WallyRC

I contacted plan B racing as well for details. As stated earlier it is +10 mm. I was wondering about body fitment as well. Somebody know? Only 2 mm different maybe no big deal.

Plan B racing said he could do a custom +8 ( or whatever ) we wanted, he would need five orders minimum. I think, don't quote me on this, I heard they are 80 dollars shipped.

Don't know if I'm ready to pull that trigger just yet. Just throwing it out there. Fred and gang?

Someone asked why use plan B, it helps increase rear bias by placing a shorty sideways instead of inline. People say it helps with rear traction. Maybe someone on here who has one can explain the difference when they switched. Chasis being longer I believe help stabilize in the straight but can slow turning. Fred would probably be able to explain the differences better than I.

Devin

Would that mater for rm or is that just for mid motor? Thinking rear motor and a battery all the way back would be plenty.

tc5 man

If your taking about a square lipo pack or a shorty mounted side to side i would think with Rear motor having the battery back all the way would be to much grip not enough steering.

So i would say benefits more to MM yes.

Cain

iTrader: (294)

be cool to hear more first hand experiences with the plan b on loose stuff in mid motor configuration if it makes it usable.

WallyRC

I think if your having difficulty getting a good set-up inline then plan B is the best bet to try a square pack or shorty sideways. I have always run mid motor. Most the guys that have run rear motor seem to be pushing the battery forward to get a good setup. Pushing shorty's all the way against the servo. So plan B rear motor with square pack may be a little too much. Would be nice to hear from somebody who has tried that. Rear motor with shorty sideways and a bit forward may be a hot ticket. Mid motor with square/ saddles or shorty sideways should be real good.
Let's hear from some peeps that have a plan B....
Thanks

Cain

iTrader: (294)

+1 looking to hear more.

Out here we run dirt, step pins can be popular though hard to find lol.

I wouldn't mind to have a nice replacement chassis that works in mid motor configuration for both indoor and outdoor conditions and just leave it as is as far as that kind of adjustment goes.

And it would look good too

If it would work for what i am looking for, I'd be game to order a +8 mm chassis version.

fredswain

iTrader: (1)

I think the Plan B chassis looks nice. It was just the length that I'm not fond of. I run the rear arms with only 1 spacer behind the arm because I always set the car up to have the driveshafts inline. That already gives me a long wheelbase. Lots of people run the rear hubs forward for more rear weight bias. We probably run similar overall wheelbases as a result. That's why I don't want a longer chassis than a +8. I've already got my carbon fiber chassis blanks with the nose kick built in so I'm planning on doing a carbon chassis on mine.

AntH3000

So I've been having some crazy ideas about making a Durango 2wd based on a DEX410 rear and a DEX210 front but quite a lot different to the others. This would be for mid traction as well.... So here goes, the DEX410 is good because of the way the propshaft enters the rear transmission....it give a big playground for design below it and it means you can massively shorten the propshaft without an angle of operation problem. So what I'm talking about is having the motor facing the other direction then shortening the propshaft so it barely exists any more.... This puts the motor right at the back..... Now here's where it gets really crazy because I then want to mount a super short shorty battery across the way under the propshaft and butted up against the motor... Why? Would give a maybe 65/35 distribution with no 3 gear or 4 gear inertia effect....which I'm becoming convinced is undesirable... There would be another layout for high grip, still involving a super shorty.... So, Fred?!

blankenj99

Ummm, 210F, anyone?

fredswain

iTrader: (1)

I'm actually good with the way the 210F and the Team C car orient the motor. To do it the way you are thinking, it may just be easier to use the drivetrain of a TC4 onroad car and adapt it to a 210 suspension with the shocks behind the arms.

I bought a B44.1 a couple of years ago to build a car that used it's rear end and a B4 front end but just never did it. I've still got all the parts.

jhautz

iTrader: (86)

Hi. Just joining this thread. For the V2, what's a decent starting setup for high traction clay. Not carpet type traction but slicks on clay. Im looking for a good place to start for 17.5 blinky setup.

Sorry because I'm sure this question has probably been asked 100 times, but I'm not finding it with the search tool.

I see the Durango site has a ton of setups, but if any of you run on a similar surface I'd appreciate your input.

Thanks in advance.

kerby

iTrader: (25)

Pm me your email....I'll send a nice starting setup your way

tc5 man

Well my Dex210 V2 is seeing its last days running on clay . After driving a B5M on it i decided to buy one and leaving the Dex210 V2 for carpet which i like it much better on .

Tunatsol

iTrader: (2)

I think this is what most people were expecting from Durango on the new V3.
http://www.dialedhobbies.com/intech-...53-detail.html

tc5 man

Yea i was also that's what works the best for US style tracks . If they did that it would change my mind on buying a B5M .