300LikesTeam Associated TC4
06-24-2005, 10:26 PM
#5026
I agree....
you can't win! 
Let me know when you have time for my custom TC4 chassis. I have money to burn. 
Let me know when you have time for my custom TC4 chassis. I have money to burn.
06-25-2005, 01:47 PM
#5027
Welcome to the boards!
06-25-2005, 02:05 PM
#5029
Anyone know where I can get a wide bumper brace (like the RPM one for the TC3) for my TC4?
Also I'm looking for some aluminium arms (front & rear) for my TC4 cuz I'm going thru the plastic/carbon ones at an alarming rate.
Also I'm looking for some aluminium arms (front & rear) for my TC4 cuz I'm going thru the plastic/carbon ones at an alarming rate.
06-25-2005, 03:07 PM
#5030
Tech Adept
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Marcos/San Antonio, Tx but chillin in Orlando, FL for now.
Posts: 113
spidude: You know if you are breaking plastic ones you'll probly bend aluminum arms. Why are you going through so many though? As far as the bumper, you can use the RPM wide bumper for the ntc3. just use some rubber gromets to get it to fit correctly. works for me...
Jason: can you send me the same pm you sent Paul_TC4, I am wondering the same things, thank you.
--Mike
Jason: can you send me the same pm you sent Paul_TC4, I am wondering the same things, thank you.
--Mike
06-25-2005, 07:41 PM
#5032
Tech Apprentice
Looks like Tower hobbies has orders pending for the FTTC4. $360, expensive....
06-25-2005, 07:44 PM
#5033
Looks like....
06-25-2005, 09:24 PM
#5034
hello again spidude. I have to agree with mike deadly. Hold off on the aluminum arms unless theyre for show. Even if you didn't bend the alum arm I have always figured you would just transfer all the stress on to another plastic part which wold break anyway. I have the NTC3 mod on my car and if you want to BULLETPROOF your front end try searching in the forums for p-dubs bumpers. Combine one of his bumpers with the RPM NTC3 lower plastic bumper with the grommets like mike said. You wont believe what an improvement p-dubs bumpers are over stock. They even look fantastic. pm me if you want a better description of the mod. I might even be able to get some pics together for it.
Understand if you hit the boards a lot, you may end up breaking rear hubs once the front is protected. Good luck.
Understand if you hit the boards a lot, you may end up breaking rear hubs once the front is protected. Good luck.
06-25-2005, 09:57 PM
#5035
Originally Posted by compuatic
Looks like Tower hobbies has orders pending for the FTTC4. $360, expensive....
I think AE as blown it again with the FT TC4
If there would not follow the other "OVER PRICE TC" they would gain a lot of market from the Car of the Week club.
The "OVER PRICE TC" are killing racing right now.
If AE would come out with $289 like the TC3FT. They would sell a lot more cars, plus might make the other "OVER PRICE TC" to rethink charging so much for a car where a car that cost less then their kicking they butt.
06-25-2005, 10:05 PM
#5036
Originally Posted by Taz_S
I think AE as blown it again with the FT TC4
If there would not follow the other "OVER PRICE TC" they would gain a lot of market from the Car of the Week club.
The "OVER PRICE TC" are killing racing right now.
If AE would come out with $289 like the TC3FT. They would sell a lot more cars, plus might make the other "OVER PRICE TC" to rethink charging so much for a car where a car that cost less then their kicking they butt.
If there would not follow the other "OVER PRICE TC" they would gain a lot of market from the Car of the Week club.
The "OVER PRICE TC" are killing racing right now.
If AE would come out with $289 like the TC3FT. They would sell a lot more cars, plus might make the other "OVER PRICE TC" to rethink charging so much for a car where a car that cost less then their kicking they butt.
agreed
06-25-2005, 10:07 PM
#5037
yea, that does seem over priced.
they didn't even change the arms or c-hub flex. They can't even cut the upper deck strait. 
Same old shocks...bla...bla...bla.... 
MY car was so much more consistant when I put the JRX-S shocks on it. I couldn't beleive it.
Same old shocks...bla...bla...bla.... MY car was so much more consistant when I put the JRX-S shocks on it. I couldn't beleive it.
06-25-2005, 10:50 PM
#5038
Originally Posted by RCknight
they didn't even change the arms or c-hub flex. They can't even cut the upper deck strait. Same old shocks...bla...bla...bla.... MY car was so much more consistant when I put the JRX-S shocks on it. I couldn't beleive it.
Same old shocks...bla...bla...bla.... MY car was so much more consistant when I put the JRX-S shocks on it. I couldn't beleive it.
06-26-2005, 12:16 AM
#5039
Taz_S....
What I do, first set your camber, back out your droop screws, set your ride height. Recheck the camber. Balancing is one thing I have not done yet, but I need to try it. My car feels great now so I'm sure it would feel even better. This is where one would use scales or a tweak board. Put the car on the scales, add weight where needed and adjust your shock collars to tweak it right (make sure all your shocks are all the same length by using a caliper), should be very fine tune and won't affect your ride height much. You want to back off the opposite to tweak it right. Then set your droop. This is one tool I need to try, but with the stock TC4 chassis you don't have the open space to add lead and keep it flat on the chassis. That's why I keep bringing up the motor mount issue. No one seems to get that using the stock motor mount keeps the weight up higher and not flat on the chassis. Not desired, but they just like how it looks. 
Why do you think AE went to it on the new TF TC4?
ProTC3....On your TC4 chassis, did you also move the servo inwards like on the Pro 4/TF TC4 to make the chassis narrower? Just wondering? Thanks.
No one seems to get that using the stock motor mount keeps the weight up higher and not flat on the chassis. Not desired, but they just like how it looks. Why do you think AE went to it on the new TF TC4? ProTC3....On your TC4 chassis, did you also move the servo inwards like on the Pro 4/TF TC4 to make the chassis narrower? Just wondering? Thanks.
Last edited by RCknight; 06-26-2005 at 12:33 AM.
06-26-2005, 04:18 AM
#5040
RCKnight,
i agree with you on the motor mount dude.but i can tell you this,THE ONLY reason AE went to a new motor mount is because they couldnt figure out how to squeeze the top deck between the spur and the fins on the heatsink.i moved the motor forward for balance reasons but it just so happened to work in my favor.and as for balance,my car seems to be balanced very close to perfect without the use of weight.the positioning of the batteries on my chassis kit really lightened up that side.
i agree with you on the motor mount dude.but i can tell you this,THE ONLY reason AE went to a new motor mount is because they couldnt figure out how to squeeze the top deck between the spur and the fins on the heatsink.i moved the motor forward for balance reasons but it just so happened to work in my favor.and as for balance,my car seems to be balanced very close to perfect without the use of weight.the positioning of the batteries on my chassis kit really lightened up that side.