RCCrawler Forums

tanmonster · 10-04-2008, 09:34 PM

We all know that the big debate in the suspension arena is droop versus compression. The biggest piece of aluminum I can get is 2 inches wide, 1/8 inches thick, and 36 inches long. This is supposedly tall enough to be turned into a really low TVP chassis. I was wondering about droop because mini LST shocks severely constrain articulation. My question is as follows: Is droop the best setup for someone who wants an extremely low CG and is slightly constrained in material size?

papasnachez · 10-04-2008, 11:08 PM

Standard size from Lowes...at least thats what I get there.

A chassis similiar in size to a blackjack can be cut out of what you got there.

Something else you can do is make the sideplates with removable, bolt on shock mounts. That way you have shocks mounted higher than that 2". Also, if you want to change shock set ups compeltely in the future you can just cut new shock mounts.

tanmonster · 10-05-2008, 07:30 AM

I think I will do that.

Thanks

Also I was wonderng about the handling characteristcs of a droop setup. Due to droop's lack of actual bump absorption wouldn't it be bouncy and have lots of wheel hop?

EeePee · 10-05-2008, 07:33 AM

We aren't going very fast, so it's not much of an issue. Tires absorb some impact too.

tanmonster · 10-05-2008, 04:43 PM

I understand this, but my dad refuses to believe that droop has any merit. He proves his point by saying that Austin Dunn doesn't use droop so why should you. I will probably go with compression but I was wondered if droop any merit at all in the real world.

Reflection · 10-05-2008, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanmonster

I understand this, but my dad refuses to believe that droop has any merit. He proves his point by saying that Austin Dunn doesn't use droop so why should you. I will probably go with compression but I was wondered if droop any merit at all in the real world.

Sorry to say,he didn't prove anything.

What works for Austin doesn't work for everyone.

Everyone has a different style and what works for them. Since Austin holds his radio backwards,should we all? Noooooo.

I've run both droop and sprung set ups. They can both work equally well as the other. Droop does take more testing and adjustments to dial in over a sprung set up. We can all tell you whats best,even pops. When it comes down to it,YOU are driving. Try both,find the set up that fits YOU!

tanmonster · 10-07-2008, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Since Austin holds his radio backwards,should we all?

I am left handed too.

Quote:

Sorry to say,he didn't prove anything.

According to him he did.

I will probaly go with droop just because it will be easier to achieve a low CG.

rckjeep · 10-08-2008, 01:07 AM

I posted this in another thread but since my reply has merit here too I'll copy and past it so others may benefit from the info. I personally don't like droop in the normal sense, I do run partial droop on Mugsy my comp buggy. I also think articulation is over-rated. A stable rig is far more capable. Here's a naked shot of my current comp rig running compression with Mini LST shocks. It uses very little articulation.

though moving the same shocks inside the chassis double the flex.

This little mini article explains the complexity of running droop and a bit about running droop a successful way. enjoy

Think of it this way. When on flat ground the CG is normally just above & a tad behind your lower link mount. When climbing a hill the CG moves back a bit, because the vertical distance between both front & rear axles is getting shorter. When running a droop set up & climbing a hill it moves back and up because you have the front axle moving down and away from the chassis in effect raising the CG. As the front axle droops the chassis gets higher. Then depending on your rear link geometry & your anti-squat # it could effectively raise the front end more causing a roll-over. When running a droop set up you want anti-squat. During acceleration you want the rear end to rise up a tad putting more force on the front axle. If it's set up with no anti-squat it's going reduce the load on the front axle when accelerating.

Set your rig on a bench or the counter, somewhere you can get down to its level and watch the rig under acceleration. Give it gas and watch the suspension. If running a droop set up and you have proper geometry the rear end of the chassis will rise(increasng front end force). If not set up correctly the front end will rise(decreasing it). Anti-squat can affect normal suspension set up just as much and help with torque roll too.

To find your anti-squat # do a search for "anti-squat calculator" either on google or on pirate4x4.com There is tons of info on Pirate4x4 that can help if you read up.

Hopefully this didn't confuse anyone. I had to re-read it twice before posting.

rckjeep · 10-09-2008, 09:38 PM

Did I lose everyone?

Flud unlimited · 10-09-2008, 10:49 PM

do yoy have a link to a anti-squat calculator?

all i can find is people talking about them.

rckjeep · 10-10-2008, 02:22 PM

Sorry I should have said four link calculator. Here's a link to the one on extreme 4x4's site scroll to the bottom

http://www.powerblocktv.com/sites/xtreme/

Flud unlimited · 10-10-2008, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rckjeep

Sorry I should have said four link calculator. Here's a link to the one on extreme 4x4's site scroll to the bottom

http://www.powerblocktv.com/sites/xtreme/

thanks

5150bronco · 10-10-2008, 03:15 PM

rck..., has a awesome point and very helpful explaining it instead of just commenting....like some do. sharing experience is important.....in my experience, limited but experience...., stability is better than flex,

the terrain is very important to think about as well. If you have the money, or really into hobby you can have rigs with different setups...or run one for a week or two and go back and do same run with changes made....keep changes to a minimun.

thanks for the link to calc.

Nacho · 10-10-2008, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanmonster

I will probaly go with droop just because it will be easier to achieve a low CG.

or because it goes against what dad said

ive tried droop,semi droop,sprung..as posted above droop takes alot of trial and error..not to say that sprung doesnt.but i prefer sprung,i dont know if it was bad luck on parts but always have issues with thec-clips inside the shock popping if with internal springs

10-04-2008, 09:34 PM	#1
tanmonster Pebble Pounder Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: yes Posts: 182	Axial Suspension--Droop/Compression We all know that the big debate in the suspension arena is droop versus compression. The biggest piece of aluminum I can get is 2 inches wide, 1/8 inches thick, and 36 inches long. This is supposedly tall enough to be turned into a really low TVP chassis. I was wondering about droop because mini LST shocks severely constrain articulation. My question is as follows: Is droop the best setup for someone who wants an extremely low CG and is slightly constrained in material size?

10-05-2008, 04:43 PM	#5
tanmonster Pebble Pounder Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: yes Posts: 182	I understand this, but my dad refuses to believe that droop has any merit. He proves his point by saying that Austin Dunn doesn't use droop so why should you. I will probably go with compression but I was wondered if droop any merit at all in the real world. Last edited by tanmonster; 10-05-2008 at 04:43 PM. Reason: duh

10-08-2008, 01:07 AM	#8
rckjeep I wanna be Dave Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: San Jose Posts: 5,207	I posted this in another thread but since my reply has merit here too I'll copy and past it so others may benefit from the info. I personally don't like droop in the normal sense, I do run partial droop on Mugsy my comp buggy. I also think articulation is over-rated. A stable rig is far more capable. Here's a naked shot of my current comp rig running compression with Mini LST shocks. It uses very little articulation. though moving the same shocks inside the chassis double the flex. This little mini article explains the complexity of running droop and a bit about running droop a successful way. enjoy Think of it this way. When on flat ground the CG is normally just above & a tad behind your lower link mount. When climbing a hill the CG moves back a bit, because the vertical distance between both front & rear axles is getting shorter. When running a droop set up & climbing a hill it moves back and up because you have the front axle moving down and away from the chassis in effect raising the CG. As the front axle droops the chassis gets higher. Then depending on your rear link geometry & your anti-squat # it could effectively raise the front end more causing a roll-over. When running a droop set up you want anti-squat. During acceleration you want the rear end to rise up a tad putting more force on the front axle. If it's set up with no anti-squat it's going reduce the load on the front axle when accelerating. Set your rig on a bench or the counter, somewhere you can get down to its level and watch the rig under acceleration. Give it gas and watch the suspension. If running a droop set up and you have proper geometry the rear end of the chassis will rise(increasng front end force). If not set up correctly the front end will rise(decreasing it). Anti-squat can affect normal suspension set up just as much and help with torque roll too. To find your anti-squat # do a search for "anti-squat calculator" either on google or on pirate4x4.com There is tons of info on Pirate4x4 that can help if you read up. Hopefully this didn't confuse anyone. I had to re-read it twice before posting. Last edited by rckjeep; 10-08-2008 at 01:24 AM.

10-04-2008, 11:08 PM	#2
papasnachez Pebble Pounder Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: college station Posts: 119	Standard size from Lowes...at least thats what I get there. A chassis similiar in size to a blackjack can be cut out of what you got there. Something else you can do is make the sideplates with removable, bolt on shock mounts. That way you have shocks mounted higher than that 2". Also, if you want to change shock set ups compeltely in the future you can just cut new shock mounts.

10-05-2008, 07:30 AM	#3
tanmonster Pebble Pounder Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: yes Posts: 182	I think I will do that. Thanks Also I was wonderng about the handling characteristcs of a droop setup. Due to droop's lack of actual bump absorption wouldn't it be bouncy and have lots of wheel hop?

10-05-2008, 07:33 AM	#4
EeePee MODERATOR™ Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Ohio Posts: 18,928	We aren't going very fast, so it's not much of an issue. Tires absorb some impact too.

10-09-2008, 09:38 PM	#9
rckjeep I wanna be Dave Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: San Jose Posts: 5,207	Did I lose everyone?

10-09-2008, 10:49 PM	#10
Flud unlimited Rock Stacker Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: clovis Posts: 69	do yoy have a link to a anti-squat calculator? all i can find is people talking about them.

10-10-2008, 02:22 PM	#11
rckjeep I wanna be Dave Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: San Jose Posts: 5,207	Sorry I should have said four link calculator. Here's a link to the one on extreme 4x4's site scroll to the bottom http://www.powerblocktv.com/sites/xtreme/

10-10-2008, 03:15 PM	#13
5150bronco RCC Addict Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: San Jose Posts: 1,697	rck..., has a awesome point and very helpful explaining it instead of just commenting....like some do. sharing experience is important.....in my experience, limited but experience...., stability is better than flex, the terrain is very important to think about as well. If you have the money, or really into hobby you can have rigs with different setups...or run one for a week or two and go back and do same run with changes made....keep changes to a minimun. thanks for the link to calc.

Sponsored Links

RCCrawler Forums

Thread: Axial Suspension--Droop/Compression