C4.1 Vs DEX210?

[lovechild]

Has anyone driven these back to back? If so how did they compare?

Thanks

[Chrislong]

Andy Shilito is the only person on here I can think of to have both...

[trekkerkk]

im surprised noones got an answer to this,
if you do please post,


trekkker

[dale]

Originally Posted by lovechild

Has anyone driven these back to back? If so how did they compare?

Thanks

I know of one driver who had both at the same time. He's now sold the DEX210 and kept the C4.1, so that's his conclusion.

[Wacker 2]

I know of one chap that has both cars up and running and has ran both back to back.

I asked him recently what he thought as I'm looking at buying a C4.1 myself for the 2012 season - his response was that the C4.1 was a improvement over the old Atomic Carbon S2 and generated more rear traction than the old S2. He said that the Durango was probably a better choice for the 'average' club driver as he felt it easier to drive and a little bit more forgiving. But said that the C4.1 was faster, and a good driver would definitely get more out of the C4.1 than the Durango.

It certainly helped me make my mind up... C4.1 on order come payday

[trekkerkk]

thanks for the reply,
just what i needed to hear


trekkker

[andys]

I've got both but only ran the C4.1 once so far !

Ran the 210 a few times indoors and really struggled with the setup. I've put the carbon rear link on it now that lots of people are running to try and cure my lack of rear grip.

Watching other 210's with the carbon rear camber link - they looked really good, so we will see.

First run with the C4.1 on the same indoor surface was good though, car much more planted for me than the 210.

That said - if I could only have one - it would be the 210 - just think there's loads of potential in the car and it's early days. Also much cheaper.

[sosidge]

Surely the most significant difference is the weight distribution.

The Durango, like the Losi 22, runs the weight relatively forward. The centro has the "classic" rearward battery layout.

It would be interesting to see some figures from the scales.

I suspect the stiff alloy chassis of the Durango contributes to the lack of grip as well. The Centro chassis is likely to be a little softer judging by the number of bent ones being reported.

I'll wager a composite chassis with the cells at the back would make a huge difference to the 210. Probably the composite chassis for the Centro is a better starting point too.

Just my opinion.

[tyreman]

At the BWOC at Silverstone one of the Durango team drivers had a full moulded +8mm plastic chassis.

[KRob]

That's on the Durango - not the Centro.

[dale]

Originally Posted by sosidge

Surely the most significant difference is the weight distribution.

The Durango, like the Losi 22, runs the weight relatively forward. The centro has the "classic" rearward battery layout.

My thoughts too. The Durango (like the Losi) looks like it will be fine in high-grip conditions, but struggle in low grip due to the weight being too far forwards.

There's a chap racing a Durango in the MAM winter series, and it's a similar speed to my X6 in the dry. But in the wet I can lap him.

Watching the 22s and 210s trying to get round a damp Kiddi track in 5deg temperatures on Sunday was quite amusing

[andys]

For what it's worth...

I ran both the 210 and the C4.1 today, on the Batley outdoor (grass / astro) track.

Ran the 210 first, then the C 4.1, same tyres, same radio gear etc so a fair comparison on this track. Both cars felt superb. I had no idea which was quickest, so I checked my times, and to all intents and purposes the lap times were identical...

I wasn't surprised as both cars felt great, Durango was possibly a bit safer, and the C4.1 felt a tad more nimble, that's all really.