Upside Down Shocks - I Challenge the Hall Brothers 

Mayfield who? We just had 2 your top guys race this weekend broc and cav in England. Cav didn’t even make the A. But the hall brothers did 😅

@@adambreese7076 Lets see how the Hall brothers make out at the 1/10 worlds this year with Mayfield. Will be interesting.

​​@@adambreese7076 cav gives no fucks about racing as long as he gets a paycheck also probably couldnt find any of that white powder substance

It's Maifield you twats.

@@Haulinbassracing the f**k is that supposed to mean?

😂 golden! 😂😂

soon it will be VINTAGE

😂

As we did for the mardave meteor.

Yes we did but I didn't know why back then🤔.

on motorcycles its done to minimize the flex in the front fork to have the fat and stabile part up on the fork and the thinner more flexing part down where it cant fles as mutch as a regular fork does. check out dyno runs with different forks and the flex is apparent with upp or down forks

its all about the weight sonny, less weight on the part that is actually moving = more responsive suspension, easy as that dyno runs? kiddo please stop trolling@@extec101

@@ohhi5237 im not trolling we are speaking of the same thing in different ways, ok you talk about unsprung mass and im about flex in the forks. we are still talking about the properties of performance of a fork.

That is awesome!

Course continues on Monday! 😎 courses.invisiblespeed.net/invisible-speed-full-course

You should buy the damn course!!!

Why not both

@@LawrenceTimme even better

I used to use fuel tubing under the pistons on my xxxnt, about 1/8"- 1/4", made the truck feel more precise on smooth outdoor dirt tracks.

@@theclubhouse1209 that is just to limit droop not slow it down.

@@extec101 Where did i mention to slow it down?

We will know when the Hall Brother's respond.

upside down forks are around for at least 50 years by now

It all works for that too, just havent made videos specific to that class yet

im sure its more then just trx that got progressive springs... xray got some in their asorment of springs. im sure its more manufacturer out there that also got springs.

It doesnt solve the problem of zero spring force in droop

@@invisiblespeedrc im thinking it is a differance in how the shock works, im no expert but for example the rear shock on a motocross is like ours on rc cars with the body upp and shock shaft down but under nitrogen preassure while the shocks on real cars is up side down compared to rc cars. havent figured out how this makes the shocks work differently by physics or if its just design that a real car got the shocks in a way that makes them not wonerable to weather and tear by the road as i seen lots if not all of off road cars like trophy trucks, king of hammers etc using shocks in a position as rc cars.

@@invisiblespeedrc Why is zero spring force a problem but minimal spring force with two stage springs isn't? I suppose you could heat shrink the tops too as a poor man's droop screw, but it might not hold up long.

@@extec101 Many cars had shocks that are actual structural to the suspension, the shock is the upper arm basically. MacPhereson strut is what it is called, and is done for economical reasons, not performance. It also may look like they are "upside down" but usually I think the oil is still up top, its just that the shock shaft is inside a bigger tube, because like I said, the shock is actually a structural part of the suspension, it needs to be more rigid.

Production road cars often have twin tube dampers where one is inside the other and the oil doesn't go through the piston, instead it is pushed and pulled through a valve into and back from the outer tube which is gas pressurised. The ly usually have the oil reservoir attached to the lower arm as JQ described for strength and rigidity. Competition shocks for the same cars ie coilovers are often monoshocks like RC cars and usually reverse the layout where the oil body is sprung weight, again like our models.

Why dont you watch my video then

if it works better, doesnt it meat your car actually was badly designed eh sorry mate

Buy my course. Thats what its for

@Sauli Luolajan-Mikkola when you say the chassis is not static that is incorrect. Really the only change you could make to one specific chassis would be weight. Technically the chassis is a non movable object nothing about it changes during operation. Now the motor does provide power to move the chassis dynamically through the environment, reactive forces outside of stationary are present on the model like inertia, centrifugal, gyroscopic, impactful still nothing about the chassis is designed to change to cope with those forces other than the suspension. The shocks and springs are not pushing your car up your car is, let's say...continuously in a state of free fall. When the tire encounters a rock or bump the vehicle inertia, momentum is on a straight path the suspension travel would allow the tire (in a perfect setup) to follow the terrain while transmitting the least amount of unwanted force into the static chassis. When people adjust their suspension to compensate for weight of a battery by pre loading the springs or moving the shock to different holes on the tower or arm they aren't really looking for the best handling. They are limiting suspension travel or making the suspension so rigid it almost becomes part of the chassis and typically they don't podium. Well now it's great that your frog won't bump its ass when it hops the vehicle may be stiff in the rear and want to oversteer and you may lose control at high speed over choppy terrain. It will cause bad attitude when leaving jumps and wheel hop on the landing. When I took suspension classes for my career it put suspension operation in a different perspective. Suspension starts from the ground up not top down. If you watch any Baja 1000 footage of those cars going over terrain at 100plus MPH you get an idea of what suspension is really about. The chassis is so smooth you could almost have a hot cup of coffee in your lap.

No you are not understanding. You are wrong

Yeah but where do you find that for 1/10?

6mik

but alu hubs do make the same thing as its increse the unsprung weight.

the air is mixed with all the oil in the shock on an emulssion shock. just take one that you can hear a slight sound of air in and work it back and fort a couple of times and the sound disappere as the air is solved in to the oil.

Because they suck. There, no need for a video. Maybe instead could make a video about the differences between the cars.

@@invisiblespeedrc Well it would be interesting to hear what was the problem some of them were trying to fix and why they suck at fixing it. I was just listing some examples, I'm sure you know some better or crazier ones.

The air doesnt separate from the oil that quickly, and I would think it would end up in the top of the shock (so bottom when upside down)

@Sauli Luolajan-Mikkola what magic would see the air settle in a different end (up vs down) just based on which way round the shock is?

@Sauli Luolajan-Mikkola That's how emulsion works. They air is mixed into the oil, it doesnt change depending on which way the shock is. It's exactly the same. Open your shock after running and look. The air is mixed into the oil evenly. The direction of the shock makes no difference to that.

@Sauli Luolajan-Mikkola no, because as I said, the air bubbles mix into the oil. We are driving the car, not looking at it in the pits. It is irrelevant how it feels on the pit table after it has been stationary long enough for air to settle. That's why if you move an emulsion shock, it will feel different first, with an air pocket, but after you move it a few times in an out, it feels smooth in all positions.

@Sauli Luolajan-Mikkola look at airbubbles in oil when you build a shock. They arent exactly moving fast

Yes but on a much smaller scale like usual. At the end of the day, just run them normal.

IMO cars are too fast for the bumpy tracks to be running 10mm bodies now, they would be far too lively and undriveable.

I dont know how using that word would change anything about the video

Anything in motion has a practical application or affect which makes it act the way it does the only thing that I was actually saying is in the centrifugal situation is that there are in fact formulas for how that can be decided as to the actual effect and how it can be produced to be better going

@@georgerhone4106 we arent doing any calculations here so we don’t need any formula.

Good to know thanks for the information

on motorcycles its done to minimize the flex in the front fork to have the fat and stabile part up on the forl and the thinner more flexing part down where it cant fles as mutch as a regular fork does. check out dyno runs with different forks and the flex is apparent with upp or down forks.

no they would work the same

​@@invisiblespeedrc thanks for replying im just throwing out ideas cause im an idiot as you are aware haha

Better watch the video

Oh I did - I’m just being a smart ass :) I hope they take up the challenge. I’m thinking VRP might make pistons that can be installed “in reverse” and could be an option.

They are not designed for carpet, they are lazy conversions from dirt cars

I dont know if you are responding to me or a comment. With a short hard spring you can set rideheight with almost no preload. Meaning that the spring does nothing above rideheight. Then you have a very soft spring, or soft portion of the spring holding it in place for droop. With a soft spring, you have to have a lot of preload to set rideheight, and the spring force above rideheight will be higher than in the previous example.

@@invisiblespeedrc I'm responding to you, I got the impression that you inferred that a softer spring has less stored energy in extension above ride height. My example was for the same ride height so same stored energy in the springs being stiff or soft. Progressive springs are another beast, they're in series when the car is above ride height and single when the soft is compressed, therefore they have more displacement going extension than compression. I think we're on the same page, just the case that rc spring sets are most commonly the same free length across all springs in the set which to me is not ideal. Then there's also the case of the soft portion not being soft enough, as you said it has to be removed from working as soon before ride height as possible.

@@setupguy no I said stiffer and shorter spring. So that spring would not be active above rideheight to full droop as they are now.

@@invisiblespeedrc that's right we're on the same page. Thanks for the conversation.

He's right though to be fair. 👍

I think 'reducing' centre of gravity that the Hall brothers refer to really means 'lowering' the centre of gravity. I'm confident that flipping the shocks upside down will only minimally lower the CoG. If you take the percentage of the shocks vs the rest of the car, it's a tiny percentage, and the heaviest stuff like the battery and motor are already slung low in the chassis. On the other hand, if you compare the unsprung weight at each corner, and factor in the weight of the shock body after you turn the shocks upside down, this is a much higher percentage increase and is much more significant than the change to the CoG.

I agree

Most don't until you try it.

If you haven't tried it then probably you shouldn't say anything about it.

I have tried it, and TC is a lot better on carpet

In the middle of a Canadian winter: you're lucky to get 'offroad' anything. It's carpet or rarely clay. And I'd prefer not to give up the satisfaction of getting a series of jumps just-right.

Not as boring as your life though

Man is trying to bless you with information and you insult him? STFU and learn something. He speaks slow and clear so you can follow. This is a good thing.

Depending on how lean the tune was before it lost the pressure line. It could be very bad if it was run for long periods and already lean. Although if your original tune was good and it was only one tank it should be fine.