AntH3000

Problem is the wheel travel needed on buggies. That is always a challenge for doing something other than the usual. Some clever stuff on this though like the through shaft dampers (TSD) to avoid aeration. Key thing is to analyse the wheel rate (stiffness vs travel) and to make that similar to the usual setup. Some attempts get / got nowhere near this (TTech Pred) , with consequences. Maybe this gets closer, who knows.

What would be amusing is if Marc Rheinard (or whoever it was) really did get close to the laptimes of TQ, to pay him to do some indoor carpet events and maybe bloody some noses.

ZackM

iTrader: (1)

The car looked pretty good in the few videos I had seen. Obviously with a pro driver behind the wheel.

The rocker ratios should be able to be done in a way that allows even more travel than a normal buggy with the same or smaller shock length.

I wouldn't be scared of the front driveline angle for the same reason, the other drivelines in the car are likely doing more extreme angles through the suspension travel.

Be cool to see if they can make it to market, even in a very limited way.

Zack

foampervert

iTrader: (5)

As in the tenth technology predators and the most inspire,

Does shock length even matter?

Doesn't the link and bellcrank provide whatever shock kinematics the suspension require? This should technically mean that you can get away with whatever shock length as long as the link and bellcrank kinematics give the full suspension throw?

I believe that is the reason the predators could work so well in spite of having short shocks all around. I also believe the predator had the longest suspension arms of any buggy.

Alexv2024

iTrader: (2)

So if you have a 2 in shock and 1 in shock on a 2:1 rocker there will be some differences. The shorter shock has to have the piston move 2x as fast, so piston hole size and oil will be different to have the same driving feel as a 2in shock.

I dont know what the ratio is on the MRO, but theres a setup they posted with I think it was 2x 1.6mm hole piston and 600CST shock. So normalish ranges. So maybe they have like a 1.1 or 1.2x ratio or something like that. So youd get a little more shock travel out of a short shock, but not have crazy pistons or oil requirements.

I will say its interesting, Associated just did a lot of work on the b7 to get long arms for more grip. Long arms, good droop/suspension travel and low center of gravity. It should make a great combination.

Sir 51D3WAYS

Yes. Very much so. It would require proportionally more damping and springing force. So a 2:1 ratio would require a spring that's twice as stiff and a damper with twice the damping force. So on an so forth with a 3:1 ratio etc. Thrice the spring and damping etc.

A stiffer spring isn't a problem and can be easily manufactured.

A stiffer damper however, is a massive problem and would require extensive R&D. Simply upping the oils or decreasing the piston holes would severely compromise performance all round apart from a very small window of conditions.

Long arms tend to give better stability and a feeling of more grip/predictability as they generally tend to make for very smooth and gradual changes in wheel geometry as it cycles.

AntH3000

The other thing is how the ratio / wheel rate changes with travel. This is the challenging bit with offroad with the long travel and the packaging constraints of the rockers. With the Predator there was a big change in rate (rising rate) especially at the rear which was a problem. Also lower peak damper speeds mean tuning is more challenging.

strodedawg

iTrader: (85)

I really wanted an x11 back then, now really like the look of this car. I just race carpet mostly in 10th scale and am looking for a new wheeler. Anyone in the know, have an idea when this car might if ever be released? I also wonder on price point as kit prices have been rising also. really enjoy watching this car develop.

lutach

iTrader: (3)

I like this one and I'm glad I kept all my Predators (on and off-road ones).