PhillipM wrote:
kybuggy1 wrote:
Maybe so. Luckily, guys like Lewis and friends, and Mr. Burns already did the 'paperwork' for us years ago and spent 25 years in the woods hillclimbing making sure nothing was forgotten.
It is unfortunate the pond is so big and expensive to cross. Its sort of a "you had to be there" kinda thing. You would not be the first to be suprised by what some of these ol' boys here can do. No amount of video or typing can show it or explain it. You might pinch a hole in your Def Leppard bloomers if you could see it in person.
I might give you a shock yourself when you see what I do for a living
I don't like extra unsprung weight for offroading, it's bad enough with the big tyres as it is, I rather just get the MC's right to start with.
And you don't want to know how many times I hear that 'well the old guys did it this way' statement in the off-roading scene, we used to get that over here from those telling us a lightweight frame was no good, use steam pipe, and you need a beam axle for enough travel, and everything had to be made out of 1/4 thick angle iron, brake discs have to be massive but you can use shit calipers and pads and then go bigger and bigger with the discs if they don't work...
Been there, heard it, might have worked for them, doesn't mean there's isn't a better solution, it just means they didn't try it or went about trying to improve it the wrong way, or just couldn't be arsed
Progress - taking all the hard work the old guys did, and work on it from there, improve it, don't just nick the fruits of their labours and sit on it
Apparently, the old school guys you been talikn to are WAY older school than our gurus. We ALL know heavy chassis and heavy rotating masses are not the way to go for extreme hillclimbing, or racing for that matter.
You are barkin up the wrong tree if you think I dont agree 100% about the light weight deal. I damn sure dont like extra unsprung weight. I (and many many others) run smaller, lighter tires (31 x 15.50, about 28 lbs each tire and beadlocked wheel). My buggy weighs 1340 lbs, Dont know if thats heavy to you, but thats fairly light over here. Some woods buggies are lighter than that. If someone got close to my buggy with a piece of 1/4" anything and a welder, I'd smack 'em
.
Firebug runs a heavier and totally different set up, with chaindrive. He had to do something different. He wants to try and do it his way, which is cool and I respect it. Would a smaller bore foot brake m/c made his nearly 100 lb tire n wheel combinations stop quicker and more solidly when he danced his cutting brakes (fiddle stick I think is what you called it)?
I aint sayin you dont know your stuff about racing or brakes, but hillclimbing aint racing. Most of us on here are not about rally racing. A few are, and what you know may be very beneficial to all.
So tell me what will make my cutter react even quicker? I have 3/4 bore CNC m/c, wilwood 2 psi residual valve, single handled CNC cutter ( dont know what he bore is, I think 3/4 is about standard for them), 12" of braided flex line, the rest is steel 3/16", and forged Wilwood dynalite II's with polymatrix a pads on cheap porshe style rotors, that are being lightened by drilling the hats (not finished with that yet). I get about 1" to 2" of cutter handle travel before wheel is locked down at near full throttle on a hard pull. Sometimes after riding pretty hard, the will handle will get more travel in it than that, like 3"-4" each way. Like when really cranking on them climbing 3 or 4 hills one right after the other.
My son's buggy has a wilwood 1" m/c and a neal billet single cutter, rubber flexlines, and the same caliper/rotor set up but with organic pads. Cutters feel about the same as mine initially , but they dont seem to have the same amount of fade as mine. But all of his is brand new stuff. My calipers are new, but my mc and cutter are both about 3 yrs old. (About 30 outings on them, if that)