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

Sorry for the late reply, as I have'nt been in in a while. As for the 3* inner toe. This was a very common combination to run bitd. I never really saw anyone ever run anything but. However the reason is really multi-fold, but mostly because of the swept forward drive shaft angle the 3* rear inner blocks would provide. This gives the car a "dynamic" antisquat. Basically the harder you apply throttle, the more the suspension resists squating. And in many situations this made the car more consistent, as it kept the chassis flatter. There was also a little benefit from the motor hanging out the back a bit. The negative however was that the car handled rough terrain worse than a car with less inner block toe. So, occasionally you might find on big rough outdoor tracks the cars being tried with 0 or 1.5 inners. That said, the RC10 that Kinwald won the worlds with had 3* inners (I believe), and won it on the largest ruttiest track of all time . -Go figure.

well joey
it looks good, looking at your tire ware patch and what you said about the how the car was driving
sounds like it was set up to your driving style.
we can sit and decifer what we think is wrong with that pic and state or own opinions on what we see to belive wrong
with that pic
but have driven on that track in various different weather conditions plenty of times
to make it i belive you said 8th in the b in mod! is a feat in itself at hotrods
i ve seen some unreal setups that you think would never work at the shoot out
work!
if your tire patch was way off and your explanation of how the car was working was different
i would suggest some changes
the only thing that i see and i belive JWSCAB said it would be to shorten the camber link to keep more camber gain in a hard turn
but if your pushing! than what you have going could be scrubing just that little bit of rear traction that you need to drive around the corners
i would write that setup down so next year you have a damn good starting point
maybe next year we can get all the vintage west coasters to race it
farmer

Thanks for the input guys, jay dub, once I get my hands on 3* rear arm mounts, they will go on, with 0* carriers on the outside.

Farmer, 8th in the B main for expert stock...I was WAY down in modified, 9th in the E main , but I did miss 1/2 the qualifying rounds, and the mains were set with your best 2 qualifiers (not single best).

I have the set up written down, and will be trying many more changes over the next coming months on high bite surfaces. I need to get a binder together (as I have been telling myself for a while) and update it while at the track. Maybe it is time I finally update my son's old netbook and start bringing it along with me...little solitare between races never hurt, its not like I need to cut comms or tray batteries anymore

Just remember-
Shorter rear camber link means more rapid left right weight transition- causing more roll.
Shorter rear link to effect camber gain also comes into play during acceleration and deceleration reducing the contact patch in both tremendously, on a car with rather stubby arms and links to being with-

Charlie don't surf wrote:
Shorter rear camber link means more rapid left right weight transition- causing more roll.

can you explain that bit? To me shorter rear upper link always meant accelerating wheel rate on compression... ie less roll...

thanks

Paul

Chassis roll, not tire roll.

Charlie don't surf wrote:Chassis roll, not tire roll.

I still can't make the connexion I'm not saying I disagree, rather that I don't get it


edit: excerpt from AE's B4 setup book: How do I know which link is best?
• Shortening the camber link will stiffen the rear suspension and the car will tend to accelerate or “square up” better. This typically equates to more turn-in steering and a loss of mid to exit steering."

doesnt this contradict with the above?

thanks
Paul

Maybe, but we're talking about the b4 which has a top mounted ball stud orientation (direct leverage on the stud). And a much longer link even at its shortest on the B4- the 10 with a long rear link is under 2" by memory (and the outer location Is way inside of the hinge pin) and my 4.1 rear links are 2.5" at their shortest-

When you go from the long setting on the 4.1 to the next shortest it a difference if 1/8" but in relation to the arm your only changing the size by 5%. To make the change on the RC10 if you have the worlds bulkhead your again at 1/8", but you've shortened it by 20% compared to the arm. Combine that with the fact that the link is only 75% of the length of the arm to begin with (vs 110%-90% on.the 4.1) and you upper link is now around 60% the length of the lower. This translates to no "pressure" on the inner link location allowing the chassis to pivot easily at that location, and the tire regitive cambers in as a result of that unequal length pulling the outer pivot in as it compresses.

Lonestar wrote:

Charlie don't surf wrote:Chassis roll, not tire roll.

I still can't make the connexion I'm not saying I disagree, rather that I don't get it


edit: excerpt from AE's B4 setup book: How do I know which link is best?
• Shortening the camber link will stiffen the rear suspension and the car will tend to accelerate or “square up” better. This typically equates to more turn-in steering and a loss of mid to exit steering."

doesnt this contradict with the above?

thanks
Paul

Paul,

The single sentence tuning tips with respect to the B4 are, probably not as useful due to the big differences in arm length and things. Note how they use words like "tend to" and "typically" anyway? However, I think this link:

http://www.petitrc.com/setup/associated/setupb4/B4_CharliePerezSetupHints.htm

is interesting because of the level of detail. If I remember right, the middle of the doc has some good detailed commentary, particularly on "consistency" of the camber change with compression afforded by longer (and parallel to the suspension arm) links. Like Reg says, all these concepts are magnified on where arms and links are shorter, (and you don't have the finer tuning ability to move links up and down with washers), but they still hold true I think.

Y'ernat Al wrote:Because there is that lower tower to fit the B4's out there now, it may help you, at least as a starting point. Make sure and post what you come up with, obviously .

My horrid comparison shot...old "standard" tower, newer B4 "sized" tower...22 shocks, just a tad more droop now , I need to re-screw the un-screwed rear eyelets now.

JK Racing wrote:

Y'ernat Al wrote:Because there is that lower tower to fit the B4's out there now, it may help you, at least as a starting point. Make sure and post what you come up with, obviously .

My horrid comparison shot...old "standard" tower, newer B4 "sized" tower...22 shocks, just a tad more droop now , I need to re-screw the un-screwed rear eyelets now.

you like that setup? looks like a pic of too much droop and way too much droop.. maybe its just me but i like a little less droop then the first pic. too much droop kills the drivetrain plus i like the way low buggies/trucks turn

I noticed the car is really skatey-skiddish with too little droop. Agreed on the right, that is too much. I need to take a new shot with the AE 12mm big bore shocks on there, and re-post a current set up. It has grown & changed

JK Racing wrote:I noticed the car is really skatey-skiddish with too little droop. Agreed on the right, that is too much. I need to take a new shot with the AE 12mm big bore shocks on there, and re-post a current set up. It has grown & changed

i like skatey-skiddish i cant stand that tall leaning/ almost rolling over in turn set up. on the other hand my buddy runs his sc10 tall and does great . i just saw that real tall set up and wanted to warn you about drivetrain wear since you cant get the one stealth outdrive anymore

I.have slightly less than the left pic, but that's for a super high bite track. A looser track, or more aggressive tire can need more droop for more side bite.

I'm trying to get my Rc10 dialed in, and reading through this thread has left me not knowing where to start.
Current setup:
.56 front shocks
.1.32 rear shocks
.Short arm front shock tower
.Green front springs, silver rear
.40wt shock fluid front, 30 rear
.15 degree caster blocks
.RPM rear arms
.AE wide front arms
.Square fuzzies rear
.4 ribs front
I run on a rutted, loamy backyard track. The current setup isn't very good. The car gets thrown around by bumps and oversteers.
I'm planning on getting some Jconcepts goosebumps tires, I'm guessing that'll help a lot.
My current setup is not even in the ballpark. Can someone recommend a starting point to tune from?
Thanks.
I can post up pictures and details if necessary.