Truck front ends on OIN buggies

[abailey21]

Why is everyone using the 10T front end on their OIN buggies?

Am I missing something or is there some advantage I didn't get the memo about?

[scr8p]

the arms are longer, so they require a narrow bulkhead, which needs a narrow nose plate.

or do you know that already and are just asking why in general?

[abailey21]

I do know that, but is that what guys are after?

Why not just run the Dynotech worlds front arms? Doesn't it give you the same width?

I guess I just don't know WHY their using it? To be closer to modern LWB and wide buggies like the 22, RB6, and B4.1?

[jwscab]

the dynotech worlds from arms are longer than the stock 'wide' arms. In order to keep the same track width, the bulkhead needs to narrow up. The worlds arms are designed to be used with the truck bulkhead.

longer arms give you a smoother acting suspension. less deflection(degrees rotated) in the arms for the same travel. This keeps your track width and geometry more consistent, and improves body roll characteristics. In short, it's a good idea. the biggest issue with the truck configuration is that the shocks lean too far over to make the suspension too progressive, so members have designed and used front towers that stand the shocks more upright.

[Asso_man!]

Not to mention the whole purpose, especially on the OIN builds, is to use the modern 2'2 wheels which have zero or very small offset compared to stock wheels, another reason to lenghten the arms and narrow the bulkhead and obtain a wheelbase that is close or equal to, say, a B4

[jwscab]

that's not completely accurate, with regards to the front end of the car.

the 'old is new' concept allows you to use b4 wheels on the rear of the car, as well as lengthen the arms on the front to help widen the car slightly as well as the other benefits I wrote above.

with dynotech arms in the front and rear, you can use the old offset front wheels, and b4 rear wheels, though the track width is still a little narrow in the rear, where you need the custom works spacers if that bothers you. this requires the b44 rear CVD's

you can use B4 front wheels, but since they have a larger offset, some guys are running the rc10gt wide front axles to bring the width back into line.

with jakes(bigjeepzz) arms, they are designed to use B4 wheels front and rear with no extra spacers or extended axles, but require specific rear hubs and B4 rear CVD's.

realistically, if you are not competing in races, and aren't required to pass tech, it really doesn't matter too much if your track width isn't out to the absolute max.

[soniccj5]

Because it looks cool!

[JK Racing]

Because it looks cool!

'bout sums it up

I have both an OIN and standard CE, the CE is by far my favorite to drive. I am working on the set up of the OIN car, hopefully I can get it close to the CE in feel on the track.

I believe the original thought process on the truck front/wider arms was to compensate for rough tracks BITD. A "long travel" suspension design. Smarter people will give us more insight...

[Phin]

Because it looks cool!

And here I thought the reason was a combination of there not being an alternative to the Andy's Pro Race tower that's as easy to obtain as a truck tower, and AE not making .71" stroke V2 shocks.

[abailey21]

Ok, thanks for the explanations. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something in my own build.

I'm just using the buggy stock front end width, utilizing RPM front arms and B4 components.

Is there that huge of a handling difference running the wider truck front end?

[JK Racing]

i think the stock CE front end works better.

[Phin]

Ok, thanks for the explanations. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something in my own build.

I'm just using the buggy stock front end width, utilizing RPM front arms and B4 components.

Is there that huge of a handling difference running the wider truck front end?

Just to be clear, the RPM Worlds arms with a truck nose and bulkhead has the same track width as the RC10 stock wide arms (or RPM "team" arms) with a stock buggy nose.

I get the feeling you're making the common mistake of confusing RPM's Worlds with AE's Worlds.

[Y'ernat Al]

I believe the original thought process on the truck front/wider arms was to compensate for rough tracks BITD....

JK. Just ran the short arm and 0.56 equipped Blinkinger at SDRC a couple days ago for the first time (Note they had a brand new perfectly biting track layout because of the JBRL coming through last weekend). I think a lot of folks would be real surprised to see how decent it worked with some fine (mostly bump steer related) tuning on such a smooth track. The scrub actually acts as pack for the little 0.56's. Sounds weird I know, but that;s what I think.

I wasn't driving too hot but it was going everywhere I (didn't necessarily mean to) put it. I'm back at it now!

[jwscab]

I'm not suprised at all.....there's a reason the rc10 stayed essentially the same for so many years and took so many title wins. It was a very good design that was revolutionary at first, then evolutionary.

[abailey21]

Ok, thanks for the explanations. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something in my own build.

I'm just using the buggy stock front end width, utilizing RPM front arms and B4 components.

Is there that huge of a handling difference running the wider truck front end?

Just to be clear, the RPM Worlds arms with a truck nose and bulkhead has the same track width as the RC10 stock wide arms (or RPM "team" arms) with a stock buggy nose.

I get the feeling you're making the common mistake of confusing RPM's Worlds with AE's Worlds.

Well now I'm not 100% on what I have??? My RPM front arms are the same width as some haggard stock arms I have laying in a box. I can safely assume they aren't specifically worlds arms, but I can be wrong, they are new but came opened in a lot buy so I'm not sure now?