KEV THE REV 2304 Posted July 7, 2015 I've been working on an original release Brat build over the last couple of weeks and noticed that some aspects of the design of said chassis sides and front metal parts had been designed with future updates in mind . In particular the alu plates that hold on the rear arms have 2 holes for the mounting screws , but there is a lower 3rd hole on the chassis that isn't used , so why was it cast in there to begin with ?, was it to acommodate the later Blackfoot era plastic retainer with 3 holes in it that uses the 3rd hole? , why not use a 3 holed plate to start with , or does it just leave the way clear for a new 'improved model' to hit the market ?. Another thing I noticed was the front stamped metal outer parts that the torsion bar passes through has a small hole in it just above the torsion bar hole that doesn't get used - unless you bolt on a CRP front damper kit , was it designed with that in mind ? maybe a side deal with CRP and the like ? . Just a couple of things that stare me in the face and don't give a second thought too -usually - no big deal though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grastens 2795 Posted July 8, 2015 It really does depend on how much R & D was assigned to the Frog chassis. Given the different types of models that emerged around the time as the Frog (pointing to a high priority to this department) and its relatively-high stature at the time of its release, it could have very well been designed with future upgrades in mind. I write this with the sudden revelation that the Subaru Brat and the Lancia Rally preceded the Frog, but look at the variety between those models. That could be a sign that Tamiya was envisioning a long future for the basic chassis. As for the Team CRP hop-up provisions: would it be too much credit for Tamiya to anticipate the cottage industry that arose from a demand for upgraded parts, or did they plan their own similar set until Team CRP developed it first, given that Tamiya's attention could have been divided between different products? A good question to ask, KEV THE REV I look forward to hearing the answers if any surface... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frog Jumper 3605 Posted July 17, 2015 If you compare that 3rd hole from the original ORV chassis to the Re-Re chassis, the Re-Re has more material on the inside... This makes me think the extra was added to reinforce this area??? That makes me think the original intent was to use all three holes (a la blackfoot), but it may have been cheaper and easier to make plates with two holes??? If you look on the Blackfoot plate, that 3rd hole is really close to the edge... I have no idea... Just guessing... As for the hole in the J-Part (knuckle carrier), I think you are right and that hole was put there to support a shock... Or perhaps it was designed for a different radius arm/torsion bar design??? One thing I've wondered about are the two studs that stick out of the bottom of the battery stays on either side of the car (the antenna holders)... What are these for??? I thought they would be a great place to affix a roll-bar or something... Terry Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KEV THE REV 2304 Posted July 17, 2015 The extra studs were for the older / smaller 7.2v / 6v batteries . If you use a smaller battery and not stick pack , you turned the stays the other way round to hold the battery in place to prevent it from sliding in the battery bay Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markbt73 5290 Posted July 17, 2015 Tamiya engineers seem to be pretty far-sighted, as well as good at re-using and re-purposing parts. I don't think it's too far-fetched to imagine versions of this chassis that never came to be. The Frog wasn't too long before the RC10, which essentially brought a halt to the "let's try everything and see what works" days; Tamiya was probably planning on some further development, but then abandoned it because the design was basically made obsolete for racing at that point. The third hole for the rear arm mounts is interesting; perhaps the original design called for three screws, but one was eliminated as a cost-cutting measure. I can only assume that the switch to the less-durable plastic mounts on the Blackfoot was due to cost, and the third screw was then used to reinforce the plastic mounts. I have not seen a re-re Frog/Brat chassis, but if the unused third screw hole is reinforced, then I would say that speaks well for the pending Monster Beetle re-release to be a faithful one. Otherwise, why reinforce an unused hole? They may very well have been planning a Monster Beetle (and possibly Blackfoot) re-re for years. EDIT: Although now that I think about it, doesn't the King/Super/Bush Devil rear end use all three of those holes for the gearbox adapters? The plot thickens... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KEV THE REV 2304 Posted July 17, 2015 Good points there guys . I recently bought a re-re gray chassis A parts and compared them to a vintage gray chassis A parts and all 3 of those small holes have been beefed up at the back on the re-re parts, good news all round then Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
magnumb 97 Posted April 19, 2017 I think that extra screw hole was designed for a side bar/bumper. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites