Scx10 II 3 or 4 link

[DougL]

My son is building a scx10 II and would like to know if he should stay with the 3 link or install the high clearance 4 link. If he goes with the 4 link will he have any problems with the articulation while rock crawling.

Any suggestions or comments are greatly appreciated.

[Traulus]

A front 3 link suspension is more realistic.But for crawling,4 links performs much better

[allanon1965]

Originally Posted by Traulus

A front 3 link suspension is more realistic.But for crawling,4 links performs much better

I have to disagree with that statement. I have both styles and my CMS rigs perform just as well as my 4 link rigs. My rig 626 has a CMS and has won comps over 4 link rigs.

A properly setup CMS(3 link) will perform as well as any 4 link. Both of my scx10II rigs are the factory CMS 3 link and they are 2 of my best 1.9 crawling/trail rigs

[Traulus]

Well its your right to disagree.What would be a properly setup CMS?

[lilws6]

Technically speaking the 4 link will articulate better than the 3link with pan rod. But if you 4 link the 2 and take out the pan rod you will get bump steer. I've got two of the trucks and one is factory 3 linked still which I really like the way it drives. Then my second one I tried out the 4 link but haven't gotten a chance to work it on the trail yet to see if the bump steer will bother me at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Traulus]

Well for the scx10 2 theres only one way to install the panhard.so i don't know what he means by "a good setup"

[MSH]

CMS and 4 link sounds like a bad idea.

Bad setup on the scx102 can easely be achieved by mounted the servo link at a bad angle.

[DougL]

So if he runs the CMS with a 4 link will it affect the bump steer and put a to much twist on the chassis

[allanon1965]

Originally Posted by Traulus

Well its your right to disagree.What would be a properly setup CMS?

one where the links are set properly and placed where they should be instead of hap-hazzardly like I have seen many do... my CMS rigs have virtually no bump steer....

[allanon1965]

Originally Posted by DougL

So if he runs the CMS with a 4 link will it affect the bump steer and put a to much twist on the chassis

99% of the time 4 link with CMS causes binding during articulation

[GTSLOW]

Allanon is right. The front end of the SCX.2 comes setup very nicely with the 3-link. Honestly I can't see why someone would want to change that.

Not to put words in Allanon's month but here's my take on a "properly setup" 3 link. One where the panhard and the draglink are parallel and the panhard doesn't contact the top of the differential.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[GTSLOW]

Here's my TZ V2. You can barely see the panhard.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[blackjack12982]

Originally Posted by GTSLOW

Here's my TZ V2. You can barely see the panhard.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

That's pretty good right there!

I've only recently starting dabbling in the RC world, but suspension and steering geometry is the same. For the OP, like pictured above, keep the draglink and trackbar ideally the same angle and length to minimize the bump-steer.

There's pros and cons to each setup. It's up to you to pick your poison and deal with one. Honestly, I'd leave it as a 3 link with a trackbar.

[Traulus]

Originally Posted by allanon1965

one where the links are set properly and placed where they should be instead of hap-hazzardly like I have seen many do... my CMS rigs have virtually no bump steer....

No bump steer on CMS,altouggh less articulation there,comapred to my 4 link setup with servo on axle

[DougL]

Thank you for all the information, it's greatly appreciated

[Panther6834]

I know this thread had been "hibernating" for the past few years, but I'd like to "wake it up". I'm still somewhat new to crawling, thus I'm still learning. I went to Scale Nats this year, with a 4WS Capra-based C3 rig. The rig used axle-mounted servos front & rear, with 4-link setup front/rear.

I'm now in the process of building a new C3 rig, and want to retain the 4WS. This vehicle is being built on a more traditional rail-based chassis kit (NOT SCX10-II, but loosely based off the SCX10-II design), which came with a 3-link w/ panhard setup for the front, and 4-link for the rear. I'm p planning on sticking with the kit's chassis-mounted front servo configuration (with a servo winch mounted side-by-side to the steering servo). However, it's the rear I'm concerned, and inquiring, about.

As I mentioned, the chassis comes with a rear 4-link setup. I see three possibilities for getting things set up - 1) chassis-mounted servo & 4-link (my preferred configuration), 2) chassis-mounted servo & 3-link w/ panhard (although, I'd have to focus out how to attach a panhard mount to the rear of the chassis), and 3) axle-mounted servo & 4-link (my "fallback" option, and as it is on the 'old' rig).

The 'problem' is that, in regards to my primary choice...chassis-mounted servo & 4-link...I've been told two completely different things by two different people. One said it's easily doable, and would work without any problems...although I'd have to modify the rear chassis brace, and come up with a way to chassis-mount the servo (which I've already figured out how to do). The other said it won't work, and that my only options are options 2 & 3. Both of these people have been involved in competitive RC crawling for many years, so both should be quite knowledgeable...yet, again, they are saying completely opposite things. Obviously, I'm "confused", as both CAN'T be "true".

I could REALLY use some help/advice.


~ More peace, love, and kindness would make the world a much better place

[Den72]

Originally Posted by Panther6834

I know this thread had been "hibernating" for the past few years, but I'd like to "wake it up". I'm still somewhat new to crawling, thus I'm still learning. I went to Scale Nats this year, with a 4WS Capra-based C3 rig. The rig used axle-mounted servos front & rear, with 4-link setup front/rear.

I'm now in the process of building a new C3 rig, and want to retain the 4WS. This vehicle is being built on a more traditional rail-based chassis kit (NOT SCX10-II, but loosely based off the SCX10-II design), which came with a 3-link w/ panhard setup for the front, and 4-link for the rear. I'm p planning on sticking with the kit's chassis-mounted front servo configuration (with a servo winch mounted side-by-side to the steering servo). However, it's the rear I'm concerned, and inquiring, about.

As I mentioned, the chassis comes with a rear 4-link setup. I see three possibilities for getting things set up - 1) chassis-mounted servo & 4-link (my preferred configuration), 2) chassis-mounted servo & 3-link w/ panhard (although, I'd have to focus out how to attach a panhard mount to the rear of the chassis), and 3) axle-mounted servo & 4-link (my "fallback" option, and as it is on the 'old' rig).

The 'problem' is that, in regards to my primary choice...chassis-mounted servo & 4-link...I've been told two completely different things by two different people. One said it's easily doable, and would work without any problems...although I'd have to modify the rear chassis brace, and come up with a way to chassis-mount the servo (which I've already figured out how to do). The other said it won't work, and that my only options are options 2 & 3. Both of these people have been involved in competitive RC crawling for many years, so both should be quite knowledgeable...yet, again, they are saying completely opposite things. Obviously, I'm "confused", as both CAN'T be "true".

I could REALLY use some help/advice.


~ More peace, love, and kindness would make the world a much better place

Well it appears as if there is more than one way to skin this cat. You have to separate people that have a setup that works for them, hence the two separate opinions.

I would say run with your preference and report back your findings.