Team Losi JRXS

Reply

Old 10-07-2004, 11:19 AM
  #631  
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Nebraska USA
Posts: 615
Default I just didn't know if....

I was spelling it right.
Nightbreed is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 11:39 AM
  #632  
Tech Regular
 
mwcet8k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 266
Default

Ok, Losi REALLY needs to release new info on this car. We've reached the point where we're discussing subtle differences between the way Americans and Brits spell certain words, for cryin' out loud!!! LOL!
mwcet8k is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 11:48 AM
  #633  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (6)
 
HarshGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Roseville, CA
Posts: 3,379
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Originally posted by DA_cookie_monst
There are a lot of subtle differences between the English (British, and proper version, lol), and the English (American) language. A simple one is I spell Colour, Americans spell it Color.
It's nice to have english lessongs on this thread, but can we stay on subject and get back to arguing about the JRXS
HarshGuy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 11:49 AM
  #634  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (22)
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 7,752
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

"the shorter arms by themselves has no practical bearing on camber rise/gain other than to make changes more sensitive, and very little impact on how stiff/soft the suspension can be. the only 'stiffness' would be the mechanical friction caused by the tire scrub (track width change during suspenion movement) vs. less scrub/long arm, which is mostly negated by the fact the car is in motion with toe typically being ran in the rear anyway."

Roll center. That's the only explaination for the short arms. As my friend Seaball said " the short arms are necessary to get the rc to sink, and the camberlinks obviously need to be even shorter for any type of gain when in bump movement.

if you remember our short arms/long arms thread, something i brought up was that there seemed to be a desirable amount of roll center drop/change regardless of chassis roll. and that cars that don't roll much, still need to produce a dropping roll center durring the movement. huh? was i on to something..."

Heyeva, I tend to think the car will run a softer spring. I really don't know though, since that would be based on the roll centers, the arm lengths, shock mounting, etc.
robk is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 12:00 PM
  #635  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (2)
 
rtypec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,978
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

I am certain that Losi along with other manufacturers will release info and announce cool new things during the upcoming Chicago show.

In the meantime...here's something funny :
Posting and you...

Last edited by rtypec; 10-07-2004 at 12:20 PM.
rtypec is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 12:16 PM
  #636  
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 737
Default

Originally posted by robk
"the shorter arms by themselves has no practical bearing on camber rise/gain other than to make changes more sensitive, and very little impact on how stiff/soft the suspension can be. the only 'stiffness' would be the mechanical friction caused by the tire scrub (track width change during suspenion movement) vs. less scrub/long arm, which is mostly negated by the fact the car is in motion with toe typically being ran in the rear anyway."

Roll center. That's the only explaination for the short arms. As my friend Seaball said " the short arms are necessary to get the rc to sink, and the camberlinks obviously need to be even shorter for any type of gain when in bump movement.

if you remember our short arms/long arms thread, something i brought up was that there seemed to be a desirable amount of roll center drop/change regardless of chassis roll. and that cars that don't roll much, still need to produce a dropping roll center durring the movement. huh? was i on to something..."

Heyeva, I tend to think the car will run a softer spring. I really don't know though, since that would be based on the roll centers, the arm lengths, shock mounting, etc.
Spot ON
Cobra81li200 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 12:17 PM
  #637  
X2
Tech Regular
 
X2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: England
Posts: 340
Default

Originally posted by rtypec
I am certain that Losi along with other manufacturers will release info and announce cool new things during the upcoming the Chicago show.

In the meantime...here's something funny :
Posting and you...
HAHAHA, if only everbody would watch that...
X2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 12:22 PM
  #638  
Tech Regular
 
mwcet8k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 266
Default

That flash animation was great! Every message board needs a permanent link to it.
mwcet8k is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 12:56 PM
  #639  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (5)
 
rayhuang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Posts: 6,511
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default C-Ball Junior has arrived!!!

Originally posted by robk
"the shorter arms by themselves has no practical bearing on camber rise/gain other than to make changes more sensitive, and very little impact on how stiff/soft the suspension can be. the only 'stiffness' would be the mechanical friction caused by the tire scrub (track width change during suspenion movement) vs. less scrub/long arm, which is mostly negated by the fact the car is in motion with toe typically being ran in the rear anyway."

Roll center. That's the only explaination for the short arms. As my friend Seaball said " the short arms are necessary to get the rc to sink, and the camberlinks obviously need to be even shorter for any type of gain when in bump movement.

if you remember our short arms/long arms thread, something i brought up was that there seemed to be a desirable amount of roll center drop/change regardless of chassis roll. and that cars that don't roll much, still need to produce a dropping roll center durring the movement. huh? was i on to something..."

Heyeva, I tend to think the car will run a softer spring. I really don't know though, since that would be based on the roll centers, the arm lengths, shock mounting, etc.
Great-now after you share living quarters with c-ball this weekend-your sure to be 10x more geeky!!
rayhuang is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 01:09 PM
  #640  
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: England (UK)
Posts: 440
Default

Originally posted by EricF
Have you read any other pages in this thread?
E
Sorry

Chazz
Chazz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 03:44 PM
  #641  
Tech Addict
 
Sleighty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 568
Default

i dont know if this has already been mentioned but hey,

Today i was informed by a very reliable source that there have been infact 3 seperate variations of the JRXS.

The pictures that we have all seen may have been of the first version which could be completeley different from what is being tested at this moment and what will most likely race at the worlds later this month.

Could the pictures we have all seen be throwing us all off the scent? Just a theory


thanks
Sleighty is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 04:13 PM
  #642  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Oregon City, Or
Posts: 674
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally posted by HarshGuy
but can we stay on subject and get back to arguing about the JRXS
Looks like the A-arm length is settled. Here's new subject for you to discuss/debate/argure/bicker/whatever.
How about Dogbone/CVD angle from the outdrive to the wheel? I had a discussion with a team drive a couple years ago about it, but it was regarding 2wd offroad buggies. What is the verdict for touring cars? I found some pictures posted from different manufactures is looks like the stack up like this:

TC4 - rear swept forward, front straight
HPI Pro 4 - Rear forward, front back
Corally RDX - Kinda hard to tell, but both look straight in the picutes.
Xray T1 - Rear straight or swept back slightly and front back.

Again, this is looking at pictures. Hard to tell or even know if the camera angleWhat's the JRXS going to be and why? Will the shorter length have more or any effect?
For offroad buggies, the explanation I remember was with the dogbones swept foward, it has tendency to drive the tires or suspension into the ground more...more bite.
JohnB is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 04:27 PM
  #643  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,870
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Idealy you want them as straight as possible, but then with the modern CVD joints, they are very efficient, so some deflection wont hurt I would guess.
DA_cookie_monst is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 05:15 PM
  #644  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (25)
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 4,088
Trader Rating: 25 (100%+)
Default

Originally posted by Sleighty
i dont know if this has already been mentioned but hey,

Today i was informed by a very reliable source that there have been infact 3 seperate variations of the JRXS.

The pictures that we have all seen may have been of the first version which could be completeley different from what is being tested at this moment and what will most likely race at the worlds later this month.

Could the pictures we have all seen be throwing us all off the scent? Just a theory


thanks
So what did you reliable source tell you the 3 different variations were?
MDawson is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2004, 05:55 PM
  #645  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (6)
 
HarshGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Roseville, CA
Posts: 3,379
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Originally posted by Sleighty
i dont know if this has already been mentioned but hey,

Today i was informed by a very reliable source that there have been infact 3 seperate variations of the JRXS.

The pictures that we have all seen may have been of the first version which could be completeley different from what is being tested at this moment and what will most likely race at the worlds later this month.

Could the pictures we have all seen be throwing us all off the scent? Just a theory


thanks
So to those of you that have actually seen the car in person (XXXS Bill, Badboy ...others), are the pictures we've seen of the car you've seen on the track in person?
HarshGuy is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service