I have been following this thread for a while and decided to buy the license today.

Program looks great but i have to learn how to use it properly and play around.

Would be great to have a Xray T4 car file download, and awesomatix for the future too.

Regards!!

I hope to have a T4 model soon. The awesomatix however is a different beast due to the shock configuration. I know a couple users have attempted to create a model but I haven`t heard if they were successful or not.

As far as learning the program is concerned watch the screencast videos on the website to get you familiar with the program. Then start with the T3 model and the Kit Setup. It should be very close to the T4 in terms of suspension geometry. That will give you a good base to work from. Then just start playing with settings, apply them to your car and test it out on the track. It won't be long before you will be a pro.

Hey Bob, do you have any measure of how much lower the CG is with short shocks? Is it, in your opinion, a negligible amount?
I just weighed a TRF shock without a spring but with the large diameter retainer (with oil) and it was 9.5 grams, so roughly 40 grams for 4 shocks without springs, lowered 2-4mm BUT at the expense of less damper travel and usually the use of shorter springs... what are your thoughts?

Hi narcotiks, I am with you on this one and have the same question. I however also think that races are won and lost based on the small percentage differences between chassis, setups and driving. For example a race might cover 20 laps. If one finds a 0.1 second improvement per lap then one has a two second advantage over a competitor at the end of the race, which is significant.

I think we generally place too much emphasis on having the best of everything equipment wise instead of focusing on the driving. Running wide on a corner will cost one 0.2s which negates the advantage of having the best of the best. Dont get we wrong the right equipment is very important but overall ones driving ability will make a bigger difference in my eyes.

Others thoughts?

My thoughts exactly !! But from a technical standpoint, its nice to know what these supposed "changes" do to the car, I run a hobbywing V3 speedy which without wires, weights about 40 grams. So, the gain in lowering the shocks by 2-4 mm could be lost by using a thicker or, two or more layers of double sided tape? I really think "short shocks" is all a marketing exercise to cause people to buy a new car because nothing can be drastically improved over current TC design (apart from Awesomatix which is in a different ball park) i bet you, if the design doesn't shift towards Awesomatix, or lowered shock mounting position on the arm like the Mi5, in a year or two, companies that have released cars with short shocks will come out with new and exciting "long shocks"

Hi narcotiks, agreed 100%. I also think its a marketing scam and most people are a bunch of lemmings waiting for the next greatest thing which will magically fix their inability to drive properly.
I am also interested in the detailed technical aspects of RC, understanding the variables and their relationships better will help one get it right more often and rely less on luck in doing so. I think this software gives one insight into whats going on rather than guessing based on feel.

Regarding the short shock CG difference I did a quick estimate and if you can get that entire 40gm mass 4mm lower it would lower the CG of the car by approximately .1mm or in percentage terms .3% lower.

For most of us that would be negligable. For a top tier driver though it may provide that .05 sec they need to win. As an overall guide get everything as low as possible and get the track as wide as the rules will allow. That will minimize the Lateral Load Transfer and allow the chassis to develop the maximum grip from the tires.

I have to agree you both though for most of us it would be a negligable difference as our driving is not consistent enough to take advantage of such a small change. You would be better off focusing on getting a good driveable setup on your car and then practice practice practice to get the consistency.

one of my team drivers nearly has the A700L modeled correctly in RC Crew Chief. i cannot wait to try this myself...

Good to hear hanulec...

That's too funny. I just came up with a model that matches the A700 Suspension Stiffness graph in the manual an hour ago. We'll have to compare notes.

Mike Slaughter is Your man...
We had Oleg review his model and made two minor changes...

The Awesomatix A700 model is now available for download from the website.

Also uploaded a Capricon LAB-C02 model.

And new update released with some more inprovements and for the first time no bug fixes!

Here are the highlights of the update.

New Features
-Added feature to Import X-Dyno file directly into Nitro Motor Manager.
-Added Help file for Nitro Motor Manager
-Increased max number of Shock upper and lower positions permitted. Now 21 max.
-Improved selection accuracy and resolution in Suspension and Shock graphics.
-Added Custom settings for Aero Constants.
-Improved execution speed of acceleration simulation.

Forgot one important thing. Thanks to Mike S for the A700 model and to SP33D6 for the LAB C-02. Great additions to the library.

Quick question. Does a larger number for roll sensitivity indicate firmer setup or softer? Is a 0.9 softer than 0.7 or would it be harder?

The lower the number the stiffer the setup, so as you said .7 is stiffer than .9.
If you assume a 1g lateral acceleration the chassis would roll .7 deg and .9 deg respectively.
This number takes includes the effect of sprung mass CG and roll centre position which induces the roll and the mechanical roll stiffness due to springs and ARB's that is resisting roll.