andrewdoherty

iTrader: (49)

I like the way you think

Quantra

I think if you lock the shocks out then you are measuring static weight distribution. With the shocks on you are measuring the pressure each wheel is putting on the track aka corner weights.

The method I use is as follows:

Balance car left to right, I use ball bearings instead of Hudy spikes.
Balance anti roll bars.
Set ride height, droop, toe, steering symmetry, camber. I set ride height with same number of turns on each shock.
Fit setup wheels and do corner weights by adding/removing preload from the light/heavy corners.

There are a few different ideas on how this should be done and how it can be done but the important thing is the result. So long as toe and steering symmetry is set accurately the car can be taken off the scales and put on the track and it will go straight as an arrow and handle the same left and right. This gives awesome confidence in the car.

It is also something that can take a while to get the scales setup sweetly and make the process work. I think if your car is well balanced, the chassis is free from tweak (by doing something like tightening screws evenly in kit order), you set the ride height with even turns on the shocks and the kit is high quality it will get you close enough without having to worry about corner weights. Corner weights are then the icing on the cake.

daleburr

I do pretty much the same (except I do use the Hudy spikes, which does take a bit of tipping the chassis left and right to make sure it really is balanced).

And I don't use setup wheels as I like to corner-weight the car at the track regularly to detect any tweak picked up during runs, and its often too rushed at smaller meets to be taking the wheels on and off.

Quantra

I've managed to corner weight my car after every run only at one meeting but it was a real struggle to get any settings changed and get a decent tyre prep in so I completely understand not using the set up wheels in that case. I just find it makes the measurements more repeatable. With wheels and tyres I can rotate a wheel 1/4 turn and the measurements change.

I think it's important to mention that corner weighting a car isn't a 100% precision exercise. There is always a certain amount of error and we have to decide how much error we can eliminate and how much we can accept but always keep that error in mind when taking readings.

metalnut

iTrader: (36)

So I think we're saying the same thing, but also talking about two different things...

The process you guys are describing, ending with setup wheels, is what I do as well. But instead of using scales in that final step, I pick the car up by the middle of the chassis in that final step, and I ensure that both wheels pick up off of the setup board at the same time.

When I think of using scales, I think purely of weight distribution. To me, that would mean locking the arms (so, something like replacing the shocks with equal length turnbuckles), and setting the car down on 4 scales. I'd then distribute the extra lead weights I need among the chassis to try and get side-to-side weight distribution as close as possible.

I think the scale method would then result in much less preload having to be used to detweak the car. At least in theory.

Quantra

Not flaming you and I think whatever method works for you is the best method for you which is not the same for everyone. However that method doesn't work for me for a few reasons. Droop screws can affect each wheel lifting at the same time as the other or not, so I better be super accurate with setting them. When I lift the front of the car is it the front preload affecting the wheels lifting together or the rear? I think it is rear. And I can only sort one end of the car at once whilst I believe the cross weights are what is important so I want to be adding/removing preload from opposite corners at the same time. Like I said though it's about what works for you and just because I can't get my head around your method it doesn't make it wrong by any means.

I think you are right about having a good left to right weight distribution reducing the amount of detweaking required. In fact I think that if you cover everything like equal shock length, everything moving freely, balanced anti roll bars etc you can minimise the detweaking to the point where it becomes non critical and just a nice bonus for super sweet feeling in the car. Something I do find really makes a difference to the amount of detweaking required are the springs being used. For example I find my T-Shox springs always require less detweaking than my Xray springs. So even building the car perfectly you can't avoid a bit of suspension tweak.

And I think to answer your original question about uneven ride height left and right I would say don't worry so long as it isn't huge and so long as the car goes straight and handles well as this is what is important. If it is huge it is likely something bent, binding or unequal settings (such as shock angle) left and right. Some racers I know don't check the ride height on each corner rather they check it in the middle of the chassis front and rear only. I guess it's part of what fascinates me with setup, so many different methods and theories that give positive results. Sad life perhaps :P

metalnut

iTrader: (36)

I agree with everything you've said, Quantra. Everyone does it a certain way, the only thing that matters in the end is lap times

Just to clarify, when I pick the front of the car up by the chassis (in the middle), I look for the front wheels to lift up at the same time, but I'm adjusting the rear springs to ensure they do. So I do one end of the car at a given time. When I lift the rear, I look for the rear wheels to lift up at the same time and adjust the front springs accordingly. But you're right, this assumes you've gotten the droop screws exactly even. It's pretty close with droop blocks and a droop gauge, but in the end we're talking about plastic toy cars

daleburr

Looks like roche were listening to our discussion earlier this year about finer toe and width adjustment

http://www.redrc.net/2014/07/roche-t...ts/#more-83298

Not something I usually bother changing (3deg rear toe and 0.5 front arm sweep seems to work everywhere I race), but I'm sure others will find them useful.

mac853

Could somebody tell me is possible to fit these spur gears in T4, please:

http://www.rcmart.com/kawada-sm6482-...r-p-37139.html
http://www.rcmart.com/kawada-sr6486-...r-p-33632.html

ngo8

http://www.rcmart.com/pinion-spur-mo...id=211&sort=1a .....these will work for sure the other ones you posted might not .

niznai

Kawada spurs are a bit thicker than Xray. Not sure the holes match either, but I would not be surprised if they did.

metalnut

iTrader: (36)

What's wrong with Xray spurs? I find them to be perfectly round and very well made, unlike some other brands I tried.

grippgoat

iTrader: (8)

Personally, I'm not a fan of the offset.

-Mike

locked

iTrader: (1)

I agree. For stock classes I've been using CoreRC spurs for a while now. I really like them. Those Leespeed gears looks really good too. Might try them out next. I'm very curious to hear the sound(or lack thereof) of 84P gears.

I use the kit xray 84Tooth 48P spurs for mod. Funny how those aren't offset, but all of the smaller 64P xray spurs I've seen are offset.

metalnut

iTrader: (36)

Although I wish the gears were more centered, I haven't run into trouble do to the offset (yet). I've tried Serpent spurs as you recommended, but two different ones were both not truly round. One of the two actually made me nervous enough to switch it out, as it went from almost too tight to almost too loose when spun 180*. The Xray spurs are perfectly circular.

Though, I suppose it could be a mounting error on my part