Jörn MM and shocks rear
 

Anyone tried it?
Is it just a remove hubs ( for toe etc), arm flip, shock move?

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c3.../Capture-2.png

very interesting what advantage will it give and presuming for high grip tracks.

I have been running our 410 bad 210 like that for sometime now. It would appear to calme the rear end down a lot on bumpy sections, and generally help with rear grip.

The big downside is that the shock bodies become your rear bumper...

Its a slightly longer wheelbase, and the weight is further back. Whilst the shocks are more vulnerable at the rear, the shock tower digs in less on rolling so its less likely to break.
Biggest downside is you have to trim the wing to go around the shocks.

It should give more rear traction, should be pretty good on the RM car as they will be a bit more protected.

Burgie do you have a pic of the 410 like that?

:thumbsup: Yeah, that's what I found - also gives more rotation in tight corners

I am running mine like this again tonight as it goes. all i did was redrill holes in the rear of the wishbone.

So you didn't flip your arms??

Are you using the dimec as well or stock chassis

No, i was going to, but i like the idea of leaving the arms as they are so i can switch the shocks back and forth to test them back to back. i just measured the hole spacing from the front of the arm with vernier calipers and drilled new holes.

I am running the dimec20 chassis on mine :)

Not a bad idea.. Ill have to see how steady my hands are :woot:

Heres the RM pic from RCTech

http://www.rctech.net/forum/attachme...d-img_1052.jpg

Hi Guys

This subject has me a bit puzzled, I am thinking a bit about what does what.

If you flip the arms over and stay shimmed the same way you were you will actually lengthen the wheelbase some, this will take away rear traction, but it will make it rotate a bit easier if the back end is sliding a bit, and it will calm it down over bumpy sections and probably make it a bit more directionally stable. When you move the dampers rearwards you are moving some weight, so it will give some more rear traction, but I believe not influencing as much as the effect of flipping the arms and thus lengthening the wheel base.

in addition I bet that the rear arms are twisting under acceleration, and the side that will be moving the most is the one where the damper isn't attached, so that will also account for some effect.

All of this will have different impact based on if you flip the arms or re-drill them since it will give different wheelbase and leverage on the arm.

Things to think about when you choose between re-drilling or flipping arms :-)

/Greger

Another angle.

http://eos.redrc.net/wp-content/gall...-durango-1.jpg

I now have the same chassis and the rear mount shock set up, anyone have under body pics of the 210 and set up?

I have tried re-drilling the wishbones and mounting the shocks on the rear, it does give more traction on slipper surfaces. I did try flipping the wishbones but the wishbones have some toe-in built in. Hence flipping the wishbones is not an option!!!!!

As for steady hands, its no prblem if you measure the hole centers and center punch:)

Durango needs to update the arms so there is another hole for the droop screw when you run the arms backwards:eh?:

You're mistaken, they don't have any built-in toe in.

There is a 2mm wheelbase difference when you flip the wishbones however, so to get the same wheelbase with the wishbones flipped as middle with the wishbones in the normal position, you need to run all the spacers at the back.

Very wrong indeed.

Toe in is determined by the pivot blocks and the hub inserts only not the wishbones.

Well I tried it last night on carpet and wooden floor it was really good. I don't think I'll be putting it back to standard I was well impressed. :thumbsup:

Any pics with the wheels off from the back?. Just want to know exactly where the holes are on the arms.

Phill

i just used my vernier to measure the front ones from the outer hinge pin and replicated on the rear.