New Product: OMNI2™ Below Panel Switchable 4/8-way Joystick - GroovyGameGear

[RandyT]

The OMNI2™ from GroovyGameGear is a true 4 and 8-way switchable joystick, with positive restrictor tension adjustments, a standard mounting plate, and full compatibility with a wide range of balltops / battops and our SmoothJoy™ switches.  It even has an easy to use handle for changing the restriction.  More info at the GGG store (just click on the image above).

Here's the action from below;

Thanks for looking and thanks again to those whose purchases support GGG's ongoing efforts to bring useful new items to the BYOAC community.

RandyT

[SavannahLion]

How long do you figure someone pops off that handle to add a tab or tongue style handle so it sticks out of the cab so it can be changed on the fly.

Or mods the sucker to add a nice linear driver or small hydraulic push/pull rod to change it automatically?

[equlizer]

so do you need to loosen the 4 screws each time you want to turn it or how does it work?  Looks like a JLW type stick.  Could i use that restricter on my JLW stick?

[danny_galaga]

How long do you figure someone pops off that handle to add a tab or tongue style handle so it sticks out of the cab so it can be changed on the fly.

Or mods the sucker to add a nice linear driver or small hydraulic push/pull rod to change it automatically?

The tab through the cp is an earlier product from GGG. For the second statement, you need only use a $10 RC servo. I thought about doing that with my Sanwas ages ago, and I think actually someone here has done just that. I think he might have used pushrods, but you just have to have a wheel on the servo rather than a bellcrank, and the wheel can drive against the plate directly.

[RetroBorg]

For the second statement, you need only use a $10 RC servo. I thought about doing that with my Sanwas ages ago, and I think actually someone here has done just that.

This thread here: http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=104762.0;all

[RandyT]

so do you need to loosen the 4 screws each time you want to turn it or how does it work?  Looks like a JLW type stick.  Could i use that restricter on my JLW stick?

No need to loosen screws, just grab the handle and rotate the restrictor.  It is a JLW-type stick, but it has been rebuilt to properly support the restriction switching function.

RandyT

[SavannahLion]

How long do you figure someone pops off that handle to add a tab or tongue style handle so it sticks out of the cab so it can be changed on the fly.

Or mods the sucker to add a nice linear driver or small hydraulic push/pull rod to change it automatically?

The tab through the cp is an earlier product from GGG. For the second statement, you need only use a $10 RC servo. I thought about doing that with my Sanwas ages ago, and I think actually someone here has done just that. I think he might have used pushrods, but you just have to have a wheel on the servo rather than a bellcrank, and the wheel can drive against the plate directly.

IIRC the switch is through the top. I was thinking through the side. I'll have to check out the servo idea.

[Gray_Area]

Randy, and I mean this with sincere curiosity, did you do or find any market research on the possible popularity of this feature?

[darthpaul]

This is what I did. http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=113249.0

[RetroBorg]

Randy, this looks like being a great new product, I think I would prefer this over Ultimarc's MagStik simply because it comes standard with a ball top and you have heaps of different ball top options.

What I'd really like to see from someone, is a joystick like this with the integration of a servo for automatic switching with the ability to have both a computer control it, or for those people who have 60 in 1 type PCB setups, have the ability to switch simply by pressing a push button.

Any chance you might produce something like this one day Randy?

 

[danny_galaga]

Randy, this looks like being a great new product, I think I would prefer this over Ultimarc's MagStik simply because it comes standard with a ball top and you have heaps of different ball top options.

What I'd really like to see from someone, is a joystick like this with the integration of a servo for automatic switching with the ability to have both a computer control it, or for those people who have 60 in 1 type PCB setups, have the ability to switch simply by pressing a push button.

Any chance you might produce something like this one day Randy?

 

Dude's gotta turn a buck! Imagine how much R & D would go into that, only for maybe 20 people in the whole world to buy it?

[RetroBorg]

Dude's gotta turn a buck! Imagine how much R & D would go into that, only for maybe 20 people in the whole world to buy it?

The whole 4/8way is the biggest problem with any of those Xin1 PCBs not to mention anyone building a MAME control panel.

I would think they would instantly be the biggest selling joystick making nearly all other joysticks obsolete.

I wouldn't think R & D would be all that much, you would just need some minor adjustment to the joystick's mounting plate to mount an off the shelf servo with a cog that fits nicely against the cog like edge on the current restrictor.

As far as the controller goes, there's plenty that will do the job for MAME but as far as one suitable for an Xin1 I have no idea but I'm sure for someone as smart as Randy this wouldn't be a problem. 

[RandyT]

Randy, and I mean this with sincere curiosity, did you do or find any market research on the possible popularity of this feature?

I do market research every time I read our customers' emails, evaluate our products sell through rates, and visit these forums.  I also look at my own needs for machines I own, look at what is currently available to fill them, sometimes shake my head a few times when I see what is being offered, and start spending money on prototype parts to make my visions a reality.  Keep in mind also that sometimes markets don't exist until someone breaks away from the current way of thinking and moves things in a new direction.  Had I based everything I developed on existing market demand, there would have been no interface based electronic joystick restriction, high resolution button-hole mounted spinners, High resolution RGB trackballs, RGB lighted pushbuttons and their associated controllers, etc.  This design isn't quite so revolutionary, but it is useful and I believe it will make some folks very happy, either on it's own, or as has been mentioned here, as a base for an automated switcher or other "non-below panel" switching mechanism.  I also don't care if a new design flies off the shelf like gangbusters.  I'm in it for the "long haul", so if I can help a small percentage of the community (keeping in mind that it is always growing) with a new design, then I will be happy.  After 9 years of doing this, I think it's pretty reasonable approach that benefits everyone.

I wouldn't think R & D would be all that much, you would just need some minor adjustment to the joystick's mounting plate to mount an off the shelf servo with a cog that fits nicely against the cog like edge on the current restrictor.

I don''t think the cog idea would work well.  There is no center to rotate about, so all the force would be on the side of the screw.  This would equal binding and burnt servos.  But the handle on this design offers a lot of possibilities.  I have a box full of servos (who said it wouldn't cost much for R&D  ) so when my laser gets set back up, I'll be looking at this again.  Longevity and safety are my biggest concern with regard to servo use.  Had I not seen one melt into a blob, I would probably be a little more "gung-ho" on the idea.  To the folks who have used servos: What have your maintenance requirements been like?  Has it been trouble free, or something that needs tinkering?  Or have you scrapped the idea and gone back to something more reliable?  I see a few have done it, but so far, not too many updates on the project 6 months after reasonable usage.

RandyT

[Nephasth]

I'm in it for the "long haul", so if I can help a small percentage of the community (keeping in mind that it is always growing) with a new design, then I will be happy.  After 9 years of doing this, I think it's pretty reasonable approach that benefits everyone.

Wow, when I suggested something that would "help a small percentage of the community" at the beginning of the year, you compared it to catching mosquitoes with a mouse trap, and said it wasn't worth the effort. Fortunately, a mosquito trap was released shortly after (gotta love coincidences) and it seems to be doing well. Your tune seems to have changed since then...

Anyway, I fail to see the appeal to this. You turned an underpanel manual switchable restrictor into an underpanel manual switchable restrictor? Is the plastic stud the main feature? If you're going to be placing your hand so close to the restrictor, why not just use the edge of the restrictor to turn it? Or is the restrictor mounting hardware the main feature? Are the restrictor mounting studs lock-tited into the holes? Otherwise, those nylock nuts won't be doing much. One thing to take away from this is the large OD nylon washers, should provide a lot of insight for the DIYers, I seem to recall a recent thread asking specifically about that. Convince me why I should use these instead of JLWs for my next project.

[RetroBorg]

I don''t think the cog idea would work well.  There is no center to rotate about, so all the force would be on the side of the screw.  This would equal binding and burnt servos.  But the handle on this design offers a lot of possibilities.  I have a box full of servos (who said it wouldn't cost much for R&D  ) so when my laser gets set back up, I'll be looking at this again.  Longevity and safety are my biggest concern with regard to servo use.  Had I not seen one melt into a blob, I would probably be a little more "gung-ho" on the idea.  To the folks who have used servos: What have your maintenance requirements been like?  Has it been trouble free, or something that needs tinkering?  Or have you scrapped the idea and gone back to something more reliable?  I see a few have done it, but so far, not too many updates on the project 6 months after reasonable usage.

RandyT

It's good to see you will be looking at the servo option.

The servo project I tinkered with was just a proof of concept build I used on a mock up panel.

I haven't used mine for a long enough period to give any advice of maintenance.

When I finally get around to building a proper control panel I do I intend to use a servo.

My project had one servo switching two joysticks at the one time and it seemed to switch them both effortlessly despite my poor mounting of the servo.

I discovered using one servo to switch two joysticks at once that you need the centre of the servo aligned perfectly with the centre of the two joysticks, something that probably isn't an issue when switching just one joystick.

Perhaps even if you could design your Omni2 joystick so it had some sort of universal mount for servos so people could attach them easily if they wanted to.

I used this servo on mine: http://www.robotgear.com.au/Product.aspx/Details/421

With this controller: http://www.robotgear.com.au/Product.aspx/Details/403

[RandyT]

I haven't used mine for a long enough period to give any advice of maintenance.

When I finally get around to building a proper control panel I do I intend to use a servo.

Good to hear.  I'll be waiting to hear how things hold up for you.  I have been monitoring the RC websites where these are used often and hear a lot of conflicting opinions and reviews on the same servos.  The only thing I come away with is more expensive usually (but not always) equals better, and that you still could get a wonky unit, even with those having high ratings.

My project had one servo switching two joysticks at the one time and it seemed to switch them both effortlessly despite my poor mounting of the servo.

I discovered using one servo to switch two joysticks at once that you need the centre of the servo aligned perfectly with the centre of the two joysticks, something that probably isn't an issue when switching just one joystick.

I prefer to have the restrictor be a little tighter than what the smaller servos could easily and reliably turn.  It may not be necessary with a custom controller and some good logic.

Perhaps even if you could design your Omni2 joystick so it had some sort of universal mount for servos so people could attach them easily if they wanted to.

I used this servo on mine: http://www.robotgear.com.au/Product.aspx/Details/421

With this controller: http://www.robotgear.com.au/Product.aspx/Details/403

Nifty looking parts!  That controller looks well suited to the application.  Seems like some pretty intelligent software can be developed to get around the possible problems. 

The servo you have may be better than most of the ones I tested, only because of the price point I was shooting for on the complete assemblies.  I do think a nearly bulletproof design can be made, but my biggest concern is what the market would bear cost-wise for a stick with this feature.  As would be expected, the lower the cost, the better the market, but on something like this, reliable and inexpensive tend not to go hand in hand. 

What would you pay for a stick and controller with this feature?  (question open to anyone )

RandyT

[Gatt]

What would you pay for a stick and controller with this feature?  (question open to anyone )

RandyT

What would I pay?  I would probably buy it at $100 USD/stick.

I would definitely buy 2 at $50 USD/stick.

My holdback would be that I'd want at least 2,  since it'd be in a double joystick setup.  $100/stick would make me hesitate,  $50/stick would be an immediate buy for me.  Anything over $100/stick would probably be a pass for me.

While we're on the subject of possible ideas,  Randy,  have you ever considered offering modular boxes and panels for sale?  Perhaps that metal setup I've seen where you drop bolts through to secure them?  Seems like you're one of the few with the machining resources for a project like that.

A auto-switching 4w-8w and a prebuilt modular setup are my two dream items for this hobby

Edit:

I lied.  A marquee shaped LCD panel is my third dream item!

[RetroBorg]

What would you pay for a stick and controller with this feature?  (question open to anyone )

RandyT

I guess an Ultimarc UltraStik 360 sells for $59 each, so I reckon if you could get close to this price with an auto changing physical restricted joystick you would have a very competitive product for the arcade enthusiast. 

Other things I would look to see are hollow shafts so people could customize them anyway they want, like light them up, add fire buttons etc.

Also be nice if you could mount one your nice Tron handles on it.

I don't want much do I? 

[RandyT]

Wow, when I suggested something that would "help a small percentage of the community" at the beginning of the year, you compared it to catching mosquitoes with a mouse trap, and said it wasn't worth the effort. Fortunately, a mosquito trap was released shortly after (gotta love coincidences) and it seems to be doing well. Your tune seems to have changed since then...

My "tune" has not changed, and your timeline is in error.  I have no desire to copy a competitors existing product, when doing so removes valuable and popular features from my own. Period

Anyway, I fail to see the appeal to this. You turned an underpanel manual switchable restrictor into an underpanel manual switchable restrictor? Is the plastic stud the main feature? If you're going to be placing your hand so close to the restrictor, why not just use the edge of the restrictor to turn it? Or is the restrictor mounting hardware the main feature? Are the restrictor mounting studs lock-tited into the holes? Otherwise, those nylock nuts won't be doing much. One thing to take away from this is the large OD nylon washers, should provide a lot of insight for the DIYers, I seem to recall a recent thread asking specifically about that. Convince me why I should use these instead of JLWs for my next project.

I'm not sure which sticks you are referring to, but I believe you are mistaken.  The JLW-style units are not "underpanel manual switchable" as stock items.  They are designed to be fixed as either one or the other at installation time, and left that way.  I think I stated above that the OMNI2™ units have been "rebuilt to properly support the restriction switching function", and that it has "positive restrictor tension adjustments".  The switching grip (no small nor inexpensive design endeavor on it's own) also makes it much easier to change the restrictor position when reaching blind under a panel, and even when not.  It also, as already mentioned, lends itself well to modification toward an external activation.

I have no need or desire to "convince" anyone to use the OMNI2 over a JLW, or any other stick.  I am simply presenting it as an option to those who can recognize the merits of this very functional package, and are grateful someone bothered to put in the time and effort to offer it to them.  If I have to try to convince you, then they aren't what you are looking for.

RandyT

[leapinlew]

nice Randy...

is this what slowed down the novagems? 

[jasonbar]

Randy-

I have 2 Ultimarc Mag-Stik Pluses & I do like them.  My only complaint is the short throw of the sticks.  How does the throw of your OMNI2 stick compare to the Mag-Stik Plus throw?

Thanks,
-Jason

[LeedsFan]

This looks like a cool product I would consider buying. I had the older style T-Stik Plus from Ultimarc but found the throw way too short and stiff, but they were switchable from the top of the panel. If I were to buy these it would be so I could extend the little handle somewhat (but not too much) and have it so I can switch subtly from below the panel. Any extension would need good support around it so it couldn't flex or snap outside of it's path of travel.

So... how long is that little handle? About 10mm? And could it be changed or extended even if it was a home DIY job? Does it just screw in there or is it permanently glued in place?

[RandyT]

How does the throw of your OMNI2 stick compare to the Mag-Stik Plus throw?

Longer and less stiff.

So... how long is that little handle? About 10mm? And could it be changed or extended even if it was a home DIY job? Does it just screw in there or is it permanently glued in place?

The handle is 3/4"+.  That's about 19mm.  I strongly advise against making it longer, as the directional forces would be altered, and may cause issues.  With a 3/4" handle, there should be more than adequate length anyway.  It is not permanent, but it is designed to stay tight, and needs to be kept that way for overall strength.  Any modifications should consider the handle as permanent, and interface with it.

RandyT

[Nephasth]

Are the restrictor mounting studs lock-tited into the holes? Otherwise, those nylock nuts won't be doing much.

Still wondering about this one. It's a pretty important part of the design, just to ignore the question. Because if someone wanted to loosen the tension on the restrictor, and those studs didn't have a thread locker in the joystick base holes, there would be a good chance that the stud would start to back out of the hole before the nut backed off the stud.

I have no need or desire to "convince" anyone to use the OMNI2 over a JLW, or any other stick.

If you don't have enough confidence in a product to try to sell it to a skeptic, the skeptic will remain skeptical. Still don't see the major advantage of this over just installing large OD nylon washers on the restrictor screws of a standard JLW.  

They are designed to be fixed as either one or the other at installation time, and left that way.

I don't know about you, but when I see screws or bolts holding something together, I view it as being designed to be taken apart, changed up, and serviced at will.

[RandyT]

Still wondering about this one. It's a pretty important part of the design, just to ignore the question. Because if someone wanted to loosen the tension on the restrictor, and those studs didn't have a thread locker in the joystick base holes, there would be a good chance that the stud would start to back out of the hole before the nut backed off the stud.

"Positive restrictor tension adjustments", means the tension won't change unless you want it to.

If you don't have enough confidence in a product to try to sell it to a skeptic, the skeptic will remain skeptical. Still don't see the major advantage of this over just installing large OD nylon washers on the restrictor screws of a standard JLW.  

If an individual is skeptical, they should save their money until someone less skeptical (and whose opinion they trust) buys one and offers an opinion.  I can extol the virtues of the item all day long and it will have no impact on such an individual.  But I'll give it a go because you seem to want me to;

If you have trouble finding or getting a grip on the restrictor under your panel, or keeping it tight enough so it won't move or loosen when you don't want it to, or getting sore fingers because you have to turn that tight (because you don't want it to move) SOB with whatever small portion of the sharp plastic cog that happens to be accessible, or you want an easy way to interface an external or automated switching device, or are just looking for a great, true 4/8 way switchable restriction capable stick, compatible with a wide variety of tops and switches, with a standard mounting plate design that makes it a drop in replacement for existing older sticks, without all the fuss and at a very good price, then the OMNI2™ is just what you are looking for. 
But now I'm going to go and spoil my sales pitch....If none of those things are important to you, then move along...these aren't the droids you are looking for. 

I don't know about you, but when I see screws or bolts holding something together, I view it as being designed to be taken apart, changed up, and serviced at will.

At will, perhaps.  On the fly?  No.

RandyT

[ark_ader]

I picked up a stick very similar but it has an additional 2 way capability.

Is there ever any need for a 2 way for sticks of this size and if so can you implement this on your product?

[Nephasth]

Still wondering about this one. It's a pretty important part of the design, just to ignore the question. Because if someone wanted to loosen the tension on the restrictor, and those studs didn't have a thread locker in the joystick base holes, there would be a good chance that the stud would start to back out of the hole before the nut backed off the stud.

"Positive restrictor tension adjustments", means the tension won't change unless you want it to.

NSS. Side stepped the question again... Is there any thread locker on the threads of the studs that engage the threads of the mounting holes?

[TheShanMan]

If you added 2 way capability that would certainly make it that much more appealing!

I have U360's as my main joysticks so I'm not sure how prone to switching I'd be if auto-switching was added (or was auto-switching ready), but I would have certainly been willing to pay around the same cost as the U360 for an auto-switching setup if I were to start over. And even with my U360 panel, I'd consider making a new panel with these (I have a swappable panel setup).

As for comparison to the mag stik plus, I've also got a panel with one of those and for all intents and purposes I consider it to be a dedicated 4 way joystick. The throw is just too short for me to accurately use it as an 8 way. So my opinion is this would have a big advantage due to the longer throw.

All that said, I'd be content to stick with my U360's as long as this doesn't include or at least support auto-switching. Nice new product offering though, Randy!

[RandyT]

I picked up a stick very similar but it has an additional 2 way capability.

Is there ever any need for a 2 way for sticks of this size and if so can you implement this on your product?

2-way restriction has a fairly limited practical application.  The 4 way restriction is usually more than adequate for those games, as not too many, outside of possibly those with severe neuromuscular disorders, will lack co-ordination to the extent of accidentally hitting up or down, when intending to go left or right while in 4-way restricted mode.

As for comparison to the mag stik plus, I've also got a panel with one of those and for all intents and purposes I consider it to be a dedicated 4 way joystick. The throw is just too short for me to accurately use it as an 8 way. So my opinion is this would have a big advantage due to the longer throw.

A short throw is actually desirable for a 4-way.  I've always stated that a stick like the OMNI2, OMNI-Stik, etc.. is a tradeoff in that regard.  They will necessarily work backwards from the ideal, as the distance between two flats of the square shaped restrictor will always be shorter than the distance between two corners when rotated to a 4-way diamond.  What is important is that a good compromise is struck in that the 8-way throw is not overly short and the 4-way throw is not overly long.  This stick seems to do that quite well, by balancing the shaft length, switch position, actuator size and restrictor shape so that both are quite good.

RandyT

[AndyWarne]

Still don't see the major advantage of this over just installing large OD nylon washers on the restrictor screws of a standard JLW.  

Well on our J-Stik which has been around for many years we use nylon washers, springs between the screw heads and washers to apply pressure and a low-strength threadlock which allows adjustment. Would guess similar here.

[Nephasth]

Well on our J-Stik which has been around for many years we use nylon washers, springs between the screw heads and washers to apply pressure and a low-strength threadlock which allows adjustment. Would guess similar here.

Thanks for that Andy. That's something I didn't know about the J-Stik. I had to go back to your site to check it out, and only found a pic showing the nylon washers and this sentence: "All of our joysticks are supplied to our specs for 4-8 way switching without any dismantling." An understated feature of your sticks. Never caught a hint about the springs under the screw heads, but maybe I'm still overlooking it on your site.

That also puts a whole new meaning to following:

I have no desire to copy a competitors existing product, when doing so removes valuable and popular features from my own.

[opt2not]

First one to put out an auto-switching-physical-restrictor joystick that hooks up to Mame is going to be King of the joystick castle.
That being said, I'm glad that you guys are still coming up with new products, and I enjoy seeing the Randy, Andy and Bryan dynamic in each-other's threads.

[RetroBorg]

First one to put out an auto-switching-physical-restrictor joystick that hooks up to Mame is going to be King of the joystick castle.

Couldn't agree more.

[yotsuya]

First one to put out an auto-switching-physical-restrictor joystick that hooks up to Mame is going to be King of the joystick castle.

Couldn't agree more.

Only if there's a rubber grommet involved!

[Donkey_Kong]

what would happen if you had a setup like

First one to put out an auto-switching-physical-restrictor joystick that hooks up to Mame is going to be King of the joystick castle.

Couldn't agree more.

What happens if you are in 4-way and it's trying to turn to 8-way and your 6-way year old has the stick pointed straight up and it can't turn?

[RetroBorg]

What happens if you are in 4-way and it's trying to turn to 8-way and your 6-way year old has the stick pointed straight up and it can't turn?

I doubt whether your 6 year old would be strong enough to stop it switching.

[Donkey_Kong]

What happens if you are in 4-way and it's trying to turn to 8-way and your 6-way year old has the stick pointed straight up and it can't turn?

I doubt whether your 6 year old would be strong enough to stop it switching.

where do you go to buy a little motor for something like that? Is there anything plug and play out there that would work? This is just curiosity, I really have no intentions of trying it but it would be a cool thing to check out.

I think you are right, the leverage on the stick vs force from a motor locked onto that restrictor should be like night and day.

[Gray_Area]

The following is what I (and Nephasth) had in mind, initially, in comparison:

http://retroblast.arcadecontrols.com/reviews/joysticks/ultimarc_jstik.html



And the questions, then, were: how often are you going to do this?....how easy will it be?

[RetroBorg]

where do you go to buy a little motor for something like that?

I bought mine from here: http://www.robotgear.com.au/Product.aspx/Details/421

[AndyWarne]

Well on our J-Stik which has been around for many years we use nylon washers, springs between the screw heads and washers to apply pressure and a low-strength threadlock which allows adjustment. Would guess similar here.

Thanks for that Andy. That's something I didn't know about the J-Stik. I had to go back to your site to check it out, and only found a pic showing the nylon washers and this sentence: "All of our joysticks are supplied to our specs for 4-8 way switching without any dismantling." An understated feature of your sticks. Never caught a hint about the springs under the screw heads, but maybe I'm still overlooking it on your site.

We added the springs between the screw heads and washers around 6 months ago. I mentioned this on this thread:
http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=115592.msg1225760#msg1225760

I still need to update the pictures to show the spring version.

Andy

[RandyT]

Well on our J-Stik which has been around for many years we use nylon washers, springs between the screw heads and washers to apply pressure and a low-strength threadlock which allows adjustment. Would guess similar here.

You'd guess incorrectly. As I have stated several times, the stick is built differently.  No springs, no threadlock.  Just good engineering.  If I had to approach the situation the way you did yours, I simply would not have.  Not reliable enough for my tastes.

BTW, nice form, pimping your competing product in our announcement thread.   

That also puts a whole new meaning to following:

I have no desire to copy a competitors existing product, when doing so removes valuable and popular features from my own.

If you read my reply above, I believe it's called "vindication".

RandyT

[Nephasth]

...no threadlock.  Just good engineering. 

 

[RandyT]

...no threadlock.  Just good engineering. 

 

I'm starting to think you own stock in the Loctite™ corporation.  Glue isn't the end-all-be all of engineering priciples, but feel free to use as much as you like on your own items.  I don't mind .

[Nephasth]

Glue isn't the end-all-be all of engineering priciples, but feel free to use as much as you like on your own items.  I don't mind .

You're right about that one. But if you're using lock nuts on studs as "positive restrictor tension adjustments", there is the potential for problems. Especially, like mentioned earlier, if someone wanted to loosen the tension on the restrictor plate. Either the nut or the stud will loosen, and it will be whichever one has less resistance on it. Since the lock nut is "locked" onto the stud, and the stud isn't "locked" into the hole, more than likely the stud will loosen before the nut, which kind of defeats the purpose of your design once the stud is loose. That's just good engineering...

[RandyT]

You're right about that one. But if you're using lock nuts on studs as "positive restrictor tension adjustments", there is the potential for problems. Especially, like mentioned earlier, if someone wanted to loosen the tension on the restrictor plate. Either the nut or the stud will loosen, and it will be whichever one has less resistance on it. Since the lock nut is "locked" onto the stud, and the stud isn't "locked" into the hole, more than likely the stud will loosen before the nut, which kind of defeats the purpose of your design once the stud is loose. That's just good engineering...

But if the friction holding part A, substantially outweighs the force capable of being produced by part B, then there is no need to lock Part A with glue.  In fact, it's undesirable to do so, as it has other ramifications to the overall functionality. 

The biggest problem here is that you are making assumptions about a design, which you have not seen and do not know.  Thus, your conclusions about said design, are invalid.

[Nephasth]

What did you torque the studs to, Randy? Did you even use a torque wrench to measure the tightening force you put on the studs? And what's the torque on the lock nuts?

ETA: Substantial forces cannot be applied to threaded fasteners this small without them breaking.

[RandyT]

What did you torque the studs to, Randy? Did you even use a torque wrench to measure the tightening force you put on the studs? And what's the torque on the lock nuts?

1/4 turn before it breaks.  

(BTW, that was a joke, for those of you who might be "garage humor" impaired )

[Nephasth]

That's what I figured. You haven't even measured the forces you spoke of in your previous post, but yet you claim that it's a design feature...

[RandyT]

That's what I figured. You haven't even measured the forces you spoke of in your previous post, but yet you claim that it's a design feature...

Again, you have no idea what I did or did not do.  What I choose to divulge is just that.

For your own education, in hopes of stemming further "concerns", nylon insert nuts form a tight, frictional fit, restricting movement when it is subjected to vibration or other minor rotational forces.  The frictional coefficient of nylon and steel is miniscule (more than an order of magnitude smaller, in fact) compared to the frictional coefficient of metal against metal.

RandyT

[Nephasth]

The frictional coefficient of nylon and steel is miniscule (more than an order of magnitude smaller, in fact) compared to the frictional coefficient of metal against metal.

RandyT

True, but the actual metal to metal contact of the threads is much less than the surface contact of the nylon in the lock nut. This picture shows a cut away of a tightened fastener:



The nylon in a lock nut will fill the void completely, which creates more surface friction than just bare metal threads. The same goes for thread locker, it is not a glue. It is sticky, but it is actually an anaerobic compound (meaning it hardens in the absence of air). It basically just fills those gaps between the threads with a plastic like material, creating more surface friction, which requires more force to turn the fastener. I've been dealing with nuts and bolts for years, and have first hand experience with nylon lock nuts causing studs to back out of their holes, hence my "concern". You ignoring what I consider valid questions makes me wonder about the quality of your products. And when you finally address those concerns, you throw around jargan, but have no evidence or data to back up your claims.

[RandyT]

True, but the actual metal to metal contact of the threads is much less than the surface contact of the nylon in the lock nut. This picture shows a cut away of a tightened fastener:

If one of the metals is malleable, and it is, then your photo, which shows materials which are not, and very different thread pitch and type (and there are many), is inapplicable.

And again, there are other forces in this design, aside from the threads, which serve to lock things in place.  You are simply assuming, incorrectly, that there are not.

You ignoring what I consider valid questions makes me wonder about the quality of your products. And when you finally address those concerns, you throw around jargan, but have no evidence or data to back up your claims.

I'm ignoring your questions, because they are not relevant in the design.  The evidence is for sale on the GGG site.  As for quality, it speaks for itself.  You can question it if you want, but it never seems to be by actual consumers of our products.

[Nephasth]

If one of the metals is malleable, and it is, then your photo, which shows materials which are not...

How can you discern that from a black and white magnified photo? You can't. You're making false claims yet again.

Besides all metals are malleable, but have different degrees of malleability.

Also, the threads of the screws and holes of your sticks are machine threads, as are the ones in the photo. Thread pitch has nothing to do with thread contact, that's just how many threads are in a given distance. But thread pitch does determine the amount of force the fastener can withstand, a fastener with a higher thread pitch can handle more torque than one with fewer threads per inch. Threads (when the fastener is turned) create the force that holds the fasteners together. Enlighten me, what are these other forces? (you'll probably ignore that question as well)

[Nephasth]

There is about 33% of contact (friction), per thread.  That 33% equates to about 3.333x (more, actually, based on the true frictional coefficient of the materials) times the friction, per thread, over nylon.  Now, count the number of threads seated in the nylon, and the number where metal is against metal.  In the end, you wil still have several orders of magnitude more friction on the stud, than the nylon nut insert.

Where did you come up with the 33%? Even on the surface of the thread that makes contact with its mating thread, only a fraction of the surface makes actual contact, due to the threads not being perfectly smooth.

[RandyT]

How can you discern that from a black and white magnified photo? You can't. You're making false claims yet again.

Because there is no deformation.

Also, the threads of the screws and holes of your sticks are machine threads, as are the ones in the photo. Thread pitch has nothing to do with thread contact, that's just how many threads are in a given distance. But thread pitch does determine the amount of force the fastener can withstand, a fastener with a higher thread pitch can handle more torque than one with fewer threads per inch. Threads (when the fastener is turned) create the force that holds the fasteners together. Enlighten me, what are these other forces? (you'll probably ignore that question as well)

Ok, lets take a look at it anyway.  There is about 33% of contact (friction), per thread.  That 33% equates to about 3.333x (more, actually, based on the true frictional coefficient of the materials) times the friction, per thread, over nylon.  Now, count the number of threads seated in the nylon, and the number where metal is against metal.  In the end, you wil still have several orders of magnitude more friction on the stud, than the nylon nut insert.

It's simple math.

[Nephasth]

Because there is no deformation.

Again, all metals are malleable... and there is obvious deformation of the threads in the pic...

[RandyT]

Because there is no deformation.

Again, all metals are malleable... and there is obvious deformation of the threads in the pic...

Not enough to improve thread to thread contact.  Again, the math in this situation is not difficult, and no, I won't divulge the details that make the build of this stick better than previous attempts by others.  History has shown that our competitors will do that soon enough.

[Nephasth]

There is about 33% of contact (friction), per thread.  That 33% equates to about 3.333x (more, actually, based on the true frictional coefficient of the materials) times the friction, per thread, over nylon.  Now, count the number of threads seated in the nylon, and the number where metal is against metal.  In the end, you wil still have several orders of magnitude more friction on the stud, than the nylon nut insert.

Where did you come up with the 33%? Even on the surface of the thread that makes contact with its mating thread, only a fraction of the surface makes actual contact, due to the threads not being perfectly smooth.

And yet this question still goes unanswered, which brings into question the validity of your claims.

[Nephasth]

I won't divulge the details that make the build of this stick better than previous attempts by others.  History has shown that our competitors will do that soon enough.

Since you refuse to explain what sets this stick apart from "the competition's", you leave me no choice but to assume: You're selling a J-Stik with less hardware and a $5.95 3/4" long plastic handle.

[RandyT]

And yet this question still goes unanswered, which brings into question the validity of your claims.

I won't divulge the details that make the build of this stick better than previous attempts by others.  History has shown that our competitors will do that soon enough.

Since you refuse to explain what sets this stick apart from "the competition's", you leave me no choice but to assume: You're selling a J-Stik with a $5.95 3/4" long plastic handle.

This is a product announcement thread.  I've tried to offer some education as well, and hopefully it has helped others to understand the differences.  I guess you'll just have to remain "unconvinced". 

RandyT

[Donkey_Kong]

I think you guys broke something, it quit sending me notifications for new posts somewhere around #50.

[opt2not]

Nephasth, this is poor form my man. 
Randy provides a very good service, and he constantly produces new products for mame users and enthusiasts. Many of us have enjoyed his service support and wares. This is his product announcement thread man, it's one thing that other vendors are offering up alternatives to this product, and it's another to try to disprove the validity of it. He has indulged you far further than I would have -- he stands behind his products. I've ordered from him plenty of times, and from my own personal experience I have always been satisfied with his wares.

If you wanted to continue this, I would suggest creating a new topic elsewhere and leave his product announcement as such.

[Nephasth]

Nephasth, this is poor form my man. 

You're right, I got a little carried way. Just find it frustrating when questions I think are important (from a standpoint of me buying a product) get ignored multiple times. I like to know how ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- works before I buy. Apologies to everyone for the thread derailment. I got my answers (most of them) now.

[TopJimmyCooks]

I'm starting to think you own stock in the Loctite™ corporation.  Glue isn't the end-all-be all of engineering priciples, but feel free to use as much as you like on your own items.  I don't mind .

He doesn't own stock in Loctite.  However, he does indeed hold 400,000 shares of Molex, of which Loctite is a wholly owned subsidiary, so he's on the board of Loctite as well. 

[danny_galaga]

The frictional coefficient of nylon and steel is miniscule (more than an order of magnitude smaller, in fact) compared to the frictional coefficient of metal against metal.

RandyT

True, but the actual metal to metal contact of the threads is much less than the surface contact of the nylon in the lock nut. This picture shows a cut away of a tightened fastener:



The nylon in a lock nut will fill the void completely, which creates more surface friction than just bare metal threads. The same goes for thread locker, it is not a glue. It is sticky, but it is actually an anaerobic compound (meaning it hardens in the absence of air). It basically just fills those gaps between the threads with a plastic like material, creating more surface friction, which requires more force to turn the fastener. I've been dealing with nuts and bolts for years, and have first hand experience with nylon lock nuts causing studs to back out of their holes, hence my "concern". You ignoring what I consider valid questions makes me wonder about the quality of your products. And when you finally address those concerns, you throw around jargan, but have no evidence or data to back up your claims.

NephASS, WTF? Are you having difficulties at home or something? Why are you crapping so much on this? Like it, or don't like it. But maybe just shut up about it already...

[Red]

Will this fit easily into my X-Arcade as a replacement stick? 

Or will I need to make it fit by drilling/hacking?

[RandyT]

Will this fit easily into my X-Arcade as a replacement stick? 

Or will I need to make it fit by drilling/hacking?

These should fit right in, without hacking.  The only concern might be available depth.  You will need 2.25" clearance below the bottom surface of the upper panel.

[Red]

Will this fit easily into my X-Arcade as a replacement stick? 

Or will I need to make it fit by drilling/hacking?

These should fit right in, without hacking.  The only concern might be available depth.  You will need 2.25" clearance below the bottom surface of the upper panel.

Great!  Thanks.

[DaOld Man]

Looks good Randy, now when are you going to motorize these babies?

[mgb]

Randy, I plan on buying one of these soon. I think it be the easiest solution for my controller 2 which is used for player 2 on 8 ways and as the control for 4 way games.
I will say however that the price is a bit high for this stick but I guess $30 won't break me and I have not had any problems with the other parts I have purchased from you in the past.
A couple of questions:
 1) Is the shaft, the same length as the Sanwa JLW shaft, it looks like it is.
 2) With the softjoy switches, does it definitely work well for 4-way. The reason I ask is because I'm currently using a JLW with the switches that a Happ super would use. I keep this joystick in 4 way mode but the diagonals are easy enough to hit (I can actually play Robotron, using it).
I look forward to giving this stick a try. I'm hoping it compares well to the Sanwa JLW.

[RandyT]

1) Is the shaft, the same length as the Sanwa JLW shaft, it looks like it is.

Shaft length is about 2.8" to the top of the ball.

2) With the softjoy switches, does it definitely work well for 4-way. The reason I ask is because I'm currently using a JLW with the switches that a Happ super would use. I keep this joystick in 4 way mode but the diagonals are easy enough to hit (I can actually play Robotron, using it).

It is impossible to hit diagonals in 4-way mode with the SmoothJoy switch option installed.  It is nearly perfect with regard to dead-zone between cardinal directions.  You won't be playing Robotron in 4-way mode (at least not well) with this configuration.  But that's what the 8-way mode is for .

RandyT

[wizkid32]

Dang!  Wish I could afford something like that!  Sadly, my budget restricts me to Happ Supers.   

[Mamezilla]

Will this fit easily into my X-Arcade as a replacement stick? 

Or will I need to make it fit by drilling/hacking?

These should fit right in, without hacking.  The only concern might be available depth.  You will need 2.25" clearance below the bottom surface of the upper panel.

Great!  Thanks.

Did you end up installing some of these in your X-Arcade ?  Do they clear the bottom panel ?
Thanks

[RetroBorg]

Hi Randy,

Just wondering if you have a diagram of the OMNI2 showing the measurements?

I'm particularly interested in the the measurements of the mounting plate.

[RandyT]

Just wondering if you have a diagram of the OMNI2 showing the measurements?

I'm particularly interested in the the measurements of the mounting plate.

I don't have a plate drawing at the moment, as they are pretty much the same as other sticks out there.  They are bolt-up compatible with HAPP style sticks, as well as the smaller Japanese models using the angled holes.

The outside dimensions of the plate are 78mmx95mm (3.07"x3.74").  You'll need about 2 1/4" of clearance below the underside of the mounting plate.

RandyT

[DaOld Man]

Looks good Randy, now when are you going to motorize these babies?

[Le Chuck]

What happens if you are in 4-way and it's trying to turn to 8-way and your 6-way year old has the stick pointed straight up and it can't turn?

I doubt whether your 6 year old would be strong enough to stop it switching.

where do you go to buy a little motor for something like that? Is there anything plug and play out there that would work? This is just curiosity, I really have no intentions of trying it but it would be a cool thing to check out.

I think you are right, the leverage on the stick vs force from a motor locked onto that restrictor should be like night and day.

Old quotes I know but wanted to get it out there that we've been doing this for a while over on the Mrotate side, there is even a how to in the wiki.  I have one running on my cab using an OMNI2 and you can lean on the joy all you want, the restrictor will be rotated when the servo kicks.  I am a dedicated fan of the Omni2 because I think it's a great all around joy and it's super easy to configure to auto-switch with a cheap servo and controller.  If Randy can get it integrated and have it fire on a simple batch command the software is already out there to automate it... which just happened to win the best software of 2011 I think .

If you're reading this crazy thread the take away is...Buy this joy.    

[RetroBorg]

Just wondering if you have a diagram of the OMNI2 showing the measurements?

I'm particularly interested in the the measurements of the mounting plate.

I don't have a plate drawing at the moment, as they are pretty much the same as other sticks out there.  They are bolt-up compatible with HAPP style sticks, as well as the smaller Japanese models using the angled holes.

The outside dimensions of the plate are 78mmx95mm (3.07"x3.74").  You'll need about 2 1/4" of clearance below the underside of the mounting plate.

RandyT

Thanks Randy, how high is the joystick from the plate?

I'm thinking of using these on my LAI cocktail table but if they are too tall they won't fit under the glass.

[lanman31337]

Hmmm, depending on the force needed to rotate the stick, I bet a rc plane servo + limit switch would work fantastic on those.  You can get them to run at 5 volts too.

[Le Chuck]

Hmmm, depending on the force needed to rotate the stick, I bet a rc plane servo + limit switch would work fantastic on those.  You can get them to run at 5 volts too.

There is no need of a limit switch if using a positional servo.  Cheap and simple.  Other than that you'd bet right. 

[GZed]

Sorry to resurrect an ancient thread, but it seemed the best place to ask this:

My current joystick mounting bolt pattern is 4 holes in a 66mm x 77mm rectangle.  Will some of the holes on the OMNI2 match this bolt pattern?

[RandyT]

Sorry to resurrect an ancient thread, but it seemed the best place to ask this:

My current joystick mounting bolt pattern is 4 holes in a 66mm x 77mm rectangle.  Will some of the holes on the OMNI2 match this bolt pattern?

Yes, there are 4 holes in the OMNI2 which work with these mounting dimensions.  BTW, these are the standard dimensions of a "US-type" joystick mount (as opposed to a Japanese-type.)