I have a whole list of people that want copies of the frame/suspension. The frame is still not totally correct. Basing it on the 133" frame length when it is really more like 145" screwed us up. when the frame is a realistic version I'lls end it out to everyone and probably have Woody put it on his site for everyone to play with.TRD said:what would it take to get you to send me a copy of teh frame on a cd?
Send it. I am sure that I can figure out a way for solidworks to open it..Ballard said:I've got it in Inventor. If I can get it to open and convert it to a different format, I could send it to you. It's based on the correct frame dims.
My license for 5.3 expired and the 5.0 I have a school won't open it.
Not missing anything.Medusa said:What is going to keep the axle from moving from side to side? I don't see any triangulation of the links or a panhard bar. Am I missing something?
Pretty much we are playing. Besides, in this format you would hit the frame before you hit the links..LAME said:Whats with the goofy ass links? Why not just make 'em straight?
Why not triangulate a 4 link, instead of the Watts?
Because different is heavy and weak. Oh wait, the heavy point is a moot point :flipoff2:Jason M said:
Pretty much we are playing. Besides, in this format you would hit the frame before you hit the links..
Nothing is stone yet. But why not do something different?
yeah, i think make them strong, mine are pretty thick, but i think i have made them too high above the centreline of the axle, but hey, it is CLEARwngrog said:Mace,
I used to like the bent lower links that folks are doing. They looked like they wer up and out of the way and would not get bent.
That is true, but I have also been watching those that run them and I noticed that the bent links makes the full front of the tire have to climb up a vertical wall.
With the straight links, the link helps the tire up the ledge.
Just make it stong enough and make 'em straight.