RC10Talk - The Net's Largest Vintage R/C Community

mrlexan wrote:hijacking, but speaking of which my wife is becoming "mrslexan"..... she is unemployed = my new ebay bi%ch

i got one of those too...!

asashaw wrote:

mrlexan wrote:hijacking, but speaking of which my wife is becoming "mrslexan"..... she is unemployed = my new ebay bi%ch

i got one of those too...!

Just the one?

Hahaha couldn't resist.

scr8p wrote:no, all the arm mounts had 4 holes so you could move them front and back. if you wanted to move the mounts front with the org. style bulkhead, you had to notch it out for clearance.

I thought the four holes were to allow rear toe change by swapping from left to right. Nothing was ever mentioned in the manuals or box text about adjustable wheelbase...just rear toe.

mrlexan wrote:....my new ebay bi%ch

My wife does not eBay for me but she is an ace at the last part

I told her she did not have a choice, she is/was not going to sit at home and do nothing..... Give me back my pants!

mrlexan wrote:....Give me back my pants!

You da man. I told my wife that and she said "Why? Your hind quarters don't fit them anymore".

Sure girl, pick on the fat man

templeofspeed wrote:

scr8p wrote:no, all the arm mounts had 4 holes so you could move them front and back. if you wanted to move the mounts front with the org. style bulkhead, you had to notch it out for clearance.

I thought the four holes were to allow rear toe change by swapping from left to right. Nothing was ever mentioned in the manuals or box text about adjustable wheelbase...just rear toe.

you'd have to change the degree of the arm mount or the hub carrier to adjust the toe. moving it front and back only changes the wheelbase. switching them left to right would give you positive rear toe, without changing the hub carriers, and why would you want that? plus the pitch of the arm itself would be lower in the front and higher in the rear. i don't know if that would have any ill affect on handling. probably not.

scr8p wrote:..... the pitch of the arm itself would be lower in the front and higher in the rear. i don't know if that would have any ill affect on handling. probably not.

I would think that would put more load on the front of the arm and make it prone to shock breakage. Just a thought.

scr8p wrote:

templeofspeed wrote:

scr8p wrote:no, all the arm mounts had 4 holes so you could move them front and back. if you wanted to move the mounts front with the org. style bulkhead, you had to notch it out for clearance.

I thought the four holes were to allow rear toe change by swapping from left to right. Nothing was ever mentioned in the manuals or box text about adjustable wheelbase...just rear toe.

you'd have to change the degree of the arm mount or the hub carrier to adjust the toe. moving it front and back only changes the wheelbase. switching them left to right would give you positive rear toe, without changing the hub carriers, and why would you want that? plus the pitch of the arm itself would be lower in the front and higher in the rear. i don't know if that would have any ill affect on handling. probably not.

Thus, if you swapped the 1.5º 6360 arm mounts from left to right and kept the 1.5º hub carriers in their normal orientation (or vice versa) you'd have 0º toe per side. Right? I know the early kits had 0º hub carriers, so that doesn't apply there...

Stupid toy cars...

templeofspeed wrote:

scr8p wrote:

templeofspeed wrote: I thought the four holes were to allow rear toe change by swapping from left to right. Nothing was ever mentioned in the manuals or box text about adjustable wheelbase...just rear toe.

you'd have to change the degree of the arm mount or the hub carrier to adjust the toe. moving it front and back only changes the wheelbase. switching them left to right would give you positive rear toe, without changing the hub carriers, and why would you want that? plus the pitch of the arm itself would be lower in the front and higher in the rear. i don't know if that would have any ill affect on handling. probably not.

Thus, if you swapped the 1.5º 6360 arm mounts from left to right and kept the 1.5º hub carriers in their normal orientation (or vice versa) you'd have 0º toe per side. Right? I know the early kits had 0º hub carriers, so that doesn't apply there...

Stupid toy cars...

well, i'm sure the arm mounts are designed with that pitch to the rear for a reason. one that i don't know.

so, i would leave the 1.5 degree arm mounts in the correct l&r position, and get 1.5 hub carriers, and switch those. then, you'd have 0 toe.

scr8p wrote:well, i'm sure the arm mounts are designed with that pitch to the rear for a reason. one that i don't know.

so, i would leave the 1.5 degree arm mounts in the correct l&r position, and get 1.5 hub carriers, and switch those. then, you'd have 0 toe.

The pitch is "anti-squat". You're right, better to swap the hub carriers... what were we going on about... oh yeah, wheelbase...

You would have thought Associated might have provided some help explaining all the tuning options they provided originally... I mean everything on the early kits needed hand fitting anyway.

well, shortening the wheelbase would help the car turn better. it would also help off corner traction, since there would be more weight transfered on the rear of the car. or, i could be talking out of my you know what. so, if anyone has anything to add, feel free.

lack of tuning options from ae, i don't know. they gave a base line setup-up. maybe not the best, but it was a place for the owner to start.