Xray XB8
#1142
#1143
Hello shesha,
I just want to share my understanding about shock position.
If You,
Move the "Upper" shock mounting "In" then it will get softer initially.
Move the "Upper" shock mounting "Out" then it will get harder (more linear).
Move the "Lower" shock mounting "In" then it will get softer (more linear).
Move the "Lower" shock mounting "Out" then it will get harder (progressive).
You were mentioning that, "move the lower shock position out first". Then the car will be more stable but felt harder. Then You compensate with lowering the upper shock position until one point You get the good feeling. Or You need to lower the oil if the suspension felt too stiff.
So, there is actually nothing wrong with the Theory. It is still goes according with the natural law of physics.
Cheerrss..
I just want to share my understanding about shock position.
If You,
Move the "Upper" shock mounting "In" then it will get softer initially.
Move the "Upper" shock mounting "Out" then it will get harder (more linear).
Move the "Lower" shock mounting "In" then it will get softer (more linear).
Move the "Lower" shock mounting "Out" then it will get harder (progressive).
You were mentioning that, "move the lower shock position out first". Then the car will be more stable but felt harder. Then You compensate with lowering the upper shock position until one point You get the good feeling. Or You need to lower the oil if the suspension felt too stiff.
So, there is actually nothing wrong with the Theory. It is still goes according with the natural law of physics.
Cheerrss..
You are right to say, softer, but from the feel the softer part occurs earlier in the shock dampening process, the exact feel I am getting is soft initially on immediate compression, and gradually harder as it goes past the last half of the dampening process.
Try it out on the arms first from in to out then go full down on the shock towers.
It just seems to me that theory sometimes doesnt really match to what you get as feel and feedback from the car on the track.
The major point of observation I got from switching from inner holes on the arms to the outer was, the car would land and square up much better on acceleration especially after a landing and jabbing the throttle hard after.
The other point of observation, you dont get that much sway from the shocks standing up, the car feels level with the surface at all times, so less sway, it just felt it was hogging the ground to push harder into corners.
My first advise is to first try the arms outer holes as opposed to inner holes and dont change the shock tower position from stock, then gradually lean over the tower if you want additional stability and lateral bite.
It feels like your running 0 droop with them inclined and maximum droop with the shocks stood up, just so much less sway.
Try it out on the arms first from in to out then go full down on the shock towers.
It just seems to me that theory sometimes doesnt really match to what you get as feel and feedback from the car on the track.
The major point of observation I got from switching from inner holes on the arms to the outer was, the car would land and square up much better on acceleration especially after a landing and jabbing the throttle hard after.
The other point of observation, you dont get that much sway from the shocks standing up, the car feels level with the surface at all times, so less sway, it just felt it was hogging the ground to push harder into corners.
My first advise is to first try the arms outer holes as opposed to inner holes and dont change the shock tower position from stock, then gradually lean over the tower if you want additional stability and lateral bite.
It feels like your running 0 droop with them inclined and maximum droop with the shocks stood up, just so much less sway.
#1144
I always felt that laying down the shocks resulted inn less sidebite. Unless the shocks were way too hard to start with...?
#1145
From JQ:
When standing the shocks up more, the car is more responsive, jumps better, doesn’t bottom out as easily, but can feel unstable in bumps. The rear of the car will slide in a controllable way, as it loses traction smoothly. Larger piston holes and softer springs are used when shocks are stood up a lot.
Leaning the shocks over, makes the car more stable, it will be easier to drive on bumpy tracks most of the time. It increases sidebite, but for example the rear end loses traction suddenly, and not as controllably as with the shocks stood up. You can’t slide the car as well. If you need to make the car more stable, and easier to drive, the first thing to do is to move the shock out on the front arm. It reduces steering and makes the car a lot easier to drive, and less prone to flipping over. When leaning just the front shocks over, the car is less responsive, but turns more while cornering, and when accelerating out of the corner. Leaning just the rear shocks over increases rear traction and reduces overall steering, although depending on the set up, you may get more steering into the corner
When standing the shocks up more, the car is more responsive, jumps better, doesn’t bottom out as easily, but can feel unstable in bumps. The rear of the car will slide in a controllable way, as it loses traction smoothly. Larger piston holes and softer springs are used when shocks are stood up a lot.
Leaning the shocks over, makes the car more stable, it will be easier to drive on bumpy tracks most of the time. It increases sidebite, but for example the rear end loses traction suddenly, and not as controllably as with the shocks stood up. You can’t slide the car as well. If you need to make the car more stable, and easier to drive, the first thing to do is to move the shock out on the front arm. It reduces steering and makes the car a lot easier to drive, and less prone to flipping over. When leaning just the front shocks over, the car is less responsive, but turns more while cornering, and when accelerating out of the corner. Leaning just the rear shocks over increases rear traction and reduces overall steering, although depending on the set up, you may get more steering into the corner
#1147
Tech Master
iTrader: (43)
No conversion kit.
Here is the supplementary sheet for the XB9E parts needed:
http://www.teamxray.com/xb9e/downloa...ary_manual.pdf
FYI you also have the option of using the existing XB8 servo mount/battery box for the servo/receiver/transponder.
Just cut it in between the throttle servo mount and the receiver battery box.
It will save you some money but might not look as clean as you would like.
Bent
Here is the supplementary sheet for the XB9E parts needed:
http://www.teamxray.com/xb9e/downloa...ary_manual.pdf
FYI you also have the option of using the existing XB8 servo mount/battery box for the servo/receiver/transponder.
Just cut it in between the throttle servo mount and the receiver battery box.
It will save you some money but might not look as clean as you would like.
Bent
Congrats to you and Malin on the great run at Neo! Also congrats on her getting accepted into XRay's junior racer program...
#1148
Tech Master
iTrader: (95)
Thank you sir! Great to get a answer right from the pro! Real good stuff!
Frank I would have thought the same way. Will Def keep this in mind and try it out.
TL is team losi.
We tested the upper adjustment after race day and I always thought that decreasing the caster made the car twitchy from experience on previous cars, but going form 14* to 11* (using the clips in the upper arm) it did exactly what has been discussed calmed down corner entry and made it exit more aggressively but the biggest thing I noticed is that it sailed through the bumps easier without being upset. Defiantly worth messing with.
We tested the upper adjustment after race day and I always thought that decreasing the caster made the car twitchy from experience on previous cars, but going form 14* to 11* (using the clips in the upper arm) it did exactly what has been discussed calmed down corner entry and made it exit more aggressively but the biggest thing I noticed is that it sailed through the bumps easier without being upset. Defiantly worth messing with.
#1151
Hello shesha,
I just want to share my understanding about shock position.
If You,
Move the "Upper" shock mounting "In" then it will get softer initially.
Move the "Upper" shock mounting "Out" then it will get harder (more linear).
Move the "Lower" shock mounting "In" then it will get softer (more linear).
Move the "Lower" shock mounting "Out" then it will get harder (progressive).
You were mentioning that, "move the lower shock position out first". Then the car will be more stable but felt harder. Then You compensate with lowering the upper shock position until one point You get the good feeling. Or You need to lower the oil if the suspension felt too stiff.
So, there is actually nothing wrong with the Theory. It is still goes according with the natural law of physics.
Cheerrss..
I just want to share my understanding about shock position.
If You,
Move the "Upper" shock mounting "In" then it will get softer initially.
Move the "Upper" shock mounting "Out" then it will get harder (more linear).
Move the "Lower" shock mounting "In" then it will get softer (more linear).
Move the "Lower" shock mounting "Out" then it will get harder (progressive).
You were mentioning that, "move the lower shock position out first". Then the car will be more stable but felt harder. Then You compensate with lowering the upper shock position until one point You get the good feeling. Or You need to lower the oil if the suspension felt too stiff.
So, there is actually nothing wrong with the Theory. It is still goes according with the natural law of physics.
Cheerrss..
I do recall my exact question to Reno was;
"The car handles very good all around the track but lacks acceleration stability and side bite"
His reply, was; " Place the suspension arm mount on the outer hole to gain side traction, and lower the upper shock tower to square the car out on acceleration"
Now theory says outer holes on arms for more side bite, but what would be the theory between the outer hole arm to the first outer hole shock position and one step down each, from my observation maintaining stock upper shock position and leaving the shock out on the arm, yields the best squaring up factor on a loose track , going one more innner gave it a little more forward traction but increased the overall stability and increased the cars overall smooth handling, hence less roll.
Also I do recall having spoke to JQ at the previous Nitro Party in Thailand, about suspension theory, and his point was always to focus on the suspension to pack the landing and not pronounce the landing, he was also prototyping pistons for the WE edition he was working on.
If I was to go on theory alone, then for the number of years racing from one continent to the other, my theory is to always select a piston that I am always happy with that would work at 90% of the track I am on, then base shock oil selection on the overall outside temp, Thailand most oil selection hovered around 60 to 70 cst values due to High weather temps, how do you relate this with Reno running 70cst at Neobuggy and Temps were in the 10c as opposed to thailand being 40C ???
Theory would say to me more pack, logic says to me Temps would make the oil more or less dense in various temps.
I could go on and on about this, logic sometimes does not seem to mesh with the setups some drivers race with, yet they are able to achieve outstanding results, driving being a major part of this, but one would agree that proper tyre selection and correct suspension setup is more then 60% of the work.
Driving a track that has alot of traction would not make alot of difference whether you land correctly or not or suspension being setup right, the only observation you would have is how much pack you would get from the landing, since traction is high, the buggy would square out on acceleration.
Driving a low traction track is a totally different ball game, with high Jumps and that was the case with Neobuggy, large jumps, high speed jumps, suspension has to pack and maintain traction at the same time.
If it goes more towards theory, then 1+1 = 2, but in all honesty the logic and correlation of what the shock position adjustments do in relation to the oil selection and the overall dampening process, and when it occurs does significantly affect the overall cars performance.
Just my 2 cents.
#1152
I believe this matches what I am trying to say, extracted from: http://users.telenet.be/elvo/
Note that if you change the lower shock mounting location, you change both the shock angle and the motion ratio, but it's usually the change in motion ratio that has the biggest effect. The amount of suspension travel also changes, which can also affect the car's handling.
The angle of the shocks, a, has a more subtle effect than the lower mounting position: it changes the way the motion ratio subtly changes as the suspension is compressed.
The shock angle isn't constant either: it gets bigger as the suspension is compressed. This effect is more pronounced as the shocks are more laid down, so the more inclined the shocks are, the more progressive the wheel rate will be. So think of the top mounting positions as a means of fine-tuning spring and damper rates, and changing the progressiveness.
Note that if you change the lower shock mounting location, you change both the shock angle and the motion ratio, but it's usually the change in motion ratio that has the biggest effect. The amount of suspension travel also changes, which can also affect the car's handling.
The angle of the shocks, a, has a more subtle effect than the lower mounting position: it changes the way the motion ratio subtly changes as the suspension is compressed.
The shock angle isn't constant either: it gets bigger as the suspension is compressed. This effect is more pronounced as the shocks are more laid down, so the more inclined the shocks are, the more progressive the wheel rate will be. So think of the top mounting positions as a means of fine-tuning spring and damper rates, and changing the progressiveness.
#1153
Tech Regular
Thailand most oil selection hovered around 60 to 70 cst values due to High weather temps, how do you relate this with Reno running 70cst at Neobuggy and Temps were in the 10c as opposed to thailand being 40C ???
60cst is very very very very thin oil.
Can not be used in any model racing car.
Paco
60cst is very very very very thin oil.
Can not be used in any model racing car.
Paco
#1154
Tech Regular
#1155
Tech Elite
iTrader: (24)
Thailand most oil selection hovered around 60 to 70 cst values due to High weather temps, how do you relate this with Reno running 70cst at Neobuggy and Temps were in the 10c as opposed to thailand being 40C ???
60cst is very very very very thin oil.
Can not be used in any model racing car.
Paco
60cst is very very very very thin oil.
Can not be used in any model racing car.
Paco
Shock oil....
http://www.twf8.ws/php/index.php?opt...per&Itemid=175
http://www.twf8.ws/php/index.php?opt...per&Itemid=175