Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric Off-Road
Team Associated B4.2 Thread >

Team Associated B4.2 Thread

Community
Wiki Posts
Search
Like Tree4Likes

Team Associated B4.2 Thread

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:01 AM
  #4036  
Suspended
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 534
Default

Originally Posted by aeRayls
wider at the hex will make the car feel more stable but will sacrifice rear grip.
+1 That's always been my experience.

Originally Posted by Wildcat1971
when you say rear grip, are you refering to forward bite, side bite or both?
To me, both. But more so, sidebite.

So my "general" set-up I have using the midrange of hexes. If I want more traction I go to the narrower hexes, and if I want a little less grip I'll go to the wider hexes.
pablo040 is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:04 AM
  #4037  
Wild Cherry's Avatar
Tech Legend
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 22,595
From: TRCR Modified Driver
Default

Originally Posted by Eli
With a fresh set of axles with all new parts the only time i felt a bind with the set screw in and turning in my hand i felt a little bit of bind near full movement of the cva or cvd.

Not mind .... Still Smooth ......

If you are so concern about pin wear ?

The pin is the least of the wear problems . The barrel & dog bone wear far more before the pin does .
Feel this is the source of the bind you are experiencing ...
Wild Cherry is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:04 AM
  #4038  
aeRayls's Avatar
Tech Elite
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,257
Default

Mostly forward, side bite is certainly affected though. Basically on any car that I've tried it... It's just a fail. Unless you have a track that pretty uneven and rough but still has good grip.... Which rarely happens... We run into that out here on our outdoor tracks in the summer. Most all tracks have to water frequently. It some get rutted and blown out(thanks to f'n Ebuggy and 4x4sc)...

Without ever trying it.... I'd say if you're running the C hub setup(which has a tendancy to feel great in a corner than all of the sudden step out) I'd say too going wider at the hex would make the car totally hurting.

Now with an A hub setup... It could very well work to an advantage if you have track conditions like I mentioned.
aeRayls is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:04 AM
  #4039  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,616
From: New Jersey
Default

Originally Posted by vwjuice
Just curious if anyone has ran the B4.2 against the Schumacher buggies? Those look really nice as well.

Also why doesn't Losi or AE run carbon fiber chassis' on their buggies? A lot of 4wd buggies and even a few 2wd buggies do. Just curious I wouldn't want it because I know I would break it.
the main reason AE cars don't come with carbon is because back in the original B4 days, everyone found that the flex that came from the plastic translated into a more stable and better handling car. In theory, as the grip comes up, then you switch to stiffer suspension parts, namely carbon arms. The carbon flexes less, so it reduces the level of grip. This is important if you run on high bite surfaces.

Most common parts changed are front arms, caster blocks, front top brace, and U Brace.

People will also use the rear arms from B44, which are in between std plastic and carbon. Again.... just a tuning option.

Unless you are on a very high bite surface, just throw standard kit plastic on and run it until it breaks. The slop that comes just adds to the traction.


as far as why does the 4.2 cost more? Well the shocks alone are 100.00 upgrade. The alum rack, hex conversion, vts slipper... you're looking at another 50.00-70.00. So for the money, it's a great deal.

The downside to the 4.2 is that if you want a 'fresh tight car', you will need to put new plastics on (arms, bulkheads, castor blocks) every 4-6 weeks.
Bob Barry is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:07 AM
  #4040  
Wildcat1971's Avatar
Tech Prophet
iTrader: (84)
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 17,389
From: Arizona
Default

Originally Posted by pablo040
Well, that was always my understanding - that comparing piston hole size, you start by measuring the total overall hole sizes added together. Yes, number of holes has something to do with the whole equation relative to pack, but the math still has to work. I'd have to look it up somewhere, but that's what I always thought.
I started reading about it alot more once i got the BB shocks, because they never felt right to me. I was trying to figure out what to do. I liked the v2's in the corners, but i liked the pack of the BB shocks. With the 1.7's by buggy drove horrible. No pack and like a boat in the corners. With the 1.6's I had the pack I wanted, but it was kinda of over sensitive in the corners. So far, it feels liek the 1.4x3 give me the pack of the 1.6's and the cornering of the v2's. I only have one week on the new pistons, so the jury is still out. But that is my take so far. How big were the #2's? ~ 2x 1.2 = 2.4. So obviously it cant be that simple. The bore size change would obviously effect it also. Like I said, I read quite a bit about pack when i was chassis slapping all over the place. More holes almost always means that the total area of the holes is larger than with fewer holes. but with increased pack and a change in low speed dampening.
Wildcat1971 is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:08 AM
  #4041  
vwjuice's Avatar
Tech Master
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,059
From: Oregon city, OR
Default

Originally Posted by Bob Barry
the main reason AE cars don't come with carbon is because back in the original B4 days, everyone found that the flex that came from the plastic translated into a more stable and better handling car. In theory, as the grip comes up, then you switch to stiffer suspension parts, namely carbon arms. The carbon flexes less, so it reduces the level of grip. This is important if you run on high bite surfaces.

Most common parts changed are front arms, caster blocks, front top brace, and U Brace.

People will also use the rear arms from B44, which are in between std plastic and carbon. Again.... just a tuning option.

Unless you are on a very high bite surface, just throw standard kit plastic on and run it until it breaks. The slop that comes just adds to the traction.


as far as why does the 4.2 cost more? Well the shocks alone are 100.00 upgrade. The alum rack, hex conversion, vts slipper... you're looking at another 50.00-70.00. So for the money, it's a great deal.

The downside to the 4.2 is that if you want a 'fresh tight car', you will need to put new plastics on (arms, bulkheads, castor blocks) every 4-6 weeks.
That makes a lot of sense. Thank you for a great explanation.
vwjuice is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:08 AM
  #4042  
Suspended
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 534
Default

Originally Posted by Wildcat1971
I have been adding and removing weight on both my buggies. I have decided that less weight is definitely not always better. Granted you can always add weight, but having the weight down low in the chassis is a nice place to have it. That is why some makers have gone to alum chassis in the 1/10 buggies 2wd buggies. On both my buggies if I tried to go too low, they started to hand sarcastically. Way to sensitive to inputs. twitchy is probably the right word. After a lot of testing I settled on full packs. I never really liked the shorties. Maybe on a higher bite track i would have liked it better. But for outdoor tracks, I prefer the full pack.
I've actually grown to like the shorties - because then I can use the extra 100grams worth of weight bars were, how much, and why I want it.
But at the same time I have standard packs too, just so it's an option.
It's not like I need the mAh rating of a long pack, not when I'm only putting 1200-1500 back into the pack after a race/heat.
pablo040 is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:14 AM
  #4043  
Eli's Avatar
Eli
Tech Master
iTrader: (15)
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,553
From: San Diego, CA.
Default

Originally Posted by Wild Cherry
Not mind .... Still Smooth ......

If you are so concern about pin wear ?

The pin is the least of the wear problems . The barrel & dog bone wear far more before the pin does .
Feel this is the source of the bind you are experiencing ...
Everything is new when i noticed this

See for yourself

build a new set and tell me near full movement if you noice anything then remove set screw and try again.

the method i used to try this was holding the axle in one hand and letting the cva hang and basically do small circles with my hand on the axle and noticing the cva movement, i did it back to back to back and everytime with the set screw in it didnt move as nicely but im done beating this dead horse.
Eli is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:15 AM
  #4044  
Suspended
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 534
Default

Originally Posted by Wildcat1971
I started reading about it alot more once i got the BB shocks, because they never felt right to me. I was trying to figure out what to do. I liked the v2's in the corners, but i liked the pack of the BB shocks. With the 1.7's by buggy drove horrible. No pack and like a boat in the corners. With the 1.6's I had the pack I wanted, but it was kinda of over sensitive in the corners. So far, it feels liek the 1.4x3 give me the pack of the 1.6's and the cornering of the v2's. I only have one week on the new pistons, so the jury is still out. But that is my take so far. How big were the #2's? ~ 2x 1.2 = 2.4. So obviously it cant be that simple. The bore size change would obviously effect it also. Like I said, I read quite a bit about pack when i was chassis slapping all over the place. More holes almost always means that the total area of the holes is larger than with fewer holes. but with increased pack and a change in low speed dampening.
Well, we could probably go on all day about this - but it was a huge adjustment for me when I got my 22 with big bores. Way different fluid choices than what I was used to.
But then they were 4-hole pistons, microscopic in size compared to the ones in the AE bigbore pistons. When we first started dabbling with the TLR pistons to change them to 2-holers, we were filling up 2 of the holes and boring out the other two to 1.6 - and then the AE pistons came out, and no more dorking with TLR pistons.
Then we could get into the whole tapered piston thing, or mip's bypass pistons ..... there's no end.
It still comes down to the track, and fine-tuning, and personal preference. I've been back and forth a bunch, probably too many times, but it's just one of many things to mess with.
pablo040 is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:18 AM
  #4045  
Suspended
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,104
From: Mother America
Default

Originally Posted by Eli
Im taking time out of my bussy schedule to try to quickly help some of these people and you go throw this at me? Please come down to san diego so i can smoke you on the track.
I didn't mean to disrupt your bussy schedule. So do you work on busses, or do you drive them? Basically I was saying that running the set screw will change the way the car handles. You made your decision to run what you run based on how it felt in your hands and that is fine. What you did would be like building two set of shocks with different pistons, and then picking one set solely on how they felt in your hands. I was wondering if anyone had done back to back on track testing with and without the set screw.

Also YGPM.
ifuonlyknew is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:20 AM
  #4046  
aeRayls's Avatar
Tech Elite
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,257
Default

As for the "Cvd" discussion...

Actual MIP cvd's have more bind(by design)

The AE cva's have less bind(by design and certainly when NOT using the screw)

Normally my home track is medium bite at best usually slick and rough... After many practice days the MIP Cvd was just better because the bind they created gave more forward bite, better on the bumps and you can get onto the straight(on the gas hard) way better than with cva's...

Conversely, on a smoother track lots of turns/twists or banking... Cva's are much quicker and carry more corner speed!
aeRayls is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:52 AM
  #4047  
Wildcat1971's Avatar
Tech Prophet
iTrader: (84)
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 17,389
From: Arizona
Default

Originally Posted by pablo040
I've actually grown to like the shorties - because then I can use the extra 100grams worth of weight bars were, how much, and why I want it.
But at the same time I have standard packs too, just so it's an option.
It's not like I need the mAh rating of a long pack, not when I'm only putting 1200-1500 back into the pack after a race/heat.
yeah, that is what I did with my shorties. I lightened the car then I added weight in different places. But it still felt best with a full pack. To me anyway. On my other car I like shorties because it can suck trying to remove a full pack, lol. Still adding weight to that car.
Wildcat1971 is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:58 AM
  #4048  
Tech Master
iTrader: (55)
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,130
Default

Originally Posted by Wildcat1971
yeah, that is what I did with my shorties. I lightened the car then I added weight in different places. But it still felt best with a full pack. To me anyway. On my other car I like shorties because it can suck trying to remove a full pack, lol. Still adding weight to that car.
Totally agree!
shagnat is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 11:58 AM
  #4049  
Wild Cherry's Avatar
Tech Legend
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 22,595
From: TRCR Modified Driver
Default

Eli

The difference or improvement as you claim is not good enough to risk a DNF .

This is why Brown told me use the screw on his CVA ...

I agree with his experience , use it & share with everyone ...

Tonight I will examine both just for fun...

Will remove my worn out CVA pins & compare to pins that did not use the screw with the same wear & tear .....
Wild Cherry is offline  
Old 04-11-2013 | 12:05 PM
  #4050  
Wildcat1971's Avatar
Tech Prophet
iTrader: (84)
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 17,389
From: Arizona
Default

Originally Posted by aeRayls
As for the "Cvd" discussion...

Actual MIP cvd's have more bind(by design)

The AE cva's have less bind(by design and certainly when NOT using the screw)

Normally my home track is medium bite at best usually slick and rough... After many practice days the MIP Cvd was just better because the bind they created gave more forward bite, better on the bumps and you can get onto the straight(on the gas hard) way better than with cva's...

Conversely, on a smoother track lots of turns/twists or banking... Cva's are much quicker and carry more corner speed!
yeah, that is pretty much what I read about the CVD's and the bind. Some people still use them for tuning. Does the CVS's with the set screw bind in the same way as the CVD's? I would assume different, but unsure if less or more binding. I can visually see how a free floating pin would bind less when it is not held in place with a set screw. With out feeling them in my hands or running on the track, that would make sense. But as always, it depends on how the change feels to the driver. most people come here to ask how well something works because they dont want to spend the money unless the reviews are good. Others buy everything and try it out and report back. Last, some just do what ever their friends do and believe it. Most people are of the first type. the first group rely on the second group to help decide what to buy. The last group are living in their own world. I am in the second group, lol.


To further this discussion. What about Dogbone pin wear? I have notices that some of my pins are getting flat spots on the forward driving face. I know some people rotate the bone (left to right) to get a more even wear. This flat spot seems like it would cause more friction on the plunge and also add in more bind under power. So how does all that play into when to replace the bones.
Wildcat1971 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.