I’ll have to have a chat to David about a “no bindings” class 
2 Likes
As the sport grows I think there will be different categories like this. As for now, there’s not enough people doing it to have these sort of categories. It would be good to have another column that shows bindings or not though to compare.
4 Likes
I had a feeling the long mounts and little motors were going to look weird out front but I didn’t take into account the split angle baseplates pointing them up higher in the air 
Not sure whether to redrill the motor mount holes in the trucks or just use a shorter set of flipsky mounts I have laying around and redrill those.
3 Likes
5 Likes
Doesn’t look too bad. Any chance of pointing them inwards if you used the shorter flipsky ones?
1 Like
Doesn’t need to match but getting them higher from the ground will reduce the amount of sand blasting that occurs on the motor cans haha.
I made a set of reacher v5s look old after just a month.
Look forward to seeing how u like 4wd
2 Likes
Dang they’re a mess. Ive got a beater board thankfully this one only really comes out for track stuff but the bigger wheels would give me a bit more clearance than you guys have too.
Did you connect the shield of your cable to the gnd one of the vescs?
1 Like
Yeah I had, it’s supposed to be connected to the main side which sends the signal. But then I had to redo it and skipped that part in my rush to finish.
1 Like
Geez must be those open gears or something. That’s full on
The carbon mounts had a better orientation up front, still not 100 percent feeling the length though. But these are going to tie it up very nicely I’m thinking. 76mm front 92mm rear and customised slots to suit the front baseplate angle 
thankyou Tom
Before I tuned it down a little…
2 Likes
Bit of an update with this thing. The 5p was struggling so I added a 3p in parallel. Definitely not a form upgrade but the function is a step up for sure. I actually enjoyed my first crack at fibreglass. Foam not so much.
Definitely going to redo this turtle/artillery helmet box but now it’s 16s8p the performance is definitely promising. 62.5 battery 110 motor to the back and 25-65 to the front it’s quicker than I’m confident to hard launch at the moment.
It’s heavy as shit but hopefully I can get those t-race times down a little now.
5 Likes
Very nice! Get that front binding on and watch those times drop too!
1 Like
Yeah that list is hotting up. Definitely gonna have to get over my fear of them to catch up
1 Like
This is the way, make it sexy for a week then start strapping packs and camping chairs to it.
Looking good though! 
One suggestion I got is if you’re charging in parallel too, you should swap that daly out for a smart bms(ltt/ennoid).
Charging in parallel is dangerous and should only be done if your packs have a good track record and are heavily monitored.
1 Like
Yeah it’s definitely on the cards to get rid of that Daly. I’ve got the loopkey there on the parallel connection to be able to charge them separate for sure.
I did however watch a charge, checking along the way charging at 6amps through the smaller pack. All seemed to charge nicely with the big pack on the llt charging through the connection and static balancing.
1 Like
For sure, when everything is healthy its not an issue. The thing is is that in that configuration, charging through the main pack bms, the second pack doesn’t have charge protections. Imo, thats the main reason to have a bms, good cells in a good pack shouldnt need much balancing at all.
This is good! But not as convenient.
Im not judging, as I parallel charge all the time. Just giving ya words of caution.
1 Like