Originally Posted by Julius

I had been under the impression that the xray car had its lower wishbone parallel to the ground. But looking at the build manual it seems xray forgot to ‘optimise’ this. Kickup in itself has nothing to do with anti dive etc. It is all dependant on the pivot points. And they are easily changed, however it seems the pillow ball suspension on the xray is counterproductive here as it would require a modified top arm pivot setup as well.

Also the kickup on the buggy chassis is the wrong way to go for on road cars. As the std angle of buggy front suspension will increase dive under braking and increase lift of the front under acceleration. If you wish to use anti dive for gt the lower arm should be lower in front!

I tested with the serpent rtr gt recently. As it has angled lower front arms as standard, it is similar to the xray in suspension setup. One of the tested options was the cobra 3.0 front pivot points which put the lower arm parallel to the ground. Although laptimes were only slightly better, the car felt so much more lije a real racecar. Much less reactive to on/off power transitions. A much more noticable change that just reducing caster.

The kickup rule of ifmar is a last ditch attempt to keep the cars close to buggys. But I think that station is passed already. The essence of gt is not in kickup but in the shaft drive, rubber tires and bodyshell type. As long as the tire situation is not allowed to get out of hand, read hand out or restricted tires for races, the class will be ok.

Originally Posted by Julius

I had been under the impression that the xray car had its lower wishbone parallel to the ground. But looking at the build manual it seems xray forgot to ‘optimise’ this. Kickup in itself has nothing to do with anti dive etc. It is all dependant on the pivot points. And they are easily changed, however it seems the pillow ball suspension on the xray is counterproductive here as it would require a modified top arm pivot setup as well.

Also the kickup on the buggy chassis is the wrong way to go for on road cars. As the std angle of buggy front suspension will increase dive under braking and increase lift of the front under acceleration. If you wish to use anti dive for gt the lower arm should be lower in front!

I tested with the serpent rtr gt recently. As it has angled lower front arms as standard, it is similar to the xray in suspension setup. One of the tested options was the cobra 3.0 front pivot points which put the lower arm parallel to the ground. Although laptimes were only slightly better, the car felt so much more lije a real racecar. Much less reactive to on/off power transitions. A much more noticable change that just reducing caster.

The kickup rule of ifmar is a last ditch attempt to keep the cars close to buggys. But I think that station is passed already. The essence of gt is not in kickup but in the shaft drive, rubber tires and bodyshell type. As long as the tire situation is not allowed to get out of hand, read hand out or restricted tires for races, the class will be ok.

Originally Posted by British Menace

I just read this again and I'm afraid it's actually incorrect, or at the very least, a play on words.
Nothing has anything to do with caster angle "in itself" except the caster angle itself. BUT numerous adjustments made to a car can have an effect on changing the caster angle.
For example. If you alter the kick up from 7 degrees to 2 degrees and with out changing anything else. This change WILL change the caster angle! In reality. You will have problems putting the car back together as some parts like the top bulkhead brace may not then fit.
Another point.
Yes. The angle of the lower wishbone inner pivot pin has a direct effect on anti-dive/ pro-dive setting. As does the angle of the upper, inner wishbone pivot pin.
Points of detail can so easily be lost in such forum "conversation's"
The last paragraph in the quote I totally agree with though.
Just felt I needed to put this straight. Either way. I am looking at buying the X Ray GTX when we get some details, if planned at all(?) on the 2018 model.

Regards
BM

Originally Posted by wkloppen

Julius is stating the same thing as an answer / response to the earlier messages

Originally Posted by British Menace

This is why things can get confusing. I did not get that impression at all. Mainly cause of the quote I added to (and the replied to/ the point of) my message above.

Regards
BM

Originally Posted by wkloppen

True that but if you read between the lines, take into account the various native languages we write/speak including a full awareness of the content we're discussing which sometimes can be a bit difficult, Im pretty sure the conclusions on the topic are heading in the same direction
All in all worthy content I would say....

w.