vabroom

He's a newb and probably didn't know that there was a search function.

Tltype1

Sorry.

Odin544

iTrader: (93)

No worries. It's just easier to keep all the info on one car in a single thread. And the people who can help the most with the T4 '15 will frequent that thread.

Dusttt

iTrader: (144)

What thread is that?

Odin544

iTrader: (93)

Mods combined the thread I posted in with this (T4'15) thread.

rangerjkb

iTrader: (45)

Great choice on considering the Xray T4'15 platform. Several of the top brand ESC's, Motors and Batteries will work well to provide the managable Modified power you are looking for. I would consider going to your local track and see what others are currently using. Many guys are brand loyal and you'll see several different recommendations. For Modified, a trend is to use a smaller mAh battery (6000's-7000's) due to the abundant amount of available power. Personnaly I like the ORCA VX3 ESC and a 5.0 or 5.5 Motor. I haven't used the Savox servo, but I believe I've seen it being used. Hope this is helpful.

erchn

iTrader: (7)

I'd echo much of what Ranger had to say. I personally like the batteries closer to low to mid 6000s, as their's plenty of mah in the pack and it keeps the weight down.

Also, you're going to find a lot more setups out there for the ORCA equipment when talking mod TC. Not many around here use a Tekin, not to say it won't work, just gonna have a harder time with support.

I'd personally stick to a 4.5t motor. Alex Hagberg ran the same ORCA 4.5t from the biggest track in the US (at the worlds) to a relatively small indoor track (IIC). All that really changed was gearing and speed controller settings (and his trigger finger :-).

It's the same thing I do on my Team Powers Actinium (great motors!), gear changes and timing (physical or speed control) when going from track to track.

Best of luck.
Ethan

millbank

This why I swapped the ars control link to the top of the rear steering knuckle and added shims to the post. Either way works tho

Barry_Hughes

Yes saw your post and thought that was a good idea - my only worry is that extending the height of the inner post might make it more susceptible to pulling the screw through the chassis due to the extra leverage that could occur. Thinking about I suppose you could put some wider shims at the bottom to spread the load.

I don't really understand the thinking of Xray on this, I can't really see why you would want to take toe out in the corner. More toe in yes, running stock you want to run less toe in on the straights and more in the corners, so I would have thought more adjustment to lower the ball stud would be ideal.

Other than than the ball stud for the shocks which is 5mm, does anyone know of a 4.9mm ball stud like the shock one, i.e. that you can screw into?
Xray used to do one part no 372651 but it is discontinued and no where seems to have any

Gubernator46

I have used the ball of the outer front steering linkage #307455. Instead of the 9mm mounting post, I stuck a 16mm screw through the chassis, followed by a 3mm spacer, then I add the ball stud and fix it with an M3 nut.
With this setup, I can reach +2° gain of toe. Drawback is, you cannot add more shims, since the left ball joint will make contact with the belt.

I tested this a whole day on our very high grip, technical carpet track with 17.5 blinky and LRP CPX tires.
The track has only 1 long curve, directly into the main straight, the rest are tight s-curves and chicanes.

I started with 1° static toe in and +2° gain, but this was undrivable.
I then gave it 2° of static toe in, compressed I got ~3° toe in.

The massive toe in gain of the car gives plenty of steering into the corner and mid corner. As a drawback, on the outside bend of our sharp double s-curve combination my car had massive onpower understeer, which I couldn't get rid of the whole day.
My fast ARS laps were about as fast as the times without ARS, but these fast laps were very rare.

After that I switched back to the standard 9mm post, with no shims on the inside and 2mm on the outside. This gave no measurable toe gain.
Suddenly the onpower understeer after the double s-curve was gone, the car was easier to drive inside the s-curves, but was lacking a bit of corner entry steering.

From this testing session, I would conclude, the main ARS effect is the added rear steering, due to a toe in increase of the outside tire and a toe in decrease of the inside tire.

I think the idea that you can drive less static toe in because of the toe in gain under compression is wrong!


cheers
Ludger

niznai

From this testing session I infer your car has massive front unloading on power, not a job for ARS to deal with. You should consider

1 removing front anti roll bar or softening it

2 reducing front droop

3 adding some antisquat

4 moving the front lower suspension arms as far back as possible at the inboard hinge pin

All of the above is suggested on the asumption you have the correct spring rates and oil weights as well as the correct roll centre settings.

You might want to try a different C ub as well if yours is too vertical (if you're at 4 deg overall caster I would tend to leave it alone).

If that is not correct, you need to revisit these settings.

Dusttt

iTrader: (144)

Ahh. That was totally messing with my head.

So how is the latest spec r diff compared to the xray? Anyone using it in the front? Worth buying or just get the xray?

metalnut

iTrader: (36)

Stupid question... if I want to change my rear toe from the kit 3* to 2*, which bushings should I be swapping? RR out 1*, RF in 1*, or in/out 0.5* front and rear? I'm assuming any would work, it just changes the track width and should be experimented with?

Disclaimer: my other T4 is a 2013, so this is all new to me.

jlfx car audio

iTrader: (37)

Depends on if your arm is shimmed to the front or to the rear. I would want my wheel base to stay the same and only affect toe if I was only looking to reduce drag

Skiddins

Are you running ARS or not?

If not, then you'll need 1* at the front and 0.0 at the rear.