I matched my shocks with a losi shock tool. Lucky for me, the car was balanced (weight wise) without any additional weight.

Thanks for that pic btw. I didn't mention stadium trucks because I forgot to. Any 2wd off road will do.

I took the bait one time and tried a pro set-up. that was so a bad idea, I normally have a pretty good truck, that day I had the worst truck ever, I immediately went right back to my original set-up. track conditions were very similar to what I was running that day. that pro has to be really fast to drive a truck like that good!!lol

Last night I was bored so I scaled my SC10 3 different ways-

Battery forward with 3 oz under the rear pad = 37% Front / 63% Rear
Battery back with 3 oz forward under the pad = 36% Front / 64% Rear
Battery back with no weight under the pad (forward) = 35% Front / 65% Rear

The numbers are at home right now. When I get a chance I'll come back and put them in this post. What I can tell you is the weight bias changed all 3 times. Total weight was something like 67 oz with lead & 64 without. My battery is 296 grams (or 10.441 ounces).

What do you think Fred? Battery back and add weight in back?

Ok I guess my post was misleading. I was wondering if anyone else had put a T3 through this process and come up with a similar spring result. Obviously I'm not confident about my setup, or I wouldn't be looking for advice. Call me incompetent or insecure or whatever, but at least I'm trying to learn.

Next question is about roll center. My T3 has no vertical adjustment anywhere on a camber link, except at the steering block kingpin. Plenty of camber length adjustments though. All through the thread, Fred's mantra has been to leave the springs alone, not using them to balance the turn-in, drifting, or front to rear traction. What does that leave me with for adjustments? I'd rather not throw away a former world champion platform as one of the adjustments, if you don't mind.

Shortening the camber link raises the roll center with suspension compression. If you push the suspension down to the vehicle is bottoming out, look at angle of the upper links. The steeper they are, the higher your roll center at that point.

^^ Go up 2....Updated post ^^

Hey fred did you happen to get any scale readings for a midmotor 22 or any of the x-factory rides? Curious to see where they end up.

As far as track conditions and rear weight goes, most of what I have seen seems to follow what I learned from full scale street stocks. When the track was tacky I could get by with 53% rear weight and the car turned and handled well. A good dryslick track however would have the rearweight up around 56 or even 57% rear. Too much rearweight on a tacky track and the car would not turn. Too little rearweight on a dry track and the front turns well but it looses forward bite. Also I noticed a huge difference between weight way back in the trunk vs weight just behind the rear axle. With the weight way back it gives more rear weight and better forward bite but in the corners it swings around too much. With the weight farther forward it doesent have the same swinging weight effect. Granted not everything from full scale dirt oval racing transfers directly to 1/10th scale off road but alot of the effects from weight placement still apply.
Myshortcourse truck is midmotor and the motor, battery, esc and servo all fit in a 6 inch circle right in the center of the chassis. My buggy has the traditional setup with the motor in back, battery inline with the chassis and the servo way up front. Again, not an exact comparison but the truck will rotate very quick and is just as quick to stop rotating. The buggy though is very different. Once the back starts to come around its much harder to get it to stop rotating. I personally feel it has to do with weight placement and the motor hanging off the back similar to my streetstock with the weight on the rear bumper. Just food for thought.

Nick

I agree with all of that. I haven't gotten any mid motor info from a 22, DEX210, or X Factory yet.

I'll post mine tonight. I have an x-6 and scx-60.

Imagine what it would be like if they weren't wheeling such a crapwagon...

From what I have seen, the really good drivers want a car that I would consider to be pretty edgy. They want instant fast response. At the ripe old age of 39 with the decrease in reaction time that comes with it and with a set of Coke bottle glasses I have a harder time with an "edgy" car. If its well balanced and edgy I can make it work. I've driven cars that are set up a bit better than mine with nice balance and good traction everywhere I need it. The guy I swapped rides with during practice at that time still kicked my butt with my own car. In all we are discussing here, a major part is still wheel time. You need to be able to feel what is wrong down to minute levels that when you are a raw driver you just can't sense. That's half the fun anyway, luckily.

HAHAHA!!! I'm going to refer to all of my opponents cars as "crapwagons" now.

I just saw a comment on another forum that is a prime example of what's wrong with typical online tuning advice. Someone had asked how to get more rear traction out of their car. They got an answer back to stiffen the rear springs and add weight up front. What's that going to do? What I see when I read that is shift your weight forward OFF of the rear wheels, decrease your front wheel rate, and increase your rear wheel rate. I see less rear traction but worse yet a horrible suspension imbalance. Then again that would assume it was balanced to begin with which I doubt. This is why people need to learn how to tune their own cars and stop relying on advice from other people who probably don't know how to tune. Unlike math, 2 negatives don't cancel out here.

Only you can answer that. Try it. See how you like it. Weigh it and show the numbers.