eper

iTrader: (14)

agreed delrin would be a great way of doing it. but it would need to be replaced often..

photopro

Can anyone explain what battery/ motor configuration will provide the most rear traction? The track is an indoor, very hard packed (not blue groove) clean surface, and I cannot believe how much I have to baby the car to keep the rear from breaking loose. Everyone is running rear motor, suburbs tires, and shorty batteries, but I can't help but wonder if this thing needs some weight in it or something. When I was younger and raced 2wd buggy, I NEVER had traction problems in the rear.

I heard one guy say that running the battery all the way back makes it worse? Some running saddles, most running shorty. Whats the benefit to each?

Another annoying thing is that the rear slaps so hard off these little jumps that sometimes it will cause the rear to hop sideways. Running 30wt in the rear and 35 in the front, stock front springs, gold rear.

The car is amazing quality and durability wise, but so far its a handful to drive. I would do anything to have this car push a bit.

gelshocker

iTrader: (1)

Lol I had just mentioned on the rb5 thread that this car is so unlike a typical 2wd, one being having to seek rear traction. It's almost as though weight is shifted upfront even in RM config. Or the chassis is so rigid it's pressing down towards the front so you've got huge steering but consequently loose rear. Interesting car for a 2wd. Whoever designed this may have had a vendetta towards steering!

t8rtot

iTrader: (14)

Take out the side guard screws. Then post your setup.

Johnn27

iTrader: (89)

I run rear motor with the narrow rear suspension mounts, shorty pack as far to the rear of the car as I can get it and I have plenty of traction. I think your issue maybe you are running the stock wide rear suspension mounts?

Johnn27

iTrader: (89)

dbl post

photopro

Thanks guys for your help.


Wide rear hangers...yes.
I took out the side screws
Tried shorty pack towards front and rear.
Aka rear inserts made rear traction worse. Soft white foam included with suburbs was far better.

Anyone else come up with and tips to lock the rear in?
Anyone else try the rear narrow with good luck?

What up?

iTrader: (14)

Post your full set up and track name please

toyota 2jz

iTrader: (21)

i feel you!! this is the reason why i am one click away from not getting this car!! im a k guy and have bedn for awhile! had all the rb series all the way to the wc!! if any of these cars wrre off groove!! they were out to lunch!! jus dont want to pull the trigger on a car that going to take forever to figure out the sweet spot!

aloksatoor

iTrader: (43)

I was in no way complaining about the rb6. I have an rb5 and that thing IMHO is not worth driving if you have a rb6. It does everything better than the 5. Yes the steering gets sloppy but keep in mind I was on the same parts since I got the car (which was around september) and its been run almost every week since. On the rb5 that stupid servo saver had to be glued to get some response. The chassis was always too short from the factory so had to glue cut up parts etc. Not worth the trouble for me.

For people who cannot lock the rear in enough, just use narrow suspension hangers, rear motor battery as far back (or a full pack) or 0.5 rear hubs with gold or white rear springs and test it out. This car has the best qualities of the two other leading platforms, the adjustablity and durability of the 22 and the nimbleness of the b4.

t8rtot

iTrader: (14)

thats another think that will help, gold springs did lock the rear down. i had to stand the rear shock up to get my corner speed back, but that tamed it down.

post your set up.

i would wonder if you're using optimal tires.. are they broken in?

aloksatoor

iTrader: (43)

For the bearings, we can have two to reduce slop can't we, like the rb6 rack has on the crank arms. That part is not sloppy at all and pivots as much as the rack does. Plus bearings are cheaper than the bushing to replace (1$ per avid and 6$ for the bushings LA256).

ryanpatrickgore

iTrader: (14)

I came off a super dialed in b4.1 and I am loving this car. Best purchase ice made in rc!

Cpt.America

iTrader: (52)

The RB5 was naturally biased towards rear traction. The car could never be as aggressive as the B4 because it generated too much traction at the rear. The RB6 is a different car. The bias was shifted to a stiffer car, and more towards the front. It would be interesting to see what the front to rear weight bias is of both cars, but I would bet quite a bit of % points were shifted towards the front. On top of that, no more t-plate, which is where a lot of the rear traction was generated on the 5. The 6 is just a different car, designed to be fast and aggressive.

Without seeing your exact detailed setup, we can only speculate on what kind of changes you need to make... but to flat out discredit the car as a whole because you don't know how to shift traction to a more rear bias, is flat out silly.

Are you on a really loose track? like top soil dirt? Here are the things you need to do

1. no closed cell rear inserts, run softer open cells
2. .5 degree rear hubs for 3.5 rear toe, instead of 3.
3. narrow hangers (plastic ones, if you never crash)
4. shift the battery back a bit
5. shave weight off the front with a lopro servo
6. maybe step up to white front springs, maybe down to golds in the rear

These are some of the things you can do to shift the bias back to the rear of the car. How do you generate traction? friction. How do you generate friction? Weight.

aloksatoor

iTrader: (43)

Also just realised from the hara mid motor setup you can stick a shorty sideways for max rear bias. I would not do it though. That reminds me too much of my cougar sv2.