RC10T4.1 Thread.
#2822
#2823
10mm is the same as the .400 smaller ballstuds they are still not long enough to add a locknut if your using a full ubrace
#2824
There was some talk in this thread earlier when the factory team starting using the sc10b front towers and arms. Anyone test this setup extensively? Any more feedback?
Do you need the big bores for this setup to work well, or can you use the standard bore shocks?
Do you need the big bores for this setup to work well, or can you use the standard bore shocks?
#2825
Your only hope would be the 12mm ones then.
#2826
#2827
You can still use the standard bore shocks.
#2829
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,616
From: New Jersey
Until then, we don't know what BT is trying to accomplish... for all we know is they want to see if they can reduce costs by having to produce only one set of molds for the SC10, SCB, and T4.1....
#2830
I saw Brent Theilke running it the SCB front end at CRCRC for the champs this past week. I can't say that it looked any better or worse and honestly I just never remembered to even bring it up and ask. But at any rate, they are at least testing it. Once you see Hartson, Due, and all those guys running it consistently, then I would think about trying it.
Until then, we don't know what BT is trying to accomplish... for all we know is they want to see if they can reduce costs by having to produce only one set of molds for the SC10, SCB, and T4.1....
Until then, we don't know what BT is trying to accomplish... for all we know is they want to see if they can reduce costs by having to produce only one set of molds for the SC10, SCB, and T4.1....

#2832
Thanks for helping me clarify that
#2833
Do you know if they are also testing it on the SC10?
The parts look interesting. It would be a cool change if the T4.2 had something like this.
#2835
No mod to body post. But J concepts is or has released a new body to clear the shock towers. I have a finisher body and clears but had to remove the outer hole in the shock location to fit.



