Page 8 of 12
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Fri Feb 05, 2016 2:50 pm
by RJJ
RJJ wrote:
In the process of building myself one, what v2 arm mounts should I start with, running on astroturf mainly over here or carpet indoors.
I have so far used only 3-2 indoors.
-N-[/quote]
Thankyou
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 5:16 pm
by Roasty71
Evening all
ok, so I'm very new to RC10's but i like the look of this
i have a RERE worlds car that is totally kit and I want to do this conversation. Ive wrote a list of parts that i think are needed, if any one can add to it if I've missed any thing i would be greatfull.
i think i need
1x V2 Arm set from shapeways
1x #1777 shocks ends
1x #9645 screws for retaining the hinge pins
1x #6220 front inline axles from a B4, could i use a B4.2 set up so i can use hex wheels ?
1x #9672 Rear CVA bones , do they fit straight on to the RERE axles or do i fit B4.2 and again use hex rear wheels.
1x #9696 rear wheels, are these pin or hex wheels?
1x #73392 RPM rod ends
1x #7305 Nose plate (10T/GT) shapeways
1x #7207 Front bulkhead (10T/GT) shapeways
1x #7315 Nose brace tubes (10T/GT) shapeways
Also do i need the front and rear towers ?
ThankRoss
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 11:02 pm
by JK Racing
Best I can answer...
Roasty71 wrote:
1x V2 Arm set from shapeways - YES
1x #1777 shocks ends - YES, if you dont have some already laying around
1x #9645 screws for retaining the hinge pins - YES, same as above
1x #6220 front inline axles from a B4, could i use a B4.2 set up so i can use hex wheels ? - Yes/No - I would try to find original front axles from 10T/GT/T2/Team/Worlds car, the B4 axles will need to be drilled.
1x #9672 Rear CVA bones , do they fit straight on to the RERE axles or do i fit B4.2 and again use hex rear wheels. - YES, fits and you can use pin or hex B4 series wheels.
1x #9696 rear wheels, are these pin or hex wheels? - these are hex, use your choice of wheel
1x #73392 RPM rod ends - not sure (someone else?)
1x #7305 Nose plate (10T/GT) shapeways - YES (not shapeways, its an alloy part)
1x #7207 Front bulkhead (10T/GT) shapeways - YES (not sure if this is on shapeways)
1x #7315 Nose brace tubes (10T/GT) shapeways - YES (not shapeways, its an alloy part)
Also do i need the front and rear towers ? - Front tower, YES, rear tower, NO, but its nice to have the newer towers with B5 wing mount holes already in it (you will need B5M wing mounts as well).
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2016 4:57 pm
by Roasty71
Thanks Joey, ill get the bits on order
Cheers
Ross
JK Racing wrote:Best I can answer...
Roasty71 wrote:
1x V2 Arm set from shapeways - YES
1x #1777 shocks ends - YES, if you dont have some already laying around
1x #9645 screws for retaining the hinge pins - YES, same as above
1x #6220 front inline axles from a B4, could i use a B4.2 set up so i can use hex wheels ? - Yes/No - I would try to find original front axles from 10T/GT/T2/Team/Worlds car, the B4 axles will need to be drilled.
1x #9672 Rear CVA bones , do they fit straight on to the RERE axles or do i fit B4.2 and again use hex rear wheels. - YES, fits and you can use pin or hex B4 series wheels.
1x #9696 rear wheels, are these pin or hex wheels? - these are hex, use your choice of wheel
1x #73392 RPM rod ends - not sure (someone else?)
1x #7305 Nose plate (10T/GT) shapeways - YES (not shapeways, its an alloy part)
1x #7207 Front bulkhead (10T/GT) shapeways - YES (not sure if this is on shapeways)
1x #7315 Nose brace tubes (10T/GT) shapeways - YES (not shapeways, its an alloy part)
Also do i need the front and rear towers ? - Front tower, YES, rear tower, NO, but its nice to have the newer towers with B5 wing mount holes already in it (you will need B5M wing mounts as well).
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2016 9:27 am
by EddScott
I'm in the UK and slowly gathering parts to convert my ReRe to the Quadra RC10.
One thing I've found very hard to get hold of is the RC10 T nose plate. I have purchased one although it's a copy from eRacingPro and the hole alignment, I suspect, was carried out in the dark. Or with a blindfold, it's hard to tell.
I've offered it up and should be useable. Won't know for sure until everything else arrives to get the build started.
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2016 5:21 am
by Headling
My cars running great on my v1 quadra arms on carpet but looking to upgrade my car to big bore shocks (AE ones)
I think I'll need a new front tower as the BB shocks are longer than the team shocks and I want to get a 18mm ride height so want to make sure I get the correct tower
It's a standard team front end btw
If you can help with a tower or add a link that would be great
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 3:59 am
by Niki
GoMachV have a good range of front towers available, both for RC10 and RC10T nose.
http://www.rc10talk.com/viewtopic.php?f=102&t=38684
I'm sure your car works well but just to avoid misunderstandings, it's not Quadra front end in the picture.
Most likely "NIX62061 - RC10 wide front arms" together with stock inner mounts.
-Niki-
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 5:02 am
by Headling
Ok thanks for the link and clearing up what arms I have, going to get the V2 quadra kit for it shortly
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 6:04 pm
by Phin
Working on a project and got a question about toe-in and quad-symmetry.
With toe-in at the rear arm mounts the pin-to-pin distance is narrower at the front of the inner hinge-pins than it is at the back...so which measurement is supposed to match the inner hinge-pins of the front arms? Narrowest point of the rear inner hinge-pins, widest point, an average of the two (center)...or should I be matching the front and rear arms using zero degree mounts
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 6:34 am
by Niki
When looking at the B2/3/4 rear end, matching dimension is somewhere between hinge pin center and rear end. Maybe at the point where arm mount and arm touch.
My version was made (if I remember right) with a imaginary zero degree arm mount. Turned arm mount then around rear screw and made the final 3d model. End result should be close the same.
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 4:48 pm
by Phin
Thanks for the answer.
With 3 degree arm mounts there's up to a 1/4" difference in the pin to pin distance at the inner hinge-pins depending on where you measure from. If I measured from the front of the rear arm mounts I was close to symmetrical but at the back of the rear arm mounts I was too far off for my liking.
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 5:50 pm
by Niki
This is how Quadra was designed. Front end symmetry line and rear hinge pin highlighted in red. I couldn't get it closer to B2/3/4 symmetry than that
Obviously hinge pin end difference (compared to symmetry line) would be smaller with basic B4 type rear toe-in 1.5deg/side.
1.5-1 and 1.5-2 rear arm mounts could be easily done for Quadra.
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 6:55 pm
by Phin
This is what I'm playing around with:
Started off as a wide nose graphite chassis (Hot Trick width) that had seen better days. I cut the nose down so the inside arm mount holes became the outside holes. I'm using RPM Truck Conversion arms up front which are practically the same length as stock length rears (2.25" vs ~2.23").
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 8:32 pm
by jwscab
nifty
Re: Quadra-symmetric RC10
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2016 4:46 pm
by Phin
I tried Traxxas arm mounts before, and at first, they seemed just as off as the RC10 mounts (but wider than the rear instead of narrower), so opted to stick with all AE parts. I wasn't considering the difference with toe-in at the time though. Retried the traxxas front mounts matched up to 0 degree rear blocks and it's just about spot on.
With 1.5 degree mounts the pin-to-pin at the front arm's inner pivots is wider than the front of the rear hinge-pins by the same amount as it's narrower than the back of the rear hinge-pins.
So inner and outer pivots points are only about a couple of tenths of a millimeter off symmetry...which is closer than I thought it would be.
