8LikesYOKOMO Touring Car BD-7
11-23-2016, 11:58 AM
#7336
It's easy, as Rodney Racer said: blue front springs, black rear springs. Then if the car rolls that much increase by 0.5mm or 1mm the shims used under the front and rear suspension blocks.
If the car becomes too sensitive subtract the height of shims used under the suspension blocks from under the outer ball stud on the hub.
If the car becomes too sensitive subtract the height of shims used under the suspension blocks from under the outer ball stud on the hub.
11-23-2016, 01:55 PM
#7337
All conditions actually, you can make them softer or stiffer by varying shock angle so you get plenty of leeway for them to work. The progressiveness changes accordingly so if you want to keep shock angle close to ideal then Xray 2.2 springs are according to the conversion 220gr.cm springs while Yok Black are 240gr.cm, you could develop a setup around these if you want to go to lower suspension frequencies and get all the benefits. Expect the flex, roll centres and anti angles to be altered.
Last edited by 30Tooth; 11-23-2016 at 02:20 PM.
11-24-2016, 11:44 PM
#7338
How come the pro drivers like Ronald Völker is not driving his cars like this? Have found something others don't? Very interesting!
www.andrefossto.wordpress.com
www.andrefossto.wordpress.com
11-25-2016, 03:11 AM
#7339
How come the pro drivers like Ronald Völker is not driving his cars like this? Have found something others don't? Very interesting!
www.andrefossto.wordpress.com
www.andrefossto.wordpress.com
About why Volker drives a car setup that way can be because he doesn't know more about this method or he feels fine driving a car that way. What I see with drivers that try this method (which works both on and off road cars) is they find a new limit. Can be the car or driving skill. Now about engineers or mechanics like Umino-san, they build a car to a driver's spec, not the other way around. So we have now stagnation with designs, not even the AWX could break the mould because people setup the car the old way instead of taking all advantage given by the design. And if you read my advice the new setup method needs new springs (we are going to need the softer range possible) and higher roll centre height (particularly the rear as it's under ground). I have many more things to make the setup even better but it requires a design change in most cars, making my own parts is somewhat out of question so I resort to making the setup work on current cars.
How the setup works is: the springs are solely devoted to up and down movement of the car or one end (bump and rebound) and the roll centres take care of side to side movement (roll, pitch and squat). Current old school setup is making the stiff springs managing roll, pitch, squat, bump and rebound. Then because stiff springs cause higher natural suspension frequencies (how stiff a spring is to the weight it has to support) drivers/engineers lower the roll centres to make it roll, not forgetting that engineers brought very flexible cars to make it work like a spring! That's asking too much from the springs.
All the other manufacturers haven't realized this, Schumacher, Xray and Tamiya are close though...
P.S.: Subscribed your blog.
11-25-2016, 03:27 AM
#7340
How come the pro drivers like Ronald Völker is not driving his cars like this? Have found something others don't? Very interesting!
www.andrefossto.wordpress.com
www.andrefossto.wordpress.com
11-25-2016, 08:13 AM
#7341
I've been doing this for almost my entire RC career; comparing setups, listening to pros, watching them and reading technical articles about F1... In RC I can say for sure that the pros are just good drivers. The secrecy was so much in the start of TC racing that no one made a car that used all advancements on 1:1 car racing, they still don't. I can smell marketing gimmicks from two galaxies away.
About why Volker drives a car setup that way can be because he doesn't know more about this method or he feels fine driving a car that way. What I see with drivers that try this method (which works both on and off road cars) is they find a new limit. Can be the car or driving skill. Now about engineers or mechanics like Umino-san, they build a car to a driver's spec, not the other way around. So we have now stagnation with designs, not even the AWX could break the mould because people setup the car the old way instead of taking all advantage given by the design. And if you read my advice the new setup method needs new springs (we are going to need the softer range possible) and higher roll centre height (particularly the rear as it's under ground). I have many more things to make the setup even better but it requires a design change in most cars, making my own parts is somewhat out of question so I resort to making the setup work on current cars.
How the setup works is: the springs are solely devoted to up and down movement of the car or one end (bump and rebound) and the roll centres take care of side to side movement (roll, pitch and squat). Current old school setup is making the stiff springs managing roll, pitch, squat, bump and rebound. Then because stiff springs cause higher natural suspension frequencies (how stiff a spring is to the weight it has to support) drivers/engineers lower the roll centres to make it roll, not forgetting that engineers brought very flexible cars to make it work like a spring! That's asking too much from the springs.
All the other manufacturers haven't realized this, Schumacher, Xray and Tamiya are close though...
P.S.: Subscribed your blog.
About why Volker drives a car setup that way can be because he doesn't know more about this method or he feels fine driving a car that way. What I see with drivers that try this method (which works both on and off road cars) is they find a new limit. Can be the car or driving skill. Now about engineers or mechanics like Umino-san, they build a car to a driver's spec, not the other way around. So we have now stagnation with designs, not even the AWX could break the mould because people setup the car the old way instead of taking all advantage given by the design. And if you read my advice the new setup method needs new springs (we are going to need the softer range possible) and higher roll centre height (particularly the rear as it's under ground). I have many more things to make the setup even better but it requires a design change in most cars, making my own parts is somewhat out of question so I resort to making the setup work on current cars.
How the setup works is: the springs are solely devoted to up and down movement of the car or one end (bump and rebound) and the roll centres take care of side to side movement (roll, pitch and squat). Current old school setup is making the stiff springs managing roll, pitch, squat, bump and rebound. Then because stiff springs cause higher natural suspension frequencies (how stiff a spring is to the weight it has to support) drivers/engineers lower the roll centres to make it roll, not forgetting that engineers brought very flexible cars to make it work like a spring! That's asking too much from the springs.
All the other manufacturers haven't realized this, Schumacher, Xray and Tamiya are close though...
P.S.: Subscribed your blog.
But it feels like you got something here! I feel the same way, is yokomo blue soft enough to make the car faster? Or is it still too hard?
I would like if you made a setup really, so everyone can understand as well xD i myself understand setup very good, but there is a little more missing hehe :P
SKIDDINS:
The thing is that we should give prizes for a wider range, and not just top 3 drivers. Maybe top 5 or top 10. Then i think many more people will get excited!
But that topic stays at my website
11-25-2016, 04:09 PM
#7342
Too soon to make a setup sheet, on my test mule using the diffs lower there was a big handling difference to what it was before. So now I have to figure out new camber link/shock setup because the car is doing weird things, still it's the best the car has ever been.
12-15-2016, 04:16 AM
#7344
Last weekend it was Swedish cup rd.3, i used my BD7´16 and so far this season it is faster than the BD8 wich is good news for people that keeps their BD7.
you can read my report below and also a setup sheet for wich setup i used.
www.andrefossto.wordpress.com
//cheers
you can read my report below and also a setup sheet for wich setup i used.
www.andrefossto.wordpress.com
//cheers
12-24-2016, 07:24 AM
#7346
Tech Apprentice
Active rear suspension for bd8 and bd7-2016
Team Yokomo factory drivers have been tested and proofed the performance at the several races in the world.
Available from december 28, 2016.
http://mikanews.de/2016/12/24/ars-hinterachse-fuer-den-yokomo-bd8-und-bd7-2016/#more-87369
Team Yokomo factory drivers have been tested and proofed the performance at the several races in the world.
Available from december 28, 2016.
http://mikanews.de/2016/12/24/ars-hinterachse-fuer-den-yokomo-bd8-und-bd7-2016/#more-87369
12-24-2016, 01:58 PM
#7347
Active rear suspension for bd8 and bd7-2016
Team Yokomo factory drivers have been tested and proofed the performance at the several races in the world.
Available from december 28, 2016.
http://mikanews.de/2016/12/24/ars-hinterachse-fuer-den-yokomo-bd8-und-bd7-2016/#more-87369
Team Yokomo factory drivers have been tested and proofed the performance at the several races in the world.
Available from december 28, 2016.
http://mikanews.de/2016/12/24/ars-hinterachse-fuer-den-yokomo-bd8-und-bd7-2016/#more-87369
12-30-2016, 06:09 AM
#7348
Hi, I'm currently running a bd7 2014 version. I bought it used and need to replace the upper deck which I broke tonight 
I threw out the deck so can't see which was originally used. The kit was included with a spare upper deck in packet #7
I'm assuming I need the original because the spare I have doesn't align with the motor mount hole but then it's confusing as this came from a bag of spares that came from what looks to be the kit. It looks like it's b7-003 which I'm thinking'13 version? The deck design near the pinion is square where the original is pointy (14)
I threw out the deck so can't see which was originally used. The kit was included with a spare upper deck in packet #7
I'm assuming I need the original because the spare I have doesn't align with the motor mount hole but then it's confusing as this came from a bag of spares that came from what looks to be the kit. It looks like it's b7-003 which I'm thinking'13 version? The deck design near the pinion is square where the original is pointy (14)
12-30-2016, 06:27 AM
#7349
Hi, I'm currently running a bd7 2014 version. I bought it used and need to replace the upper deck which I broke tonight
I threw out the deck so can't see which was originally used. The kit was included with a spare upper deck in packet #7
I'm assuming I need the original because the spare I have doesn't align with the motor mount hole but then it's confusing as this came from a bag of spares that came from what looks to be the kit. It looks like it's b7-003 which I'm thinking'13 version? The deck design near the pinion is square where the original is pointy (14)
Attachment 1403924
I threw out the deck so can't see which was originally used. The kit was included with a spare upper deck in packet #7
I'm assuming I need the original because the spare I have doesn't align with the motor mount hole but then it's confusing as this came from a bag of spares that came from what looks to be the kit. It looks like it's b7-003 which I'm thinking'13 version? The deck design near the pinion is square where the original is pointy (14)
Attachment 1403924
I have also tried a version of this upper deck with the cross brace at the motor mount screw holes dremeled out. Felt really good with improved grip and steering.
12-30-2016, 11:09 AM
#7350
Are you sure you're running a 14? Looks you like you may be running the kit with FMC, forward motor conversion. Check your belts and the alignment holes. let us know which belts you're running and take a look at the motor mount, you may be able to move it back.
The deck you broke is possibly a FMC upper deck.
The deck you broke is possibly a FMC upper deck.