Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric Off-Road
Team Associated RC10 B5m Mid-Motor Thread >

Team Associated RC10 B5m Mid-Motor Thread

Community
Wiki Posts
Search
Like Tree54Likes

Team Associated RC10 B5m Mid-Motor Thread

    Hide Wikipost
Old 03-09-2017, 12:23 AM   -   Wikipost
R/C Tech ForumsThread Wiki: Team Associated RC10 B5m Mid-Motor Thread
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been a member for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: RCBuddha
Quick link to the front page

First Page

Print Wikipost

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-14-2014, 08:07 PM
  #4471  
Tech Master
iTrader: (44)
 
rigor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 1,610
Trader Rating: 44 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Wild Cherry
Really like the alloy hub with its vertical ball stud, so I just switched back to the plastic camber mount.

Having both sides metal was a bit to stiff for my ride , it benefited from the extra grip gain by using a plastic camber mount .
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.
rigor is offline  
Old 05-14-2014, 08:46 PM
  #4472  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 503
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by RCBuddha
Correct!

Just curious how much the weight bias changes...
Check the b5 nation fb page. Someone just posted the weight change.

I believe it was very minor. 62 % on the rear prior and 60% after. (Ive rounded to what I can remember)
robbie_gtc is offline  
Old 05-14-2014, 09:49 PM
  #4473  
Tech Legend
 
Wild Cherry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: TRCR Modified Driver
Posts: 22,595
Default

Originally Posted by rigor
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 .
Wild Cherry is offline  
Old 05-14-2014, 09:51 PM
  #4474  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 149
Default

Does anyone have the link to the b5 nation Fb page. I can't seem to locate it.
splking1 is offline  
Old 05-14-2014, 10:23 PM
  #4475  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Bellingham Washington
Posts: 145
Default

Originally Posted by Wildcat1971
so are avid's. I suggested the avid, then he suggested caspers. I was wondering what was better about caspers.
Bfast sells the same caged thrust assemblies. There $17.99 for pair. I'm sure that bfast, Casper, and avid all buy them from the same place tho
Justinb86 is offline  
Old 05-14-2014, 10:27 PM
  #4476  
Tech Master
iTrader: (21)
 
suby723's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Spring Hill Tennessee
Posts: 1,378
Trader Rating: 21 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by splking1
Does anyone have the link to the b5 nation Fb page. I can't seem to locate it.
Search rc10b5 nation.
suby723 is offline  
Old 05-14-2014, 10:51 PM
  #4477  
R/C Tech Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (40)
 
RCBuddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,094
Trader Rating: 40 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Justinb86
Bfast sells the same caged thrust assemblies. There $17.99 for pair. I'm sure that bfast, Casper, and avid all buy them from the same place tho


Just what I said earlier...I have both the Casper and the Avid, and they work equally well. Next Bfast order I make, I'll order their version of the caged thrust to try.
RCBuddha is offline  
Old 05-14-2014, 10:53 PM
  #4478  
R/C Tech Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (40)
 
RCBuddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,094
Trader Rating: 40 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by robbie_gtc
Check the b5 nation fb page. Someone just posted the weight change.

I believe it was very minor. 62 % on the rear prior and 60% after. (Ive rounded to what I can remember)
Just looked it up. Interesting that there was only a small % change. Also fascinating that the guy who did it owns a $800 set of scales!
RCBuddha is offline  
Old 05-15-2014, 12:06 AM
  #4479  
Tech Master
iTrader: (34)
 
markt311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Nashville Tennessee
Posts: 1,395
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by RCBuddha
Correct!

Just curious how much the weight bias changes...
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.
markt311 is offline  
Old 05-15-2014, 12:09 AM
  #4480  
Tech Master
iTrader: (34)
 
markt311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Nashville Tennessee
Posts: 1,395
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by RCBuddha
Just looked it up. Interesting that there was only a small % change. Also fascinating that the guy who did it owns a $800 set of scales!
That was me, lol I don't own the scales. We have some die hard carpet oval guys at my local track
markt311 is offline  
Old 05-15-2014, 04:21 AM
  #4481  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (14)
 
eper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: new milford, CT.
Posts: 2,622
Trader Rating: 14 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by blingy
I noticed that cav was running the rear motor rear arms and someone else was running them on petit rc also ,what difference is there between the two ? thnx
I noticed te same thing what are they looking for with the rm front arms and I think the shock tower. I know the geometry is different but what's different feel wise
eper is offline  
Old 05-15-2014, 05:22 AM
  #4482  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
 
dmatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Galloway, Ohio
Posts: 861
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

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.
dmatter is offline  
Old 05-15-2014, 06:46 AM
  #4483  
Tech Adept
 
SilentHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Milwaukee WI
Posts: 128
Default

Originally Posted by Wild Cherry
Keep the alloy hubs because they
allow more tunability with the vertical stud .
I thought you had 25% less side bite with the alloy hubs??? Why would you run with that???
SilentHunter is offline  
Old 05-15-2014, 07:15 AM
  #4484  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (14)
 
gticlay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,105
Trader Rating: 14 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by SilentHunter
I thought you had 25% less side bite with the alloy hubs??? Why would you run with that???
I think that was the hard arms.
gticlay is offline  
Old 05-15-2014, 07:16 AM
  #4485  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (14)
 
gticlay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,105
Trader Rating: 14 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by eper
I noticed te same thing what are they looking for with the rm front arms and I think the shock tower. I know the geometry is different but what's different feel wise
More rear bite, drives more square with the RM arms flipped. On the front it smooths out the steering.
gticlay is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.