10LikesTLR TEN-SCTE 2.0 Kit Thread
12-11-2013, 11:23 AM
#5778
1. Depends on your driving style. If you like more on power steering and are on the throttle early in the corner, heavier rear fluid allows you to steer with the rear end. I'm more point and shoot so I run 3k rear.
2. 2mm washers go under the outside steering link where it attaches to the spindle. Changes the bump steer and makes the steering smoother and more consistent.
3. Unscrewing shock ends 2 turns gives more droop, more weight transfer, better on jump landings. Also makes the truck easier to drive.
2. 2mm washers go under the outside steering link where it attaches to the spindle. Changes the bump steer and makes the steering smoother and more consistent.
3. Unscrewing shock ends 2 turns gives more droop, more weight transfer, better on jump landings. Also makes the truck easier to drive.
12-11-2013, 11:46 AM
#5779
For really low ride height you should look at snr graphite +9mm towers, using the top mounting positions will drop a lot of height. You loose some of the camber link mount positions though.
12-11-2013, 01:07 PM
#5780
Tech Apprentice
http://users.telenet.be/elvo/
http://jq-products.com/the-news/43-t.../160-the-guide
Can someone explain to me why these 2 links above contradict the 2.0 handling guide particularly on the Roll Center understanding? 2.0 guide says raising camber link in rear increases chassis stiffness? Thats lowering the RC giving more leverage to the CG giving more roll. I believe that to be true and is explained in detail in the first link. It also states that a longer link has less roll? Another contradiction for me. What am I missing? Trying to help my buddy with his 2.0 I read the 2.0 guide and was like WTH? I am fairly new but spent some effort on understanding of tuning options on 1.0/ MIP SCTE with these 2 links mostly and track time.
http://jq-products.com/the-news/43-t.../160-the-guide
Can someone explain to me why these 2 links above contradict the 2.0 handling guide particularly on the Roll Center understanding? 2.0 guide says raising camber link in rear increases chassis stiffness? Thats lowering the RC giving more leverage to the CG giving more roll. I believe that to be true and is explained in detail in the first link. It also states that a longer link has less roll? Another contradiction for me. What am I missing? Trying to help my buddy with his 2.0 I read the 2.0 guide and was like WTH? I am fairly new but spent some effort on understanding of tuning options on 1.0/ MIP SCTE with these 2 links mostly and track time.
12-11-2013, 02:08 PM
#5781
Tech Apprentice
iTrader: (8)
Hello.
Quick question about the 2mm bump steer washers on the latest Casper/Dunford setup. Is this change independent of all the other settings?
I am currently running the 2/11/13 setup and am really comfortable with the truck as I get reacquainted with Pro4, but would like the idea of the smoother steering response.
(I'll prolly try the change before a response, just curious on the thoughts.)
Quick question about the 2mm bump steer washers on the latest Casper/Dunford setup. Is this change independent of all the other settings?
I am currently running the 2/11/13 setup and am really comfortable with the truck as I get reacquainted with Pro4, but would like the idea of the smoother steering response.
(I'll prolly try the change before a response, just curious on the thoughts.)
12-11-2013, 02:34 PM
#5783
http://users.telenet.be/elvo/
http://jq-products.com/the-news/43-t.../160-the-guide
Can someone explain to me why these 2 links above contradict the 2.0 handling guide particularly on the Roll Center understanding? 2.0 guide says raising camber link in rear increases chassis stiffness? Thats lowering the RC giving more leverage to the CG giving more roll. I believe that to be true and is explained in detail in the first link. It also states that a longer link has less roll? Another contradiction for me. What am I missing? Trying to help my buddy with his 2.0 I read the 2.0 guide and was like WTH? I am fairly new but spent some effort on understanding of tuning options on 1.0/ MIP SCTE with these 2 links mostly and track time.
http://jq-products.com/the-news/43-t.../160-the-guide
Can someone explain to me why these 2 links above contradict the 2.0 handling guide particularly on the Roll Center understanding? 2.0 guide says raising camber link in rear increases chassis stiffness? Thats lowering the RC giving more leverage to the CG giving more roll. I believe that to be true and is explained in detail in the first link. It also states that a longer link has less roll? Another contradiction for me. What am I missing? Trying to help my buddy with his 2.0 I read the 2.0 guide and was like WTH? I am fairly new but spent some effort on understanding of tuning options on 1.0/ MIP SCTE with these 2 links mostly and track time.
Longer links in our experience make the rear end feel stiff with less chassis roll. Raising the inside pivot of the link (you can't adjust the outside up or down on the SCTE) gets a similar feel but changing the angle of the link can really change the dynamic (how the camber changes with roll or squat of the car) and make some interesting things happen. Ryan built the SCTE guide based off his 30 years of offroad experience and doing a lot of testing with the SCTE. Not saying the other guides are wrong in the end use them as what they are as guides. There are many different aspects of a setup in the front and rear settings of the car and how they interact with each other that determine a good or bad setup or what you want to change in a given situation. Now I know I did not really answer you question but looked to give you a different perspective on where the SCTE guide comes from. I have never sat down and looked at Roll centers to really start tuning based off there principles. I have always just looked at it from pure dynamic camber gain when tuning with camber links.
12-11-2013, 04:01 PM
#5785
Tech Apprentice
Ryan and I don't typically think of camber link changes as in there effect to roll center which has become all the rage lately. We think of camber links in terms of camber gain the tire sees through roll there are quite a few ways to skin this cat and different ways of looking at things to try and understand what all is going. Roll center is important and all and the theories of vehicle dynamics are there but you also have to understand not all of it is perfect and the dynamics of an offroad car with less then perfect traction can be different then those for a road car with exceptional grip.
Longer links in our experience make the rear end feel stiff with less chassis roll. Raising the inside pivot of the link (you can't adjust the outside up or down on the SCTE) gets a similar feel but changing the angle of the link can really change the dynamic (how the camber changes with roll or squat of the car) and make some interesting things happen. Ryan built the SCTE guide based off his 30 years of offroad experience and doing a lot of testing with the SCTE. Not saying the other guides are wrong in the end use them as what they are as guides. There are many different aspects of a setup in the front and rear settings of the car and how they interact with each other that determine a good or bad setup or what you want to change in a given situation. Now I know I did not really answer you question but looked to give you a different perspective on where the SCTE guide comes from. I have never sat down and looked at Roll centers to really start tuning based off there principles. I have always just looked at it from pure dynamic camber gain when tuning with camber links.
Longer links in our experience make the rear end feel stiff with less chassis roll. Raising the inside pivot of the link (you can't adjust the outside up or down on the SCTE) gets a similar feel but changing the angle of the link can really change the dynamic (how the camber changes with roll or squat of the car) and make some interesting things happen. Ryan built the SCTE guide based off his 30 years of offroad experience and doing a lot of testing with the SCTE. Not saying the other guides are wrong in the end use them as what they are as guides. There are many different aspects of a setup in the front and rear settings of the car and how they interact with each other that determine a good or bad setup or what you want to change in a given situation. Now I know I did not really answer you question but looked to give you a different perspective on where the SCTE guide comes from. I have never sat down and looked at Roll centers to really start tuning based off there principles. I have always just looked at it from pure dynamic camber gain when tuning with camber links.
Thanks again
12-11-2013, 05:08 PM
#5786
http://users.telenet.be/elvo/
http://jq-products.com/the-news/43-t.../160-the-guide
Can someone explain to me why these 2 links above contradict the 2.0 handling guide particularly on the Roll Center understanding? 2.0 guide says raising camber link in rear increases chassis stiffness? Thats lowering the RC giving more leverage to the CG giving more roll. I believe that to be true and is explained in detail in the first link. It also states that a longer link has less roll? Another contradiction for me. What am I missing? Trying to help my buddy with his 2.0 I read the 2.0 guide and was like WTH? I am fairly new but spent some effort on understanding of tuning options on 1.0/ MIP SCTE with these 2 links mostly and track time.
http://jq-products.com/the-news/43-t.../160-the-guide
Can someone explain to me why these 2 links above contradict the 2.0 handling guide particularly on the Roll Center understanding? 2.0 guide says raising camber link in rear increases chassis stiffness? Thats lowering the RC giving more leverage to the CG giving more roll. I believe that to be true and is explained in detail in the first link. It also states that a longer link has less roll? Another contradiction for me. What am I missing? Trying to help my buddy with his 2.0 I read the 2.0 guide and was like WTH? I am fairly new but spent some effort on understanding of tuning options on 1.0/ MIP SCTE with these 2 links mostly and track time.
12-11-2013, 11:21 PM
#5787
dirtracin58-- I totally agree with you that ever time you change a camber link you are also changing the roll center. 100% in agreement. My point was that with offroad cars general car dynamics for a high grip street car don't always apply due to how the car gets traction and how an offroad car slides more then a typical onroad car. If you do your research and get your own data on how your car works at your track I am not going to argue with you findings and they are what they are. The SCTE guide is Ryan's findings from all his years of testing.
Fordguru-- We will typically look for more camber gain when looking for more side bite or lower speed grip.
12-12-2013, 04:47 AM
#5788
Tech Apprentice
Bump steer is bump steer. We tend to like to get rid of it if we can as the car tends to handle more consistently so I would recommend this change to either setup.
dirtracin58-- I totally agree with you that ever time you change a camber link you are also changing the roll center. 100% in agreement. My point was that with offroad cars general car dynamics for a high grip street car don't always apply due to how the car gets traction and how an offroad car slides more then a typical onroad car. If you do your research and get your own data on how your car works at your track I am not going to argue with you findings and they are what they are. The SCTE guide is Ryan's findings from all his years of testing.
Fordguru-- We will typically look for more camber gain when looking for more side bite or lower speed grip.
dirtracin58-- I totally agree with you that ever time you change a camber link you are also changing the roll center. 100% in agreement. My point was that with offroad cars general car dynamics for a high grip street car don't always apply due to how the car gets traction and how an offroad car slides more then a typical onroad car. If you do your research and get your own data on how your car works at your track I am not going to argue with you findings and they are what they are. The SCTE guide is Ryan's findings from all his years of testing.
Fordguru-- We will typically look for more camber gain when looking for more side bite or lower speed grip.
Last edited by Fordguru; 12-12-2013 at 05:06 AM.
12-12-2013, 05:00 AM
#5789
Tech Apprentice
First off, I want to say I hope nobody takes this reply as disrespect because it is absolutely not intended that way. I think there is a lot of bad information out there about roll centers and camber links and how they affect vehicles especially in the RC industry. I spent a lot of time modeling the front and rear clips of the SCTE to help study its kinematics, and what I found is the camber gain and roll center height are directly related. I think the reason most people think they can tune one without the other is because they don’t consider that shortening or lengthening the camber link has an effect on the roll center just like raising or lowering it. When you move the inner link from the outer pivot to the inner pivot you are also flattening it out if it is running downhill. I made a table of all the different geometries available (plus a few extra) with the camber gain and roll center height for each. If you look it up you will see that they change together in the same order. As camber gain goes up, so does the roll center. I have done a lot of testing as well to confirm the order also, the fact is the two are directly related and you won’t change one without changing the other. I made a tuning guide for camber links that makes sense to me based on everything I have studied and I hope it can help some of you get a better understanding too...