R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-28-2013, 10:11 PM   #18961
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnh View Post
You may need to search for 'PS-0458' but they are available.
I've only come across them within the last 12 months and they certainly save the time and effort (yes, I'm lazy) of gluing the ends of the Tamiya inserts together.

No offence taken. Just replace the word ideal with; a very suitable alternative

To be honest though they are both of a very similar firmness and a mere mortal like myself is very hard pushed to notice a difference on track.
For me they are much more user friendly and eliminate the inconsistencies of the Tamiya insert, which as we know has a mind of it's own if not fitted correctly.
Thanks for the heads up. The foam insert the tires come with is much too soft. Just asking for traction rolling problems with those. I'll give these a try with the next set. Yep, I'm lazy also.
Granpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 01:51 AM   #18962
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyracing View Post
Have a large container of silicone oil and build/cap the shocks beneath the surface of the liquid? That's about the only way to get them absolutely, positively filled. Terribly impractical and messy though.

There's a great two part video on YouTube covering this subject. It's about as close as you'll get and is probably what Granpa does when assembling his. Vids are Japanese, with English subtitles.

+ YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


+ YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
If you have no air in the shock and have only 100% oil, the shock shaft won't move in. The oil is not compressible so when you try to push the shaft there's no place to displace the volume that the shaft occupies. You either need a bladder with air (air compresses) on top or an emulsion shock where air is mixed in with the oil.

I build my shocks like the vid you posted. The shocks work fine with about about 2 mm rebound. As a matter of fact it has suck back. Pull the shaft all the way out and it'll suck back in a little. To get as little rebound as possible, push the shaft all the way in before you put the bladder on. This will displace the most oil and let more oil out as you put the bladder on. This will leave as little "head" pressure to push on the bladder which in turn won't push back as much.

If you want no rebound at all you need to look into T-Shox. It's similar to the side damper on a AE wgt car. The shaft pokes through on both ends of the shock. No air above a bladder pushing back.
Sydewynder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:49 AM   #18963
Tech Champion
 
monkeyracing's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SnowMexico
Posts: 5,842
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

Never said it would work: It's completely impractical and has possibly hilarious consequences. I've always wondered about emulsion dampers. I had some on a short course truck. Bled all the air through the caps a plugged them, but they still worked perfectly. Weird!
__________________
Stab it and steer.
monkeyracing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:23 AM   #18964
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,583
Default

Oh Jim. I never ever said you ever said it would ever work. I know you never ever implied for anyone to ever build their shocks fully under oil....ever.

Maybe you never ever fully bled all the air out of your emulsion shocks. Maybe some of the air is still ever present suspended in the oil and that's why your shocks never hydrolocked.

I'm done confusing myself......
Sydewynder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 09:08 AM   #18965
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydewynder View Post
If you want no rebound at all you need to look into T-Shox. It's similar to the side damper on a AE wgt car. The shaft pokes through on both ends of the shock. No air above a bladder pushing back.
No, not really. There's no interest in other types of shocks, just the TRF or the plastic Mini shocks.

My question was if anyone knew of any way to build these shocks as a true zero rebound shock other than drilling a small hole in the plastic end cap. I knew that using conventional methods would not give one. And I did post the reason why it was nearly impossible to build one.

Sorry that point got lost in the conversation.
Granpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 09:26 AM   #18966
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Granpa View Post
No, not really. There's no interest in other types of shocks, just the TRF or the plastic Mini shocks.

My question was if anyone knew of any way to build these shocks as a true zero rebound shock other than drilling a small hole in the plastic end cap. I knew that using conventional methods would not give one. And I did post the reason why it was nearly impossible to build one.

Sorry that point got lost in the conversation.
The way bladder shocks are designed, I don't believe there is way to achieve true zero rebound. I threw out T-Shox as others might find it useful to know. I know you run TCS and can't use anything other than Tamiya or drill a hole as that is not built per instructions. No hiding the hole under the ballend.

You noticed I quoted Jim only.

Sorry that I was no help.
Sydewynder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 10:35 AM   #18967
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydewynder View Post
The way bladder shocks are designed, I don't believe there is way to achieve true zero rebound. I threw out T-Shox as others might find it useful to know. I know you run TCS and can't use anything other than Tamiya or drill a hole as that is not built per instructions. No hiding the hole under the ballend.

You noticed I quoted Jim only.

Sorry that I was no help.
No problemo. At least you agreed with me which to me is a good thing.
This really is merely for academic interest and had no practical application. Some times things like zero rebound etc. get bandied about carelessly.

It can lead to someone trying to build his shocks with zero rebound which, both you and I seem to agree, is nearly impossible if not impossible. Just wanted to save some people a lot of frustration.
Granpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 10:36 AM   #18968
Tech Champion
 
monkeyracing's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SnowMexico
Posts: 5,842
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

Sorry Sydey, I forgot to use the sarcasm font, but believe me, I was grinning the whole time as I wrote that.
__________________
Stab it and steer.
monkeyracing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 02:06 PM   #18969
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,583
Default

No need to be sorry monkey. I fully grasp your sarcasm. I've been reading your posts for a good 3 or 4 years. It was my feeble attempt at wit with the never ever post and maybe the last "ever" in the first paragraph that may have caused you to believe that I wasn't laughing the whole time I was writing it. So I appologize for giving you concern. I did start off with "Oh Jim"...
Sydewynder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 03:40 AM   #18970
Tech Adept
 
Laguna Bozo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Beach
Posts: 163
Default Shock Rebound

Question to all Mini Tech Masters and Elitists,
Why would one want a shock WITH rebound? Are not shocks meant only to dampen spring oscillations? If one wants more "push-back", wouldn't a stronger spring be indicated? Or are you trying to get some "in-between" springs fine tuning?
__________________
Craig Richter
Laguna Bozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 05:33 AM   #18971
Tech Adept
 
ruebiracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Southern Germany
Posts: 222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laguna Bozo View Post
Question to all Mini Tech Masters and Elitists,
Why would one want a shock WITH rebound? Are not shocks meant only to dampen spring oscillations? If one wants more "push-back", wouldn't a stronger spring be indicated? Or are you trying to get some "in-between" springs fine tuning?
Not sure to answer your question, but that discussion is (again) really interesting in my eyes.
I also thought and tried a lot to understand the effects of "rebound" in a model car the last 2 years. From the beginning in the childhood, I always built my shocks like Tamiya recommends, with the piston rod fully down when putting the shock bladder on and screwing the cap. With this setup, the piston rod moves completely out again, when you push it in. In a real shock this is a bump force (gas spring) working additionally to the steel spring, as you mention. There are multiple theories also for real cars, why you want that more or less or not, this is not important here.
In the model car shocks, I learned from my races over the years, that some people build them with the piston rod moved completely up or just partly up with spacers (like grahoo in his superb videos). When you now push the piston rod completely in, it doesnt come fully back, you even have to pull it some mm`s out to see the full shock length. I hope I say it right, please correct me, if Im wrong: this displacement is meant by "built with xx mm rebound".
I also noticed, that this really can affect the handling of the car, although these forces are, as you say, very small compared to the spring you have.
So my theory, which is maybe crap, is that it affects the roll behaviour of the car, when running with not much preload on the springs. So, if you have for example 1mm of "play" in full length of the shock, where the spring does not work, 2mm of rebound will stop the piston rod going in the full length of the shock, whereas a manual build shock will go to full length, and has to be compressed by the car 1mm, before the spring is in contact and working again. So my guess is, that this reduces the roll angle during cornering compared to a car with the same springs.
Hope I could explain my thought, now Im open for your input or critics.


Br,
Matthias
__________________
www.TTSC-Racing.de
www.skodacup.de
ruebiracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 07:54 AM   #18972
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruebiracer View Post
Not sure to answer your question, but that discussion is (again) really interesting in my eyes.
I also thought and tried a lot to understand the effects of "rebound" in a model car the last 2 years. From the beginning in the childhood, I always built my shocks like Tamiya recommends, with the piston rod fully down when putting the shock bladder on and screwing the cap. With this setup, the piston rod moves completely out again, when you push it in. In a real shock this is a bump force (gas spring) working additionally to the steel spring, as you mention. There are multiple theories also for real cars, why you want that more or less or not, this is not important here.
In the model car shocks, I learned from my races over the years, that some people build them with the piston rod moved completely up or just partly up with spacers (like grahoo in his superb videos). When you now push the piston rod completely in, it doesnt come fully back, you even have to pull it some mm`s out to see the full shock length. I hope I say it right, please correct me, if Im wrong: this displacement is meant by "built with xx mm rebound".
I also noticed, that this really can affect the handling of the car, although these forces are, as you say, very small compared to the spring you have.
So my theory, which is maybe crap, is that it affects the roll behaviour of the car, when running with not much preload on the springs. So, if you have for example 1mm of "play" in full length of the shock, where the spring does not work, 2mm of rebound will stop the piston rod going in the full length of the shock, whereas a manual build shock will go to full length, and has to be compressed by the car 1mm, before the spring is in contact and working again. So my guess is, that this reduces the roll angle during cornering compared to a car with the same springs.
Hope I could explain my thought, now Im open for your input or critics.


Br,
Matthias
You're a much braver man than I. This is a pretty complicated issue and I'd agree with much of what you've posted. But, I'm going to sit this one out. A brave effort which I applaud you for.
Granpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 10:40 AM   #18973
Tech Adept
 
ruebiracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Southern Germany
Posts: 222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Granpa View Post
You're a much braver man than I. This is a pretty complicated issue and I'd agree with much of what you've posted. But, I'm going to sit this one out. A brave effort which I applaud you for.
Thank you Bob,
I just thought, why not also think about the effects, as a lot was already explained on rebound now.
Anyway, Im ready to take the punishment for it.
__________________
www.TTSC-Racing.de
www.skodacup.de
ruebiracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 05:12 PM   #18974
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Granpa View Post
You're a much braver man than I. This is a pretty complicated issue and I'd agree with much of what you've posted. But, I'm going to sit this one out. A brave effort which I applaud you for.
C'mooon Granpa! You know you want to! You got that nagging itch you gotta scratch!!
Sydewynder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 06:46 PM   #18975
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydewynder View Post
C'mooon Granpa! You know you want to! You got that nagging itch you gotta scratch!!
Nope, not this time. I'm far smarter than you think. Falstaff had it right. Discretion is the better part of valor. Poor Mathias made a pretty good stab at it, but I fear he's in for it. Too many variables to make a cogent and/or concise argument. You're not sucking me into this one.

This is one of those situations where you can be wrong and right at the same time.

Last edited by Granpa; 05-30-2013 at 06:48 PM. Reason: Addition
Granpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tamiya Mini Cooper M-03L Hop-ups mini71 R/C Items: Wanted to Buy 4 05-04-2016 11:07 AM
Tamiya Mini Cooper mach51 R/C Items: Wanted to Buy 10 09-02-2011 12:08 AM
FS:TAMIYA Mini Cooper, TA 04S rthmotorsports R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 4 10-20-2007 09:37 PM
Tamiya 415 MSX and M03 Mini Cooper F/S Racer X79 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 14 12-22-2006 07:38 AM
Tamiya M01,02,03, or 04 Mini Cooper ccugolf.com R/C Items: Wanted to Buy 2 12-05-2004 08:55 PM


Tags
m03, m03r ules, m05, mini, tamiya


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (1 members and 1 guests)
RotorTruck
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 05:09 PM.


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

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.0