Cautrell05

iTrader: (8)

Simple as what? That doesent make any sense for either question

Autocratic

iTrader: (26)

Instead of making new front shock bodies or shafts, they are able to use parts currently available since they are already making new front arms. By adding the hump for the front lower mounting they can keep the shocks the same and still have the required travel.

Same with using front hex wheels. Without knowing 100% sure, I'm assuming they are using the same front and rear wheels. This would be a huge cost savings because they won't have to make a new front wheel just for the SC210.

Cautrell05

iTrader: (8)

I can understand what your saying about using existing parts although I would think it would make more sense to put a shorter tower on vs raising the lower mounts. Seems to make more sense keeping everything as low as possible.

As for the hexes on a shortcourse it makes perfect sense to have them on the front. I just converted mine from the old AE front axles to hexes so I could run the wheels on the front or rear and it is nice. What I dont understand is the rush for 2wd buggys to have hexes on the front. the big thing I see is rotating weight. with the old style the axle is fixed and only half of the wheel bearing is rotating. With the hex style half of the bearing is spinning along with the axle(usually steel) the pin, hex and wheel nut. Im not sure if its enough to matter but I would think every little bit helps.

Nick

Jonny5

iTrader: (19)

The front wheels only roll- they are not directly accelerated/decelerated by the motor, making the increase in centrifugal mass less noticeable.

twigman08

Seriously, it really isn't even enough to matter. If that little amount of "weight" was going to cause a handling problem or anything then absolutely none of us would add weight to our cars. Plus these are RC cars. These are not million dollar machines that are placed on a 7 post shaker every week to simulate a track. We don't go and dyno our shocks and all that.

Jmuck69

iTrader: (14)

they feel like a million bucks to the pocketbook sometimes!

TAMAK

iTrader: (29)

The car IMO looks production ready and may be the reason why we are having issues getting more parts for the DEX210. This car uses ALOT of the the same pieces the 210 has. The reason I say it looks production ready is I cannot point out 1 piece from another manufacturer.

I give it till the start of the summer season, June is my guess. Only because of Parts availability.

rickybobbyxxx

iTrader: (-1)

Dam just saw pics of this truck at toy fair, looks just like an x factory truck before they went all carbon fiber, looks like x factory is def getting my money!!! Theres really nothing new to be excited about

Jmuck69

iTrader: (14)

Good luck with that.

TAMAK

iTrader: (29)

This states 2 months!! http://www.shortcourse.eu/2012/02/du...-2wd-sc-truck/

Jmuck69

iTrader: (14)

Sign me up! I wonder why the composite chassis was chosen over the aluminum? Weight, flex characteristics or a combination of both?

jmackani

iTrader: (14)

I know the hexes on the 4x4 allowed them to take the arms out wider. The arms are wider than most of the 1/8 scales that I have seen. Not so sure this is the reason the 2wd version or not, but I am betting it would be similar because the wheels are probably the same between the 2wd and 4wd sct.

Jonny5

iTrader: (19)

Maybe the longer length necessitated larger and more sturdy side pods, adding too much weight. Either way, I'm ready to get my hands on one.

cnelson3

iTrader: (66)

can someone tell me about the durango plastics? are they jello like the losi xxx sct or stiff like the kyosho stuff? I've been a big kyosho fan and it's mainly because the plastics are awesome. AE stuff turns to slop sooooo fast and i heard losi stuff does the same.

Grandturk

iTrader: (5)

The stock plastic on the Losi SCT are junk. Flex like wet noodles.