RCCrawler Forums

heeper40 · 12-21-2008, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msps003

Actually most of the stuff you see in the 1:1 world was built by guys in their garages. Something breaks so they go bigger or better or both, some of the coolest rigs I have ever seen have come out of some guys garage that he spent a year or more working on it every night after work. Usually engineers just screw things up... I can say that with confidence since I work with a bunch of them, they usually create more problems than they fix.

Exactly....I work with 2 engineers as well and I also get this saying from them: " Well, in theory this should work perfectly" or " I don't get. Why isn't this working out? According to my calculations..."
Bottomline is that most geeks/engineers who's never been on the "Battle Field" don't really know how things work in the REAL world. An engineer or geek who's had a long time hands on experience with offroading and it's equipment would be the best canidates for building indepn' suspension rigs.

rikstr · 04-22-2009, 07:57 PM

Well as it goes, we have a Vitara (sidekick to you lot) comp car that still has IFS it runs 35" tires and works really well, there are some real advantages with the IFS in the comp world. We are thinking of put a independant setup in the rear as well, just to be different, but I dont want to chop up a good truck and have it be crap.

The reason I was looking at this was I tried a setup on my Juggernaut a while ago. I left the leaves in the front, and put a 4 link in the rear, I had coil overs leaning forward from the lower links to the chassis to get more flex from the rear. It was really good and flexing and slow stuff like opposed holes and logs. But when it came to hills it used to torque twist so much the rear wheel used to almost drive under the truck and it would lift a wheel and roll over backwards. This just made the setup to unstable so put it back the way it was.
About a month later a 4WD mag here in OZ made a comp rig through the mag and they were doing a rear suspension setup similar to what I had tried. I said to a mate "it will roll over backwards at the first hill it gets to"
I was right, first comp, first hill, first big roll.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=73ljDXHMRm8

gooba · 04-22-2009, 08:55 PM

ok im gonna go against the herd here and say an independent crawler CAN compete competitvely. I myself used to run a stock emaxx and the only real thing that hurt its performance was it had too short of a wheelbase. One of thr mwrca guys used to run a streched maxx and it worked really well. Now im not saying its better than solid axles or ever will be but with a driver willing to tinker and a good driver an indy could run well. Im actually considering tinkering with another independent setup and making it a competitive comper.

doomdog666 · 04-22-2009, 10:37 PM

i don't think that independent is bad, but the c/g must be low. an emaxx tranny is just too high to really get the job done efficient. solid axles are tough, easy to articulate, and leaves the imagination open to link design to make it work good. a narrow skid is also a benefit of solid axles, indy chassis's are alot bigger, have exposed outer axles, and i won't even get into suspension geometry and how critical it is for ifs and irs systems.

JatoTheRipper · 04-23-2009, 05:16 PM

Don't say "never". One day IRS might be the norm.

Squamch · 04-23-2009, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JatoTheRipper

Don't say "never". One day IRS might be the norm.

wash your filthy mouth.

rikstr · 04-23-2009, 07:54 PM

I think JATO is right, indepentdent stuff works better at speed, has better clearances and if someone can get it to work at slow, flexing, crawling type things that would make it better all round

P1choco · 04-23-2009, 08:46 PM

What about this guys rig?

http://www.rccrawler.com/forum/showt...06#post1697606

am4x4 · 04-25-2009, 02:42 PM

The way I see it in the 1:1 world there are 2 reasons to build an IFS crawler. #1 you want to compete in KOH (100mile desert/rock race). #2 you con only afford one rig and you want to be able to crawl or haul. Neither of these apply to r/c, there is no endurance racing and lets face it, if we can afford these crawlers we can probably afford a second go fast car.

gooba · 04-25-2009, 08:02 PM

or you build one to challenge the norm and show people it can be done.

04-22-2009, 07:57 PM	#22
rikstr Rock Stacker Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Australia Posts: 52	Well as it goes, we have a Vitara (sidekick to you lot) comp car that still has IFS it runs 35" tires and works really well, there are some real advantages with the IFS in the comp world. We are thinking of put a independant setup in the rear as well, just to be different, but I dont want to chop up a good truck and have it be crap. The reason I was looking at this was I tried a setup on my Juggernaut a while ago. I left the leaves in the front, and put a 4 link in the rear, I had coil overs leaning forward from the lower links to the chassis to get more flex from the rear. It was really good and flexing and slow stuff like opposed holes and logs. But when it came to hills it used to torque twist so much the rear wheel used to almost drive under the truck and it would lift a wheel and roll over backwards. This just made the setup to unstable so put it back the way it was. About a month later a 4WD mag here in OZ made a comp rig through the mag and they were doing a rear suspension setup similar to what I had tried. I said to a mate "it will roll over backwards at the first hill it gets to" I was right, first comp, first hill, first big roll. www.youtube.com/watch?v=73ljDXHMRm8

04-22-2009, 08:55 PM	#23
gooba Quarry Creeper Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: dsm IA Posts: 416	ok im gonna go against the herd here and say an independent crawler CAN compete competitvely. I myself used to run a stock emaxx and the only real thing that hurt its performance was it had too short of a wheelbase. One of thr mwrca guys used to run a streched maxx and it worked really well. Now im not saying its better than solid axles or ever will be but with a driver willing to tinker and a good driver an indy could run well. Im actually considering tinkering with another independent setup and making it a competitive comper.

04-22-2009, 10:37 PM	#24
doomdog666 Rock Stacker Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: montrose co Posts: 77	i don't think that independent is bad, but the c/g must be low. an emaxx tranny is just too high to really get the job done efficient. solid axles are tough, easy to articulate, and leaves the imagination open to link design to make it work good. a narrow skid is also a benefit of solid axles, indy chassis's are alot bigger, have exposed outer axles, and i won't even get into suspension geometry and how critical it is for ifs and irs systems.

04-23-2009, 05:16 PM	#25
JatoTheRipper Moderator Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: PA Posts: 13,935	Don't say "never". One day IRS might be the norm.

04-23-2009, 07:54 PM	#27
rikstr Rock Stacker Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Australia Posts: 52	I think JATO is right, indepentdent stuff works better at speed, has better clearances and if someone can get it to work at slow, flexing, crawling type things that would make it better all round

04-23-2009, 08:46 PM	#28
P1choco Quarry Creeper Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: El Cajon San Diego Posts: 417	What about this guys rig? http://www.rccrawler.com/forum/showt...06#post1697606

04-25-2009, 02:42 PM	#29
am4x4 Rock Stacker Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: simi valley, ca Posts: 79	The way I see it in the 1:1 world there are 2 reasons to build an IFS crawler. #1 you want to compete in KOH (100mile desert/rock race). #2 you con only afford one rig and you want to be able to crawl or haul. Neither of these apply to r/c, there is no endurance racing and lets face it, if we can afford these crawlers we can probably afford a second go fast car.

04-25-2009, 08:02 PM	#30
gooba Quarry Creeper Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: dsm IA Posts: 416	or you build one to challenge the norm and show people it can be done.

Sponsored Links

RCCrawler Forums

Thread: Independant Rock Crawler