dex210 transverse shorty mod

[dex210Nick]

****************************
This is the finished product from my adventures with weight placement and garolite. You can read the whole process I went through in this thread and see the steps through which this project evolved. Currently I am running the buggy in mm3 on a medium grip smooth indoor clay track with good success. With just the shorty, I achieved a f/r split of 35/65. I have added 24g to the rear to achieve an 33/67 split which works very well on dirt. This is a +8mm chassis and the running weight of the car is ~1600g.

*****************************

In an attempt to get a better f/r weight distribution on my mm4 dex210, I decided to try a transverse battery orientation. I actually got the idea from these guys and xfactory. With a shorty placed as far back as it can go in an in-line configuration, I measure a 63% rear weight distribution with 84g needed to bring it up to 65% (the magic number from what I've gathered from various sources). While 84g is less than the difference between a shorty and full sized pack, I'd still like to keep the car as light as possible.

I have not yet had a chance to check the f/r balance on scales yet, but I have driven it. It felt like it had more rear grip like this than with an in-line battery placement. So far I am pleased, but certainly anxious to get this on the scales. Hopefully I can get to at least 65% rear weight without having to add nearly as much weight.

It's also interesting to note I can fit a full size pack like this as well, an important detail due to that silly ROAR rule.




1/30/18 Edit: Rehosted pictures. Screw photobucket.

[FrogPrince82]

Nice to see someone else try this too

I posted a query about trying this on the Durango thread but was told to not try it I of course ignored this and tried it anyway .

I am using the RDRP +11mm chassis and placed all my electrics inline (speedo in front of battery with cap under battery holder and receiver in front of that).

Found it had more rear grip and could balance it, as needed, with a small amount of weight (20g) up front when needed dependant on grip levels etc.

[dex210Nick]

Originally Posted by FrogPrince82

Nice to see someone else try this too

I posted a query about trying this on the Durango thread but was told to not try it I of course ignored this and tried it anyway .

I am using the RDRP +11mm chassis and placed all my electrics inline (speedo in front of battery with cap under battery holder and receiver in front of that).

Found it had more rear grip and could balance it, as needed, with a small amount of weight (20g) up front when needed dependant on grip levels etc.

Who told you not to? And what was their reason? Glad to hear I'm not the only one with this idea and that it worked for you! What sort of surfaces do you normally race on? I run on some pretty loose outdoor tracks so I'm trying to get as much %rear as possible. Have you also weighed yours?

mind posting a link or some pics of yours?

[kartstuffer]

sssssh dont tell everyone !!!!

[dex210Nick]

Originally Posted by kartstuffer

sssssh dont tell everyone !!!!

bah, I don't need to worry. In America, nobody makes it much further than swapping to mid motor for a day before they hate it and swap back

Hit the scales with it tonight. With 21g of weight on the rear it came out to 64%. Not quite the gain I had hoped for, but certainly an improvement.

[mattr]

Hows the chassis stiffness with lopping a couple of inches out of each of the centre/chassis ribs?

TBH, i think i'd want to be using either the RDRP or the kit aluminium chassis if i was going to do that (i will do eventually, when i get round to it, i have a spare set of sidepods waiting......)

[FrogPrince82]

Originally Posted by dex210Nick

Who told you not to? And what was their reason? Glad to hear I'm not the only one with this idea and that it worked for you! What sort of surfaces do you normally race on? I run on some pretty loose outdoor tracks so I'm trying to get as much %rear as possible. Have you also weighed yours?

mind posting a link or some pics of yours?

I also run mid motor and I have found it helps in being able to adjust the weight well, especially when we go indoor on low grip wood flooring or grass outdoors. A small amount of weight and it is good for astro.

Not driven it on all carpet yet, but expect a simialr reaction to astro.

Here are some pictures, minus electrics with my RDRP chassis.

As you can see I have also adapted the battery holder, by linking it via a ball joint, to the rear section to help control the stifffness. I just swap in a different battery holder, without the ball cup, if I find I want to reduce stiffness.

[Origineelreclamebord]

I looked at this layout with the alu chassis and sidepods... to me it felt on the table as if the longitudinal flex of the chassis was very bad (torsional flex didn't seem affected much). I ditched it and went for this inline layout (which has at least 65% on the back). So how do you find the flex levels affected on the DIMEC chassis' then? And how's the rigidity levels on your chassis FrogPrince?

[dex210Nick]

I can flex it with my hands if I try, but I didn't check this before I did the mod so I have no clue on the before/after effects.

I've got something in mind now that I might want to try, but it requires a lot of dremmel work and one of those fr4 sheets. I'm feeling pretty creative right now

*edit*

well, I accidentally ordered a sheet of this while trying to figure out how much they charge for shipping. It turns out they don't tell you shipping costs until AFTER you buy it and they don't have a "confirm order" step! So, expect something clever from me in the next few weeks. Should be fun

[CC44]

Hi Origineelreclamebord,

before I get the dremmel out to the side pods on my 210 - can you upload some slightly bigger pictures for your car. Have you added any extra weight in front of the motor?

Thanks