12LikesTekno NB48
12-08-2014 | 11:41 AM
#2941
Well, I had the opportunity to meet John, Matt, and Lutz over the weekend at the Badlands here in SC. Great crew of guys. I've meet a number of the big names over the years, but hadn't yet me Lutz. Let me tell you what, this dude is definitely what the hobby should be about for most of the big sponsored guys. Helping out, volunteering, and probably one of the fastest turnmarshals out there regardless of it's the F main, kids class, or otherwise. I always thought it was a good idea after Tekno brought him onboard, but even more now watching his presence and attitude at the track. You can see the big tekno area they had setup across the track.
Some of the mains had brutal starts (mine included having lap times nearly double what it should be due to people not playing it safe and hammering down), but a great event in general. Surface is a clay/dirt/sand mixture and the majority of it was blue groove in a matter of hours. There was also minimal dust, no matter how many were running on it. Definitely will be back again next year.
Some of the mains had brutal starts (mine included having lap times nearly double what it should be due to people not playing it safe and hammering down), but a great event in general. Surface is a clay/dirt/sand mixture and the majority of it was blue groove in a matter of hours. There was also minimal dust, no matter how many were running on it. Definitely will be back again next year.
12-08-2014 | 11:47 AM
#2942
Im currently running Mo's set with the exception of 6x1.5 pistons with losi shock oil 35f 27r. From this setup what are the changes I can make to gain more on power rear traction? Tires I have run - Megabits(pink) Impacts (s,ss) Gridirons II (s) Turbo trax(extra soft). The reason I feel its in the the setup is bc I ran My D812 on the same track and with the same tires and it was hooked. But to be honest that car has always been hooked and stable. Im trying to get my Tekno to feel this way bc I know I can be faster with it. I placed second(Should have won,but thats a long story) at a toys for tots this weekend but the car felt like it was on top of the dirt. I couldn't really push it.
Rear: Outer on arm and tower, Red spring
Front: Center hole on arm, 2nd from inner on tower (3)
Although the CG is a bit higher and slightly more rear than the EB-48.2, the front to rear spring balance between the 2 is close enough to start here. I ran this setup on the NB-48 when I was at the track that Wednesday trying to get the final few break-in tanks down. The only thing I will modify when I head back out will be to go from 27.5 to 30wt oil (Losi) in the back.
Initial feel of my NB is quite similar to the EB with this setup. Besides the rear bottoming out, I had just a slight push that I'll work on the next time I am out at the track. I've got almost a gallon on the Speed; is tuning nicely now with temps in the 205 - 215 range. Hope to be out at the track during the week.
Jim
12-08-2014 | 12:24 PM
#2943
Tech Adept
iTrader: (7)
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 179
KP, have you tried the shock positions like my EB-48.2 setup you've been running?
Rear: Outer on arm and tower, Red spring
Front: Center hole on arm, 2nd from inner on tower (3)
Although the CG is a bit higher and slightly more rear than the EB-48.2, the front to rear spring balance between the 2 is close enough to start here. I ran this setup on the NB-48 when I was at the track that Wednesday trying to get the final few break-in tanks down. The only thing I will modify when I head back out will be to go from 27.5 to 30wt oil (Losi) in the back.
Initial feel of my NB is quite similar to the EB with this setup. Besides the rear bottoming out, I had just a slight push that I'll work on the next time I am out at the track. I've got almost a gallon on the Speed; is tuning nicely now with temps in the 205 - 215 range. Hope to be out at the track during the week.
Jim
Rear: Outer on arm and tower, Red spring
Front: Center hole on arm, 2nd from inner on tower (3)
Although the CG is a bit higher and slightly more rear than the EB-48.2, the front to rear spring balance between the 2 is close enough to start here. I ran this setup on the NB-48 when I was at the track that Wednesday trying to get the final few break-in tanks down. The only thing I will modify when I head back out will be to go from 27.5 to 30wt oil (Losi) in the back.
Initial feel of my NB is quite similar to the EB with this setup. Besides the rear bottoming out, I had just a slight push that I'll work on the next time I am out at the track. I've got almost a gallon on the Speed; is tuning nicely now with temps in the 205 - 215 range. Hope to be out at the track during the week.
Jim
12-08-2014 | 12:50 PM
#2944
This is what I did for more mechanical grip, works good and also has the effect of taking some steering away without limiting the throw in any way. Take some stick on weight, clean off the double sided tape, drill a 3mm hole through the weights and rear hub, put a 28mm through the lot and secure with an m3 locknut. Had 10g on there could have easily gone 15.
Get the car handling as good as it possibly could with other adjustments first and then leave this for last as an extra tuning aid.
Get the car handling as good as it possibly could with other adjustments first and then leave this for last as an extra tuning aid.
12-08-2014 | 01:04 PM
#2946
lol, the Tekno's one car that can really do with it
if you try it, you'll see it literally does nothing but good (except take away a little steering)
*does depend on what's "wrong" with your setup in the first place, why I said leave it for last (and then if you need more on power traction try it) imo better option than limiting the steering, which does not physically add any traction, just gets you to slow down more lol*
if you try it, you'll see it literally does nothing but good (except take away a little steering)
*does depend on what's "wrong" with your setup in the first place, why I said leave it for last (and then if you need more on power traction try it) imo better option than limiting the steering, which does not physically add any traction, just gets you to slow down more lol*
12-08-2014 | 01:39 PM
#2949
12-08-2014 | 02:04 PM
#2950
so you may need to up the shock oil a weight to keep the extra mass under control (doubt many could even tell), the benefits far outweigh the negatives. the extra tire deflection and vibrations etc that apply to unsprung mass in 1:1 cars is a distant, totally negligible consideration in 1/8 offroad.
12-08-2014 | 02:18 PM
#2953
so you may need to up the shock oil a weight to keep the extra mass under control (doubt many could even tell), the benefits far outweigh the negatives. the extra tire deflection and vibrations etc that apply to unsprung mass in 1:1 cars is a distant, totally negligible consideration in 1/8 offroad.
What is the increased mechanical grip you are mentioning?
12-08-2014 | 02:25 PM
#2954
actually Imbue use a similar concept with their brass pistons which are x number of times heavier than delrin, and most everyone who uses those thinks their suspension was improved. a similar outcome can be achieved placing mass at the base of the shock, or in my case, end of arm. like I said, yes if you are an engineer, i'm sure you could pick holes in the theory, and you may need to play with shock oil, but, I have tested, and the weights work
mechanical grip as per post above yours mate
mechanical grip as per post above yours mate
12-08-2014 | 02:38 PM
#2955
I read the posts in the Imbue thread a while back and did notice a couple people reporting positive results.
With the weights that you're running, did you try adding weight to the chassis before going to the hubs? The ability to control the center of gravity and polar moment by adding weight to the sprung mass of the vehicle may be beneficial and should have provided similar results without being added to the unsprung mass. It would be more difficult to place it in line with the axles but having that weight over/behind that line create issues as well.
Hate to see you move to a different vehicle because of something like this; especially when you're wanting something that feels more aggressive but have a setup that is being numbed because of things like this.
With the weights that you're running, did you try adding weight to the chassis before going to the hubs? The ability to control the center of gravity and polar moment by adding weight to the sprung mass of the vehicle may be beneficial and should have provided similar results without being added to the unsprung mass. It would be more difficult to place it in line with the axles but having that weight over/behind that line create issues as well.
Hate to see you move to a different vehicle because of something like this; especially when you're wanting something that feels more aggressive but have a setup that is being numbed because of things like this.