4LikesTamiya TRF416 / TRF416WE / TRF416X
11-18-2008, 06:34 AM
#3331
I'd love to keep poking the tiger but I have to go and race tonight... well hopefully, the weather looks like it'll spoil the fun. John, I race at SMA in Australia (www.smaracing.org), it's a fantastic facility and if you do find yourself down under I encourage you to come for a race
And I don't have a major malfunction, I just don't like how you come on here proclaiming that everyone else is wrong, and if someone puts forward their own point of view you belittle them. Anyway, I'm sure your customers are happy with their "Exceige's" that you tune for them, given the spelling (try Exige champ, and maybe a decent education) I assume you get the coffee or clean the floors
*blocked*
And I don't have a major malfunction, I just don't like how you come on here proclaiming that everyone else is wrong, and if someone puts forward their own point of view you belittle them. Anyway, I'm sure your customers are happy with their "Exceige's" that you tune for them, given the spelling (try Exige champ, and maybe a decent education) I assume you get the coffee or clean the floors
*blocked*
Id love to go to Australia ! I actually have a friend down under. In Brisbane.... but thats not how he says it.
All I will say is if you were to take a look at the Losi shock jig, you would realize its for balance in extension of rebound of the shock. Once again you fail to understand that the shoch is in the center of its travel and the usable stroke (once installed on the car) is inconsequential for rebound to effect your touring car.... that if if its built correctly. you are not jumping it or have unlimited droop. the shock oil will never reach the level of action that is required to effect damping like you are suggesting. Off roaders would be a bit more concerned about rebound due to the volume contained in the shock and usually the fact that there arent many of them that use bladders. Why do you think they include volume compensators. Im deffinatrely not on here worried about what words i happen to misspell or which pronouns i neglect to capitalize.
11-18-2008, 06:50 AM
#3332
I perfer to let the piston bleed the oil to the full stroke. leaving minimal rebound im my 416. no spacers... no limiters. the fuel tubing is a good idea. there are some plastic spacers for 1/8th cars used for adjusting castor that would do very nicely for that job as well.
11-18-2008, 07:12 AM
#3333
Tech Regular
iTrader: (1)
I was thinking about those as well. But wouldn't plastic result in damage to the shock shaft? The rubber tubing seems to me a better solution but it would be great if they had the same form as the plastic spacers you refer to. These are (or at least were) used on a.o. Serpent and XRay cars to set wheel base.
11-18-2008, 07:23 AM
#3334
oR FOR THAT MATRER , EVEN SLIT O-RINGS... opps caps lock
placed at the bottom.. plastic on steel.. .. i doubt it would hurt it .. but it would be at the bottom near he spring coller it it did.
placed at the bottom.. plastic on steel.. .. i doubt it would hurt it .. but it would be at the bottom near he spring coller it it did.
11-18-2008, 09:04 AM
#3335
about rebound-settings.
I found out some time ago that I was assembling my shocks in a wrong way. So i digged in some more and ask questions around.
It seems people like Jilles Groskamp, add a silicone or ribber O-ring on the shockshaft. Then, when wanting to bleed the shock, they just push the shock completely in, until the o-ring touches the shockbody, then put on the bladder, letting the excess oil drip away (= bleeding
) and screwing on the shock-top.
i was thinking some more and because I didn't want to dismount the shock-end (my shocks are perfectly trimmed to be all the same length), i figured there had to be another way.
I invented this:
I took a silicone tube, as fuel-line for nitro cars, and cut off some small rings. One of 2mm, one 3mm, one 4mm ...
I then marked the size on every ring with a permanent marker and I cut them open.
Now it was very easy for me to slide one of these spacers on the shaft, setting the rebound, finishing the shock and then, sliding the spacer of the shaft and used it again on the next one.
I easely made for exact same shocks this way.
And when I didn't liked the rebound-setting, I could easely do the shocks again, but this time with another of my spacers, with a different thickness.
I would post some pictures I made but haven't had the time yet to shrink them to a forum-friendly format.
They can be seen here: http://ludodg.com/RC/images/416/shocks/
please give me some feedback on this method.
Other question. Freidns learned me to always make my shocks (offcourse Tamiya TRF-ones) 62mm long, but then I found out some people make them 61.5 or even 62.5 ..
what difference does this make on the setting of the car?
Thx in advance.
I found out some time ago that I was assembling my shocks in a wrong way. So i digged in some more and ask questions around.
It seems people like Jilles Groskamp, add a silicone or ribber O-ring on the shockshaft. Then, when wanting to bleed the shock, they just push the shock completely in, until the o-ring touches the shockbody, then put on the bladder, letting the excess oil drip away (= bleeding
) and screwing on the shock-top.i was thinking some more and because I didn't want to dismount the shock-end (my shocks are perfectly trimmed to be all the same length), i figured there had to be another way.
I invented this:
I took a silicone tube, as fuel-line for nitro cars, and cut off some small rings. One of 2mm, one 3mm, one 4mm ...
I then marked the size on every ring with a permanent marker and I cut them open.
Now it was very easy for me to slide one of these spacers on the shaft, setting the rebound, finishing the shock and then, sliding the spacer of the shaft and used it again on the next one.
I easely made for exact same shocks this way.
And when I didn't liked the rebound-setting, I could easely do the shocks again, but this time with another of my spacers, with a different thickness.
I would post some pictures I made but haven't had the time yet to shrink them to a forum-friendly format.
They can be seen here: http://ludodg.com/RC/images/416/shocks/
please give me some feedback on this method.
Other question. Freidns learned me to always make my shocks (offcourse Tamiya TRF-ones) 62mm long, but then I found out some people make them 61.5 or even 62.5 ..
what difference does this make on the setting of the car?
Thx in advance.
That's indeed how Jilles, Marc, Viktor and Hupo build their shocks. They usually run minimal rebound as this seems to work best, especially under hot conditions.
It could be. While John is right that 1 or 2mm difference in rebound will be hard to notice, you are running full rebound where the team is running almost no rebound. That's a big difference and definitely noticeable on the track.
More rebound in an on-road application in general can roughly be compared to running harder springs (not the same mind you). It will push the car back to level quicker when the chassis rolls to one side and also make the roll smoother. Less rebound will make the car roll from one side to the other in a more "clunky" way. This can work very well if grip is ok. But the cost, like with harder springs, is that the tyres heat up quicker and more. If your tyres are overheating and you are already running a relatively soft setup you could try reducing the rebound.
Another reason to look at rebound (in combination with springs and oil thickness) is when the track is bumpy. In this case the right amount of rebound will help keep te tyres in contact with the track surface. This is especially applicable to off-road and, as John indicated, has less influence on-road as the differences are too small.
Yes, the way you build it is full rebound. To get less do what Low_E explained. Push the shock rod in before you put the bladder on. The more you push the shock rod in the less rebound you will get. The ultimate is completely in, but I have never seen that used. Jilles normally leaves about 1.5mm of the shaft showing (or the thickness of an o-ring).
It could be. While John is right that 1 or 2mm difference in rebound will be hard to notice, you are running full rebound where the team is running almost no rebound. That's a big difference and definitely noticeable on the track.
More rebound in an on-road application in general can roughly be compared to running harder springs (not the same mind you). It will push the car back to level quicker when the chassis rolls to one side and also make the roll smoother. Less rebound will make the car roll from one side to the other in a more "clunky" way. This can work very well if grip is ok. But the cost, like with harder springs, is that the tyres heat up quicker and more. If your tyres are overheating and you are already running a relatively soft setup you could try reducing the rebound.
Another reason to look at rebound (in combination with springs and oil thickness) is when the track is bumpy. In this case the right amount of rebound will help keep te tyres in contact with the track surface. This is especially applicable to off-road and, as John indicated, has less influence on-road as the differences are too small.
Yes, the way you build it is full rebound. To get less do what Low_E explained. Push the shock rod in before you put the bladder on. The more you push the shock rod in the less rebound you will get. The ultimate is completely in, but I have never seen that used. Jilles normally leaves about 1.5mm of the shaft showing (or the thickness of an o-ring).
Yep you've got it. Build the shock with the piston fully extended and you'll get full rebound. For 0 rebound, fill the shock with oil, push the piston fully in and hold it there while you put on the diaphragm and screw the shock cap on. For 50% I cut a piece of plastic to the right size and held it against the shock shaft while building, and for 2mm I use an oring on the shaft like the pros, low-e's trick sounds even better though, saves unscrewing the shock end.
Have a play and see what you think, I found less rebound meant less body roll and a more predictable car, but 2mm all around with 400 weight oil feels a little dull so I think I'll go back to 4mm at the front
Great trick!
As for the shock length, mine are 61.5 because thats where the shock end stopped on the thread so I just made them all the same size. The shock length will effect the droop, but I cant see .5mm making much difference here, especially because you car should hit the droop screws before bottoming out on the shock ends
hope that helps, it's good to be talking 416 in peace again
Have a play and see what you think, I found less rebound meant less body roll and a more predictable car, but 2mm all around with 400 weight oil feels a little dull so I think I'll go back to 4mm at the front
Great trick!
As for the shock length, mine are 61.5 because thats where the shock end stopped on the thread so I just made them all the same size. The shock length will effect the droop, but I cant see .5mm making much difference here, especially because you car should hit the droop screws before bottoming out on the shock ends
hope that helps, it's good to be talking 416 in peace again
looks like i have some rebuilding to do for this weekend's race. 
11-18-2008, 09:24 AM
#3336
Shock length is irrelivent . The piston is in the center of travel and the fully extended length is only so u get 4 equal shocks. The droop screws top out long b4 the shock runs out of travel.
11-18-2008, 09:43 AM
#3337
Tech Regular
iTrader: (1)
I agree that the actual effect of 0.5mm or even a mm in shock length is minimal. However since the ride height is determined by the spring and spring collar setting shortening the shock (actually you shorten the piston rod) means that at the same ride height the piston will sit lower in the shock body. That could have an effect if the difference in length is sufficient and you compare a minimum rebound and maximum rebound shock setup.
Personally I have never truly felt the difference so I would not worry about it too much.
Personally I have never truly felt the difference so I would not worry about it too much.
11-18-2008, 12:25 PM
#3338
As far as I can remember, it was actually you that began to whine about tyres and tires.
.. and on more then one occasion I find you here contradicting yourself. You are very tiring John and even when people make remarks, you just can't stop, so .......
congratulations!!!
you are *blocked* by me, the waffle-guy
as well.
.. and on more then one occasion I find you here contradicting yourself. You are very tiring John and even when people make remarks, you just can't stop, so .......
congratulations!!!
you are *blocked* by me, the waffle-guy
as well.
11-18-2008, 12:34 PM
#3339
As far as I can remember, it was actually you that began to whine about tyres and tires.
.. and on more then one occasion I find you here contradicting yourself. You are very tiring John and even when people make remarks, you just can't stop, so .......
congratulations!!!
you are *blocked* by me, the waffle-guy as well.
.. and on more then one occasion I find you here contradicting yourself. You are very tiring John and even when people make remarks, you just can't stop, so .......
congratulations!!!
you are *blocked* by me, the waffle-guy
as well.
11-18-2008, 12:37 PM
#3340
And can I get some powdered sugar for my waffels please ? And some more O.J. too.. thx
11-18-2008, 12:57 PM
#3343
Here we go again...another UFC internet moment...who won? who cares..To rebound or not to rebound!!!! 
I was actually enjoying the 416 read through the last few pages on this thread...until all the dramatics...
congrats to MR on the win!
anyone have a guess on the street price of the new release?
I was actually enjoying the 416 read through the last few pages on this thread...until all the dramatics...
congrats to MR on the win!
anyone have a guess on the street price of the new release?
TAMIYA 42138 TRF416 WORLD EDITION 75800YEN(Pre-order 20% Off 60640yen) DEC 5th
That's a discounted price of £412 !!
As much as I'd like one, at that price it's staying on the shelf
Last edited by TryHard; 11-18-2008 at 01:10 PM.
11-18-2008, 01:06 PM
#3344
Does anyone know if there will be a update for the 416 to the wc spec.?
Or more likely I would have to purchase the parts individually to convert it myself... New lower susp mounts upper and lower deck arms and all.. I still can't quite tell whats so different about the motor mount.
Or more likely I would have to purchase the parts individually to convert it myself... New lower susp mounts upper and lower deck arms and all.. I still can't quite tell whats so different about the motor mount.
11-18-2008, 01:27 PM
#3345
On the shock rebound thing, here's a quote from Corey from earlier in the thread. I've pretty much found the same thing
HiH
Ed
Originally Posted by TRFWhitey
Its an adjustment not too many people play with. I have tried alot of different shock adjustments at many different tracks. The effect of rebound directly impacts the way the car handles bumps and negotiates quick switchbacks(aka shicanes). I have found the more rebound i use, makes the car more responsive/aggresive but can handle bumpy tracks much better, less rebound the opposite is true. The reason why rebound works best for bumps is rebound keeps the tire in contact with the track after you hit a bump, the longer you car stays in contact with the track the more stable it is. As for shicanes your car needs to change directions quickly, so with alot of rebound your car will be able to transfer the weight L/R quicker with assitance from the rebound. For me i almost always run full rebound just because i like a responsive car and if there is any inperfections in the track my car will keeps its composure. Hope this was not to confusing!
Ed
