80LikesDurango DEX210 Thread
06-09-2013, 04:55 AM
I need to work on my shock package. Car was great 1st half of the race (was out front for a few laps)...but got very bouncy and traction rolled about 3 min in. Not too sure what is causing this issue..but it's coming from the back of the car.
Car is in mm4 setting.
My bulldog body fit right in place over the +11 chassis. I just had to elongate a body mounting hole.I would assume the Durango body would as well.
06-09-2013, 08:23 AM
Do you have your shocks on the rear?
06-09-2013, 08:32 AM
looking at this drawing, you can see the new RR hanger is needed for the rear bumper in rm configuration. looks like those of us who run mm can get away with the old aluminum rr hanger from the kit 
06-09-2013, 10:22 AM
06-09-2013, 12:03 PM
Hi all
We run this car in Sweden, and we tend to run quite a lot on high grip tracks and it works great in those condotions. However, when running RM on low grip tracks I seem to be struggeling for rear grip, mid corner, on throttle. I can play with most settings of the car and understand which way to go most of the time, but I get a lot of different input regarding rear anti-squat.
One explanation I've read is: "Less anti-squat gives more rear grip since it will squat more and transfer weight to the rear under acceleration."
But I have also read: "More anti-squat will increase the chassis' resistans to squatting, hence putting more pressure on the rear tires and increasing grip"
i have tried looking at diffent set-ups at Petit, and they are a litle bit all over the place regarding this.
So if I am looking for more rear traction do I go up or down from 1,5 degrees anti-squat? What is the general verdict with the 210?
Any help and input is much appreciated.
/Greger
We run this car in Sweden, and we tend to run quite a lot on high grip tracks and it works great in those condotions. However, when running RM on low grip tracks I seem to be struggeling for rear grip, mid corner, on throttle. I can play with most settings of the car and understand which way to go most of the time, but I get a lot of different input regarding rear anti-squat.
One explanation I've read is: "Less anti-squat gives more rear grip since it will squat more and transfer weight to the rear under acceleration."
But I have also read: "More anti-squat will increase the chassis' resistans to squatting, hence putting more pressure on the rear tires and increasing grip"
i have tried looking at diffent set-ups at Petit, and they are a litle bit all over the place regarding this.
So if I am looking for more rear traction do I go up or down from 1,5 degrees anti-squat? What is the general verdict with the 210?
Any help and input is much appreciated.
/Greger
06-09-2013, 03:28 PM
So I have a question. I'm still new to ball diffs. I picked up a used dex210 and the guy said the diff was fresh and after I got it he said he wasn't sure to just run it and find out for myself. Well I swapped everything from rm4 to mm4 and put it all together. I tried to get the diff to break in but after starting up the car I kept tighting the diff till I got to the barely forward rotation. Well finnly got it set with the wheels off and the diff screw was way out to get to that point. Was barely tight enough to not be able to hold the axle with my fingers. And as I was doing all thisnote the slipper was about 2 turns from locked. Well as I pur the tires on to do the rotations it seemed like the slipper was really loose BC I set the car on the floor and it diddent move.........
http://www.petitrc.com/setup/durango...ialBuildGuide/
I have replaced the Durango circlip with an Xray one, the stock ones are quite weak.
/Greger
06-09-2013, 05:00 PM
Does anyone have a type a dimec for sale the older or rtr version
06-09-2013, 05:03 PM
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (13)
new chassis + new hanger + misc, it's an $50+ upgrade.
Why can't durango just come out with the +8mm aluminum chassis? you know, the one Jorn Neumann has been using for over an year.
Why can't durango just come out with the +8mm aluminum chassis? you know, the one Jorn Neumann has been using for over an year.
06-09-2013, 05:40 PM
i understand where you're coming from and I agree, but i actually prefer to have a lighter dimec chassis vs an aluminum one. it is pretty stupid, though.
06-09-2013, 06:18 PM
06-09-2013, 07:31 PM
Also is Amain the only U.S. seller of the RDP +11, there out of stock.
06-09-2013, 08:20 PM
Rdrp has a big batch heading towards A-main right now (according to f.b.).
I would assume with such a high demand Amain will bulk up on stock...unless they know something we don't (like a new dex coming out ect..).
06-10-2013, 07:34 AM
I run the DIMEC+8 with the TD 30oz brass nose weight. I was running about that much weight with the aluminum chassis, but when I switched to the DIMEC (not DIMEC20 as they have been sold out) I went with the TD custom made one. They have 15oz & 30oz and they fit perfectly.
06-10-2013, 08:16 AM
Hi all
We run this car in Sweden, and we tend to run quite a lot on high grip tracks and it works great in those condotions. However, when running RM on low grip tracks I seem to be struggeling for rear grip, mid corner, on throttle. I can play with most settings of the car and understand which way to go most of the time, but I get a lot of different input regarding rear anti-squat.
One explanation I've read is: "Less anti-squat gives more rear grip since it will squat more and transfer weight to the rear under acceleration."
But I have also read: "More anti-squat will increase the chassis' resistans to squatting, hence putting more pressure on the rear tires and increasing grip"
i have tried looking at diffent set-ups at Petit, and they are a litle bit all over the place regarding this.
So if I am looking for more rear traction do I go up or down from 1,5 degrees anti-squat? What is the general verdict with the 210?
Any help and input is much appreciated.
/Greger
We run this car in Sweden, and we tend to run quite a lot on high grip tracks and it works great in those condotions. However, when running RM on low grip tracks I seem to be struggeling for rear grip, mid corner, on throttle. I can play with most settings of the car and understand which way to go most of the time, but I get a lot of different input regarding rear anti-squat.
One explanation I've read is: "Less anti-squat gives more rear grip since it will squat more and transfer weight to the rear under acceleration."
But I have also read: "More anti-squat will increase the chassis' resistans to squatting, hence putting more pressure on the rear tires and increasing grip"
i have tried looking at diffent set-ups at Petit, and they are a litle bit all over the place regarding this.
So if I am looking for more rear traction do I go up or down from 1,5 degrees anti-squat? What is the general verdict with the 210?
Any help and input is much appreciated.
/Greger
06-10-2013, 03:13 PM
The answer is both... lol. More anti squat will have less side bite (more rotation near the apex), but will accelerate harder exiting the corner. On lower grip tracks, the tradeoff is that it will be less stable accelerating over a long straight. Less anti squat will have less initial bite exiting a corner, but will allow more weight to be transferred as you accelerate down a long straight. I ran a loose track last week where I struggled to get over a double consistently, so I added anti squat. I could make the double every lap then, but it required more finesse on the track's two straightaways to keep it straight. I had run less anti squat the previous time at the same track and while it was more stable at high speeds, I couldn't get out of the corners as well. In that case, more anti squat was faster.
/Greger