Dlux Berg Build

[ROWDY RACING]

Where's the balance point rtr?

[SkaldidDog]

Originally Posted by TheSCorpionKing

Where's my royalties damnit?!

Get in line.

J

[ittybitty]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

Where's the balance point rtr?

Probably just a hair forward of where it is in that pic on top of the vise...he runs the battery on the back of the motor and that's all that would really change in RTR form...tires and wheels should be similar front to rear.

He's not lying when he says he likes having the weight on the front is he?

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by ittybitty

Probably just a hair forward of where it is in that pic on top of the vise...he runs the battery on the back of the motor and that's all that would really change in RTR form...tires and wheels should be similar front to rear.

He's not lying when he says he likes having the weight on the front is he?

Even if the front and rear wheels and tires weigh the same, the rears are farther from the fulcrum and should bring the bias back a tad, the battery may offset that.

[SkaldidDog]

There is a fine line between bias towards the front and outright discrimination against the rear.

Rear axles have rights too.

J

[stubs179]

Originally Posted by SkaldidDog

There is a fine line between bias towards the front and outright discrimination against the rear.

Rear axles have rights too.

J

Haha!

He put a little bit back there!

[SkaldidDog]

Originally Posted by stubs179

Haha!

He put a little bit back there!

I saw that, but the ACLU may not find that sufficient to dissuade legal action. Erik is walking a fine line. He's lucky he doesn't live in Hippiefornia.

J

[TSK]

Since the front weight system had a name, I'd like to suggest the name "dangly bits" for the rear weights.

[Erik D_lux]

[stubs179]

Yep, I'm afraid that sucks. The weight is just to low!

[SkaldidDog]

Brings back fond memories. I still have these squirreled away.

J

[stubs179]

Originally Posted by SkaldidDog

Brings back fond memories. I still have these squirreled away.

J

Sure, i would love to try them! Thanks

[ROWDY RACING]

The bias did move back IB, suck it!

[Harvo]

I'm finding the more weight I put up front, the more any slight steering input pushes the rear off side hills. How do you FUF guys combat that?

The extra weight up front will allow it to do some wild things on climbs though.

[stubs179]

Originally Posted by Harvo

I'm finding the more weight I put up front, the more any slight steering input pushes the rear off side hills. How do you FUF guys combat that?

The extra weight up front will allow it to do some wild things on climbs though.

You and your side hills! I really need to get up there, the curiosity is killing me.

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by Harvo

I'm finding the more weight I put up front, the more any slight steering input pushes the rear off side hills. How do you FUF guys combat that?

The extra weight up front will allow it to do some wild things on climbs though.

I'm guessing he is combating it by adding the weight to the rear.

[ittybitty]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

The bias did move back IB, suck it!

You'll notice in the picture that the rig still looks a little heavy towards the front...which would move the bias back forward just a touch...

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by ittybitty

You'll notice in the picture that the rig still looks a little heavy towards the front...which would move the bias back forward just a touch...

[rob_b]

Are the vise jaws level to the world? Is the truck square to the split line of the vise jaws? Is the camera angle square to the truck? Maybe you need to place a level between the axles (if they are the same diameter). There are just too many variables involved to be sure you aren't trying to mindf*ck us!

[Erik D_lux]

Originally Posted by Harvo

You are moving your lower links? Like rotating your mounts up? Aside from more clearance, is that doing anything for you?

First off.... note to self... if ever in a comp or fun crawling make sure there are no sidehills around. All climbs,transitions and downhills.

To be honest, I do so many changes everytime I put on a new set of tubes that its hard for me to pinpoint what I like about it. For example, last time was from Bergs to the Super Lites. Let me just say that I think it "flat out works" and "side hills like no other", pretty much just "predictable" when I move the links up. On a serious note, I think it has to do with the relation of the center line of the housing. If youre below, it will try to pull the lower link away from the chassis, if youre above, it will try to push it towards. I think this may have something to do with it?

Originally Posted by ittybitty

It would be reducing the separation between the uppers and lowers at the axle...which was one of the biggest reasons the XR's were better suited for the lighter RTR weights we were seeing. The separation between uppers and lowers on a stock berg axle is HUGE compared to a stock XR axle. Once Erik produced his axles and provided the ability to not only move the lower link/shock mounts around but to also have the upper links mount lower at the gearbox things got interesting and the Bergs were back in the game.

I dont know if I believe in this theory 100%. I tried to reduce the separation with link mounts and I didnt like it at all. I for sure wont say youre wrong though.

Originally Posted by Harvo

But his set up isn't what I would call "light" anymore

Ahhhh..... look back to when I got my first Berg built in this thread. I think I was just over 5lb. I know there were others before me that went light but it was still pretty crazy in the day. I remember people in 801 holding it at 5lb and just thinking it was crazy. 5lb is a pretty big piggy now? Besides, I am 4lb 12oz loaded

Originally Posted by Harvo

Tiny phone video in the garage.

Thanks for the video. I think I need to study sidehills more. I dont get it. I dont understand how your car would do that. My best guess would say that the up hill axles are pulling into the chassis but the video sure does say otherwise. Gotta be 8*?

Originally Posted by ittybitty

He's not lying when he says he likes having the weight on the front is he?

More nostalgia.... Imagine running a fully loaded VP DH wheel. Thats 16oz per front, not including the knuckle etc,. Even with my weights coming in at 8.8oz, my tire wheel should be between 5-6oz, thats still lighter than I used to run with a weighted wheel.

Originally Posted by SkaldidDog

There is a fine line between bias towards the front and outright discrimination against the rear.

Rear axles have rights too.

J

Praise the Lord! Hallelujah!

I dont know why so many are afraid to run rear weight.

Originally Posted by SkaldidDog

He's lucky he doesn't live in Hippiefornia.

Obviously we run it a bit different in UT.

Originally Posted by TheSCorpionKing

Since the front weight system had a name, I'd like to suggest the name "dangly bits" for the rear weights.

Cant afford your royalties anymore.

Originally Posted by Harvo

I'm finding the more weight I put up front, the more any slight steering input pushes the rear off side hills. How do you FUF guys combat that?

The extra weight up front will allow it to do some wild things on climbs though.

Do you not find a huge advantage with the weights and sidehilling? I think thats where I found the most advantage. The steel rings were a pretty good option and put the weight low for climbs but now that they are this far out at the wheel, my sidehill is angry!

I think you are experiencing new stuff that I dont see since I have been running no less than 6oz of front weight ever.

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

I'm guessing he is combating it by adding the weight to the rear.

Believe me or not, my rear feels really good and planted (ha). The only reason I run weight back there is for a stable, non quirky car (predictable). I think the rear and its characteristics are mostly tuned with suspension.