PDA

View Full Version : Pn muti-lentgh vs pn v4 lcg 98-102


dvsstrike
2011.01.23, 09:58 PM
hello all
was wondering who is running the new pn mount and how it compares to the older 98-102mm v4 mount?
pro and cons would be great.
I am skeptical on running this mount due to all the mounting points and how the motor is suspended rather than secured on top and bottom.
thanks

lfisminiz
2011.01.24, 07:13 PM
I have a couple of them. I really like them.
pros.....
looks cool
very easy to change from 94-96-98-etc...
very easy to change motor out

cons.......
only thing i can think of, not sure on a good hit, if it would tweek easier. (no problem so far on my stock racers).

color01
2011.01.24, 11:37 PM
I haven't seen tweak from car-to-car collisions, but I can report that I did tweak the reconfigurable pod after dropping my car about 4 feet right on the rear left wheel. All I had to do was loosen and re-tighten the screws, problem solved. :) That's better than the alternative case, where I probably would've broken a T-plate with that kind of drop (has happened before).

Digitalis West
2011.01.25, 03:22 AM
cons.......
only thing i can think of, not sure on a good hit, if it would tweek easier. (no problem so far on my stock racers).

Since the bottom and top plates are made of carbon fiber I think these mounts will break before they permanently tweak. In fact I bought mine to replace a V3 aluminum mount that was hit from behind and bent. I was worried that if offered less protection for the diff and shaft.. but then I remembered that the shaft is much less expensive than the mount.

Overall I am happy with the mount and have only found two issues with it. There are a ton of screws and it takes judicious use of loctite to keep everything snug over a few days of racing. Second, the area where the T-Plate mounts only has alignment features on one side which means that you can install the mount crooked on the t-plate if you are not careful.

I think the trade off is worth it for the easy motor access.

lfisminiz
2011.01.25, 05:34 AM
Sounds good. Like i said....no problem at all, here.:)

dvsstrike
2011.03.22, 06:35 PM
I just got the 98-102mm multilentgh maount and do not like it at all. The lower plate flexes like crazy causing unwanted rear droop. I like the car to have 1 -2 mm rear droop max and now with this mount it droops back further than i would like. the older mount works better as it does not flex at all. After looking on the site ther is a new stiffer lower plate. They should have replaced all the ones with the stiffer plate. Now i have to spend more money on a already expensive mount to make it work hopefully.

color01
2011.03.23, 03:12 AM
Do you have any pics? I know the plate flexes with some force, however the only way you could drop the rear wheels more is if you have overtightened or bent the bottom plate somehow. It is CF after all, it's not a wet noodle and I have had no handling issues to report that would suggest it is.

dvsstrike
2011.03.23, 07:15 AM
i have no pics. but it does flex like crazy and I did not overtighten the plate. i swapped out for the old mount and my car works normal again.The car will diff out in hard corners all the time. I can't say anything good about this mount.

hrdrvr
2011.03.23, 08:26 AM
dvs - I had the same initial impression and was upset that I spent the money at first.

The bottom plate does seem soft and flexy, but how much force is actually put onto in a drection that it flexes? Also, is there anything else that will give first?

The answer to the first question is hard to answer and I hear it debated all the time. You never know the exact amount of foce that is generated form these cars. We can only specualte whether or not we have sufficient travel, and what not.

The second question is easy to asnwer, because there is a device attached to the motor pod that is just for just that, to flex when force is applied to it. Thats your T-Plate. I did extensive testing, and on small movements, the bottom plate never flexes. It actually never flexes until the normal suspension movement is totally maximized. I could see if you were running a super stuiff T-plate that isnt giving much in up/down motion, that the bottom plate could flex, but having a plate this stiff would cause other handling issues...IMO.

The design is questionable though. The rear axle is basically dangling from the bottom plate, and is cantilevered to the rear of the car. There are two unsupported strips (about 4mm x 1.5(?)mm) that are about a half inch long (even longer when running 98/102 positioning) holding the weight of the car. Again, they are only holding this weight once the H-Plate is no longer able to flex, as it is holding everything up as well, abnd should flex first.

After seeing what I thought was questionable design, I didn't like the pod right away. After ordering the thicker bottom plate, scrutinizing all the physics at work, and numerous hours of track testing, I love the pod, and the 2mm bottom plate is hanging on my pit table un-opened. I A-Mained in stock with this pod at the recent Capital Challenge amidst a field of sponsored drivers.

Felix2010
2011.03.23, 08:45 AM
Can anyone give me the weight of the newest PN mounts please, either 94-96 or 98-100mm? I have had a lot of questions about this mount that hrdrvr answered very well (TY for that:D) - The weight is he last piece of the puzzle and deciding whether to go with one of these reconfig PN mounts or go another route...

lfisminiz
2011.03.23, 04:46 PM
I would also agree with Brian and Landon. I have used it for awhile. No problems. I did try the thicker bottom plate on a 102 LM set-up. I like the way it runs.

Felix - ill check it when i get a chance.;)

dvsstrike
2011.03.23, 06:06 PM
I run the qtec plate and a tried several other plates as well., I mainly run med to hard all the time. i have ran it on several differnt heights and with new and used tires. I ran ok with new tires and when they wear handling strange issues arise. If you run with a lot of rear pod droop the issue will not be as bad i guess. but run very little droop and run hard side springs for the tds. My track I run on has very high grip compared to others that i have ran on. if i run a solid alum rear pod my car is on rails with this mount i get issues. I do not want to re arrange my car to make this pod work. I can run a modified atomic or the original v4 mount without issues.