26LikesTLR 22 3.0 Race Kit Thread!
08-23-2016, 10:37 AM - Wikipost
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cub86 posted the question: Hi. I'm struggling to understand the lay down situation. I run on high bite damp smooth clay and think the conversation would help on my surface but from what I'm reading I need to buy the lay down kit tlr338004. And the dirt gear case tlr332063. But do I really need both from what I've read the dirt case is 1-2mm higher anyway and u don't use the +3mm hubs or the front pivot hrc or Hrc mod. So is the dirt lay down kit tlr332063 is all that's needed to get me a lay down set up that's suited for clay With the components and car I already have. And if I only get the dirt case is there any problems that will need to be addressed IE.. bone plunge . I do know I'll need 1mm spacers on the waterfall to clear the battery. Thanks guys really trying to get my head around this.
Franks response: Laydown Conversion will work great by itself. You run the aluminum +3mm hubs, the diff is +3.5mm, and you run the HRC front setup. Just follow a setup sheet from tlracing.com (Frank Root). Dirt Tranny has the diff at the same height as the standard tranny case, and works with the standard plastic hubs. Both are +/- 0mm from stock. When you run this, no need to run the HRC front mod either. I've found the stock laydown conversion parts to work great for most tracks. The dirt tranny is a great tuning option, but definitely not 'required'. K.King Something I made, pretty basic. Just to give people an idea. 
|
12-30-2015, 01:57 AM
#1292
Tech Rookie
I use the avid slipper setup in mine, it gives you a lot more spur gear options I run 69/30.
12-30-2015, 05:18 AM
#1293
So I have had the car for a few week now and I have one problem with it.I can seem to get the on power push out of it.its not to bad indoors but for some reason outdoors it pretty bad.I have tried different setups on still the same end result, pushes.yes I have changed slingshot oils, shim placements, moving battery.could it be the fact im running the thin shorty packs. Or should I just get that brass weight for the front.
12-30-2015, 06:35 AM
#1294
Here's my follow up to my initial build post. I had the chance to get the car dirty last night and as I predicted at the end of my first post, I was very happy with the car. There are some details worth going into, however.
As many people have pointed out, the out of the box setup on this car is pretty good. It lands and jumps well and is very easy to drive. However, I feel TLR sacrificed steering to get that easy to drive feel. The car felt sluggish to turn in and in general didn't respond very quickly to steering inputs. However, when I did manage to get the back end out of shape, the car was very easy to correct and get going straight again, which goes back to being very easy to drive.
I'd like to talk a little bit more about the landing/jumping aspect. I was pretty surprised to see the kit setup go with 1.5 holes pistons up front and 1.6 hole pistons in the rear. Traditionally racers like to run bigger holes up front and smaller holes in the rear, so why is it that TLR appears to be doing the opposite, and why does it work so well? To understand that, we need to talk physics and engineering. Don't worry, I won't get too deep into it. Our shocks are simple viscous dampers. We know thicker oil and smaller/less holes will increase our shock's dampening. We're also vaguely aware of the third variable that affects dampening. We call it "pack", but it's really the third variable that affects damping, piston speed. When the piston travels faster through the shock fluid, damping increases. Now think about the way our car's suspensions are designed. We have longer shocks in the rear and shorter shocks in the front. This leads to the rear shock pistons traveling faster than the front shock pistons for the same wheel deflection (google "motion ratio" for more on this). Now that we know this about our shocks, it makes sense why TLR would put a smaller piston up front and a bigger piston in the rear. The rear shocks already have an inherent increase in "pack" compared to the front pistons by virtue of the piston speed. By putting a larger piston hole in the rear, you can balance the amount of pack front to rear. This gives you a suspension package where the front and rear shocks respond similarly to bumps and jumps. It is a large part of the reason why everyone says the 22 3.0 jumps so well.
To learn more about achieving balance in your car's setup, I strongly urge you to read through this thread. All the posts by FredSwain are filled with tuning gold. He outlines a process by which you end up with a car that has a balanced suspension. If you don't feel like combing through that miles long thread, I have gone through and copied all the relevant posts to a google docs sheet here. Many of you may brush off what he has to say about tuning because it is so far outside of what is "common knowledge" in the RC community. However, if you built the car with the kit setup, you are already outside of what is "common knowledge" for shock setups and you know it works. Why not go a little further? Every car I've applied Fred's methods to have seen a drastic improvement in driving performance. As good as I think the out of the box setup is on the 22 3.0, I plan on doing the full balance method to it because I know it will make it better.
Anyway, off of my tuning soapbox and back to the car. One thing I didn't mention in my previous post that I had thought about was the lack of captured CVD pins. On my dex210, the CVD pins were entirely captured within the inner hub carrier bearing. This completely eliminates any chance of the pin ever falling out while driving. During the build, I noticed the 22 3.0 doesn't have captured pins on the CVD, and I remember thinking to myself "I hope the pin never falls out." Well, at the end of my second run on the track last night, one of my pins had come out (and yes, I did use thread lock on the set screw that holds the pin in place, it still came out anyway. I'll be ordering some shrink wrap to put around the CVD axle to prevent it from happening again). Thankfully I had another pin I could throw right in and be on my way, but it's just one more of those neat little design features that would have been nice to have.
I tweaked the setup throughout the night to try to eliminate some of the push the car had. I made two changes to the stock setup that I think really helped. The first thing I did was move the rear hubs to their full forward position. The second change I made was to switch to the long arm setup on the front. However, I didn't change the shock mounting locations or the camber links as shown in the manual. I simply moved the shoulder screws to the outer hole on the arm. This is what really helped tame the car's push. I would recommend this to anyone looking to get more steering out of the kit setup.
TL;DR - The car drove great. There's an unconventional shock setup that make the car jump great. There's design features lacking on this car that I miss from my dex210, but the driving experience more than makes up for it (I'd still like to see those design features and some point, though). In short, I'm very happy with my decision to switch to TLR from Durango.
p.s. For anyone who was worried, my car's wiring held up just fine and didn't cause any problems at all.
*edit*
Holy cow, my first post I linked to is post 1243 in this thread, and this post is my 1243 post. Pretty neat coincidence!
**2nd edit**
I also wanted to add how pleased I am with the wing. The thicker lexan is really tough and stood up great to all the abuse I subjected it to last night. Other wings I've used were very quick to dent/bend/break, but the TLR wing holds up great.
As many people have pointed out, the out of the box setup on this car is pretty good. It lands and jumps well and is very easy to drive. However, I feel TLR sacrificed steering to get that easy to drive feel. The car felt sluggish to turn in and in general didn't respond very quickly to steering inputs. However, when I did manage to get the back end out of shape, the car was very easy to correct and get going straight again, which goes back to being very easy to drive.
I'd like to talk a little bit more about the landing/jumping aspect. I was pretty surprised to see the kit setup go with 1.5 holes pistons up front and 1.6 hole pistons in the rear. Traditionally racers like to run bigger holes up front and smaller holes in the rear, so why is it that TLR appears to be doing the opposite, and why does it work so well? To understand that, we need to talk physics and engineering. Don't worry, I won't get too deep into it. Our shocks are simple viscous dampers. We know thicker oil and smaller/less holes will increase our shock's dampening. We're also vaguely aware of the third variable that affects dampening. We call it "pack", but it's really the third variable that affects damping, piston speed. When the piston travels faster through the shock fluid, damping increases. Now think about the way our car's suspensions are designed. We have longer shocks in the rear and shorter shocks in the front. This leads to the rear shock pistons traveling faster than the front shock pistons for the same wheel deflection (google "motion ratio" for more on this). Now that we know this about our shocks, it makes sense why TLR would put a smaller piston up front and a bigger piston in the rear. The rear shocks already have an inherent increase in "pack" compared to the front pistons by virtue of the piston speed. By putting a larger piston hole in the rear, you can balance the amount of pack front to rear. This gives you a suspension package where the front and rear shocks respond similarly to bumps and jumps. It is a large part of the reason why everyone says the 22 3.0 jumps so well.
To learn more about achieving balance in your car's setup, I strongly urge you to read through this thread. All the posts by FredSwain are filled with tuning gold. He outlines a process by which you end up with a car that has a balanced suspension. If you don't feel like combing through that miles long thread, I have gone through and copied all the relevant posts to a google docs sheet here. Many of you may brush off what he has to say about tuning because it is so far outside of what is "common knowledge" in the RC community. However, if you built the car with the kit setup, you are already outside of what is "common knowledge" for shock setups and you know it works. Why not go a little further? Every car I've applied Fred's methods to have seen a drastic improvement in driving performance. As good as I think the out of the box setup is on the 22 3.0, I plan on doing the full balance method to it because I know it will make it better.
Anyway, off of my tuning soapbox and back to the car. One thing I didn't mention in my previous post that I had thought about was the lack of captured CVD pins. On my dex210, the CVD pins were entirely captured within the inner hub carrier bearing. This completely eliminates any chance of the pin ever falling out while driving. During the build, I noticed the 22 3.0 doesn't have captured pins on the CVD, and I remember thinking to myself "I hope the pin never falls out." Well, at the end of my second run on the track last night, one of my pins had come out (and yes, I did use thread lock on the set screw that holds the pin in place, it still came out anyway. I'll be ordering some shrink wrap to put around the CVD axle to prevent it from happening again). Thankfully I had another pin I could throw right in and be on my way, but it's just one more of those neat little design features that would have been nice to have.
I tweaked the setup throughout the night to try to eliminate some of the push the car had. I made two changes to the stock setup that I think really helped. The first thing I did was move the rear hubs to their full forward position. The second change I made was to switch to the long arm setup on the front. However, I didn't change the shock mounting locations or the camber links as shown in the manual. I simply moved the shoulder screws to the outer hole on the arm. This is what really helped tame the car's push. I would recommend this to anyone looking to get more steering out of the kit setup.
TL;DR - The car drove great. There's an unconventional shock setup that make the car jump great. There's design features lacking on this car that I miss from my dex210, but the driving experience more than makes up for it (I'd still like to see those design features and some point, though). In short, I'm very happy with my decision to switch to TLR from Durango.
p.s. For anyone who was worried, my car's wiring held up just fine and didn't cause any problems at all.
*edit*
Holy cow, my first post I linked to is post 1243 in this thread, and this post is my 1243 post. Pretty neat coincidence!
**2nd edit**
I also wanted to add how pleased I am with the wing. The thicker lexan is really tough and stood up great to all the abuse I subjected it to last night. Other wings I've used were very quick to dent/bend/break, but the TLR wing holds up great.
Last edited by RC10Nick; 12-30-2015 at 08:00 AM. Reason: pistol hole size correction courtesy of slakr
12-30-2015, 06:52 AM
#1295
So I have had the car for a few week now and I have one problem with it.I can seem to get the on power push out of it.its not to bad indoors but for some reason outdoors it pretty bad.I have tried different setups on still the same end result, pushes.yes I have changed slingshot oils, shim placements, moving battery.could it be the fact im running the thin shorty packs. Or should I just get that brass weight for the front.
12-30-2015, 07:13 AM
#1296
1. Different front tires. Your surfaces are different. If your car is working one and not on another, start with tires.
2. Less rear toe in?
12-30-2015, 07:44 AM
#1297
12-30-2015, 08:25 AM
#1298
Tech Adept
I run indoor clay and I'm using the Exotek direct spur mount using 69/31 gearing which has been solid and fast for me.
12-30-2015, 08:48 AM
#1299
I was pretty surprised to see the kit setup go with 1.5 holes pistons up front and 1.6 hole pistons in the rear. Traditionally racers like to run bigger holes up front and smaller holes in the rear, so why is it that TLR appears to be doing the opposite, and why does it work so well?
Is this your first LOSI?
12-30-2015, 10:24 AM
#1300
Anyway, off of my tuning soapbox and back to the car. One thing I didn't mention in my previous post that I had thought about was the lack of captured CVD pins. On my dex210, the CVD pins were entirely captured within the inner hub carrier bearing. This completely eliminates any chance of the pin ever falling out while driving. During the build, I noticed the 22 3.0 doesn't have captured pins on the CVD, and I remember thinking to myself "I hope the pin never falls out." Well, at the end of my second run on the track last night, one of my pins had come out (and yes, I did use thread lock on the set screw that holds the pin in place, it still came out anyway. I'll be ordering some shrink wrap to put around the CVD axle to prevent it from happening again). Thankfully I had another pin I could throw right in and be on my way, but it's just one more of those neat little design features that would have been nice to have.
Thanks for the link to the google doc. I am sure a lot of people appreciate it but just won't admit it.
12-30-2015, 12:36 PM
#1301
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...HA3AGQ70TK4H7X
12-30-2015, 01:24 PM
#1302
I use a Permatex thread locking Gel medium(blue) strength P/N 24010. The gel is great because it does not run and you just twist the bottom to dispense more. No more thread lock leaking in my tool box. As for the cvd pins, I have aluminum rear hubs which have more clearance around the cup of the axle. This allows me to use a black shrink tube over the cup to hold the pin. I put a small hole in the shrink tube for the drive axle to exit and articulate. The shrink tube sorta makes a boot over the cvd keeping dirt out. Again, you have to have aluminum rear hubs.
http://www.rctech.net/forum/members/...9-10-39-38.jpg
http://www.rctech.net/forum/members/...9-10-39-38.jpg
Last edited by Guch; 12-30-2015 at 01:42 PM.
12-30-2015, 04:11 PM
#1303
I use a Permatex thread locking Gel medium(blue) strength P/N 24010. The gel is great because it does not run and you just twist the bottom to dispense more. No more thread lock leaking in my tool box. As for the cvd pins, I have aluminum rear hubs which have more clearance around the cup of the axle. This allows me to use a black shrink tube over the cup to hold the pin. I put a small hole in the shrink tube for the drive axle to exit and articulate. The shrink tube sorta makes a boot over the cvd keeping dirt out. Again, you have to have aluminum rear hubs.
http://www.rctech.net/forum/members/...9-10-39-38.jpg
http://www.rctech.net/forum/members/...9-10-39-38.jpg
