R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric Off-Road

Like Tree23Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-05-2017, 11:14 AM   #18796
Tech Legend
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Fargo, North Dakota
Posts: 28,509
Trader Rating: 233 (100%+)
Default

I don't think durango took off in the USA like say AE or Losi at all, but, it had a following for those who wanted a vehicle that was considered exotic and race oriented. Saw quiet a few of the 1/8 buggies (the DEX408s I think they were) when they became available. Problem was that they still had teething issues that causes guys to go elsewhere, not bad vehicles though and at the time you had a race team.

The 4x4 SCT was one heck of a vehicle, still is.
__________________
Member - Red River Radio/Control Car Club
< Tekno SCT410.3 x 2 |HB Racing D413 x 2 | Tekno EB48SL x 2 | Yokomo YZ-2 DTM x 2>
Cain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 12:11 PM   #18797
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: South East US
Posts: 695
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
I don't think durango took off in the USA like say AE or Losi at all, but, it had a following for those who wanted a vehicle that was considered exotic and race oriented. Saw quiet a few of the 1/8 buggies (the DEX408s I think they were) when they became available. Problem was that they still had teething issues that causes guys to go elsewhere, not bad vehicles though and at the time you had a race team.

The 4x4 SCT was one heck of a vehicle, still is.
Had the DESC10 for a short time, but was really interested in the DESC410.Thats why I'm doing the 410V5 first though before tearing the used sc410 down and rebuilding it. They are similar enough that I figured it'd be easier to do it in that order. I can't wait to get that thing on the track though. I love SCT in all forms. Probably my favorite classes, demo derby or otherwise. Good bumpers and defensive driving.....
Alan_r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 12:49 PM   #18798
Tech Legend
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Fargo, North Dakota
Posts: 28,509
Trader Rating: 233 (100%+)
Default

yeah its a fun truck for sure. was tempted to keep it but I needed to factor in more than just my self to support it. But its definitely fun truck.
__________________
Member - Red River Radio/Control Car Club
< Tekno SCT410.3 x 2 |HB Racing D413 x 2 | Tekno EB48SL x 2 | Yokomo YZ-2 DTM x 2>
Cain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 01:12 PM   #18799
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,521
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Here are the pictures of the 210 prototype. At least, one variant of it. You can clearly see the B4 parts. I wish the saddle arrangement had stayed.

http://www.redrc.net/2010/01/durango...ggy-prototype/
__________________
Follow my rc products on Facebook at Raborn Racing Originals and the line of 3D printed parts at
http://www.shapeways.com/shops/rebellionrc
fredswain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 01:29 PM   #18800
Tech Legend
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Fargo, North Dakota
Posts: 28,509
Trader Rating: 233 (100%+)
Default

yeah, then the whole sideways shorty thing would already be in place.

Amazing to see where they were at with tech back then.
__________________
Member - Red River Radio/Control Car Club
< Tekno SCT410.3 x 2 |HB Racing D413 x 2 | Tekno EB48SL x 2 | Yokomo YZ-2 DTM x 2>
Cain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 03:29 PM   #18801
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 482
Default

Yeah I do remember Durango mainly being in the 4WD scene when they finally came to the 2wd Scene I didn't see many Durangos at the track, they were all Serpent, AE and Losi
__________________
Associated B6 "Dirt Version" latemodel, Team Losi Racing 22T 2.0 Bomber Truck.
Team Losi Racing 22 2.0 2wd Short Course Truck,Duratrax 835e Brushless 8th scale Buggy,
Stock Slash, B4.1 latemodel(retired), T4.2 Factory Team BOMBER CAR
Castle Creations( Since April 2016)
bmag5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 03:39 PM   #18802
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 66
Default

this thread is a life saver. been reading a ton as I'm setting this car up now. thanks again guys.

so a question regarding shocks.... as I have completed the 3gear swap and am rebuilding shocks today.

the buggy i have is used and came with extra shocks..... I measured the bodies as it looks like the shafts are identical on most of the shocks.

currently have shock bodies that are 39mm in length on the rear. shock itself is 111mm roughly

the front has shocks with a body of 32mm. and total roughly 88mm total length

I have two complete shocks that are slightly longer than the ones installed in the front. and they have a 37mm body. complete shock is 92mm. They are durango but no idea of vehicle. (dark blue stripe painted on the spring, came with light blue springs as well). should I put the larger shock body up front (37mm) and keep the rears larger (39mm)

or is increasing the shock length itself not the same as increasing the uptravel?

as for the lack of up travel..... maybe making a custom front shock tower would be ideal?
banx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 06:02 PM   #18803
Tech Addict
 
Kremzeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mt. Horeb, WI
Posts: 647
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredswain View Post
Here are the pictures of the 210 prototype. At least, one variant of it. You can clearly see the B4 parts. I wish the saddle arrangement had stayed.

http://www.redrc.net/2010/01/durango...ggy-prototype/
And its a 3 gear. Durango is an OG.
Kremzeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 07:46 PM   #18804
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 656
Default

Thanks for posting that link. It looks close to what the Dex210f looks like with the standard gear box. Come full circle.

As for shock bodies.
Should be 21.5mm front bodies and
31mm rear. Longer shock bodies actually decrease up travel.
It should say at the top of the shock body what size, written on the nut part. That sounds funny..😜

Custom front shock tower would be great !!

Last edited by WallyRC; 01-05-2017 at 10:39 PM.
WallyRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2017, 09:51 PM   #18805
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 656
Default VRP PISTONS

Are these worth getting. I am thinking of pulling the trigger!!

Also since they only offer
2x1.6
3x1.4
Which ones??
I was thinking of getting 2x1.6 and drilling one to 2x1.7 for rear.
I know JP and Travis ran 3x1.4 front and 2x1.6 rear, just seem counterintuitive. I was thinking 2x1.6 front and 3x1.4 rear as well.
Thanks for input ahead of time!!
WallyRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2017, 05:15 AM   #18806
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 136
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WallyRC View Post
Are these worth getting. I am thinking of pulling the trigger!!

Also since they only offer
2x1.6
3x1.4
Which ones??
I was thinking of getting 2x1.6 and drilling one to 2x1.7 for rear.
I know JP and Travis ran 3x1.4 front and 2x1.6 rear, just seem counterintuitive. I was thinking 2x1.6 front and 3x1.4 rear as well.
Thanks for input ahead of time!!
I may be incorrect, but following some internet discussion I have derived a ratio between the weight of the oil (measured in cst) and the surface area of the holes. This has allowed me to look how the buggy is absorbing the bumps and think I need to try another 10% etc etc and also once the front back balance is there, I can adjust both front and rear to keep the ratio the same.

However believe that the Durango Big Bore shocks are 12.3mm compared with 12mm for AE and TLR. I think this explains why I keep looking at SE/TLR setups and think how can they run so heavily damped when they are running 1.6x2 when I am running 1.3x6!

Does anybody else have any thoughts or comparisons to this problem?
Pistol123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2017, 08:35 AM   #18807
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pistol123 View Post
I may be incorrect, but following some internet discussion I have derived a ratio between the weight of the oil (measured in cst) and the surface area of the holes. This has allowed me to look how the buggy is absorbing the bumps and think I need to try another 10% etc etc and also once the front back balance is there, I can adjust both front and rear to keep the ratio the same.

However believe that the Durango Big Bore shocks are 12.3mm compared with 12mm for AE and TLR. I think this explains why I keep looking at SE/TLR setups and think how can they run so heavily damped when they are running 1.6x2 when I am running 1.3x6!

Does anybody else have any thoughts or comparisons to this problem?
Thanks pistol,
Good points and questions. That is what I'm trying to figure out before spending the money. What PISTONS are people finding work best for them??
With larger shocks than say AE, does that mean we can go little lighter oil than their setups in comparison?? Need more homes for similar damping??
I'm indoor with big jumps. 2x1.6/1.7 or Maybe run 3x1.4 front and drill other set to 3x1.5....
WallyRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2017, 09:12 AM   #18808
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 66
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WallyRC View Post
As for shock bodies.
Should be 21.5mm front bodies and
31mm rear. Longer shock bodies actually decrease up travel.
It should say at the top of the shock body what size, written on the nut part. That sounds funny..😜

Custom front shock tower would be great !!
thanks
banx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2017, 10:06 AM   #18809
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 136
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WallyRC View Post
Thanks pistol,
Good points and questions. That is what I'm trying to figure out before spending the money. What PISTONS are people finding work best for them??
With larger shocks than say AE, does that mean we can go little lighter oil than their setups in comparison?? Need more homes for similar damping??
I'm indoor with big jumps. 2x1.6/1.7 or Maybe run 3x1.4 front and drill other set to 3x1.5....
A quick calculation in my phone suggests 1.7x2 will give a surface area of 4.5mm^, 1.4x3 will be 4.6mm^. I assume you will get different pack between the two.

Dex210v1 has 1.3x6 which works out at 7.96mm^.

All calc using pie as 3.1415.
Pistol123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2017, 01:20 PM   #18810
Tech Legend
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Fargo, North Dakota
Posts: 28,509
Trader Rating: 233 (100%+)
Default

here is a chart Dino_D made:

Quote:
Made a little chart to show hole area and hole sizes.

mm..........2.......3......4.......5.......6..
1.0......1.571 2.356 3.142 3.927 4.712
1.1......1.901 2.851 3.801 4.752 5.702
1.2......2.262 3.393 4.524 5.655 6.786
1.3......2.655 3.982 5.309 6.637 7.964
1.4......3.079 4.618 6.158 7.697 9.236
1.5......3.534 5.301 7.069 8.836
1.6......4.021 6.032 8.042
1.7......4.540 6.809
1.8......5.089 7.634
1.9......5.671 8.506
Also, some info on pistons, pack, and dampening from him:

Quote:
As you can see 2x1.7 will have similar STATIC pack to 3x1.4 or 4x1.2 or 6x1.0.
When you move the shock shaft slowly, the differences between them is not that noticeable. However, the differences between fewer larger holes and more smaller holes is when the shock starts to pack. Less holes pack late in the stroke. More holes pack earlier due to more turbulent flow from more holes. Normally I alter pistons size and holes to adjust for track conditions. Bigger holes also favor bumpy tracks, but will bottom out more on larger jumps, smaller holes are preferred on smoother tracks with larger jumps.

I don;t have a chart referencing piston sizes (area of the holes) and oil weight combinations as there are too many different brands of oils.

Remember, oil weight is used to control the weight transfer front to back and side to side.
You can match heavier oil, and more holes or larger oils and light oil with smaller and less holes to achieve the same damping ratio, but heavier oil and larger hole area pack later in the stroke. Lighter oils and smaller hole area pack earlier in the stroke. It depends on what you want to achieve with the car.

Normally I tend to figure out what oil I want to use (heavier for fast flowing, high grip, and lighter for smaller technical tracks) and match the piston sizes and holes accordingly. Bigger holes for low grip and bumpy tracks, smaller holes for higher grip surfaces. Smaller holes for larger jumps. Just need to find the perfect balance and it takes time to test and find the right combination.

This is my opinions and testing. Feel free to experiment and try.
__________________
Member - Red River Radio/Control Car Club
< Tekno SCT410.3 x 2 |HB Racing D413 x 2 | Tekno EB48SL x 2 | Yokomo YZ-2 DTM x 2>
Cain is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
St Ives RC Club B4Bandit Australian Racing 16564 Yesterday 05:06 AM
EPMTs check in here. (a subsidiary of TNT) overtki11 Singapore R/C Racers 55470 05-07-2017 11:57 PM
Team Durango DEX410 ASH93A Australian Racing 925 04-08-2013 09:51 PM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 05:08 AM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net