Serpent 710
04-26-2005, 09:44 PM
Originally posted by InitialD
Sorry bro. My German vocab is no good.
Sorry bro. My German vocab is no good.
You expect me to be fooled by that
04-26-2005, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by InitialD
Like Darth Vader said (may the force be with you), you get more steering. It is best used when you have a high speed sweeper as the cornering speed increases because of the less Ackerman.
Like Darth Vader said (may the force be with you), you get more steering. It is best used when you have a high speed sweeper as the cornering speed increases because of the less Ackerman.
Come on Mark, hop on this , I know your were involved with cutting down the front tires,etc. How did you feel?
04-26-2005, 10:08 PM
Jack,
I would be interested to hear how the comparison goes. For the circuit which I run on, the long servo saver is definately better. I will also carry out a comparison when I get my second 710 back together.
Cheers, Mark.
I would be interested to hear how the comparison goes. For the circuit which I run on, the long servo saver is definately better. I will also carry out a comparison when I get my second 710 back together.
Cheers, Mark.
04-26-2005, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by clmbia45
Come on Mark, hop on this , I know your were involved with cutting down the front tires,etc. How did you feel?
Come on Mark, hop on this , I know your were involved with cutting down the front tires,etc. How did you feel?
I think I was more twitchy than my car at the winternats
But for me, it felt ok - maybe it gave a little too much steering (I had my dual-rate down around 55-60%) - but I didn't really have the feeling that it was too twitchy.It would be interesting to hear if any of the 710 guys had the old servo saver in at the winternats.
Next year, when my pit monkey is also there
I should have more time to experiment 
04-26-2005, 11:18 PM
Originally posted by clmbia45
Several of us changed them out at the winter nats, so not too much time to evaluate. My feeling was I got a significant increase in steering, not only on turn in but mid-sweeper, and in the infield. However, the car was twitchy. This was reduced by reducing the width of the front tires, but it never completely got comfortable. The least move from dead center and the car was right on it. I constantly felt like I'd like "a longer lever handle". I have driven it several times since, and my opinion has not changed. So I'm switching back to the original to compare them again.
Come on Mark, hop on this , I know your were involved with cutting down the front tires,etc. How did you feel?
Several of us changed them out at the winter nats, so not too much time to evaluate. My feeling was I got a significant increase in steering, not only on turn in but mid-sweeper, and in the infield. However, the car was twitchy. This was reduced by reducing the width of the front tires, but it never completely got comfortable. The least move from dead center and the car was right on it. I constantly felt like I'd like "a longer lever handle". I have driven it several times since, and my opinion has not changed. So I'm switching back to the original to compare them again.
Come on Mark, hop on this , I know your were involved with cutting down the front tires,etc. How did you feel?
04-26-2005, 11:21 PM
Re: Re: Re: Re: titanium screws
Originally posted by InitialD
If you can get countersunk ones, that would be good. Use the countersunk shims with the countersunk screws and you solve the problem.
The thing is it's difficult to even get M4 size titanium screws. I wonder if the East titanium screw set for 710 has those screws in titanium or do they only include M3 screws in titanium...
If you can get countersunk ones, that would be good. Use the countersunk shims with the countersunk screws and you solve the problem.
The thing is it's difficult to even get M4 size titanium screws. I wonder if the East titanium screw set for 710 has those screws in titanium or do they only include M3 screws in titanium...
And the prices are...
!!!Maybe will go back for a 2nd and closer look...
04-26-2005, 11:53 PM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: droop
Originally posted by thamjk
Actually this is a very interesting topic. For me this is the way I look at droop. The defination is to represent how much is the chasis travel (up/down) while the car is on the track. They are two measurements that is taken to get the droop.
First is the chasis down travel. The down travel most of the time will be the chasis right height and that can be reduce with applying more up stop.
Second is the chasis up travel. The up travel is measured from the relax point to where the tyre just about to left the ground. The up travel can be reduce by applying more down stop.
Sum up that two measurement and that is what i called droop. Notice, its not the same value as down stop, up stop and right height.
Actually this is a very interesting topic. For me this is the way I look at droop. The defination is to represent how much is the chasis travel (up/down) while the car is on the track. They are two measurements that is taken to get the droop.
First is the chasis down travel. The down travel most of the time will be the chasis right height and that can be reduce with applying more up stop.
Second is the chasis up travel. The up travel is measured from the relax point to where the tyre just about to left the ground. The up travel can be reduce by applying more down stop.
Sum up that two measurement and that is what i called droop. Notice, its not the same value as down stop, up stop and right height.
The effect of the these measurements are to do with weight transfer and of course, how fast and how much weight transfer takes place at any given time depends on the up/down travel a chassis can make and this depends on the upstop/downstop setting as well as shocks settings.
04-27-2005, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by InitialD
Like Darth Vader said (may the force be with you), you get more steering. It is best used when you have a high speed sweeper as the cornering speed increases because of the less Ackerman.
Like Darth Vader said (may the force be with you), you get more steering. It is best used when you have a high speed sweeper as the cornering speed increases because of the less Ackerman.
04-27-2005, 02:27 AM
Originally posted by thamjk
Ya by putting more front toe-in you can futher improve the ackermen.
Ya by putting more front toe-in you can futher improve the ackermen.
You loose a little bit of initial steering when entering the corner.
04-27-2005, 05:37 AM
Re: Impulse/705 chasis
Originally posted by toratoza
Any mod. required for a 705 chasis to be used in an impulse? Any one experience?
Any mod. required for a 705 chasis to be used in an impulse? Any one experience?
04-27-2005, 06:16 AM
Tech Regular
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Milkyway/Planet Earth/Europe/Sweden/Skåne/Malmö
Posts: 349
As the 705 has its battery under the tank, and the impulse hasn't they aren't interchangeable.
04-27-2005, 07:10 AM
Originally posted by markp27
D, you got time to do an experiment for me? If you do, could you do the following:
remove the metal shielded bearings and end-play shims from you clutch.
Now add shims to the thrust bearing carrier until it can no longer be pushed/pulled. Using your verniers, measure the shims which had to be added to achieve this and compare with your measured clutch gap.
Cheers, Mark.
D, you got time to do an experiment for me? If you do, could you do the following:
remove the metal shielded bearings and end-play shims from you clutch.
Now add shims to the thrust bearing carrier until it can no longer be pushed/pulled. Using your verniers, measure the shims which had to be added to achieve this and compare with your measured clutch gap.
Cheers, Mark.
04-27-2005, 07:30 AM
Originally posted by JustRace
Mark...this is how I set my gap. After it's tight I just remove the shims which adds up to the gap I'm trying to achieve. I think I get a more accurate result doing it this way.
Mark...this is how I set my gap. After it's tight I just remove the shims which adds up to the gap I'm trying to achieve. I think I get a more accurate result doing it this way.
I've also used feeler guages (the pre-formed strips of metal which range from 0.01mm upto 1mm) and I get the same measured value. But with the calipers, I'm about 0.2mm off.
For my driving technique, I seem to require a 0.7mm clutch gap to avoid blowing the bearings.
Cheers, Mark.
04-27-2005, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by markp27
I have done it this way before, but that was for a 0.5mm gap - with which I also ended up blowing the bearings. But I feel it is also the most accurate way.
I've also used feeler guages (the pre-formed strips of metal which range from 0.01mm upto 1mm) and I get the same measured value. But with the calipers, I'm about 0.2mm off.
For my driving technique, I seem to require a 0.7mm clutch gap to avoid blowing the bearings.
Cheers, Mark.
I have done it this way before, but that was for a 0.5mm gap - with which I also ended up blowing the bearings. But I feel it is also the most accurate way.
I've also used feeler guages (the pre-formed strips of metal which range from 0.01mm upto 1mm) and I get the same measured value. But with the calipers, I'm about 0.2mm off.
For my driving technique, I seem to require a 0.7mm clutch gap to avoid blowing the bearings.
Cheers, Mark.
04-27-2005, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by jag
Is it the gap or the spring tension that is causing the bearing problem?
Is it the gap or the spring tension that is causing the bearing problem?
I tired many different clutch tensions and non made any real difference to the clutch bell temp.
As a last resort, I opened up the clutch gap and hey-presto, clutch bell temp was 48C after a run.
I measured a friends clutch bell temp after a run he did and it was 51C - he's never had problems with the metal shielded bearings.
I hope now that the temp is lower, that I won't have any further problems.
Cheers, Mark.