Tekno RC EB48 Thread
#556
#559
I run that combo on 4s with a Tekno converted Mugen (heavier than this buggy). It's all the power you'd need for any track that isn't a bunch of 200+ft straightaways strung together. Great combo.
#560
I run a 1400kv system in 5S which provides about the same rpm as a 1700kv 4S and I've more power than needed for any track. That's the absolute best compromise I found in termes of power delivery from the motor, sometimes I add 10 degrees of timing for high grip tracks but that's it
#565
The spare parts order is already placed and will be shipped right after the kits. So we should be good to go
.
#567
#568
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,298
From: Raleigh, North Carolina
#569
I realize this may be a hair-splitting question, but I am looking at this buggy with more interest than any other, and would like to know any honest input about this particular question:
If anybody who has driven the EB 48, and driven an Associated B4.1 with lots of toe-in and a very nice and high rear roll center (with the chassis ball stud mount shaved down to lower the mounting position, and/or a longer camber link), can you tell me whether I will be able to make the car handle like that? With the outstanding characteristics of basically a locked-in rear end. I simply can't hardly stand tail-happy cars. It would be so frustrating to me to never be able to really open the taps with my cars (even a 17.5!), as they would fish-tail even when I was gentle with the throttle coming out of corners; no matter what tires, diff setting, slipper setting, or even 4.0 of toe-in. I was almost ready to get rid of my B4.1 until I did the mod to lower the rear ball stud mount and raise the roll center dramatically. I absolutely loved the car after I did that, and actually had to dial in a shorter wheelbase to make the car rotate a little more. I want a car whose rear will not break loose through corners, on-power or off-power, but will break loose slightly, and control-ably, with brake input. That works perfectly with the way I naturally drive. So my question to anyone with the patience to answer is- will I be able to achieve that kind of wonderfully locked-in rear end with the EB 48? I would really appreciate some honest input on this.
If anybody who has driven the EB 48, and driven an Associated B4.1 with lots of toe-in and a very nice and high rear roll center (with the chassis ball stud mount shaved down to lower the mounting position, and/or a longer camber link), can you tell me whether I will be able to make the car handle like that? With the outstanding characteristics of basically a locked-in rear end. I simply can't hardly stand tail-happy cars. It would be so frustrating to me to never be able to really open the taps with my cars (even a 17.5!), as they would fish-tail even when I was gentle with the throttle coming out of corners; no matter what tires, diff setting, slipper setting, or even 4.0 of toe-in. I was almost ready to get rid of my B4.1 until I did the mod to lower the rear ball stud mount and raise the roll center dramatically. I absolutely loved the car after I did that, and actually had to dial in a shorter wheelbase to make the car rotate a little more. I want a car whose rear will not break loose through corners, on-power or off-power, but will break loose slightly, and control-ably, with brake input. That works perfectly with the way I naturally drive. So my question to anyone with the patience to answer is- will I be able to achieve that kind of wonderfully locked-in rear end with the EB 48? I would really appreciate some honest input on this.
#570
I realize this may be a hair-splitting question, but I am looking at this buggy with more interest than any other, and would like to know any honest input about this particular question:
If anybody who has driven the EB 48, and driven an Associated B4.1 with lots of toe-in and a very nice and high rear roll center (with the chassis ball stud mount shaved down to lower the mounting position, and/or a longer camber link), can you tell me whether I will be able to make the car handle like that? With the outstanding characteristics of basically a locked-in rear end. I simply can't hardly stand tail-happy cars. It would be so frustrating to me to never be able to really open the taps with my cars (even a 17.5!), as they would fish-tail even when I was gentle with the throttle coming out of corners; no matter what tires, diff setting, slipper setting, or even 4.0 of toe-in. I was almost ready to get rid of my B4.1 until I did the mod to lower the rear ball stud mount and raise the roll center dramatically. I absolutely loved the car after I did that, and actually had to dial in a shorter wheelbase to make the car rotate a little more. I want a car whose rear will not break loose through corners, on-power or off-power, but will break loose slightly, and control-ably, with brake input. That works perfectly with the way I naturally drive. So my question to anyone with the patience to answer is- will I be able to achieve that kind of wonderfully locked-in rear end with the EB 48? I would really appreciate some honest input on this.
If anybody who has driven the EB 48, and driven an Associated B4.1 with lots of toe-in and a very nice and high rear roll center (with the chassis ball stud mount shaved down to lower the mounting position, and/or a longer camber link), can you tell me whether I will be able to make the car handle like that? With the outstanding characteristics of basically a locked-in rear end. I simply can't hardly stand tail-happy cars. It would be so frustrating to me to never be able to really open the taps with my cars (even a 17.5!), as they would fish-tail even when I was gentle with the throttle coming out of corners; no matter what tires, diff setting, slipper setting, or even 4.0 of toe-in. I was almost ready to get rid of my B4.1 until I did the mod to lower the rear ball stud mount and raise the roll center dramatically. I absolutely loved the car after I did that, and actually had to dial in a shorter wheelbase to make the car rotate a little more. I want a car whose rear will not break loose through corners, on-power or off-power, but will break loose slightly, and control-ably, with brake input. That works perfectly with the way I naturally drive. So my question to anyone with the patience to answer is- will I be able to achieve that kind of wonderfully locked-in rear end with the EB 48? I would really appreciate some honest input on this.
For 4WD and on the EB48, the setting I think you'll find that can achieve a very locked in rear end on-power while creating more off-power steering is anti-squat. Anti-squat is kind of a weird adjustment because it gives you better traction on-power and better off-power steering (turn in). Other adjustments that give you better rear traction usually come at the cost of decreased off-power steering.
Increasing anti-squat almost acts like having a softer rear spring on-power without squatting (more traction, and will square up better) while acting like a stiffer spring off-power (more forward weight transfer and more turn in). Less anti-squat results in better traction off-power (less forward weight transfer) traction (more stable entering a turn) while decreasing forward traction.
More rotation off-power ultimately results in lower corner speed, so finding a setting that matches your track is important. If there are lots of 180's, more anti-squat is probably better. If there are sweeping turns, less is probably better.
The EB48 has the same adjustments (and a few others) as most of the 8th scale buggies so you can get it to do whatever you need it to on the track.
Not sure if this answers your question, but the options are there to play with on this buggy.



2Likes