Bill is right.
But, I believe they discontinued that as policy of manual edits a while back. It’s only automated now as per Discourse’s design.
This question is off topic for that thread, so I moved here.
What battery are you pairing it with?
For me, MakerX is going to continue getting my recommendations for best bang for the buck.
If you need to have an integrated antispark, either go with a Xenith or Stormcore, 60D for you since you’re only on 10s.
If you need really cheap, save money, or get a flipsky
From MakerX, either the DV4 or the DV6 would be good
2 Likes
Here here.
Plus, I can’t explain it, but their VESCs feel smoother, kind of more efficient, less power being used for similar speeds.
Maybe I’m just crazy.
1 Like
Is it just me or does it feel like the Matrix II profile doesn’t match at all compared to the CAD? I was testing a slip mount part based off the profile, but none of the sides matched and it couldn’t slide on. Similarly my BN mounts don’t line up with the profile either no matter which way I rotate it, so I only have two points of contact on them. I know they aren’t precision but the geometry can’t be wrong even from casting right?
Did you try swapping sides? I dont think the profile is symmetrical.
2 Likes
I guarantee you you’re just confused by the geometry
It is super hard to tell which side the BN adapters go on, especially bc of tolerance.
And yeah like the duck said, they’re not symmetrical, it’s a mirror
Yep tried all combos, the way I have it now is close, but still not quite right. It has the smallest gaps around the entire thing, but there’s still a gap. And the 3D printed one doesn’t fit no matter which way I turn it, it’s not even a matter of scale, the profile doesn’t seem to match whatsoever.
Well something is wrong then, you sure your truck isn’t backwards?
Pics?
You’re Jeff now.
Frank was a dragon but you’re a landshark now.
As for your problem, I’ve recently noticed that matrix 2 has notoriously nonexistent tolerances. So the cad models are more of a hand drawn manual.
2 Likes
They’re not great, but here’s my setup. It’s like 90% there, but it’s only contacting on two sides.
Also this is the closest I could get my part to be. The frontal curve seems much more pronounced though, and the deck tip angle seems much higher than the advertised 30 since it’s supposed to be parallel.
This is why I’ve avoided channels honestly. Every 3 days someones mounts don’t fit their matrix 2’s. And other options suck or are way more expensive.
1 Like
Its just that matrix 2s suck lol. I can’t believe our most popular truck is this inconsistent disaster.
2 Likes
RKP4Lyfe
1 Like
Matrix 2’s function really well for the price point, but they’re made sloppy. They weren’t designed with our use considered. I have high hopes for matrix 3’s since they thought of us. But airs are rkp² and I think that’s still far superior.
1 Like
Aaahhh a LandShark! Don’t bite my LandYacht!
1 Like
“read” it’s Jeff please. All of you. It doesn’t even have words. It’s the best though.
1 Like
Apparently Jeff works for Ikea now as a realtor, how’s that for a backstory? Even got a painting to boot
1 Like
I’m (unfortunately) in love with my trampa trucks.
1 Like
See channels are so different from kingpin. One whole dimension less movement. I’ve ridden both; I have airs I haven’t ridden. I’m not sure, but I think the best combination of how they ride for our use would be hard channels in the back, soft kingpin, ideally a tuned in air truck, in the front. But I haven’t built it so idk.