jsorwell

Anyone have experience with v1 and v2 motor mounts? So far have only run the v2. What, if anything can be gained with the v1?

duckman996

iTrader: (14)

I like the idea that the V2 allows you to run less screws in the top-deck which is great when you need the added flex. If you are going to run less screws in the top-deck then the V2 is the way to go since you might run into stripping Spur gears with the V1 with less then all the screws.

rdlkgliders

iTrader: (21)

my 2.25mm chassis came with my LE kit

Johnny Wishbone

iTrader: (6)

The only chassis that I have had that comes with the cutouts is the 2.5 first gen cars stock. The 2.25 and 2.0 are both smooth and these I have ordered individually and that's they way they are out of the bag.

I prefer the V1 motor mount as the V2 had a weird torque steer feel on hard starts. The V1 can be run with less screws if you run the center setscrew mod and then you can cut the top deck to still have the same support but more flex. The cut keeps the center hole for the motor mount in the top but is just a straight cut along the right frame rail and it works very well. I have several hundred laps with this mod and haven't lost a spur gear yet. It is actually my preferred setup and I've tried a lot of them. You'll also notice on the V1 mount the lower screws run down the center of the chassis where the V2 are offset, which I believe contributes to the different feel of the car. Lap wise my V1 setup runs more consistent over the V2 as well, although all out fast lap went to the V2.

musti72

johnny, can you show some pictures of your mod? thanks

rdlkgliders

iTrader: (21)

I lost a cvd insert (the barrel betwween the axle and shaft) has anyone tried the xray one? its 20.00 bucks to replace after you get the pin and screws needed to put it back together.
I will probably just get the dcj set are you guys liking the dcj's over the standard cvd's?
Also what is the verdict spring steel or aluminum cvd's

red7fifty

iTrader: (3)

I used the Tamiya Servo Saver:
#51000 black
(#50473 white)
and it fits without issues, if you mount the servo as far up on the servo mounts as the screws will allow within the servo ears.

duckman996

iTrader: (14)

I switched to the DCJ's and I found that the car finishes the corner a little smoother. Lap times were about the same however, I did notice that the front of the car didn't feel like it was shaking the car apart. Well worth the investment IMO

As for the torque-steer with the V2... I did feel the same when I ran all the top screws - however, for outdoor I found that with only using the rearmost 4 screws holding the top-deck on this went away. Personally - I use V2 for outdoors and V1 for indoors.

M

rdlkgliders

iTrader: (21)

THX,
I just ordered the dcj's, $73.00 shipped from stormer.

Johnny Wishbone

iTrader: (6)

I change out to the DCJ right away, just due to the smoother feeling on tight corners. At out track, which is very tight, there was always extreme wheel chatter in the corners with the cvd.

I have run both the steel and the alum cvd in the rear of the car, can't really notice a difference, but run the alum as its less rotational mass. Never ran them in the front, but from my previous car, this usually resulted in bent shafts.

I have to get some pictures posted of my servo plate mod. You're idea will work, BUT, to be safe use two layers of servo tape under the servo to keep it up off the servo saver. I ran the way you described but noticed the servo eventually would work its way down and eventually would be on the servo saver rubbing the plate. End result was some strange handling issues, servo would not return to straight, and if your not looking for the clearance it can easily be missed.

Martin Crisp

Well, I think that had to be the worst race of my life this past weekend at the reedy race. It started out so promising winning the practice race Friday night, but it was a different story on Saturday and Sunday. I had i think 3 or 4 dnfs with on being of my own doing being too agressive at the end of the straight. But even in the 2 or 3 races where I did not have something bad happen to me, and was in the p2 or p3 after the first lap, I just could not get the job done and ended up falling way back either due to poor driving concentration on my part or a miss on the setup.

I kept trying to anticipate where the track was going to be with my setups, but got it wrong most of the time. For example in the last round with the sun finally coming out, I decided to try a diff up front and a thicker oil (2100cst) in the rear diff, but the car would not allow me to put any power down coming off the corners due to the rear diff having too much resistance. I was very surprised that it was loose because I ran 3000cst on the friday 3rd round and had great rear traction. In other rounds I tried lowering the roll center a little (0.5mm) from my friday setup, because it was pushing in and oversteering off the corner. It helped, but the car never felt as good as it did on Friday.

So the perfect storm of some DNFs, poort driving concentration on my part and chasing the track with setups and not really getting it right, made for a poor performance. It's too bad because the serpent car is much better than I was able to demonstrate on the saturday and sunday. On the Friday a few of the invite drivers said my car was very fast.

Cheers
Martin.

Johnny Wishbone

iTrader: (6)

Martin, your car looked great on Friday that's for sure, but you know, in order to loose the big show, you have to be in the big show, and there aren't too many that get the invite, so be proud of what you did, I know the rest of us here are.

Maybe the IIC will be a better outcome.

rdlkgliders

iTrader: (21)

I agree with Gary, great job Martin at least you got to represent the serpent fraternity. And I am glad to hear it was driver error and not that you ran out of speed in the car. I can not believe you were able to run 3000 cst in the diff, Wow what I wouldn't give to run an outdoor track with that high of grip level.
Sounds like fun.

Geberit

I looked at set-ups of Fischer and some other drivers and see they some times use FF 1 and FR 1,5 brackets does that mean the front arms are angled toward the front? If yes what effect does this have?

Johnny Wishbone

iTrader: (6)

Since the stock setup runs ff 2.0 and fr 1.0 this makes the arm sweep back a little, where Marks setup would actually bring the arm forward? or less sweep back but actually sweep forward. I would guess he was trying to get some of the aggressiveness out of the front end of the car, maybe a little bit of a push, with the compensation of getting a little more rear traction out of the setup. Going to the 1/1.5 instead of 2/2.5 was probably used so the car still felt a little more reactive to steering change but not enough to make the car feel slow to steering change.

All wild speculation on my part, but thats how I would use that option setup. For asphalt I think this may be the answer to lite feeling in the rear cars.

Of course, not to forget that changing the arm sweep will also effect several other settings on the car, such as wheel base, ackerman, the feel of the shocks due to shock angle and so on and so on.