Taz_S

iTrader: (5)

last year we had more 235 then pan car GT

AndiF

Hey Guys, don't wait for wonders...help yourselves!
I've transformed my RC10L2 to a L2/R5 Hybrid for saddle LiPos...and if you look at the R5 oval version, you just need the Full Option 235mm front end kit along with the long IRS wheel hubs and some skills in cutting your own chassis plate and you have your full blown 235 pan car...

For sure it would be great if Asso would provide again a 235mm 2WD missile in the tradition of the L2...I would be the first to order it...but I don't wait for it...the greatest thing on pan car is, that they are so "simple", easy to work on and easy to build your own upgrades and tuning parts...

...my 2 cents...

Rgds,
Andy

V12

iTrader: (1)

I think I read somewere about a new chassis or conversion for 7.4V lipo stick type from Associated for the RC10R5. So an inline batteryposition as the CRC. Someone knows about this?

AndiF

It's not from Associated, but from Full Option. Unfortunately, their homepage is down at the moment, but in case it's up and running again, see here the link: Full Option

My R5 200mm version is already converted, see pictures. Works perfectly!









Rgds,
Andy

V12

iTrader: (1)

Thanks for your pictures but that´s not what I meant. I have seen pictures from the Full Option conversion before but I thought Associated would bring a chassis or at least a batterybrace ready for stick packs.
I think with the Full Option conversion you have to use tape for fixing the battery but I don´t like that.
Actually I like some things on the RC10R5 more than on the Gen-X 10 but it seems just CRC cares for stick type lipos.

2wdrive

well you should see JoostK 's car. He made a wide version of the rc10r5 with t-bar. Used the same shock configuration as the rc10r5, so only one shock in the middle for side movement and one centershock but with a full width 230mm rear pod and front setup. He designed the chassis himself. If you saw the pictures you would think it is a new associated 235mm production model. It looks really good. He used 2 standoffs on each side to put a carbon brace on to hold each saddlepack. NO tape! Everything in nice blue aluminium. Top notch stuff!

Or shouldn't i have said that joost? ;-)

Tuner EM

I was able to replace the center shock with one from a Losi JRX-S. I replaced the rod end with a Losi JRX-S sway bar rod end which fit on the stock AE upper ball. Cut the rod end slightly to set droop. Replaced the center shock front mount screw with a 4-40 which doesn't have any play once tightened. It felt a lot better than the stock one which was starting to feel gritty. I was expecting the stock one to last longer due to the two plastic shaft bearing.

I can run stiffer springs. The 30 lb/in spring seemed to work well.

AndiF

That sounds great and lot like my RC10L3/R5 conversion (unfortunately, I don't have any pictures available at the moment). However, I never use braces to fix the batteries, because I always feel that they add stiffness to the chassis, something which might cause some troubles on low or middle grip surfaces. That's why I always use tape to hold the batteries, it's not so sophisticated, a bit more messy and might look less "top notch", but works great...

I've done the same, but using a Tamiya TRF damper. It's a 1:1 exchange, you just have to use the long ball cup provided with the damper. Good thing: you can use almost all touring car springs. Best fit according to my experience until now is with the short TRF springs.
I also found that the car feels much better with the larger damper and I can run stiffer springs without losing rear grip. Especially if you run 6 cells or 2s LiPos in the car, I always felt that the original damper is to "soft" irrespective of what oil I was using...
With the TRF Damper, the car now works much better, at least in my opinion...the biggest improvement is that it reacts better and more predictable to changes in setup...

trackdesigner71

iTrader: (6)

Frankly we're not gonna make any progress as long as its a matter of 235 vs. 200 mm 10th pan. It shouldnt be about comparing whether there were more wide (235) cars vs narrow (200) cars but if people can make an effort to get people to give 10th pan a try then that is AOK by me

2wdrive

well i think it does matter if companies make 200mm WORLD GT cars for the US market with 4 cell nihms configuration while the rest of the world drives PRO10 with 2S lipo's. Anyway... this has been discussed already a lot.

For the rest 200 or 235 can drive together i agree with you, i don't have a problem with that. In the races we have they do race together but i do see that 235mm have more corner speed then 200mm cars on the tracks that i vissited. That is why there are more 235mm pro10 then 200mm
pro10 cars here.

For instance, i haven't seen a 200mm crc 10x after they introduced the wide option. On very small (indoor) tracks the 200mm are maybe better but we drive on big outdoor tracks.

trackdesigner71

iTrader: (6)

Im just saying that I think that instead of trying to just get the bigger group and just do what would be for the betterment of 10th pan in general. I mean if there was a way to get it so that people can step up to 235mm or something similar then that would I think be of benefit to everyone instead of simply just trying to get more and (correct me if Im wrong in thinking this) hoping the other one goes away

LOW ET

iTrader: (109)

do the shock ends that get set screwed to the shock shafts get pushed all the way on the shaft?

if you pick up your car, looking at it from the side, how much does the rear pod sag down? does it stay level with the rest of the chassis?

AndiF

If you put the car ready-to-run on a flat surface and look at it from the side, the rear pod should be in line with the chassis. The rear pod then should not have more than 1 to 1.5mm of droop otherwise you may loose too much on-power steering when exiting the corners.

2wdrive

@Trackdesigner
I understand what you are saying. The more pancars the better, be it 200mm, 220mm, 235mm whatever. Last year were saying as well eveything can be driven during the race, even f1's. No rules except 10.5t brushless or 19turns brushed motors and 2s lipo's or 6 cel nihms. Just to attract as many drivers as possible. Wel it worked great with a great turn out. We still say everything is allowed.

I am not hoping 200mm is going away. For me 200mm or 235mm is fine to race together. It doesn't need there own class or something like that. It is great fun to see all those different cars driving together, 200mm pancar with a gt body, 200mm f1's, 235 lemans cars.

But Its is just natural selection once they see the corner speeds of the wide pans they want to build a wide car as well. Same with brushless and lipo's. Once they get brushless and lipo's they don't want to go back. That is why some people say they want associated to build a propper wide version for the european market wich is designed for 2s lipo.


Normaly my pod is even with my chasis with 1 to 2 mm of rear movement of the pod.

LOW ET

iTrader: (109)

my car is a bare chassis right now as i'm just building it. when holding the main chassis and i look at it from the side the rear pod is in line with the main chassis. i can move the rear pod upward like it would when the car is hitting bumps but the downward travel is basically none.

also any input on my shock question?