Cross Link Suspension - It's New - Comments and discussion invited

Wicked Al

Well-Known Member
Posts
108
Reaction
112
Would you mind sharing your background? Just curious to how you came up with this. I don't think an average internet fabber could even come up with something like this lol.

Just being a problem solver. A little bit of art, a little bit of science. I tend to look at systems rather than items, this allows for some decent innovations. For example, for suspension most people look at shocks if they want a better ride. I race ATV's, I look at anything between the ground and my feet and hands as being a possible area to absorb shock. I developed an antivibe handlebar mount that works on three axis. ATV's are unique in how they convey forces as opposed to dirt bikes, this considers those forces. I also developed a handlebar mount with over three inches of travel in it, great for arm pump issues and reducing the amount of work your body does. Observation, solution, repeat. Don't be satisfied with the status quo. Oh, if you're into motors, I did a motor that can take power off of top dead center and a wind turbine that doubles the efficiency of vertical axis wind turbines. Observation, solution, repeat...from a systems perspective. If I can pull down a few dollars with this, I have an extreme terrain vehicle to build which will do for the SxS industry what this suspension does to standard shocks. Then I'm switching gears and seeing if I can change society for the better, I have ideas... To say I have a squirrel problem is an understatement :D.

I ask "why?" and "how?" a lot.

The Cross Link Suspension started as a custom ATV build and I was looking for more wheel travel constrained by width and length and a host of other constraints. I came up with the triple shock solution but still had issues with articulation. Why did I do a triple shock solution? I knew I had to control sway and a sway bar is nothing but an uncontrolled spring, so I made a controlled sway bar by making it rigid and adding a coilover shock to it at the same time made it responsible for half the wheel travel which means it had to be twice as strong as the outer shocks as it had to handle the full hit on the front end. This also gave the benefit of a higher progression and shared loading. It is a cross between a straight axle and IFS. Speaking of a cross, the rear suspension I did was an IRS on a swing arm...triple shocks, the center one being twice as strong. It looks different, but acts exactly the same way as the front. Cool stuff, 18" of front wheel travel and 20" of rear wheel travel but still didn't have full articulation. A part of this process was going through what I call mechanical logic. What is the state of the suspension in different scenarios and how do you want it to respond? In order to get it to respond a certain way, how to you link it up to achieve that? Observation, solution, repeat...from a systems perspective.

All it took me was taking what I had on the front, and instead of going across the front, going diagonal front to rear. This took away the movement dependency of the front left to the front right. It also gave all kinds of other advantages which leads me to believe it is the correct solution for a vehicle. In exploring this further, I came up with a multitude of configurations ranging from a 7 shock set up to a single shock set up, from 4, 3 and 2 wheels. Pros and cons with each configuration, it's a matter of choosing the one that has the attributes best suited for your application. Exactly what those attributes are is the subject of a lot of R&D, years and money. I'll leave that to the vehicle and shock manufacturers, I have an extreme terrain vehicle I want to build.

You can thank Cole Potts for this, seriously. During the 2017 Vegas To Reno, I was racing my ATV and he went though heavy dust, he didn't see me and took me out at about 70mph, lucky if I was doing 20 in the dust. Results were not good. During my recovery I was thinking about all of these things I had developed that weren't doing any good to anyone. What impact did I make on this world? During that accident, there were any of 100 things that if they happened differently, I wouldn't be here...what was my legacy? When I felt I could actually manage a project again, early this year, I started this business to move the Cross Link to market. Bottomline, you never know when your card is going to get pulled, so do what you can to leave a positive mark. I was supposed to be retiring, that's not working too well. Ha! But I'm having a lot of fun making a go of this thing and it will make a difference to a lot of people, especially if I can get it into the auto market. Of course there is the performance aspect of it, but with suspension, any improvement in performance is also an improvement in safety. What was once an out of control situation is now in control.

Does that answer your question? Or were you looking more for the resume type of answer? I don't do "normal" well. :D
 
Last edited:

Ty Owings

Well-Known Member
Posts
106
Reaction
87
Just being a problem solver. A little bit of art, a little bit of science. I tend to look at systems rather than items, this allows for some decent innovations. For example, for suspension most people look at shocks if they want a better ride. I race ATV's, I look at anything between the ground and my feet and hands as being a possible area to absorb shock. I developed an antivibe handlebar mount that works on three axis. ATV's are unique in how they convey forces as opposed to dirt bikes, this considers those forces. I also developed a handlebar mount with over three inches of travel in it, great for arm pump issues and reducing the amount of work your body does. Observation, solution, repeat. Don't be satisfied with the status quo. Oh, if you're into motors, I did a motor that can take power off of top dead center and a wind turbine that doubles the efficiency of vertical axis wind turbines. Observation, solution, repeat...from a systems perspective. If I can pull down a few dollars with this, I have an extreme terrain vehicle to build which will do for the SxS industry what this suspension does to standard shocks. Then I'm switching gears and seeing if I can change society for the better, I have ideas... To say I have a squirrel problem is an understatement :D.

I ask "why?" and "how?" a lot.

The Cross Link Suspension started as a custom ATV build and I was looking for more wheel travel constrained by width and length and a host of other constraints. I came up with the triple shock solution but still had issues with articulation. Why did I do a triple shock solution? I knew I had to control sway and a sway bar is nothing but an uncontrolled spring, so I made a controlled sway bar by making it rigid and adding a coilover shock to it at the same time made it responsible for half the wheel travel which means it had to be twice as strong as the outer shocks as it had to handle the full hit on the front end. This also gave the benefit of a higher progression and shared loading. It is a cross between a straight axle and IFS. Speaking of a cross, the rear suspension I did was an IRS on a swing arm...triple shocks, the center one being twice as strong. It looks different, but acts exactly the same way as the front. Cool stuff, 18" of front wheel travel and 20" of rear wheel travel but still didn't have full articulation. A part of this process was going through what I call mechanical logic. What is the state of the suspension in different scenarios and how do you want it to respond? In order to get it to respond a certain way, how to you link it up to achieve that? Observation, solution, repeat...from a systems perspective.

All it took me was taking what I had on the front, and instead of going across the front, going diagonal front to rear. This took away the movement dependency of the front left to the front right. It also gave all kinds of other advantages which leads me to believe it is the correct solution for a vehicle. In exploring this further, I came up with a multitude of configurations ranging from a 7 shock set up to a single shock set up, from 4, 3 and 2 wheels. Pros and cons with each configuration, it's a matter of choosing the one that has the attributes best suited for your application. Exactly what those attributes are is the subject of a lot of R&D, years and money. I'll leave that to the vehicle and shock manufacturers, I have an extreme terrain vehicle I want to build.

You can thank Cole Potts for this, seriously. During the 2017 Vegas To Reno, I was racing my ATV and he went though heavy dust, he didn't see me and took me out at about 70mph, lucky if I was doing 20 in the dust. Results were not good. During my recovery I was thinking about all of these things I had developed that weren't doing any good to anyone. What impact did I make on this world? During that accident, there were any of 100 things that if they happened differently, I wouldn't be here...what was my legacy? When I felt I could actually manage a project again, early this year, I started this business to move the Cross Link to market. Bottomline, you never know when your card is going to get pulled, so do what you can to leave a positive mark. I was supposed to be retiring, that's not working too well. Ha! But I'm having a lot of fun making a go of this thing and it will make a difference to a lot of people, especially if I can get it into the auto market. Of course there is the performance aspect of it, but with suspension, any improvement in performance is also an improvement in safety. What was once an out of control situation is now in control.

Does that answer your question? Or were you looking more for the resume type of answer? I don't do "normal" well. :D

My previous paragraphs were deleted as RDC crashed again lol.

I'm just a 17 year old kid who's been following desert racing my entire life. After reading and learning about racecars and fabrication and geometry, I have a view questions. Mind you I'm not taking any shots at you and I'm very curious to all of this geometry and car setup. I'm just here to learn from someone that may have different ideas. Basically just to pick your brain for learning purposes. Now here are my questions with examples.

In the video, you raised the back end of the car, and the front end began to rise, thus keeping the car flat.
Now, say you hit a whoop section at 50mph. As the car goes through the whoop section the shaft speeds increase tremendously. This creates heat and as we know "cooking" the internals of the shock such as the oil and seals severely impacts the consistency of the shock. I do understand this is not a racecar, but say the ambient temperature is 100 degrees. This adds another element to how each shock individually functions. Do you think that the way the system works will "upset" the chassis or body of the car?

Going a little deeper into shock talk, I believe that you said each shock will feature different rebound/compression zones. As we know from most big companies, they use a coilover with valving to get a base line, then they add the dampening through the bypass tubes which feature different rebound/compression zones. A common coilover on for example a class 1 buggy uses 2 springs per coilover. With your setup every shock uses a spring, so (I believe) there would be a total of 7 independent springs. Would this create a ginormous headache to tune? Not to mention they are in some pretty tight spots. Wouldn't the best way to get the best performance on a SxS be to add a coilover/bypass to each corner similar to most racecars now?

Also, do you have an estimate for OTD cost? It seems like there would be a pretty high cost as your paying for time to build each component, each shock, and every heim or uniball. It can get costly. Would all of these moving parts also effect reliablity? Not to mention you can't necessarily go buy a part at a local motorsport store like coyne, chapperal, etc.

Again, not shooting you down or anything just trying to learn from a different perspective as this has NEVER been done before. We have tried many different suspension setups through the years but in the end we always seem to end up at the basic A-arm (or J arm) and trailing arm setup, be that live axle or IRS depending on class specifications. Is this "reinventing the wheel"?
 

Wicked Al

Well-Known Member
Posts
108
Reaction
112
My previous paragraphs were deleted as RDC crashed again lol.

I'm just a 17 year old kid who's been following desert racing my entire life. After reading and learning about racecars and fabrication and geometry, I have a view questions. Mind you I'm not taking any shots at you and I'm very curious to all of this geometry and car setup. I'm just here to learn from someone that may have different ideas. Basically just to pick your brain for learning purposes. Now here are my questions with examples.

In the video, you raised the back end of the car, and the front end began to rise, thus keeping the car flat.
Now, say you hit a whoop section at 50mph. As the car goes through the whoop section the shaft speeds increase tremendously. This creates heat and as we know "cooking" the internals of the shock such as the oil and seals severely impacts the consistency of the shock. I do understand this is not a racecar, but say the ambient temperature is 100 degrees. This adds another element to how each shock individually functions. Do you think that the way the system works will "upset" the chassis or body of the car?

Going a little deeper into shock talk, I believe that you said each shock will feature different rebound/compression zones. As we know from most big companies, they use a coilover with valving to get a base line, then they add the dampening through the bypass tubes which feature different rebound/compression zones. A common coilover on for example a class 1 buggy uses 2 springs per coilover. With your setup every shock uses a spring, so (I believe) there would be a total of 7 independent springs. Would this create a ginormous headache to tune? Not to mention they are in some pretty tight spots. Wouldn't the best way to get the best performance on a SxS be to add a coilover/bypass to each corner similar to most racecars now?

Also, do you have an estimate for OTD cost? It seems like there would be a pretty high cost as your paying for time to build each component, each shock, and every heim or uniball. It can get costly. Would all of these moving parts also effect reliablity? Not to mention you can't necessarily go buy a part at a local motorsport store like coyne, chapperal, etc.

Again, not shooting you down or anything just trying to learn from a different perspective as this has NEVER been done before. We have tried many different suspension setups through the years but in the end we always seem to end up at the basic A-arm (or J arm) and trailing arm setup, be that live axle or IRS depending on class specifications. Is this "reinventing the wheel"?


Ty, for being a 17yo you're asking some great questions, never stop asking.

Heat build up. The quality of the shock and the make up of it dictates how fast heat is dissipated. Let's assume comparable shocks between standard and Cross link. Cross Link has three valves for every two wheels. A traditional single coilover system only has one valve per wheel AND the valve is usually tighter (generates more heat) than it should be in order to account for worse case scenario. In Cross Link the valving matches the function of the shocks, quick for the wheel shocks and slower for the middle shocks. The quicker valves are less restrictive and the slower valves have a stronger spring to absorb some of the impact. Between all of these differences, I would expect the temperature of the fluid will be cooler than with the standard suspension.

Cross Link does not have different compression and damping zones, it does have dual rates for both. A bypass is position specific, Cross Link don't care. You have both rates available anywhere in the stroke, it will respond appropriately to the conditions. Quickly to stay in contact, slowly to keep from launching you.

Springs. For the six shock set up, I currently have 5 springs per shock pair on the RZR. Center shock has one spring, wheel shocks have a dual rate. I set the spring rate and valving per the load at each shock. The wheel shocks see approx 25% weight, the center shock 50% of the weight. Of course I also figure in leverage rate and stroke. That gives a baseline. From there you then look at the interaction of the shocks and set your dual rate according to how you want it to progress and transfer to the center shocks, valving accordingly. This is the area of "secret sauce" for the builders as they play with the variables and develop the combination that works best for their application.

OTD cost. Don't know, as I don't fab shocks, but I can guess. As an aftermarket add on, I expect pricing to be about 15% more than normal. Less for a factory option as they can delete the sway bars. I can be off on this one, may be as much as 25% more. I'll find out when we get our prototype shocks built for 3.0. 3.0 is the only viable aftermarket application and a shock manufacturer would do like they do now, engineer a solution then offer a fixed product, maybe with some slight mods per customer use. There is nothing unusal in how these shocks are made, it is all mature technology, I don't anticipate reliability issues.

This is not reinventing the wheel. Levitating vehicle would be reinventing the wheel :) This does change what inputs are used to create an output. I would call it evolutionary. Technology is the same, just changing configurations.

Good questions! Thanks for asking.
 

Ty Owings

Well-Known Member
Posts
106
Reaction
87
Ty, for being a 17yo you're asking some great questions, never stop asking.

Heat build up. The quality of the shock and the make up of it dictates how fast heat is dissipated. Let's assume comparable shocks between standard and Cross link. Cross Link has three valves for every two wheels. A traditional single coilover system only has one valve per wheel AND the valve is usually tighter (generates more heat) than it should be in order to account for worse case scenario. In Cross Link the valving matches the function of the shocks, quick for the wheel shocks and slower for the middle shocks. The quicker valves are less restrictive and the slower valves have a stronger spring to absorb some of the impact. Between all of these differences, I would expect the temperature of the fluid will be cooler than with the standard suspension.

Cross Link does not have different compression and damping zones, it does have dual rates for both. A bypass is position specific, Cross Link don't care. You have both rates available anywhere in the stroke, it will respond appropriately to the conditions. Quickly to stay in contact, slowly to keep from launching you.

Springs. For the six shock set up, I currently have 5 springs per shock pair on the RZR. Center shock has one spring, wheel shocks have a dual rate. I set the spring rate and valving per the load at each shock. The wheel shocks see approx 25% weight, the center shock 50% of the weight. Of course I also figure in leverage rate and stroke. That gives a baseline. From there you then look at the interaction of the shocks and set your dual rate according to how you want it to progress and transfer to the center shocks, valving accordingly. This is the area of "secret sauce" for the builders as they play with the variables and develop the combination that works best for their application.

OTD cost. Don't know, as I don't fab shocks, but I can guess. As an aftermarket add on, I expect pricing to be about 15% more than normal. Less for a factory option as they can delete the sway bars. I can be off on this one, may be as much as 25% more. I'll find out when we get our prototype shocks built for 3.0. 3.0 is the only viable aftermarket application and a shock manufacturer would do like they do now, engineer a solution then offer a fixed product, maybe with some slight mods per customer use. There is nothing unusal in how these shocks are made, it is all mature technology, I don't anticipate reliability issues.

This is not reinventing the wheel. Levitating vehicle would be reinventing the wheel :) This does change what inputs are used to create an output. I would call it evolutionary. Technology is the same, just changing configurations.

Good questions! Thanks for asking.
Thank you for explaining. This definitely clears up my questions. Great idea and explanation. I hope to see this out in a desert soon. I'm curious to see how it works in real world application compared to on paper.

-Ty
 

Ty Owings

Well-Known Member
Posts
106
Reaction
87
Here it goes,
Adding onto my questions from the forum, do you think trying to add this anti-dive/anti-roll setup will upset the car in rough sections? My cousin just recently purchased a can-am prerunner and after driving it multiple times i've already noticed things that I personally didn't feel comfortable with.

If the car with the cross link goes into a corner with a berm similar to a wash in mexico or soft sand berm in parker. Do you think that adding this anti-roll and anti-dive characteristic will make the car very uncomfortable and unpredictable in the corner? As the car enters the corner, the front end does not dive down, but as the outer tire rises from compression the car will raise itself in the corner. Wouldn't this raise the center of gravity as it trys to enter the corner? The SxS's are already very prone to rolling as the wheelbase is short. Basically the car would be fighting itself entering/exiting the corner.

Also, with adding these bigger components between each shock, do you think that you will experience more stress on the chassis of the car? The UTV's are a mass produced product and the cage/chassis configurations are not very strong as it is. Where will these stress points be moved to? Now that the pressure points have been moved to other areas, have you thought of where the next component to break would be?

Again, this is all on paper and on computer models and most in off-road realize that for some reason it could work perfectly on paper but in a real life situation it wouldn't do exactly as it did because of outside changes between friction and other outside sources acting against it.

To conclude my thoughts, not taking any shots but I think its very interesting to see new innovation in the industry. I'm excited to see this thing work and I hope I can be invited to a test session once or twice to see how it really does. I would say a good area to start for the desert side of things would be Ocotillo wells or barstow. Both are super gnarly and will really torture test the system to see if it works. Maybe you could even make it out to KOH this year the first week of Febuary to test the prototype.
 

Wicked Al

Well-Known Member
Posts
108
Reaction
112
You know it! We'll be bench marking this against a RZR Turbo S Ride Dynamix 2 seater. Some of the testing will be on asphalt so you can see what full ground resistance does to the vehicle. Slalom, spin cone, start and stop test. Then we'll head out to dirt and rock country for some more testing and video. We'll have fun and document it for everyone else to appreciate. If we don't have fun, we'll do it again.
 
Last edited:

Wicked Al

Well-Known Member
Posts
108
Reaction
112
Here’s our first test! Comments welcome!

PS. I need a great shock tuner! The springs rates are alright, but there is so much more there and I don’t have that expertise. Valving on the shocks is full soft, haven’t done anything with them yet.
 

jon coleman

Well-Known Member
Posts
7,261
Reaction
3,941
from video , looks like C L susp. is just the ticket for hi profile riggs, top heavy, like kamaz dakar trucks, or big suv's.cant wait for the hi speed desert stuff!
 

Wicked Al

Well-Known Member
Posts
108
Reaction
112
hmmm, shock expert for cross link, that's You Al, looks killer, plaster city has Your number , buddy ;)

:D Yeah, I wish! I did the system. I understand the basics of shocks. What I don't have is years of experience to guide my experimentation to zero in on a 95% solution. Even for an advanced tuner, I'm throwing a couple more variables into the equation that will get them thinking.
 

Wicked Al

Well-Known Member
Posts
108
Reaction
112
from video , looks like C L susp. is just the ticket for hi profile riggs, top heavy, like kamaz dakar trucks, or big suv's.cant wait for the hi speed desert stuff!
It will add a lot of value for top heavy vehicles, by the same token, it will improve the performance of a regular road going sedan. We can tighten up the anti roll/dive/lift features while still having it be supple for the small stuff. One driver or a load of seven people, it will better balance the load and reduce CG for turning...safer ride.
 

michael.gonzalez

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,820
Reaction
887
What are all of your motion ratios for each linkage and what are the corner weights and F/R weight distro?

I can assist in spring rate selection and macro-level damping (overall system-ballpark)
 

Wicked Al

Well-Known Member
Posts
108
Reaction
112
What are all of your motion ratios for each linkage and what are the corner weights and F/R weight distro?

I can assist in spring rate selection and macro-level damping (overall system-ballpark)

Thanks for the offer! I have too many variables to easily lay that out. The shock on the front has a progressive ratio, it's connected to a shared shock which also has a progressive ratio. All of the connections from the front shock to the shared shock "should" all be the same rate...except they are also progressive...mostly.

What I'm dealing with here is balancing the rates on the corners to communicate with the center so it provides a soft ride over the small stuff, still provides excellent antiroll and then excels at bottoming resistance. I still have a tradeoff just like in a normal shock set up, except my range is much broader, so there's that. I'm just trying to fit the right amount of characteristics into this range. Soft, but not too soft. transition to excellent articulation, then transition to a progressive full bump.

The center springs really assist with anti roll. To engage them, the corner springs need to be stiff enough to transfer that movement quickly (but then the small stuff is too stiff). I'm thinking a higher difference in the corner dual rate. Initial soft, quickly moves to a medium center (the problem is the center is handling two corner shocks, so you really need it to be softer than just double the rate). If I do a dual rate with a large difference, it will have a soft initial movement which helps with antiroll and also articulation, then it can go back to a stiffer primary which puts the shock movement back to the corner.

Just built a spreadsheet to play with different shocks given the amount of preload I currently have and where I'd like to be.

What I really could use help with is understanding the generalities of set up. In other words, if the weight is X, what should the total load be to make it fully compress? Should there be a curve? Do you want that curve to be spring or valving? To arrive at ride height on the RZR, I'm at 20% of shock travel. Is that where I should be at? Because of my progressive rate, making spring changes doesn't do much that early in the stroke but it has a big effect further into full bump. In order to get that ride height, the shocks are stiff. What progression should the shocks have?

My center shocks are my biggest concern right now. Because they are shared, they support half the weight of the vehicle each. Previously I had one 12" 600lb spring on it, but I'd like to do a dual rate so it engages earlier but still has the bottoming resistance. The problem with going dual rate my spring rate essentially doubles, in other words I'd need 2 1200 pound springs. The biggest rating springs I had were 2 6" 700lb, so that's what is on it right now, but it is way undersrpung. I'm thinking of doing a 8"/4" dual rate, so that would help a little. Even two 900's would work pretty good I think. That drops the engagement down to 450lbs and then step up to 900 as it goes further into the stroke. If my corner shock is a 400/500 (6"/6") that is an equivalent 222lb shock until the cross over. So when the center shock goes to 900, it's telling the corner shock to use it's 500lb rate to address the obstacle. It's a heck of a conversation these shocks are having with each other. :D

Let me draw up a diagram to reference.
 

michael.gonzalez

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,820
Reaction
887
Like most suspensions. Valving is secondary/dependent to spring selection.

Spring rates come first. Then damping.
My gut says you want your center springs to have a higher spring rate than your corner springs.
I wouldn't mess with dual-rate just yet, not until you have a good baseline with your single rate spring setup already.
 

Wicked Al

Well-Known Member
Posts
108
Reaction
112
Ok, here we go!

This is what I currently have on the SxS that is shown in the video. Under it is my planned single rate set up, springs have been ordered. I punched in some numbers and it looks like my articulation should be very close to what I currently have. I might drop the center spring down to 550 to not only improve the articulation, but improve the anti roll characteristics (not intuitive). Once I get this on and run it, we'll see how it goes and what I should change from here. I think the single rates will do pretty good as I already have a lot of progression in the linkages. If you look at my current set up, you'll see the spring rates next to each spring. In smaller type is a number, that is the compressed height of the spring at ride height/empty seats. The "crossover is how much shock travel before the spring seat hits the crossover rings. The other small numbers at the top of the spring is how much pre-load I had to put on each shock, keep in mind this is adjustable pe-load, I have to compress the springs to get them on the shocks so there is a bit of preload already. My single rate numbers I looked to reduce the amount of preload a little bit, but not much, and I still should be the ride height up to where it should be....in theory. Keep in mind the red and blue circles show the total shock movement going to the corner wheel. The center shocks are shared so these numbers represent just the force going into one wheel. If both the front and rear have force going into them, the center shocks are half of what you see as their response is split between the two.

That center shock brings up some interesting scenarios. Instinctively you want to set it as twice the rate of the corners as it is handling both of them. When you go around a corner, what is happening? The front tire is increasing it's pressure on the center, but the rear tire is decreasing it's pressure for a net result of??? Not a lot of movement on flat asphalt to that center shock Going hard into a banked turn or sticky tires will be different. You need more lateral g's to really make that center shock start to move. So a thought of mine is to play with that a little. Increase the rate of the corner shocks, decrease the rate of the center shock...make it more like a middle shock instead of a bottoming shock.

Right now the center shock is half of the front wheel travel. What would happen if I made it 60/40? 70/30? Give more action to that center shock? More anti-roll AND more articulation? It would take away from the independent movement of the wheel though as you now only have 30-40% of the stroke to play with. That comes back to my lack of knowledge of the forces these shocks actually see. How much movement is independent movement? How much is in sync with the other front or rear wheel? What % of stroke and where in the stroke is it used what % of the time for what type of driving?

This system has a much broader operating range than a typical system, that's good. It also has a lot more variables that can be tuned for a particular type of driving. Setting this up right will always come back to how it's going to be used and continual R&D to play with the variables to optimize that use. This is so much "in the beginning" for where it can go and already so much fun!

Add your knowledge, add your questions!

Thank you.

Race Dezert form.jpg
 
Top