NEW RC10B5

[slow_jun]

they seem to look like ( the C hub and the inserts) a DEX210, hope the rear link Carriers wont be a PITA as the DEX210 . hope they just release the FT instead of the TC to save on the upgrades.

[longboardnj]

i bet u can get stick packs in the b5 but id want the b5m and i dont think it will fit .. hope the t5m will fit a stick pack.. if not maybe the sc10.2m will fit.. a mid motor rwd offroad rc has been on my wish list for years.. if they just did the 3 gear mid motor id be a little more happy. any advantage to the 4 gear setup? seems like it will just slow down the car.

[slotcarrod]

The power and runtime of brushless and lipo these days out weigh the rotating mass. I do think the reason for the four gear in the M was to keep the rotation of the motor moving forward. It will have a better effect than reverse. Motor placement is critical as well, as a heavy part of the car, you want that centered as much as possible.

[losiXXXman]

i bet u can get stick packs in the b5 but id want the b5m and i dont think it will fit .. hope the t5m will fit a stick pack.. if not maybe the sc10.2m will fit.. a mid motor rwd offroad rc has been on my wish list for years.. if they just did the 3 gear mid motor id be a little more happy. any advantage to the 4 gear setup? seems like it will just slow down the car.

Three gear trans in mid setup, cause a lifting moment on the rear of the car under acceleration. Not good when you need a holeshot out of a low speed corner, or to setup for a jump with little run-up distance.

[Sixtysixdeuce]

a mid motor rwd offroad rc has been on my wish list for years.. if they just did the 3 gear mid motor id be a little more happy.

That option has been available for some time, and in a proven and particularly durable platform from Associated with tons of hop-up options.

Yup, I'm talking about an E-converted RC10GT. You want it to be a buggy? Just use the Klein arms so popular with the OIN builds and adapt buggy shock towers.

Three gear trans in mid setup, cause a lifting moment on the rear of the car under acceleration. Not good when you need a holeshot out of a low speed corner, or to setup for a jump with little run-up distance.

I get the theory behind this, but in my experience, with RWD, keeping the nose down is a priority. On our local indoor, traction is never my problem, but steering under acceleration is, even with weight shifted forward. If I were running a 4-gear that had the motor's centrifugal force acting with the wheels, it would be even worse. I already have to watch the throttle on my 3,300 KV/3s destroyer buggy (geared 24/81) and 10 turn/2s RC10T (19/87) to avoid doing wheelies. Both can easily clear the 10' double with only 6 or 7 feet of run-up (including the ramp itself). Shoot, if I really hammer destroyer buggy, it'll hit 2 or 3 feet up the wall, 8 feet past the landing.

If you have a technical track where acceleration is paramount, opt for a rear motor design. A 3-gear rear motor > 4 gear mid motor for rear wheel traction every day and twice on Sunday.

[terry.sc]

I get the theory behind this, but in my experience, with RWD, keeping the nose down is a priority. On our local indoor, traction is never my problem, but steering under acceleration is, even with weight shifted forward. If I were running a 4-gear that had the motor's centrifugal force acting with the wheels, it would be even worse. I already have to watch the throttle on my 3,300 KV/3s destroyer buggy (geared 24/81) and 10 turn/2s RC10T (19/87) to avoid doing wheelies. Both can easily clear the 10' double with only 6 or 7 feet of run-up (including the ramp itself). Shoot, if I really hammer destroyer buggy, it'll hit 2 or 3 feet up the wall, 8 feet past the landing.

If you have a technical track where acceleration is paramount, opt for a rear motor design. A 3-gear rear motor > 4 gear mid motor for rear wheel traction every day and twice on Sunday.

The 4 gear gearbox has been around in mid buggies for 5 years now and have proven to have better traction and better handling than a 3 gear mid chassis. On 3 gear mid chassis the torque of the motor will effectively lift the rear end under acceleration, reducing rear grip and traction. This doesn't mean you get more steering, you just get less rear grip. A 4 gear gearbox gives you more consistent handling, the motor is working with the chassis to give you more steering into a corner and more consistent traction coming out, so it also works well on medium grip surfaces. The 4 gear gearbox also helps with jumping, helping to alter attitude in the air.

The US is very much behind Europe regarding buggy technology, we run on grippier surfaces and the old rear motor designs aren't competitive. We've now moved on to experimenting with 4wds without front driveshafts removed in 2wd when having lots of grip, which has led to the likes of the Schumacher Cougar KF, Xray XB4 2wd, Kyosho DB1 and Team C TM2 which change direction even quicker with more steering, but try and run them on low grip dirt and you will spend all your time trying to point them in the right direction.

A mid motor buggy is much less stable with more steering than a rear motor car and a mid motor car will always have less rear traction on low grip surfaces than a buggy with the weight of the motor hanging out the rear, but a lot more steering. If you have enough rear traction a mid motor buggy will always corner and steer faster than a rear motor buggy, especially on a technical track with lots of turns and chicanes. If you have a rear motored buggy with enough grip to make it hard to stop it wheelies, you really need to try a mid motored buggy.

[kaiser]

terry, while i agree with everything you posted i sure hope the us doesn't "catch up" to the uk/eu standards.

offroad should be raced on dirt, clay was pushing it but turf is just plain wrong. IMHO of course.
and whoever invented sugaring a dirt track should be drawn and quatered.....i jest, i jest.

[GoMachV]

The US is very much behind Europe regarding buggy technology, we run on grippier surfaces.....

Yeah I wasn't getting this either. Your comparing apples and oranges when the tracks are completely different.

[terry.sc]

offroad should be raced on dirt, clay was pushing it but turf is just plain wrong. IMHO of course.
and whoever invented sugaring a dirt track should be drawn and quatered.....i jest, i jest.

I do find it amazing the reaction by racers, especially US ones, to running on astro. Our astro tracks are laid on dirt or sand so even if smoothed off it ends up with lots of small bumps and ruts in it after a season of weather, and very few of our astro tracks are completely astroturf, usually they include multi surfaces. My local track is mainly astroturf, different grades of astro so the grip isn't consistent all round the track, and includes sections of asphalt, grass, cobblestones, dirt and concrete.
[youtube]CKoXvfuh69g[/youtube]
This is dismissed as "not off road", while a clay surgace that has been brought in and rollered perfectly smooth is still classed as off road.

In the UK if we wanted to race on a dirt track we would only get a month or two each year when it is dry enough to not end up with a brown buggy at the end of the day. I raced on dirt here before we had automatic lap counting, we had to pull over before race control every lap so a pit man could wipe the mud off the race numbers so you could be lap counted. With an astro track you can[img=http://www.oople.com/rc/photos/2012national-epr/4wd/OOP_8089.jpg] race in the rain[/img] which we have to do. Even raced in the snow, just sweep the track clean and you are good to go. And we get the astro free from sports surface suppliers, when they replace a sports surface they are happy to give the old stuff away instead of paying for the disposal.

I do find it strange how much hostility there is to a track surface that is zero maintenance for the club in all weathers, with enough grip for the racers without being too grippy, which has a soft surface that protects the cars from damage when landing jumps or in an accident, that once bedded in doesn't throw up grit and dirt that gets into bearings, and leaves the buggies fairly clean after the finals.

And sugaring a track is very much a US thing used in on road, especially parking lot tracks to bring the grip up. We would never use it as it would be washed off the track by lunchtime.


The Associated B4 has been uncompetitive over here for at least 5 years now, it has been seen as a good starter buggy for beginners, but if you wanted to be competitive you use something else. Most sales of B4s to experienced racers is to use as a donor car for a mid conversion. Even the Losi 22 doesn't have much of a following, there are loads of better buggies for our tracks. The B5M looks like it can claw back some of the UK market again.

[GoMachV]

Again, it's not that one is better or the best- they are different. To suggest that the US is "way behind" in technology because our surfaces are substandard to euro track shows that there is just as much "hostility" on that side. We have two different cars and each are designed to work on one track better than the other. Where is the problem?

[klavy69]

personally I'll have to get a 5m to see how badass they really are supposed to be...and then run my vintage with them instead

Todd

[Phin]

Off-road should be raced on dirt, clay, and turf....all on the same track.

[Charlie don't surf]

This site is also very much a non racer oriented forum- I think we took a poll once and came up with like 10% regular club racers max. I understand the reasons the UK uses turf indoor and out, and would love to try it myself! But, to say that the US is behind is like me saying how bad Schumachers were vs Yokomos. It's a regional thing, and neither is better...both have positives and negatives such as: US indoor clay is predominately a tire and tire prep war- chassis differences are almost negligible..almost. Eastern US outdoor tracks have a high natural moisture level, and don't need the sugar prep to be consistent, and don't break up. Western US outdoor seems to favor sugar (it is amazing to race on if you can handle the grip) Orange would be a better rep for why, but I did prep our local track with an old-school soda type mixture before a big race and it was great grip...and super low maintenance. But, back to the differences between US/UK...our track layouts for 1/10 seem way more rhythm based.than yours, we use way more air time and what seems to be longer speed sections and sweepers, whereas yours seem to be tight and technical..lots of short timing and such. So it seems to me, that they are different approaches which also may require or favor a different driving style and it different car to maximize the track, the available traction, the tire carcass and size (why are your front tires sooo small LOL)

[RC10resto]

I wonder if they drive their RC cars on the wrong side of the track

[askbob]

^ Now that's funny right there....