|
|
|
| Truck Reviews (15215 Posts)
|
| Truck |
Review |
|
Same Thing-Correction
|
|
On 5/20/2005 Same Guy
wrote in from
United States
(64.5.nnn.nnn)
Item #5: 13mm should read as 130mm- Paul
|
|
|
|
|
Axle's and Stuff
|
|
On 5/20/2005
Paul Howard
wrote in from
United States
(64.5.nnn.nnn)
Hey, OK- First I want to restate my much earlier statements that I am very glad to have trucks done by MMW, PPS, Asphalt Playground, and L&M Welding and Machining. These have worked very well. Some axles have been VERY straight, some have not and both conditions have come from all of the aforementioned truck-fixer-uppers. Here's my observations on "bent-hole" hangers
1)If you remove the axle that you suspect or know is not straight, take a known perfectly straight rod or extra long drill bit that is of smaller diameter of the axle hole in the hanger.
2)Insert the straight smaller rod into the hanger holding the hanger in front of you at eye level, position the hanger so the pivot(or something) is pointed up. Using your thumbs on the lower end portions of the hanger, and your fingers on the rod, gently try to rock the rod back and forth a MICRO amount(that's all you'll get anyways). If there is no "rocking" of the rod, then the rod is on the concave side of the bend and resting on the higher ENDS of the curve in the ENDS of the hole. If it rocks, it's resting on the "hump" in the MIDDLE. Do this test at different positions of the hanger rotating it 90 degrees, then at 180, then 270, to find the orientation of the bend of the hole. Likely it will also be visible just by eyeballing it also. If the rod does not rock at all then you may(probably) have a straight hole. If the hole is bent, so to will be the axle, that is inevetable. If a rod is put in and then "bent straight" at the ends, some rods are an elastic enough alloy to rebound and return to their old shape. I have had straight axles put into "bent" hangers which bent the axles, then once removed, the axles straightened out on their own. I also have had axles that stayed bent due to a lower elasticity of the alloy- In these cases I re-bent those axles straight as I could. After that I did my oversize re-bore/JB Weld Voodoo and ended up with a straight axle in the hanger.
3)If the racing surface is perfectly flat and smooth, perfectly straight axles become more noticeble on wider offsets cones. If the racing surface is weird and funky, this extreme straightness nitpicking does'nt even matter, because straight or not, it won't matter unless the alignment is REALLY bad.
4)If you use an 8mm axle and have to sand it down with emery cloth as some of my rebuilts have required, them there is no slop in the axle/bearing inner race interface (unless they've been oversanded), a lot of MMW axles are just a smidge less than 8mm to avoid this step. Anyhow, if true 8mm material is used and sanded to an exact fit, and bearings like an Oust 7 are used, the "slop" will be so little as to be insignificant for the test. Yes, hangers are unbalanced in rotation, but if spun slowly, this centrifugal effect should'nt come into play. I've done the same test with the axles removed from the hanger and they are still straight and not wobbling or they are not straight and still wobbling. The two-wheel test is also valid, but with good bearings and a snug fitting axle, it's redundant and actually not as accurate if you are watching your axle wobble/not-wobble against a fixed background point and have a fixed-eye viewing point.
5)Now for some really geeky experimentation: I'm currently using one Asphalt Playground Splitfire, and one 13mm Seismic MMW 8mm hanger with a v-e-r-y s-l-i-g-h-t-l-y bent axle positioned so that the axle has a "downpitch" to it in an effort to have a better wheel contact with high crown asphalt roads such as Morro Bays Sunday T/S location. Further results will be forthcoming.
If I sound like I am being negative to MMW, Asphalt Playground, PPS, or L&M Welding and Machining, I am not, in fact, I'm very greatfull of all their efforts and all the trucks I have recieved from them. If it weren't for all of them, I would have what I have and I would'nt have the opportunity to do what I am doing. I also got 3rd at Hood River Amature, 2nd at Morro Bay 2004 in the general slalom amature class which was the highpoint of my racing, Those were my first "big national/internatioal" podium finishes ever. The trucks that got me there were made in combinations from all the above. Fluitt told me I'm the geekiest about trucks of anyone out there, I take that as a compliment. We would'nt be having this tread if the same couldn't be said of all involved in making slalom trucks. If I have more deep thoughts I'll post them, but for now, this is too much already so I'm going home and off to bed and hopefully not having more dreams about racing related stuff. Later Guys, Thanks Again, and to Gilmore:Good luck with the leg. -Paul
|
|
|
|
|
round, wobbly levers
|
|
On 5/20/2005 Mercury
wrote in from
United States
(208.59.nnn.nnn)
You're both right. If you twist and flex the two ends one way or the other, you can get a bent-axled hanger to start spinning pretty good. I was able to start spinning a chinese truck from a dead stop a couple years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Uhh Dave...
|
|
On 5/20/2005 PSR
wrote in from
United States
(69.161.nnn.nnn)
Your wrist twists totally perpendicular to your forearm? Ow, must hurt like hell doing Motocross!
|
|
|
|
|
Korner
|
|
On 5/20/2005
AP
wrote in from
United States
(207.114.nnn.nnn)
Anyone Try these Korner Kutter Trucks? I've request a set for review. If anyone has any comments I would like to hear them, if not I well review and post once i get the set.
|
|
|
|
|
bent or straight axles
|
|
On 5/20/2005 John Gilmour
wrote in from
United States
(209.6.nnn.nnn)
The hold the two wheels test is perfectly adequate for a quick check prior to racing a set up. It will tell you if something is not "true". You'll have to figure out what that is....but at least you'll know if you are racing on a set up that is not true.
|
|
|
|
|
Uhhh... PSR
|
|
On 5/20/2005 Dave G
wrote in from
United States
(207.69.nnn.nnn)
When holding the wheels, t's much more accurate to "flex inwards and outwards" To see the most nominal irregularity(s) You're old enough to know that from back in the 70's
|
|
|
|
|
Axle test
|
|
On 5/20/2005 PSR
wrote in from
United States
(69.161.nnn.nnn)
Pauliwog, consider this; truck hangers have unequal mass. So, using a single wheel as you describe will only truely tell you that the hanger is heavier near the pivot as it rotates. There's too much slop in your Bearings to even hope to use that as a 'test'.
John Gilmour gave me a simpler means of axle-straightness testing; A hanger, with two wheels on it, a wheel held in each hand (ala bike handlebars). Now, 'twist' the bike's throttle. If the hanger then suddenly rotates, yup, that axle's not so straight. If the hanger dosen't twitch then you're good to go (straight, that is).
BTW, this IS getting way too anal, and is starting to border on compulsive behaviour. Either it's time too get new medication, or start trying to figure out how to twddle your thumbs in opposite directions! ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
geezer-x : check your e-mail
|
|
On 5/20/2005
Mile High Mark
wrote in from
United States
(69.15.nnn.nnn)
Geezer... check your e-mail. Have folks asking about the trucks, etc, that we discussed a while back.
--Mark @ Mile High Skates
|
|
|
|
|
Straight axles
|
|
On 5/20/2005
Geezer-X
wrote in from
United States
(151.200.nnn.nnn)
The last step in all or axle jobs is to place one axle stub in the lathe chuck and rotate the hanger. I use a dial indicator to measure runout at the other stub. I then align the assembly to minimize runout.
Using a wheel will work *sort-of-ok* if you have a properly faced hanger, perfect bearings, a nice square bearing spacer, and properly torqued nuts. It also begs that your wheel bearing seats are perfect.
An axle should be a light press fit in the hanger bore. If, once the axle is locked in the hanger there is misalignment, hold the axle by the ends and realign the assembly.
The downside is that you really need a lathe to do this properly.
|
|
|
|
|
rts/offset
|
|
On 5/20/2005 DAve g
wrote in from
United States
(207.69.nnn.nnn)
Lemonoles,
Yup... The RTS just don't hack it! I never tried..But think maybe a strong positive wedge would help!! But what sense does that make? I sold the 2 that O'shei sent me and never looked back
|
|
|
|
|
split-axle rts
|
|
On 5/20/2005
panda
wrote in from
France
(82.225.nnn.nnn)
hey todd, you were asking about spit axle rts, it seems manufacturer stopped doing those and went for split axle rtx (like the airflow and the splitfire back) since it seemed split axle rts didn't turn enough.
|
|
|
|
|
Seismics on the back and stuff
|
|
On 5/19/2005 Pauliwog
wrote in from
United States
(64.5.nnn.nnn)
Hey, Steve-iwog from AZ-email me bird041167@yahoo.com and yes, I'm all about Hood River!
Tod lemonboy- Interesting observation about the traction issue of a Seismic in the back. I actually feel I get more traction with the Seismic MMW 8mm, But-I have taken a liking to testing all of my trucks with a simple test: Get a wheel with bearings in it, lay it on a horizontal surface with the outer edge down, take the hanger off of the truck in question, put one axle into the bearings and spin it slowly, if it wobbles, it's not straight. Now, Here's where I get into trouble with everybody: All these guys(and I mean ALL of them) are putting perfectly straight 8mm rod into hangers which may or may not(more often the case) have a straight hole. Even despite claims of re-boring/reaming, most of these still have a bent hole which means now they have a perfectly bent 8mm axle. I have been removing the axles, slightly overboaring the hole so there is no impingement of the axle, then straighening when needed if possible, sometimes the rod has enough elasticity it has straighened itself out, or in a few cases I go to a machinist in town and get a new axle made. Then I put the axle back in with JB Weld and shims made from aluminum pop cans. I then bake the hanger at 200-250 degrees Fahrenheit for 1.5 hrs which cuts the cure time way down and makes it cure way harder. Now, retest your axle/hanger-it will spin like a top and you'll have noticably more traction. I made a jig to do this alignment with TTC's and Splitfire's as well(they however are still 2 separate axles and thus are harder to get perfectly aligned- so a better jig is being pondered on at present). Fluitt said "you have got to be the geekiest guy racing" or something like that. I like that.
I do agree, the Seismic is a little more "chattery" due to how solid the interfaces are, so far it's been more of an adjustment to getting used to it rather than losing traction.
Adios-Paul
|
|
|
|
|
Seismic rear
|
|
On 5/19/2005
Tod aka Lemonboy
wrote in from
United States
(12.148.nnn.nnn)
Paul,
I am totally a rear Seismic fan...more of your pump energy gets to the ground with the hanger working in full contact with the kingpin, but to me there is one situation when I won't be using one and that is on anything less than perfect pavement. PSR, This was more the point I was trying to make in my post way down below...
There doesn't seem to be enough compliance (?suspension?) with a Seismic on rougher conditions, which, in my opinion, takes out a point of "forgiveness" for over worked wheels to recover in comparison to a "regular" truck (double action)
The cyber drugery I do to test different setups doesn't lie though....
for me, a Radikal up front and a shallowed out 30* Seismic on back
has the fastest and maybe more importantly, most consistent times of anything I've tried...
One thing I'd like to try but can't find is a split axle
(offset) with RTS geometry......anybody know if this is out there??
|
|
|
|
|
Pauliwog's Seismic Adventure
|
|
On 5/19/2005
Steve "iwog" in AZ
wrote in from
United States
(192.175.nnn.nnn)
Hey, Paul I've been talkin' to Scotty over at SS and we've got some ideas for a Hybrid 33"er that's similar to yours but with some of my special "quirks".
Email me, and we'll go further into this whole seismic F/R thing. I'm running the old 110 45* front on my Roe with a Split rear and Avs, but I'm experimenting with other stuff, too.
See you in HR in July, YES??
-=S=-
|
|
|
|
|
GULLWING ALPINE TRUCKS
|
|
On 5/19/2005 Jo Jo Fuzz
wrote in from
United States
(68.123.nnn.nnn)
Anyone heard anything about these? Supposed to be a refined version of their cruiser 60's.
|
|
|
|
|
Seismics as a rear slalom truck
|
|
On 5/18/2005 Paul Howard
wrote in from
United States
(64.5.nnn.nnn)
Hey, I have never gotten a Seismic to feel really good to me as a front truck, though a lot of people have/do. I have found that for big hybrid and G/S, a 130mm MMW 8mm with a 30 degree baseplate is pretty stable, solid in traction and just feels good if used flat(not wedged). For T/S, the 100mm MMW 8mm version with the 30 degree baseplate was a little too draggy/not-turney, it probably could benefit from a smidge of POS wedging for the really tight T/S but it worked OK on the bigger T/S and hybrid courses. I did recently use the same hanger but with the 45 degree baseplate and POS wedged it with 1/4" of lift in the rear and no riser in the forward end of the back truck. For really T/S this worked REALLY well. For all these setups, the front end had a matching-in-width RT-X 8mm conversion (from MMW or AsphaltPlayground) Pos wedged with a STEEP homemade wood wedge. Adios-Paul
|
|
|
|
|
flipping trucks
|
|
On 5/17/2005
Julien
wrote in from
United States
(68.60.nnn.nnn)
I agree with PSR that you should definitely not turn the truck around. If you have some randal R2s though you can flip the hangar in the back if you want to lower the board a little and make it more stable. all this stuff is explained on Chaputs website: chrischaput.com (look under randals)
|
|
|
|
|
reversed truck
|
|
On 5/17/2005 PSR
wrote in from
United States
(69.161.nnn.nnn)
Myke, don't go there, unless you want to play a practical joke on someone. I did that once, broke my friend's elbow about two turns down the hill. Damn good thing that was back in the 70's, as these days, I would've been sued by his parents for the medical costs.
|
|
|
|
|
help
|
|
On 5/17/2005
myke
wrote in from
United States
(68.118.nnn.nnn)
i heard that if u turn your back truck around. so ur kingpins are not facing eachother..but the same direction as the front truck. this is a better ride? carves? anyone hear of anything like this?
|
|
|
|
|
Gus 'fix' list
|
|
On 5/17/2005 PSR
wrote in from
United States
(69.161.nnn.nnn)
To get these to work, I've ditched the baseplate, replaced with a Tracker Aggro. This change alone added 7* of steering to what is supposed to be a front truck. The stock bases are set at a way laid-back geometry, like the steering on a long-wheelbase Ford pickup truck. I had to ream the hole in the casting of the truck where the pivot pin fits in. I filed that end of the hanger flat while I had the pivot pin out. I reamed the inner ring as well, then smoothed the lumps out there as well (lumps like that could rip apart a soft bushing like a White Khiro). The axles are still the stock ones, and I'm not sure yet I want to add to cost by fitting 8mm axles. I had to add bellingham washers (cupped in shape,8mm) to the ends of the hangers, as those were machined, but not perpendicular to the axles?! Oy. I'll run this configuration awhile first, then see if it'll be worthwhile. I tried a few truck hangers on the GUS baseplate, and the RTS fits, kind of. But the kingpin is still way short. So, that's also a 'fix' item.
I can see that replacing the kingpin and bushings would be probably enough to make this truck usable, where filing,de-burring,and reaming are things that are truely needed, but blemishes that beg for those fixes are annoying. The axles, man, my Ventures fit the bearings tighter. So, I'm not impressed with a range of things that could, should be, dealt with in design and production. Sorry to be harshly sarcastic about this, but; if it's a Slalom Truck, then I've got a Powell Guerrero 'Slalom Board' and a nice set of 'Slalom' Krypto Lite wheels to match these cutting edge trucks.
The spherical pivot, That is cool. It obviously does reduce turning resistance and stays true through the truck's range of motion while steering. It's a feature that is worth using on other trucks.
|
|
|
|
|
Gus Truck "counterpoint"
|
|
On 5/16/2005 Chris B
wrote in from
United States
(68.60.nnn.nnn)
Couldnt disagree with you more PSR....i find the quality of the one i have no different than an assembly line Tracker or indy. The bushings needed to replaced with Khiros, which called for a longer kingpin, but that's pretty standard practice...and they react much faster than a standard truck. I got mine a while ago though, it's possible that quality has fallen down since then, i s'pose
|
|
|
|
|
GUS truicks
|
|
On 5/16/2005 PSR
wrote in from
United States
(69.161.nnn.nnn)
Allright, WTF? I had thought these Japanese trucks would give me Toyota Quality in a sphereical-pivot front truck. Nope, try Datsun B-210...
There's lots of slop in the axles between them and any 608 bearing (607's anyone?), the pouring cast quality is pure Newporter (junk from the 70's, should you not know), the kingpin is 1/4" too short for any proper bushing that allows for turning, and the bushing quality...Heck, I've granite with a higher rebound factor...might as well used PVC for the bushings, which are ineptly shaped, sized, and really badly thought through in terms of resilience or durometer. The few good things are the sherical pivots, and hanger width. Oops. That's not a few, but a ere pair of goodness factors.
I'll be 'building' these trucks for a far longer time than I'd spend on making Fury Mids work as a front slalom truck. So, those who are looking for a cost-effective front truck, please stay with Tracker RTX's or RTS's. These niponese 'slalom' trucks need to be re-designed with the thoughtfulness that has made Japanese Innovation such a draw. I felt like I had just bought a Japanese Truck that got lost in a time-vortex,from somewhere back in the mid-80's.
|
|
|
|
|
re - carver cx trucks
|
|
On 5/16/2005
peters
wrote in from
United States
(64.236.nnn.nnn)
re: toddc's Carver CX post before it slides into the ether... i've been putting many miles on the CX over the past months and i'm diggin 'em. they've got a quicker, more responsive feel based on the same principles as the C7, with a fraction of the moving parts. Instead of C7's 3 pivot points (short kingpin on top hangar, long kingpin and spring/tension mechanism inside baseplate, and a set of rotating discs as front pivot), with the CX there is now only ONE kingpin, like a standard truck. A top + bottom standard bushing setup pushes the hangar back to center. It's like they reduced a 100-line-of-code program down to 10 with the same (better, imho) result.
The CX still creates a really loose truck feel, without the same tension on the middle of the kingpin as a traditional reversed kingpin setup. Primary difference: the CX kingpin points straight up from the baseplate, at a 90 degree angle from the deck, and the axle/hangar's exaggerated triangle shape 'swings' or swivels the axle behind it. With the board flipped on its back, if you grab both wheels and crank the truck, note the kingpin maintains its perpendicular position. On a traditional rev-kingpin setup, if you flip the board upside down, and crank the hangar hard left or right, you can visually see how the kingpin slightly angles off its parallel axis with the deck. That small wiggle is what eventually results in a snap.
My other test was seeing how much raw mileage these endure without a kingpin breaking...so far it's 200+ miles without failure. Typically Grade8's have snapped around the 80-mile mark on a traditional but very loose setup - the bolt break almost always occurs at the weak border where the threading begins. On almost all rev-kingpin-type trucks, the kingpin points up at a 45? or sharper degree angle from the baseplate while the axle/hangar body pivots on top of it, like a see-saw. With soft bushings set up loose, this creates an excellent surf feel, but a lot of torque on the pin. Of course, when keeping bushings tight the kingpin moves little if at all - and the broken-pin issue practically goes away.
A stiff deck works great with CX because you can take advantage of the hangar's 'swivel', and commit all your momentum to each turn, committing from the tail of the deck -- its great to be at a fast cruising speed with these, then spend a minute or so committing hard, connected carves to the point where you can feel the urethane shredding off the wheels and the deck practically lifting off the ground. Skateparks still feel a little weird - the front pivots so easily that riding up a bowl face takes some getting used to, but the CX's stability is improved for this as well. I think Carver's got one of the most understated innovations for trucks over the past couple years...
|
|
|
|
|
Sliding on Springs
|
|
On 5/16/2005 PSR
wrote in from
United States
(69.161.nnn.nnn)
Airin, they work fine, but for one little issue, which is spring rebound... When you slide efficiently, you 'unweight' the board, or rather don't put much downward pressure on, but 'push' the board into ,the 'retract' the board from, a Slide. Seismics steer in just great, and come back under your feet without much prodding. But, about mid-way between starting a slide, and getting the wheels to 'break', you'll find that the springs are working just a bit against you, causing some 'hop', which can lead to an unpredictable slide, or change of direction. My cure has been simple. Instead of fatter, harder wheels, I use skinnier, softer wheels. The idea is that the narrower wheels will 'let go' with less contact patch, but regain traction (softer compound) once I can push down on them. For comparion purposes, look at Gravity's bigger wheels, the Abec-11's Flashbacks. You'll see that the G's are taller by a bit, ut narrower that the lashbacks are. Flashbacks are great 'sliders', but a narrow wheel (based on the old Hyper Mundo) is what works with Seismics. I haven't tried Abec 11 Strykers with Seismics yet. That might be a good combo? You'll have to try to know, I guess. (we have a sayin' here in N. New England that fits-- "Hard Tellin', Not Knowin") but then again, 'you'll have that' from time to time...
|
|
|
|
|
