80LikesDurango DEX210 Thread
01-19-2017, 12:27 PM
Tech Addict
Guys, the 210F and the 410v5 have the same problem at the rear end, i had to remove the uptravel spacer and did cut down the lower ball eye by 1 mm to get more uptravel, not the right way, we realy need a 27mm shock body instead of the 29 mm, or a taler shock tower for them, or i just get a set of ae shocks, sad as i realy like the smoth action from the td fat shocks... 
Just for a side note, that is not a just problem at td, my schumacher k2 does have the same problem front and rear, 0 upravel there too!
Just for a side note, that is not a just problem at td, my schumacher k2 does have the same problem front and rear, 0 upravel there too!
01-19-2017, 01:27 PM
Tech Adept
This was the basic shock tower. 3 mm.
Xtreme racing makes a nice 4mm one that has multiple holes that I think could be used with gullwing or flat w/o having to change shock towers. About 20 bucks. You will need the aluminum shock mounts from and exotek or STRC shook tower. Good luck dremelling. I bolted
my ST shock tower to it to use as a template when dremeling the base.
Edit: just thought of this that you need to drill the wholes a little larger for the shock attachments. So maybe the Xtreme ones wouldn't be good because of lack of material. Just find thicker b44 ones.
http://https://www.amazon.com/photos/share/LoPy6qUWffYgglRX1nv6qF9CBjpAkIC5ver81TzaCye
Xtreme racing makes a nice 4mm one that has multiple holes that I think could be used with gullwing or flat w/o having to change shock towers. About 20 bucks. You will need the aluminum shock mounts from and exotek or STRC shook tower. Good luck dremelling. I bolted
my ST shock tower to it to use as a template when dremeling the base.
Edit: just thought of this that you need to drill the wholes a little larger for the shock attachments. So maybe the Xtreme ones wouldn't be good because of lack of material. Just find thicker b44 ones.
http://https://www.amazon.com/photos/share/LoPy6qUWffYgglRX1nv6qF9CBjpAkIC5ver81TzaCye
is this the b44 tower your referring to?
http://www.xtremercracing.com/Produc...10940T&pID=155
01-19-2017, 01:39 PM
Tech Addict
nice work, looks beefy.
is this the b44 tower your referring to?
http://www.xtremercracing.com/Produc...10940T&pID=155
is this the b44 tower your referring to?
http://www.xtremercracing.com/Produc...10940T&pID=155
01-19-2017, 11:29 PM
Tech Addict
01-20-2017, 05:26 AM
01-20-2017, 07:57 AM
The kick angle revelation happened one night while I was playing with various vintage cars. I had an RC10, with it's 30° kick and a JRX2, with it's 20° kick. Both cars were tuned. I noticed that on the RC10 when I pushed down on one side of the rear shock tower so that I'm putting most of the force on a back corner, the opposite corner came up very quickly and it became easy to pick the front wheel off the ground. On the lower kick JRX2, doing the same thing didn't have as dramatic of an effect. I tried it with a Vintage Ultima that has a 20° kick and noticed the same thing. Then I started playing with my Invencer dirt oval cars. They have adjustable kick on the car at 10°, 15°, 20°, and 25° and left and right are independently adjustable from the other side. I found the exact same effect happened with the change in kick here as well. Once I realized what I was seeing, I started some driving experiments just in the street with various kick amount and tuning to compensate and those tests verified what I saw on the bench. I'm sure some naysayer would proclaim those tests invalid but a modern track is damned near concrete anyways.
Front kick needs to be treated independently from caster. The whole point is caster is that when the wheels are turned, the top of the wheels lean over. The more caster, the more they lean over BUT the less they actually steer, although it isn't an issue at the levels of caster that we run. Don't believe me about less steering? See what 90° of caster would do.
The whole point of caster is to get as much tire contact patch on the ground in turns as possible. So if caster decreases steering throw, why does more caster increase turn in? When the wheels are turned, the tires lean over and you essentially ride the inside edge of them momentarily until the weight shifts forward into them. It's almost like skis. Once you get into that corner, mid corner is all about contact patch. Corner exit is all about the effect of weight transfer and this is one reason why those cheater cars with little front kick were so good in the corners. We used to need 30° caster on old dirt tracks because the surface was soft and we wanted those tires to dig in. Again, think skiing. Do on road pan cars with foam tires run much caster? No! If they ran rubbers they'd want a little more as the soft tire rolls over so that's really what we are compensating for with caster.
Front kick needs to be treated independently from caster. The whole point is caster is that when the wheels are turned, the top of the wheels lean over. The more caster, the more they lean over BUT the less they actually steer, although it isn't an issue at the levels of caster that we run. Don't believe me about less steering? See what 90° of caster would do.
The whole point of caster is to get as much tire contact patch on the ground in turns as possible. So if caster decreases steering throw, why does more caster increase turn in? When the wheels are turned, the tires lean over and you essentially ride the inside edge of them momentarily until the weight shifts forward into them. It's almost like skis. Once you get into that corner, mid corner is all about contact patch. Corner exit is all about the effect of weight transfer and this is one reason why those cheater cars with little front kick were so good in the corners. We used to need 30° caster on old dirt tracks because the surface was soft and we wanted those tires to dig in. Again, think skiing. Do on road pan cars with foam tires run much caster? No! If they ran rubbers they'd want a little more as the soft tire rolls over so that's really what we are compensating for with caster.
01-20-2017, 09:10 AM
The kick angle revelation happened one night while I was playing with various vintage cars. I had an RC10, with it's 30° kick and a JRX2, with it's 20° kick. Both cars were tuned. I noticed that on the RC10 when I pushed down on one side of the rear shock tower so that I'm putting most of the force on a back corner, the opposite corner came up very quickly and it became easy to pick the front wheel off the ground. On the lower kick JRX2, doing the same thing didn't have as dramatic of an effect. I tried it with a Vintage Ultima that has a 20° kick and noticed the same thing. Then I started playing with my Invencer dirt oval cars. They have adjustable kick on the car at 10°, 15°, 20°, and 25° and left and right are independently adjustable from the other side. I found the exact same effect happened with the change in kick here as well. Once I realized what I was seeing, I started some driving experiments just in the street with various kick amount and tuning to compensate and those tests verified what I saw on the bench. I'm sure some naysayer would proclaim those tests invalid but a modern track is damned near concrete anyways.
Front kick needs to be treated independently from caster. The whole point is caster is that when the wheels are turned, the top of the wheels lean over. The more caster, the more they lean over BUT the less they actually steer, although it isn't an issue at the levels of caster that we run. Don't believe me about less steering? See what 90° of caster would do.
The whole point of caster is to get as much tire contact patch on the ground in turns as possible. So if caster decreases steering throw, why does more caster increase turn in? When the wheels are turned, the tires lean over and you essentially ride the inside edge of them momentarily until the weight shifts forward into them. It's almost like skis. Once you get into that corner, mid corner is all about contact patch. Corner exit is all about the effect of weight transfer and this is one reason why those cheater cars with little front kick were so good in the corners. We used to need 30° caster on old dirt tracks because the surface was soft and we wanted those tires to dig in. Again, think skiing. Do on road pan cars with foam tires run much caster? No! If they ran rubbers they'd want a little more as the soft tire rolls over so that's really what we are compensating for with caster.
Front kick needs to be treated independently from caster. The whole point is caster is that when the wheels are turned, the top of the wheels lean over. The more caster, the more they lean over BUT the less they actually steer, although it isn't an issue at the levels of caster that we run. Don't believe me about less steering? See what 90° of caster would do.
The whole point of caster is to get as much tire contact patch on the ground in turns as possible. So if caster decreases steering throw, why does more caster increase turn in? When the wheels are turned, the tires lean over and you essentially ride the inside edge of them momentarily until the weight shifts forward into them. It's almost like skis. Once you get into that corner, mid corner is all about contact patch. Corner exit is all about the effect of weight transfer and this is one reason why those cheater cars with little front kick were so good in the corners. We used to need 30° caster on old dirt tracks because the surface was soft and we wanted those tires to dig in. Again, think skiing. Do on road pan cars with foam tires run much caster? No! If they ran rubbers they'd want a little more as the soft tire rolls over so that's really what we are compensating for with caster.
Good stuff. I'll be doing some testing now.
01-20-2017, 10:35 AM
Tech Addict
Guys, the 210F and the 410v5 have the same problem at the rear end, i had to remove the uptravel spacer and did cut down the lower ball eye by 1 mm to get more uptravel, not the right way, we realy need a 27mm shock body instead of the 29 mm, or a taler shock tower for them, or i just get a set of ae shocks, sad as i realy like the smoth action from the td fat shocks...
Just for a side note, that is not a just problem at td, my schumacher k2 does have the same problem front and rear, 0 upravel there too!
Just for a side note, that is not a just problem at td, my schumacher k2 does have the same problem front and rear, 0 upravel there too!
01-20-2017, 09:52 PM
Tech Addict
Fred, thanks for that explanation, realy good stuff!
Wally, i only have a 210v1 to compare, even i do have the v2 rear schock tower laying arround somewere, i'll check again, but td did a drastical change at the rear end(not even there, but for this reason now), they lowerd the rear shock tower quit allot, as you can see in the linked image below, but they did not change the length of the shock body, only the shaft, thats where the big differents and problem in my eyes are comming from...
210v1 had 31 mm body, with 55 mm shaft at the rear
210v2 and also the v3 does have 31 mm body, with 52 mm shafts
http://www.team-durango.com/race-car.../gallery/3.jpg
To work against this at the v2/v3 you could use the v1 rear shock tower, or, what i think is the better choice as you dont rase the cog, you could get the 29 mm thock body, the 210F and the 410v5 uses, i think it is also used as front shock from the desc(t)210!?
At the 210F they use the 29 mm shock body and the 52 mm shafts and lowered the tower again, i have no other car to compare at the moment, cause my v1 is in parts in a box.
The 210F and the 410v5 share exactly the same rear geometry and by doing my tests, i only could lift the rear wheel by about 1 mm off of the ground, when the chassis is sitting on the bench, thats not anougth for me and thats the reason, i did this mod.
Where have you set your shocks top and bottom to reach that result and what does that 1 mm at the shaft give you at the wheel itselve on clearence to the ground?
I'll have some time at this weekend, to do some testing and of course, i'll do the spring drop test at my schumacher car to look, if i've done it not correct at the last time...
Wally, i only have a 210v1 to compare, even i do have the v2 rear schock tower laying arround somewere, i'll check again, but td did a drastical change at the rear end(not even there, but for this reason now), they lowerd the rear shock tower quit allot, as you can see in the linked image below, but they did not change the length of the shock body, only the shaft, thats where the big differents and problem in my eyes are comming from...
210v1 had 31 mm body, with 55 mm shaft at the rear
210v2 and also the v3 does have 31 mm body, with 52 mm shafts
http://www.team-durango.com/race-car.../gallery/3.jpg
To work against this at the v2/v3 you could use the v1 rear shock tower, or, what i think is the better choice as you dont rase the cog, you could get the 29 mm thock body, the 210F and the 410v5 uses, i think it is also used as front shock from the desc(t)210!?
At the 210F they use the 29 mm shock body and the 52 mm shafts and lowered the tower again, i have no other car to compare at the moment, cause my v1 is in parts in a box.
The 210F and the 410v5 share exactly the same rear geometry and by doing my tests, i only could lift the rear wheel by about 1 mm off of the ground, when the chassis is sitting on the bench, thats not anougth for me and thats the reason, i did this mod.
Where have you set your shocks top and bottom to reach that result and what does that 1 mm at the shaft give you at the wheel itselve on clearence to the ground?
I'll have some time at this weekend, to do some testing and of course, i'll do the spring drop test at my schumacher car to look, if i've done it not correct at the last time...
Last edited by micholix; 01-20-2017 at 10:08 PM.
01-21-2017, 10:51 AM
Hi all, can anyone recommend a retailer for Dex210v1 parts? Need a GB cover and everyone seems to be out of stock
01-21-2017, 11:11 AM
01-21-2017, 01:19 PM
Use either V1 or V2/3 rear shocks with the V1 rear tower. Don't overthink the cg effect. You won't notice it. No one would. I run the V2/3 rear shocks up front with the truck front tower. Any negative from a small cg change is MORE than offset by the uptravel and I can get it without resorting to an archaic emulsion style shock.
Last edited by fredswain; 01-21-2017 at 01:20 PM. Reason: Grammar correction
01-21-2017, 01:48 PM
01-21-2017, 02:37 PM
Tech Apprentice
iTrader: (1)
01-21-2017, 02:58 PM