Team Associated RC10 B5m Mid-Motor Thread
|
|||
#4471
Tech Master
iTrader: (44)
Interesting. I thought I was crazy, but I also noticed what I felt was a slight loss in traction after going alum / alum on both rear pieces. I think I might switch back to "stock" rear hubs and keep the alum rear camber ballstud mount, as I haven't had any breakage on the rear hubs at all.
#4473
Interesting. I thought I was crazy, but I also noticed what I felt was a slight loss in traction after going alum / alum on both rear pieces. I think I might switch back to "stock" rear hubs and keep the alum rear camber ballstud mount, as I haven't had any breakage on the rear hubs at all.
Keep the alloy hubs because they
allow more tunability with the vertical stud .
#4479
Tech Master
iTrader: (34)
My car went from 61.4% rear stock, to 60.4% inline. I did mine a little different than WC as you can see a few pages back.
Got a chance to run a few packs tonight, small medium traction clay. It didn't feel like it lost much rear traction. It changed direction sharper and didn't over rotate. I gained some high speed steering, but felt like I lost a little on the low speed 180's.
Overall I like the inline car, I'm going to get another cradle and cut it like WC did his and see if there is any difference.
Got a chance to run a few packs tonight, small medium traction clay. It didn't feel like it lost much rear traction. It changed direction sharper and didn't over rotate. I gained some high speed steering, but felt like I lost a little on the low speed 180's.
Overall I like the inline car, I'm going to get another cradle and cut it like WC did his and see if there is any difference.
#4482
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
1% is a big difference. You have to move your battery pack around quite a bit to get 1%. Not only are you adding 1% to the rear of the car you are taking 1% off the front. This is a generalization not WC's modification. He changed the whole weight of the car which is another story.