I don't follow all testing sessions. He might have been testing with pipes as we are working on a line to complement the engines. Also on the Heemstede track gearing ant especially tire size have a big influence on power and topspeed.

Hi Julius,

Thanks for the info

Hope to see more of the engines soon.

Thomas

Thanks for the info

D

Did you find any advantage with the 1.2 holes...seems like a bit of work

Using it with thicker shock oils make the car feel more grippy on certain tracks while still making it stable and not lazy.

I had a few sets of shocks around and with too much time. I work with the fix hole set of piston. Not the adjustable ones. Easier to drill. Yeah it's a lot of work but if you're like me who like to tinker a lot, then it's kinda fun and the findings are pretty satisfying.

OK..I have just put in 40W oil and red springs because the car feels a bit lazy at times. My problem with modifying the pistons is that it seems like it would be the same as putting 35W in my shocks with standard holes? Or 40W with 1.2 holes?

Ok, so here is a close up of where it hits when the new part is installed. Both mine and Picards have hit here. We just shaved off a little of the bulkhead to allow it to clear.

i didnt even notice . however, they are the same size as the standard shock.

Most of the times, lower spring rate combined with lower oil gives you more cornering speed (very noticable on bigger flowing track at any traction condition). Yes, harder to drive since you always need to filled with enough throttle power right after going into the corner or you will 'break' the rear traction.

No they are not the same in terms of speed flowing through the piston holes but it might have the same hardness feeling.

These are the adjustable shocks of long ago....
They work nice when put together perfectly. But the adjustment O-ring would often come unseated and make the shocks inconsistent. Also for ease of setup comparison the step-adjustment shocks are way better.

In my experience I have found that the car is easier to drive with a softer setup but it lacks response in my opinion. I have always found a harder setup to give a quicker car reaction, in turn giving you less room for error. This weekend I am trying 40W oil instead of the 30W i have been using

Why "surely NOT 61"??? This is the combo which gives the best acceleration and for small tracks this is the combo which is best.

I am not suggesting the answer IS to make the 16 bigger either. Maybe the answer is ta make the 61 slightly larger in diameter instead?

I was just waiting an answer from Serpent and if you (as a rep of Serpent) are suggesting that that particular combo should not be used than I suggest this is announced at myTSN or maybe place a note in the current spurs or pinion packages which are not recommended as a combo.

I have struggled to get the power to the ground with that combo, tried lots of different car settings myself, I think that is what julius means but could be wrong

Ah thanks for this info Julius. I have just bought the set and now I'm really looking forward to trying it out.

This now makes sense. I've tried the 17-61 without problems at all and after this weekend's race (errr, maybe kicking Mark's a$$ ) I'm going to try the 16-60 combo.