Losi215

iTrader: (1)

Agama looks nice out there. Definitely picking one of these up if they even come to fruition.

xyzyx00

iTrader: (6)

i really like the idea too, but the more i look at it the more questions i have... just how my adjustability might be sacrificed with the new design - one thing im looking at is the rear end, specifically that which exists with a normal shock tower such as adjusting shock and rear camber link position. I suppose it could be possible to adjust the camber link if there were other holes on that center plate where it attaches, also washers could be used to adjust height on that plate. as far as shock position, maybe they could offer different lengths of the arms that push on the shocks? (longer arm = softer).

be interesting to see what the options are when it comes out

LIV3FAST

I think the design has a lot of potential for high grip euro tracks. Low CG + the ability to have a very progressive shock leverage rate would allow it to be more like a long travel touring car. The shock arrangement would allow for a huge amount of leverage tuning also, more so than tower and arm positions.

Something to keep an eye on for sure.

foampervert

iTrader: (5)

looks really cool! i especially like the single wing mount reminiscing the old Bergonzoni buggy designs.

I just wonder if a short shock on both front and rear might limit springs to very heavy spring weights? and thus make it a less capable car over very bumpy tracks where a soft and pliant direct shock might work better? just wondering... much like the old tenth technology buggies... were always a little more challenging to set up due to the need to run harder then regular springs.

stanleyw808

Hello foampervert,

I like the wing design of Bergonzoni Flash as well.. I also remember that their Wing was really soft but simply indestructible!!! Hahaha...

Sir 51D3WAYS

Regarding the single wing mount, it looks fragile (to my eyes). Why not elongate the shell and integrate it into the rear like a giant duckbill spoiler? Less parts,lighter and as strong as the rest of the bodyshell.

But regardless, sign me up for the e version. Just when I thought I wanted a JQ as well....

foampervert

iTrader: (5)

if you've owned a bergonzoni buggy before, you would know that statement to not be true at all... i think it has to do with not being too rigid... modern twin wing supports do not allow any flex upon impact... and therefore tend to deform or break... It is very simplistic engineering which the bergonzoni designers have come to embrace across their buggy products... and hence the single wing mount is quite synonymous with the brand.

MP10rocks

would not be a problem for camber. Use shimes to rise or take away shims to adjust vamber hight. Several holes for the upright svrew could me moved in or outwards to adjust length.

For shocks: you are basicly doing the same thing to a convential buggy. If you move the outer shock (lower on conventinal car) up or down it will be the exact same thing to move the shock in or out on the arm. You need to look at it from how you calculate forces ie newton meters. Sorry for bad explenation but english is not my native language.

romeo_charlie33

iTrader: (13)

Not only is the shock tower weight removed the shock oil is now at a lower height.
Any weight reduction and any centre of gravity movement lower in the chassis is beneficial.

kgombe

iTrader: (13)

anymore info to share??

captain america

iTrader: (12)

https://www.rcmag.com/modules.php?na...r=asc&start=90

mauro67

MAX TURBO 1969

so you can already book?

mauro67

Yes

XCELL

iTrader: (10)

Really love the look of this buggy, I hope they make an electric buggy version of it after the nitro release.

Patrick