I didn't what is this????
01-16-2007, 03:47 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: monterial, QC, CANADA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't what is this????
I made order for many alloy parts of my stadium truck, this part I didn't order but shop sent and charged my card!!!!! they said it is important with wheel hub lengthening which I already ordered… that part number is 4460 they name it ( alloy rear spring deflection limit) ... I don't know what is the benefit of this part and where I can install… any help please and anyone have picture of this part installed in his car
01-16-2007, 04:37 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: cramlington, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 1,543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
01-16-2007, 04:38 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: corcoran,
MN
Posts: 1,151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
According to:
Molzer Mowery Racing
6126 Olson Memorial Highway
Golden Valley MN 55422
763-525-8267
Fax 763-544-2481
email: sales(at)molzermoweryracing.com
You have a Rear Upstop Limiter Bracket for the rear of a Sedan - NOT A ST PART! RETURN!
Molzer Mowery Racing
6126 Olson Memorial Highway
Golden Valley MN 55422
763-525-8267
Fax 763-544-2481
email: sales(at)molzermoweryracing.com
You have a Rear Upstop Limiter Bracket for the rear of a Sedan - NOT A ST PART! RETURN!
01-16-2007, 05:20 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: corcoran,
MN
Posts: 1,151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
Not sure what you said there?
It is for a Sedan and unless you have a sedan its not going to work on your ST.
You can email Molzer Mowery Racing if you would like, or contact the dealer you bought it from and ask how you would use it on your ST.
Hope this helps.
It is for a Sedan and unless you have a sedan its not going to work on your ST.
You can email Molzer Mowery Racing if you would like, or contact the dealer you bought it from and ask how you would use it on your ST.
Hope this helps.
01-16-2007, 06:08 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Carlisle, PA
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
You polt that on top of the rear bulkheads. It will work on your truck but I dont see the need for it. There is an FG marder with one but I cant find the picture right now.The person that has it on the MARDER goes by the name JD. The pictures are on here somewhere! You can ajust it for the suspension going up just like you adjust how far you want it to go down..
01-16-2007, 07:12 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: AUS, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
I am the person that built JD's marder and put one of those on it. It is as you have written a rear deflection limitation set. It is used in the rear to stop the back of the car/chassis from bottoming out and hitting the ground. It will fit any off road FG as long as you have the rear alloy lengthening set (Part No 7478) on it. You must also have FG rear alloy upper wishbones for it to work. If you are running Elcon rear alloy upper wishbones then you cannot use this part as the Elcon rear alloy upper wishbones are really thin on both sides and do not line up with the screws for the deflection set. Below is the picture of how it looks fitted from the side so you get the idea of how it works.
01-16-2007, 07:51 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Nuuk, GREENLAND
Posts: 1,363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
caad5: According to Onno Abbes/Elcon it s by design that the Elcon upper Rear A-Arm has room to move a bit from side to side.
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
01-16-2007, 07:58 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: AUS, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
ORIGINAL: JRexA
caad5: According to Onno Abbes/Elcon it s by design that the Elcon upper Rear A-Arm has room to move a bit from side to side.
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
caad5: According to Onno Abbes/Elcon it s by design that the Elcon upper Rear A-Arm has room to move a bit from side to side.
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
01-17-2007, 01:02 AM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: melbourne, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
ORIGINAL: caad5
Why is it not a good idea to stablise it with clips ???? Even the stock plastic upper arms have c-clips mounted on them. They are used to align the upper wishbone threaded rod to the upright mount and stop it from moving side to side. If it did move from side to side it would come out of alignment with the upright mount and then there would be stress on the up and down movement of the upper wishbone because it would be at an angle with the upright mount.
ORIGINAL: JRexA
caad5: According to Onno Abbes/Elcon it s by design that the Elcon upper Rear A-Arm has room to move a bit from side to side.
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
caad5: According to Onno Abbes/Elcon it s by design that the Elcon upper Rear A-Arm has room to move a bit from side to side.
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
01-17-2007, 08:03 AM
#15
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Milton,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 1,697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
I haven't seen many guys using it on offroads. You should have ordered from www.advancehobbies.com. They are the Canadian distributor in Toronto and have 2 wicked stores just 15minutes from each other! Must be doing well!!
The clips used are needed but I know what is happening. Remove the shocks and move the arm up and down manually. The turnbuckle moves slightly toward the rear. You should feel it if you don't see it. When you use the FG alloy extensions with the alloy uprights you still have the same problem. I went through this when I had a Marder/MT/MB.
Elcon has a fix for this or you can use KP Designs aluminum upright which is all in one.
Elcon - 18508 http://www.elcon-models.com/?q=taxonomy/view/or/7
KP Design - KPD118 Extended alloy rear http://www.kp-designs.co.uk/Off%20road%20cars.html
The clips used are needed but I know what is happening. Remove the shocks and move the arm up and down manually. The turnbuckle moves slightly toward the rear. You should feel it if you don't see it. When you use the FG alloy extensions with the alloy uprights you still have the same problem. I went through this when I had a Marder/MT/MB.
Elcon has a fix for this or you can use KP Designs aluminum upright which is all in one.
Elcon - 18508 http://www.elcon-models.com/?q=taxonomy/view/or/7
KP Design - KPD118 Extended alloy rear http://www.kp-designs.co.uk/Off%20road%20cars.html
01-19-2007, 04:09 PM
#16
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: monterial, QC, CANADA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
CAAD5 Thanks very much for your explanation, now I know how to install this part ..... all parts I have is FG parts including rear alloy lengthening set (Part No 7478) and rear alloy upper wishbones for it to work ... Thanks again for your support
01-20-2007, 09:07 AM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Nuuk, GREENLAND
Posts: 1,363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
ORIGINAL: caad5
Why is it not a good idea to stablise it with clips ???? Even the stock plastic upper arms have c-clips mounted on them. They are used to align the upper wishbone threaded rod to the upright mount and stop it from moving side to side. If it did move from side to side it would come out of alignment with the upright mount and then there would be stress on the up and down movement of the upper wishbone because it would be at an angle with the upright mount.
ORIGINAL: JRexA
caad5: According to Onno Abbes/Elcon it s by design that the Elcon upper Rear A-Arm has room to move a bit from side to side.
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
caad5: According to Onno Abbes/Elcon it s by design that the Elcon upper Rear A-Arm has room to move a bit from side to side.
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
Here is the explanation to why you should not run clips, un the upper rear arms, when using the Elcon Rear Arms.
ORIGINAL: Onno Abbes(in e-Mail)
When you are running the 18504 or the 12504.
These elcon lower wishbone mounts have a 2 degree anti-squad angle in them
(caster angle).
So the lower arms are under an 2 degree angle (better approach to bumps
and traction improvement).
The arm being under an angle implies following:
When the arm moves up it moves also a little bit to the rear.
Moving down vice versa to the front.
The 12504 and 18504 should be mounted this way so the arms lean to the rear.
As the hub and upper arm are connected to the lower arm they should move
along not only up and down but also front/back.
This is why the upper arm has the possibility to move front/back. So it is
not a misserable fit, it is designed on purpose this way.
Though the movement front back is small, placing rings or clips in the
open space will put stress to the rear suspension system during up/down
movement.
With the FG lower arms there is no angle on the lower rear arms.
Then the space can be filled as the movement then is strictly vertical.
We however have the opinion the 2 degree angle is an improvement in
traction and approach of bumps and that's why it is made there.
Hope it is all clear.
When you are running the 18504 or the 12504.
These elcon lower wishbone mounts have a 2 degree anti-squad angle in them
(caster angle).
So the lower arms are under an 2 degree angle (better approach to bumps
and traction improvement).
The arm being under an angle implies following:
When the arm moves up it moves also a little bit to the rear.
Moving down vice versa to the front.
The 12504 and 18504 should be mounted this way so the arms lean to the rear.
As the hub and upper arm are connected to the lower arm they should move
along not only up and down but also front/back.
This is why the upper arm has the possibility to move front/back. So it is
not a misserable fit, it is designed on purpose this way.
Though the movement front back is small, placing rings or clips in the
open space will put stress to the rear suspension system during up/down
movement.
With the FG lower arms there is no angle on the lower rear arms.
Then the space can be filled as the movement then is strictly vertical.
We however have the opinion the 2 degree angle is an improvement in
traction and approach of bumps and that's why it is made there.
Hope it is all clear.
01-20-2007, 11:12 AM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
Nice of him to look out for you, but I think the law is, if somebody sends you something (and not the wrong address--a mistake) that you did not order----it's free. Legally, I think that guy ows you some money.
01-20-2007, 01:05 PM
#19
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: monterial, QC, CANADA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
Yes, you are right, this applicable in USA and Canada, I'm leaving in Paris where system a little different, maybe this was my mistake because I tried to convert ST from standard version to fully alloy with front and rear hydraulic break… although I try my best to get all part number I was afraid to miss part which could leads to delay conversion then I asked shop for part maybe I forgot to place in my order accordingly, he add this part , FG ball drives and alloy servo saver…. O.K. no problem for parts worth 200.00 Euro and I will use them but the issue which make very upset is the servo tray and alloy servo saver which are not compatible with steering servo ( Hitek HS805BB), the space on try smaller than servo and servo saver will stuck the servo… Now I’m oblige to wait
ORIGINAL: Earth Surfer
Nice of him to look out for you, but I think the law is, if somebody sends you something (and not the wrong address--a mistake) that you did not order----it's free. Legally, I think that guy ows you some money.
Nice of him to look out for you, but I think the law is, if somebody sends you something (and not the wrong address--a mistake) that you did not order----it's free. Legally, I think that guy ows you some money.
01-20-2007, 05:47 PM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: melbourne, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: I didn't what is this????
ORIGINAL: JRexA
Here is the explanation as why NOT using clips is the preferred option:
Here is the explanation to why you should not run clips, un the upper rear arms, when using the Elcon Rear Arms.
ORIGINAL: caad5
Why is it not a good idea to stablise it with clips ???? Even the stock plastic upper arms have c-clips mounted on them. They are used to align the upper wishbone threaded rod to the upright mount and stop it from moving side to side. If it did move from side to side it would come out of alignment with the upright mount and then there would be stress on the up and down movement of the upper wishbone because it would be at an angle with the upright mount.
ORIGINAL: JRexA
caad5: According to Onno Abbes/Elcon it s by design that the Elcon upper Rear A-Arm has room to move a bit from side to side.
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
caad5: According to Onno Abbes/Elcon it s by design that the Elcon upper Rear A-Arm has room to move a bit from side to side.
It is NOT a good idea to stabilize it by using clips.
(Been there, done that, and asked why the design was such a misserable fit
Here is the explanation to why you should not run clips, un the upper rear arms, when using the Elcon Rear Arms.
ORIGINAL: Onno Abbes(in e-Mail)
When you are running the 18504 or the 12504.
These elcon lower wishbone mounts have a 2 degree anti-squad angle in them
(caster angle).
So the lower arms are under an 2 degree angle (better approach to bumps
and traction improvement).
The arm being under an angle implies following:
When the arm moves up it moves also a little bit to the rear.
Moving down vice versa to the front.
The 12504 and 18504 should be mounted this way so the arms lean to the rear.
As the hub and upper arm are connected to the lower arm they should move
along not only up and down but also front/back.
This is why the upper arm has the possibility to move front/back. So it is
not a misserable fit, it is designed on purpose this way.
Though the movement front back is small, placing rings or clips in the
open space will put stress to the rear suspension system during up/down
movement.
With the FG lower arms there is no angle on the lower rear arms.
Then the space can be filled as the movement then is strictly vertical.
We however have the opinion the 2 degree angle is an improvement in
traction and approach of bumps and that's why it is made there.
Hope it is all clear.
When you are running the 18504 or the 12504.
These elcon lower wishbone mounts have a 2 degree anti-squad angle in them
(caster angle).
So the lower arms are under an 2 degree angle (better approach to bumps
and traction improvement).
The arm being under an angle implies following:
When the arm moves up it moves also a little bit to the rear.
Moving down vice versa to the front.
The 12504 and 18504 should be mounted this way so the arms lean to the rear.
As the hub and upper arm are connected to the lower arm they should move
along not only up and down but also front/back.
This is why the upper arm has the possibility to move front/back. So it is
not a misserable fit, it is designed on purpose this way.
Though the movement front back is small, placing rings or clips in the
open space will put stress to the rear suspension system during up/down
movement.
With the FG lower arms there is no angle on the lower rear arms.
Then the space can be filled as the movement then is strictly vertical.
We however have the opinion the 2 degree angle is an improvement in
traction and approach of bumps and that's why it is made there.
Hope it is all clear.
