Jump to content

cobalt

Members
  • Content Count

    112
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About cobalt

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 02/01/1975

Profile Information

  • Location
    canada

Recent Profile Visitors

1051 profile views
  1. Depends on how "progressive" the rate is if done right it can be very good...the linkage also allows to eek out more wheel travel from a short travel shock...but if the wheel to shock stroke is too high then you end up with the need for for very stiff spring so dampning becomes harder more wear in the pivots... From a design point of view tamiya engineers where very bold for 1984!
  2. Hotshot chassis You know one of these days i will put an analysis of the HS supension on TC.(mapping out the suspension) The HS is very sound in term of design engineering, it has a rising rate rear suspension but were tamiya engineering messed up is with the "ratio". (too small of shock stroke vs the travel) So if you put a period accurate motor in the HS it isnt that bad! Frog/orv chassis If you map out the rear suspension of the Frog you will notice it has a linear rising rate suspension, again you can see that tamiya were not in the dark when designing their buggies!
  3. Thanks for the reply jonny:) My theory was that a 35t motor is around 12000rpm no load vs 17000(silver can), so my thinking was that the 6.7 ratio would bring back some speed. 17000/7.3=2328 rpm at the wheel(silver can) 12000/6.7=1791 rpm(35t motor)
  4. Hey guys Just wondering if it would be a good idea to use a 35t motor(tamiya cr-tuned) with a 6.7 ratio in a frog i was thinking that i could get away with the low ratio because of the motor high torque! (also by using the bigger pinion i could limit the torque going into the gearbox)
  5. Any of you gentlemen remember an old RCCA 4WD shootout article (i think circa 1992...) peeting the Top-force evo against other 4WD racing buggies? (i think it was in a special "off-road" edition print) thanks
  6. Groing up i never really liked the looks of the Falcon, but today i took a second look and this little buggy is starting to grow on me! The suspension seems well designed and the diff looks bulletproof! Im sure TAMIYA will re-re this one! So what do you gentlemen think about this odd box buggy?
  7. Welcome 76capri! Really nice colors on the frog! You have two of myall-time favorite tamiya buggies! I also have a rere-HS re-re Hornet The Frog is my next buggy! Again welcome! youre among addicts eeerrr i mean friends!!
  8. So i imagine the FAV rear springs are much softer when compared to the re-re frog?
  9. Do you guys know of anyone that makes soft rear springs for the Re-re frog? I will be a getting a re-re frog and read that the springs are still too stiff!?...is this true? (I do not want to change the rear dampers as i like to keep my cars as close to the original as possible!) thanks
  10. But the washer seems to be there in the original instructions!? Strange as to why the old FAV/WO had "slippage problems"!
  11. B.M.T could you please tell me the shims thickens? its 5 shims per side?
  12. Just wondering if the FAV this time around(build per manual) still has the diff slipping problem?
×
×
  • Create New...