RC10Talk - The Net's Largest Vintage R/C Community

Anybody know how front to back shock angle affects performance?

I would think it would affect the caster angle when it compresses but that's just a guess

While I could be wrong but if it affected anything, other than dampening characteristics, I would think it affects camber not caster. On top of that the rear doesn't have caster.

The reason I'm asking, is because I'm modifying my 10t's rear suspension so I can run T4 bodies properly (with out any rubbing, mounting it further forward, or shim it up). I'm testing shimming the rear shock tower forward then mounting the shocks on the back and use the lower GT shock mount to allow the bottom of the shocks to mount within the dimensions of the arms. Unfortunately that limits the rears travel; preventing the chassis from touching the ground.

So I'm also contemplating mounting the shock tower on the back of the bulkhead which would allow me to mount the shocks normally but angles the top of the shock towards the back of the truck.

Angle as in side to side or front to back?

Front to back.

rcgerber wrote:Front to back.

unless the shocks are perpendicular to the suspension arm all you effectively do is cause binding in the shock. With that being said your rc10 has built in anti-squat in the rear suspension by way of s slight kick up in the rear toe blocks, so your rear shocks are supposed to follow that slightly bottom forward angle.

Isn't Camber angle side to side and Caster angle front to back?

In any case, I'm no suspension expert, I just go with whatever seems to work, lol

RC104ever wrote:Isn't Camber angle side to side and Caster angle front to back?

In any case, I'm no suspension expert, I just go with whatever seems to work, lol

Caster is front to back, but I think your referring to anti-squat/anti-dive. Caster is the kingpin angle in relation to the chassis or horizon.

Charlie don't surf wrote:

rcgerber wrote:Front to back.

unless the shocks are perpendicular to the suspension arm all you effectively do is cause binding in the shock. With that being said your rc10 has built in anti-squat in the rear suspension by way of s slight kick up in the rear toe blocks, so your rear shocks are supposed to follow that slightly bottom forward angle.

So if your looking at the left side of the truck (the front to the left) the shock angle if there is any should look like this /

So do you shim the bottom out when using the long wheelbase holes on the rear mounts to keep the angle good?

Front shocks should look like that (perpendicular to the nose plane) rear with lower spacers

rcgerber wrote:...The reason I'm asking, is because I'm modifying my 10t's rear suspension so I can run T4 bodies properly (with out any rubbing, mounting it further forward, or shim it up). ..

You could try a new body...

http://www.rc10talk.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=21998&hilit=bulldog+body

Laying the shock down front to back is essentially loosening up the suspension without much of a progression change (because the anti-squat angle is probably negligible for the amount you are proposing to move the shock-top rearward - and the arms just don't move in that direction like they do when you lay the shocks down in the traditional manner), akin to using a more inward hole on the suspension arm BUT , as CDS pointed out, the binding of the shock (because the mounting pivots don't rotate too well in that direction) may just screw the pooch anyway.

IMO, get a new aftermarket body style (or maybe some lexan scissors).

Yeah the Jconcept Finisher fits well, but I've never been a fan of the cab forward bodies especially the Proline Bulldog.

Here's a pic of what I'm doing, so the angle doesn't look bad then, and will get a smig better once I tweak the bulkhead.


By the way I love this forum, it's a wealth of knowledge.

Thanks everyone.

Use a flat 4/40 nut behind the FT upper shock bushing and you should be good to go, or grab the longer variation of that bushing. The Jconcepts Interceptor fits extremely well and has a very normal 10T look )

Isn't that a Jconcept Illuzion body. I have one of those, but it doesn't fit correctly, the rear shocks are to far forward. That is why I'm doing what I'm doing. Thanks for the info though.

Looking back to the build thread it has the part # of the illusion (0005) but I had no clearance issues with the rear mounting system I used-