thank you for putting your money on the line, great video, you got my subscription
A disconnect and reconnect after each step would be helpful. By using the mechanism it would show smaller damages than total failure.
Thank you for providing us with this service to the Sun racing community
at 10.46 when QR2 break down, after that it could start brake the pins, also that huge movement could break pins down much sooner
I really appreciate this, thank you for this testing!
Nice one Danny, i also had the same thought when seeing the clubsport DD+ extreme wheel with a QR2 lite on it. The only reason I can think is fanatec limit the lite on other wheel i.e the CSL wheels ( expect the McLaren gt3) is that the wheel itself wouldn't hold up to the forces of bigger wheel bases.
i reckon you're onto something there, has been mentioned on a few forums
Very interesting video. Good job! I am not an engineer (and native speaker), but my remark would be that except from rotation force in this method you also have applied strong pulling force in one direction.
Good point - I should have braced the wrench with the other hand a bit closer to the centre, or used a comically large pirate ship helm
What you're essentially testing is static strength of the interface which is a single force application. The other test is a fatigue test which is repetitive load application .. A given part can fail at a lower applied load that is repeated on and off several times .. aka fatigue failure
I think he said that in the video
awsome test there
It does have its flaws, I gotta emphasize that - I call upon someone with the skills and knowledge to do a better test that more closely simulates the stresses and strains caused by force feedback
Now we need a test of the Moza QR
Would be cool to find the twisting torque required to separate Custard Creams, Bourbons, Oreos
@@dannyleeracingFinally someone is asking the real questions.
Custard creams come apart in the packet and it don't matter how much you lick them, they won't stick back together again.
@dannyleeracing
I had different issue with QR1 lite - it was jamming. It was great but you have to know that you won't be removing the wheel at all. After year and a bit I felt that QR1 started to overtightening on its own which resulted in issue with removing the wheel after. Upgraded to metal QR1, and that issue is gone
Strength doesn’t matter. It’s longevity and micro fractures to failure over time that does. Something can take 100nm of force but crack after a month on 10nm… but a quality product could snap at 40nm but last years at 10nm.
Great point - same thing that brings down trees in high winds. It's not one big gust that does it all on its own, it's hundreds/thousands of them that weaken it over time
You can remove the torque limitation by cutting the plastic "pin" protruding at the back of the QR2 wheel side so it does not engage the microswitch inside the wheel. As it is just a dumb plastic part that is the only way the wheel knows that it should set everything to limited mode. I have DD2 and typically run 10-13Nm max with my wheels and with the lite no issues whatsoever.
Hi very interesting, but I think is not so easy I am afraid. I am not a mechanical or materials engineer (I am electrical one), but for what I know about these issues the specified torque ratings of this kind of materials, not for sim racing but for general industrial uses, before arriving to a "limit" breakpoint you need to consider fatigue of the material and this will arrive at much more lower levels of Nm. I mean when Fanatec says the max. torque is X Nm, I think they mean if you operate it above this X Nm frequently and repetitively over time the material will get fatigue and may not support this repetitive effort above the rated Nm over time, it will not break instantly like in your test, but the fatigue of the material will cause to lose its mechanical properties with time and at the end to break even at much more less than X Nm. In short, you tested the maximum peak Nm supported in one moment, but I do not think this is what Fanatec means with this Nm limit, I understand this figure as the one that will cause the break by fatigue of the material over time. As said not an expert in the field, but for my maintenance experience in industrial sites, this is how I understand it.
That's exactly what I think is the real story - It's a lot easier to break something with 1000 little wiggles back and forth than it is with 1 strong push
Yes that is how I understand it, if you surpass this Nm level indicated by Fanatec only a few times should be OK, but if you do it many times it could break because the material lost its internal mechanical properties over time, is what the mechanical guys call breakdown by fatigue of the material
Please note, that you must use these torque wrenches in a certain way (see respective manual)! You must grab exactly on the handle and only on the handle. Otherwise, the applied torque differs from what you adjusted to. Many people think, torque is torque and that's true for some wrenches (clicking mechanism coaxial to the nut) but the wrenches that you use (clicking mechanism ~30 mm from the nut) rely on that certain ratio of handle to nut and handle to clicking mechanism. Anyway, interesting test! Thanks.
That's a super interesting point and you're the first to highlight it! All I can say is that 240nm felt like I was gonna go flying if it let go
I would have used a podium hub to see if the pins were damaged after all that flex, and then attach the wrench to that podiom hub("cheap" test pins). I think that flex is what's limiting the forces it can withstand. Great video btw, it was interesting.
Good test. Even if you had a 20nm base like the dd1, if you assume that a lock to lock rotation direction change is likely to be 40nm or there or there abouts. I think that it would safely manage a dd1 let alone a 15nm base. Provided it's not abused and used as intended obviously.
I wonder if the torque rating is more about delivered torque quality without flex dampening the feedback than outright quantity.
I also wonder how much damage is caused by apes like me pulling on the wheel under braking and skewing it while leaning during cornering, as leaning in your seat while cornering does improve lateral grip, as does a white knuckle grip 😂
Interesting and fun video 👍🏻
I give the QR2 3.5 Ape Rating while the QR1 gets a 1.2
Not scientific, as you say, but good to see that both should be able to survive my kids.
So I’m guessing the gt7 rim with the qr2 lite is more than good enough for 15 nm.
Torque limit is probably based on a target stiffness. Still, should be up to the user as long as it's safe to operate
Also need to consider fatigue
We need a Moza Torque test!!!
One last thing.
My points are based on impacts right?
Well the reason the GT wheel with QR2 lite can do 15nm is all down to just that - impact.
That wheel has more flex in it itself, which allows that impact to be absorbed at the point of grip, before it is transferred back to the base.
The more flex the wheel has, the less impact the base takes
The scary point about this, is will QR1 and QR2 be available what with all the issues going on at Fanatec, I was lucky to get my order, but I still wished I went with Moza even though I love the kit that I now have, I dont have any confidence in the company.
But if they allowed you to use the lite how would they sell you a 100.00 or 200.00 qr?
It was actually cracking in another spot before it failed at the flange
A saw that. Check 10:48. To the left of the QR in line with the bottom of the vice the plastic cracked.
I spent all evening yesterday cutting and editing and never saw it - it was only today that I woke up with fresh eyes and noticed it! Good job I moved the camera for that one particular turn!
@@dannyleeracing probably the sound you thought may not have been the torque wrench earlier.
Still amazing to think either of the QRs could handle that load, even if slow and one off.
Honestly I thought these where strong, Iv'e had mine a couple of weeks now and was super impressed by how good they are vs the qr1. A lot of people of reddit etc are worried about buying this over the normal qr2 and Iv'e been trying to reasure people that these are way over engineered for 8nm bases.
I think the qr2 fails at the moment when the twist becomes visible.
Keep in mind that in real use there are connecting pins between the steering wheel and the wheelbase which would probably be bent or sheared off at that moment.
A good point - if I tried it with a wheel, it might be the case that the pins would be damaged much earlier than the QR2 itself. It might also be the point that any flex might cause the pins to fatigue and break quicker than in a standard metal QR2. Until time has it's say, it's all speculation.
This is the kinda test that i feel like youd need to do if you weren't just gonna do a power steering delete but a straight up steering rack delete and literally steer the cars with your arms alone
How does the base know which type of QR2 is attached to the rim? Is there an rfid chip in it?
There's a plastic tab which pushes a switch inside the steering wheel. If the tab is pressed in, it knows it's got a QR lite on it. It's complicated to explain but there's no chip or RFID involved, just a small physical tab
@@dannyleeracing Just cut the tab off. So far all is good with qr2 lites on all of my wheels. I saved some money too. Plastic can be strong and lite. Theres no cracks on my lites on 4 rims.
It's not the one sided max torque that is critical, it's the alternating for thousands and thousands of times that gets you. And btw it's not force, it's torque (N=force, Nm=torque).
The QR1 Lite does not brake so easy. The spikes a torgue limited wheelbase can produce (although limited to 9nm but spikes to about 12nm under certain circumstances) can wear it down in a few hours to a point that you get disconnects. I wouldnt recomment a QR1 Lite with wheelbases that can go beyond 8nm. The Quickrelease will just wear down over time and you wont notice it until its to late to save the QR1 lite.
There's a difference between slow torque and sudden jolting impact.
Think of a drill vs an impact driver.
Both might make similar turning torque, but the nut busting torque of the impact driver will be higher, because of the hammer effect.
When a wheel suddenly jolts and is suddenly impacted by your grip, then the power increases significantly!
For example, look at the impact of jumping.
Just by landing, your bones may be subjected to upto double your body weight on impact.
Power is a result of torque multiplied by revs, then devided by 5252.
And even that isn't able to account for impacts
Having said all that, this is absolutely scientific. Because it's repeatable and the same on each test.
But it doesn't tell us what NM base the quick release can handle is all I'm saying
In fact this test shows us exactly the kinds of forces that are actually applied when a QR does break.
It's power not torque, but taking away speed/revs, it's still a way of showing the resistance of the part
I wonder what a impact wrench on it would do
yeah that's the kind of abusive testing, closer to real world use.
Failure in my opinion is not when it brakes but when it starts flexing. This the point where the experience gets compromised. QR1 showed flex, even at 10Nm. Don't know about QR2 since it wasn't tested in the torque range where it's going to be used....I don't know about you guys, but if I spend that kind of money on equipment, I like to have (see and feel) materials that I can associate with the hobby. Those things are important too. Others manage to do it for less money, so why can't fanatec do the same.
I think if Fanatec had just opted for a standard QR2 with the DD extreme, then this question wouldn't even need to be asked. Surely someone must have anticipated this question when they used the QR2 Lite for a wheelbase that is almost double the strength of the previous limit they imposed. Time will tell...
In the name of science lol thank you for your sacrifice
Should have just gotten a torque meter. It records the highest torque sustained.
And these tests really don't show anything because the real test is repeated fast shock loads. Hitting it with an impact wrench on low pressure would show their strength better than a slow steady torque application.
This makes me wish they actually got their stuff out to people that's a hell of a torque number to take. Too bad we can't actually get it
I could imagine that the electronic pins from the wheel might shear away due to the high torsion even before the QR breaks. Perhaps that's one reason, why Fanatac rates the QR much lower than your test result.
A good point - had I done this with a wheel attached, would the pins have survived?
@@dannyleeracingyes it didn't rotate that much
I think you missed the point here.....
You want to add torque until you see a clear twist movement between the 2 parts, not so much when it fails, whole point of DD is to get a 100% feel of what the motor is doing, if you have a sloppy joint you will lose some FFB feeling,
Even 20 Torque would be enough to break fingers, you're not going to hold a wheel with 100 Torque going through it.
The rare win for Fanatec 😼
They've righted a few wrongs with the QR2 Lite, that's for sure. Even to hold and handle it's clearly a better solution, and I haven't yet seen any real world examples of it failing or cracking under regular use - doesn't mean it hasn't happened, but you'd definitely expect to have seen something on socials by now if it was problematic.
No wonder the QR1 had such a low rating. I mean, look how much torsional flex there was at just 10Nm even. Pretty awful amount of hysteresis already vs metal QR. So the high safety factor fanatec have gone with is mainly just to minimise this because from a failure point of view, it's not an explosive failure so it's reasonably safe.
It definitely shows the clear difference between the QR1 and QR2 Lites, if nothing else
But don't forget that the slight twisting of the qr1lite/qr2lite can probably also break the pins of the wheels🤔
Too true! A stretch too far for me to test, but you're not wrong in this line of thinking. Would be good to know.
That’s equivalent to around 180 foot pound, and would have went way further. That’s a lot more force than you’re going to put on it sitting in a chair.
But if you google it the QR1 Lite didnt even survive with many 8NM direct drive bases after months of use. SO not sure what is shown here
You're totally right, but I do make a point that it doesn't matter what my test says, it's what happens in the real world that'll matter. I do reiterate that the QR1 Lite did have issues for sure
This was an interesting video although, as you disclaim yourself at the start, this doesn't give much of a representative info. What you're doing is only interesting but you can draw next to none practical information from it.
For me on the QR1 lite the biggest issue was that it was noticeable flexing a lot which can't be good for the pins. Even the QR1 (rigid) had play in its key without the additional retaining bolt, which again, can not be good for the electrical pins and having load shifts on them on a crazy rate over the course of even a single lap.
I recently updated to QR2 and, its just rigid. No flex. Finally something 'trustworthy'.
You can see how much more flex the QR1 has compared to the QR2 - the QR2 took 100nm like it was nothing whereas the QR1 felt like it was about to go noodle mode.
Hopefully it's really clear that I'm self-aware about how unrepresentative this is of the actual, real world results that may yet come to pass. The best I could hope for is 'interesting' if not 'informative'.
@@dannyleeracing Yes, thank you a lot for taking the time and effort into making this video!
Real life race cars are around 12nm turning power, so no worries chap!
It broke on the other (base) side first. Look at your repositioned angle.
So the QR2 lite is the one to go for. No need for QR2
GFRP is way, way, way more stout than most realize.
It’s the whole reason I saved the extra cash and just bought the lite QR2
That fact I don't know what GFRP stands for tells you all you need to know about my proficiency in this field
@@dannyleeracingI would take a guess at Glass Fibre Reinforced Plastic?
if talk about qr1 that same thing what break down at there, over years and years it goes weaker and weaker with constant usage
That's true - the QR1 Lite suffered over time especially. The QR2 Lite looks like it'll fair much better just by way of it's design, but time will be the judge
@@dannyleeracing there is one problem with this test tho at qr2, it does move kind off allot, lets say qr2 can survive but does the steering wheel pins can self survive ?
Please like and subscribe!
torque
Surely the back of most steering wheels would break first...???
Test a metal standard qr2!
I gotta be honest, I don't think the standard metal QR2 has much to worry about! I'll surely crack before that does
😺✌🏻
now can you set them on fire? 😂
Be very cautious buying fanatec! If you want item fast buy any other brand and if you don't like toylike feel, look elsewhere
Hahaha that's not made in china or taiwan Dont forget fanatec is made is germany ! Damn
Sorry, dude - box says Made in China 😅
Although it is a German company, most of its products are manufactured in china.
A while back the OEM is literally selling surplus QR2 for 60 and QR2 pro for $80 coming straight from China.
r/confidentlyIncorrect
Was debating on going QR2 lite or regular. This seals it, I'm going lite. I have 4 wheels. I'm about to shell out nearly 300 dollars for an upgrade not really needed but I stripped retaining screw out on my OEM CSL DD wheel shaft. a small upgrade costing half as much as the entire new wheel base!?! Shame on you Fanatec I'm sorry. There should be a pre owner discount or an upgrade discount of sort. 100 dollars for a quick release is just ignorant in my opinion...but I'm just one guy with one voice.