Yes RC3 will work with both cars. There is no specific model for either at this point so you would have to create them yourself. It's not that difficult to do you just need digital calipers and some time to dismantle and measure the components. Lots of users have done this already. There are graphic images built into the program that illustrate the measurements required.

Hey Bob, would it be possible to get a weight distribution slider on the handling page? just something to quickly see what moving around a few grams would have.

(I'd love to see the impact of moving arms forward/back within their limits, but I have a feeling that's a bit of work to calculate).

Just so I am clear you would like to be able to adjust the wheel base and the location of the CG front-rear and left-right.

Both are possible and I'll add them to the list.

Not left and right, wheelbase as one, and F/R weight balance (I think we can do this in the car setup, just a quick way to change it on the handling page).

OK I'll see if I can work something in. In the mean time you change the wheelbase in the Chassis manager and change the fore/aft position of the CG in the Car Manager if you want to look at the effects. You just won't get a head to head comparision.

hello bob and everyone!

would it be possible to add multiple LAxle points to a single front suspension in a future version?

I'll add it to the list but just so you know this change involves a change to the internal structure of the database that contains all the car, chassis and setup information. It can be done but is something I am very reluctant to do as it could have bad consequences in the form of affecting evryones database.

It's something I will consider for a new version. For now just create a second chassis model with the other Laxle dimension.

well, thanks for considering it

Bob, Very interesting software. I am very interested to give it a try. I've recently gotten back into racing in a big way (off road electric buggy) and am curious as to what effect anti squat and pro squat have on your calcs, and also if caster, and kick up could be added?

There will be a point where I can't get any more useful info out of the current program data setup. That's when I plan to start work on a new version. That version will likely be more 3D in nature so I can include more effects such as dive/squat, castor, akerman, chassis stiffness etc.

It will be a while though before that happens as I need to see where the current program goes before I invest more time into developing a bigger better version. I have a couple more updates planned that will include improvements to the Dynamics page and possibly looking at shock response. Then I plan to move the program to a cloud App so it will be accessible to all platforms not just PC's. After that I plan on starting the new version.

If I could just get rid on my day job it would all happen a lot faster.

hi, just got program... i love chassis dynamics this is excellent to have something specific to RC.
I have the some thoughts about chasis flex too. It is said in everything i read on chassis dynamic that ideally should be negligable flex, well why is RC any different now.
Likely it is just a quick way to fine tune overall stiffness, by removing some screws instead of swapping springs and re-aligning things. Also perhaps track surface and tyre roundness isnt quite as smooth for a 1/10th as for full size cars. Flex in chassis might help deal with that (thus increasing tyre contact) without having to go to very soft springs. Just my thoughts thanks.
-Jeff

I certainly agree with you comments on chassis stiffness. A lot of research into vehicle dynamics went into this program during development and I can honestly say that not one of the sources I used said the way to better performance was to reduce chassis stiffness. They all state and provide examples of how to increase the bending and torsional stiffness.

The other problem with using chassis stiffness as a tuning tool is now you have essentially added another spring into the suspension. A spring with no damper (shock) to control the response. That's like saying take all the oil out of your shocks and see what happens.

Personally I don't play around with chassis stiffness so maybe I am wrong. We already have more adjustability than full scale race cars so that's enough to keep me happy.

I agree with not complicating things too much. I guess I'll leave my chassis at one particular setting for now, and try to adjust other things. My tc4 was the king of traction rolling, but now it's as planted as a pro racer . Thanks Bob! I don't have your program yet( I got no credit card/Paypal), only an Android phone and old windows98se computers , so I am in the hole .... I'll see if I can get ready by 2013 ....

Chassis stiffness/flex in radio controlled racing is simply there to account for the fact that if you hit a small bump, you are only relying on your visuals to react and counter the force put onto the car. This is quite difficult to do with normal human reaction time, and requires a huge amount of focus and ability (two things which I myself lack ).

If you have a totally stiff car with a properly adjusted suspension, the car will not ride bumps very well as the smallest bump will affect the suspension directly which will then move the car around on the surface, making it unpredictable.

If you introduce a small amount of chassis flex, the car will be more settled over bumps and not require any user inputs to steady the car (in a perfect situation).

Coming back to 1:1 cars, this is a non issue, as the driver is quite literally part of the car and can feel the movement and correct the steering accordingly with their subconscious mind, rather than using visual stimuli and the conscious mind, increasing their reaction time.

What you are describing here is a shock absorber issue more than a stiffness thing, yes we are looking for a car that gives predictable results but the biggest problem we have with bumps are the shocks.

Chassis flex works as de-coupling of the the front and rear roll stiffness, a car that has a very large Difference in roll stiffness will benefit from the flex to remain stable.
Basically if we are able to better balance our roll stiffnesses front and rear we would need the flex less and be faster, if we cannot achieve balance by either wrong decisions or design flaws we have to work around we would be slower without the flex.

My 2cts