TA04, TA05, TA06 setback

[mike_o 35]

Having spend this afternoon at the local track with my newly build TA05 and my trusted TA04, I started wondering about the TA04->TA05->TA06 evolution. Spending most of the time keeping the boys' (aged 9 and 10) M-03 Swifts charged and running, I'm not racing any particular class, and trying to keep my own car light and nimble. Using 3000mAh LiPo weighing half of a 4000mAh NiMh, I did struggle with weight distribution and even had to relocate ESC to the top of the battery. The TA04 had the motor and battery centered, while the TA05 has the motor and battery on each side reducing weight flexibility and increasing rotational enertia. The new TA06 seems to have gone back (and even reduced enertia a bit) to the TA04 symmetrical motor lay-out. BUT the TA06 design suffers from extra friction of the 2 additional gears in the rear gearbox.

So with the kids taking over my current TA04 and TA05, I'm confused over what to get myself. I'm not getting another TA05 because of the hassle of balancing the chassis to different batteries, and I don't like the additional friction of the multi-gear TA06. Actually, I think I'll go for an ancient TA04R (available NIB w body for $175), perhaps with a carbonfibre lower deck.

Can anybody follow my reasoning, or have I gone off the chart?

[Butler 338]

I agree. I never understood the idea of running a battery down the side unless you were going to corner weight the car. Maybe it was because its the easiest to layout for a simple, efficient transmission.

Surely down the middle is the best way like the TA06 and DF03.

[qatmix 794]

I agree. I never understood the idea of running a battery down the side unless you were going to corner weight the car. Maybe it was because its the easiest to layout for a simple, efficient transmission.

Surely down the middle is the best way like the TA06 and DF03.

The idea of the transmission down the middle and the electronics on both sides is a sound one. The chassis can be perfectly balanced. Infact even now with Lipo batteries my 417 is perfectly balanced with only a small amount (5g) of chassis weights. The benefit is that the rotational mass is also lower, no high layshafts and the motor can be mounted low in the chassis.

The left to right transitional speed on my 417 is fantastic, which shows that the weight distribution is solid.

Personally, I like innovation, but then the worst sort of engineering is over engineering so I understand why high end TC's dont always try to be radical. However with shorty lipo's you can now look at new centre mounted chassis designs (especially shaft) that can revisit the older types of chassis concepts.

[94eg! 834]

The TA05 is/was better than the TA04 when your running heavy Nimh batteries. They perfectly offset the weight of motor and electronics while keeping the drivetrain perfectly symmetrical. Once lightweight lipo hit the scene, everything went screwy. The chassis had to be changed. Now with the lipo down the middle, you can have a balanced car at a lower weight (not so much ballast).

[mike_o 35]

The TA05 is/was better than the TA04 when your running heavy Nimh batteries. They perfectly offset the weight of motor and electronics while keeping the drivetrain perfectly symmetrical. Once lightweight lipo hit the scene, everything went screwy. The chassis had to be changed. Now with the lipo down the middle, you can have a balanced car at a lower weight (not so much ballast).

That is exactly my point; I use only very lightweight LiPos, so the 05 lost it's advantage over the 04. And going TA06 will add two gears compared to the TA04...

[Origineelreclamebord 45]

That is exactly my point; I use only very lightweight LiPos, so the 05 lost it's advantage over the 04. And going TA06 will add two gears compared to the TA04...

Don't you think a brushless motor will counteract the friction of two extra gears? I know gears increase friction of the drive train, but I seriously doubt it will make you a lot slower. I hear more people about it, recently also someone in the LHS who didn't want a TA06 because of just that. The Dutch distributor doesn't sell TA05s or v2 anymore apparently - I would've suggested he'd take a look on eBay if I wasn't in the middle of the store

Anyway, the only thing I don't know how it will affect the car is the fact that the front has kind of a slingshot effect to it from a typical belt drive car (or at least I heard they have it) whilst the rear is pretty direct in drive. Yes, it has to do with the gears but it's not the friction I'm talking about. Anyway, I think that would just result in a car that has a slightly looser rear in the stock setup than it would've had with belts on the front and rear, which is not all that bad, right?

[WillyChang 1814]

main drawback with TA04 is that its drivetrain predates brushless power

and its outdated suspension system doesn't generate as much mechanical grip.

You could put a set of Short Reversible on it i guess... but the belts will give issues.

Tub TA05s aren't too bad on the track although everybody loves hopping them up with

CF chassis sets and fancy unnecessary extras. Yeah they did handle better when

we had NiMHs and our local track had a highspeed righthand sweeper end of straight;

it didn't feel as good after LiPO and the track got redesigned.

Today tub TA05s are pretty hard to find used in decent condition for good price,

i thought they sold well new but maybe everybody is just holding on to them.

Haven't seen LHS have much new 05 kits in past 2 yrs anyhow.

Or they're so good they've all gone underground...

my latest track experiment:-

Very stable for takeoff acceleration yet lively when needing to change direction,

more than enough steering available (track VDF runs Ackermann rack).

...

Anyway, the only thing I don't know how it will affect the car is the fact that the front has kind of a slingshot effect to it from a typical belt drive car (or at least I heard they have it) whilst the rear is pretty direct in drive. Yes, it has to do with the gears but it's not the friction I'm talking about. Anyway, I think that would just result in a car that has a slightly looser rear in the stock setup than it would've had with belts on the front and rear, which is not all that bad, right?

ssshhhh...! lets keep that to ourselves hehe

yep power-on loosens the tail somewhat so no longer need to tune the tail to be loose to make corners.

Probably more so in slower motor classes than all-out mod.

Not sure if its because stock tub is quite flexy but car is also very stable on corner entry,

seems to spread its weight nicely across all tyres on liftoff once you've tuned for the roll.

No noticeable difference felt between IFS or conventional.

(long shaft TRFs are a PITA though!!)

Driveline inefficiencies now no longer an issue with brushless and lipo, the belts run quite loose.

In terms of speed & energy consumption its about the same as a TA05.

[qatmix 794]

Nice VDF! I considered racing mine as there is no drift club near me.. the thing is a VDF costs about as much as a TRF417.. especially when you buy the steering kit and bulkheads. So at the moment its a pretty occasional runner.

As to the Ta06 I have only heard good things about it, totally agree about brushless negating any potential drive train efficiency. I was so tempted to buy one when they came out but I had only got the 417 so couldn't justify it. Personally I like the backend to be loose off power (power in to the corner, release near apex and then throttle out). However I am fascinated to try one, I might sell some of my cars and get one to play with as my spare race car.

This is a 417 with brushless and lipo and just 5g of chassis weight.

[mike_o 35]

...main drawback with TA04 is that its drivetrain predates brushless power

and its outdated suspension system doesn't generate as much mechanical grip....

Could you pls clarify? I don't see in what way the TA04 wouldn't handle brushless power - basically it has the most direct, straight belt drive of the three. Or what am I missing?

And in what way is the suspension dated? The lower A-arm / upper turnbuckle design seems quite similar to the 05 and 06. Geometry different? Friction?

Thanks for your opinion!

[qatmix 794]

Could you pls clarify? I don't see in what way the TA04 wouldn't handle brushless power - basically it has the most direct, straight belt drive of the three. Or what am I missing?

And in what way is the suspension dated? The lower A-arm / upper turnbuckle design seems quite similar to the 05 and 06. Geometry different? Friction?

Thanks for your opinion!

You can fit TRF417 suspension arms and hubs on the TRF414 (which is the same as the 04). I have ran brushless in my 414, so I would think it would be ok in the 04. I would use the hop up stronger belts though.

here is a pic of a brushless 414

[WillyChang 1814]

Nice VDF! I considered racing mine as there is no drift club near me.. the thing is a VDF costs about as much as a TRF417.. especially when you buy the steering kit and bulkheads. So at the moment its a pretty occasional runner.

worse think it tallys up to about TWO 417s...

if anyone's crazy enough to replicate ... you're gunna need

84150 TA05-VDF Ackerman Steering

54250 3x42mm turnbuckle

53943 3x46mm Hard Turnbuckle Shaft

84151 TA05-VDF Titanium Screw Set

84108 3x6mm Aluminum Flanged Machine Screw Blue - 5pcs

84107 3x8mm Aluminum Flanged Machine Screw Blue - 5pcs

53765 3x6mm Round Head Socket Screw (Blue / 5 Pcs)

53766 3x8mm Round Head Socket Screw (Blue / 5 Pcs)

53767 3x10mm Round Head Socket Screw (Blue / 5 Pcs)

53851 3x46mm Ti. coated suspension shafts

53917 2.6mm Ti. Coated shaft set for reversible suspension

53709 fluorine coated suspension ball

53601 low friction 5mm adjuster ballcup

53539 Aluminum Spacer Set 5.5mm

53928 hard Short Reversible suspension arm

51332 TRF416 hard Front Upright

51333 hard Rear Upright

54031 hard Hub Carrier 4Deg

53890 Swing Shaft Protector Blade

53918 trf damper low friction v parts

53850 Tamiya Ti. coated damper shaft

53845 Ta05 front carbon damper stay

53846 ta05 rear carbon damper stay

53919 Ta05 aluminium diff joint

42142 3mm ceramic diff ball

42171 620 HC Thrust Bearings

54121 Aluminium Horn for Hi-Torque Servo Saver

53990 TA05 aluminium bulkhead Blue

54070 RC TB03 Sus Mount 1B

54067 RC TB03 Sus Mount 1XA

54172 ta05 ver 2 separate sus. Mounts 1a/1xa (base setup)

54128 TB03D Alum Bumper Support

54091 TB-03 Aluminum Servo Stay (left)

54090 TB-03 Aluminum Servo Stay (right) ..or 2x 54091

53869 5mm Aluminum Short Ball Nut Blue

53598 5mm Aluminum Ball Connector

53640 5mm Aluminum Ball Nut Blue

for tuning etc also have...

53876 Aluminum Damper Retainer (1mm Down)

54069 tb03 suspension mount 1A

53916 TA05 Aluminum Stabilizer Holder

53932 Aluminum Roll Center Spacer - (0.5mm) 4pcs

53933 Aluminum Roll Center Spacer - (1mm) 4pcs

49398 Tamiya TB Evo 5 Bumper (Clear Blue)

53833 TA05 Front One Way

53842 TA05 Sway Bar Kit

[WillyChang 1814]

Could you pls clarify? I don't see in what way the TA04 wouldn't handle brushless power - basically it has the most direct, straight belt drive of the three. Or what am I missing?

TA04 chassis isn't stiff enough to handle the belt... belt tension to front makes it warp,

chassis takes a tweak which the topplate maintains and handling goes all funny after that.

Loosen all the topplate screws and retighten whilst sitting on a flat surface.

Belts chews up the layshaft pulleys very fast.

If you run a oneway on the layshaft, that chews up shaft &/or slips very fast too,

oneway bearing is too small. Very expensive option part too.

Nobody ran with fixed axle front spools then... anybody make them today?

Ran TA04s when the SS5800 first appeared; after endless maintenance moved to TB EvoIII.

At least that beast could handle the brushless without failing every 2nd pack.

And in what way is the suspension dated? The lower A-arm / upper turnbuckle design seems quite similar to the 05 and 06. Geometry different? Friction?

Similar perhaps, but safe to assume Tamiya's R&D haven't been simply hibernating over the years.

Modern iterations generate noticeably much more corner grip... i don't know why, they just do.

Tyres last longer and don't blowout in spots like before, so they must be distributing weight & reducing overheating better.

Don't forget the 1st TA05s came with TA04 arms, so if you want to directly compare just get one of those vs a later TA05.

I had a TA05 sametime as a TA05R with Reversible suspension... its noticeable, it'll keep might tighter lines around track.

Similarly the TB Evo5 (short reversible) has a lot more steering than an EvoIV (reversible) which is already better than the EvoIII (TA04).

Haven't bothered trying new suspension designs on a TA04 though, got rid of my runners yrs back.

Could be an interesting experiment for anybody hellbent on campaigning a TA04 today at whatever cost.

Recently I did drag an EvoIV screaming into 2011 by outfitting it with a full StreetJam OTA-R31 setup

Parts required:-

Built-up:-

Transplant!

Have identical SJ OTA setup installed on another VDF and it feels better than stock suspension too.

[94eg! 834]

The VDF looked like a joke to me from the start.

I had to learn the hard way as well (after starting with a Hopped-up TA05). If your going to be thinking about hop-ups, just go with the TRF chassis from the get-go. You can always find a recent model used with spares in fantastic condition. I raced my $250 415MRE for two seasons. It was great. By the end, the car couldn't hang with the more modern chassis (despite being perfect condition). Progress is made in the engineering dept all the time. They don't just bring out new designs for the fun of it. Factory drivers that can tell the difference in small changes help design these things now (not like the old Avante days).

[Butler 338]

You can fit TRF417 suspension arms and hubs on the TRF414 (which is the same as the 04). I have ran brushless in my 414, so I would think it would be ok in the 04. I would use the hop up stronger belts though.

How does it compare to a full TRF417?

Interest thread guys...keep it up.

Shame there is nothing I can apply to my M03

[qatmix 794]

How does it compare to a full TRF417?

Interest thread guys...keep it up.

Shame there is nothing I can apply to my M03

Buy a TRF, old used ones are pretty cheap (£60 for a trf415)

The thing with racing cars is that the things that make the biggest difference to performance is

Driver Skill

Set-up

Car

The 414 is still fast, its not as responsive as the 417 in left-right transitions (chicanes etc) but the new arms definitely make it much better.

[94eg! 834]

Buy a TRF, old used ones are pretty cheap (£60 for a trf415)

The thing with racing cars is that the things that make the biggest difference to performance is

Driver Skill

Set-up

Car

The 414 is still fast, its not as responsive as the 417 in left-right transitions (chicanes etc) but the new arms definitely make it much better.

There is more to it than that. You cannot buy a 415 and be competitive right now. You can't fit a big enough lipo in it to keep up with others throughout the entire race. At this point you need a 416 or better (unless your not allowed to run lipo).

[WillyChang 1814]

meh, in overall scheme of serious racing $500 for a brandnew TRF is peanuts

if you're into 1:1 you could easily pay $500 for 1 tyre, you'd need 4 of those to make a set for trackday.

Plus a set of forged light wheels would be another $3-4k comfortably.

[94eg! 834]

meh, in overall scheme of serious racing $500 for a brandnew TRF is peanuts

if you're into 1:1 you could easily pay $500 for 1 tyre, you'd need 4 of those to make a set for trackday.

Plus a set of forged light wheels would be another $3-4k comfortably.

And those are considered consumables...

[mike_o 35]

Hmmm...getting back to reality. I'm not racing seriously, just taking part in the training sessions and having fun with the occasional moron that happens to go as slowly as myself. So a TRF may be over the top. I have also accumulated enough spares (apart form a single diff) to build two TA04s for the kids to take over, so I could just keep running my new TA05. Having put foamies on it, I have to admit it handles better than the TA04.

But I noticed you mentioned that the TA05 was revised with new A-arms at a point. The one I have (Item 58378**18400, Ferrari FXX) is probably one of the first releases, and I wonder which would be the most cost effective hop-ups for me? As mentioned, it runs on foamies, a protoform body, and a LRP X11 9.5T brushless. Are new A-arms on the to-do list?

[sosidge 624]

Hmmm...getting back to reality. I'm not racing seriously, just taking part in the training sessions and having fun with the occasional moron that happens to go as slowly as myself. So a TRF may be over the top. I have also accumulated enough spares (apart form a single diff) to build two TA04s for the kids to take over, so I could just keep running my new TA05. Having put foamies on it, I have to admit it handles better than the TA04.

But I noticed you mentioned that the TA05 was revised with new A-arms at a point. The one I have (Item 58378**18400, Ferrari FXX) is probably one of the first releases, and I wonder which would be the most cost effective hop-ups for me? As mentioned, it runs on foamies, a protoform body, and a LRP X11 9.5T brushless. Are new A-arms on the to-do list?

If the suspension arms are the same as your TA04s, then you have the original TA05.

If, as you say, you run for fun and are not going particularly fast, then the updated suspension will make very little difference to your driving pleasure. If you are unhappy with the handling balance then it might be worth a try, but it's expensive (Tamiya have done them as a complete kit of "lightweight reversible suspension").

PS I don't think the TA04 drivetrain principle is unable to cope with the power (the principle was used on the TRF414 and has been on many top-end cars from the early '90s until the early '00s) it's just that Tamiya's application of it is really bad on that car, it's very inefficient compared to the TA05 and other more modern cars.

[qatmix 794]

Hmmm...getting back to reality. I'm not racing seriously, just taking part in the training sessions and having fun with the occasional moron that happens to go as slowly as myself. So a TRF may be over the top. I have also accumulated enough spares (apart form a single diff) to build two TA04s for the kids to take over, so I could just keep running my new TA05. Having put foamies on it, I have to admit it handles better than the TA04.

But I noticed you mentioned that the TA05 was revised with new A-arms at a point. The one I have (Item 58378**18400, Ferrari FXX) is probably one of the first releases, and I wonder which would be the most cost effective hop-ups for me? As mentioned, it runs on foamies, a protoform body, and a LRP X11 9.5T brushless. Are new A-arms on the to-do list?

With foams I always quite liked the ta04 (1st gen ta05). However you really can tell a difference with grip with the latest suspension arms, the ta05r etc felt a little more planted.

If you got new suspension I thin you will need new c-hubs and knuckles (I will check tomorrow.

You can fit lipos in a trf415. If the are thin you can dremel a part of the rear bulkhead, or just moun them further out. You can then balance the chassis and not increase overall weight. I can fit any lipo in mine even 90c orions. (will post a pic soon)

The ta05 stock is a more than good enough car, if I was to get hop ups I would just get universals for the front and carbon shock towers (or the plastic re-enforced ones. If you really splashed out get the TRF shocks, the best tc shocks period.

[HunterZero 76]

There are three hopup kits you can buy that have all the parts to convert older TA04/TB02/TA05 to newer lightweight reversible suspension and CVD setups.

You can get the short lightweight reversible suspension set part #54083, that basically upgrades the suspension on a TA05 or TA05 IFS v1 to the same suspension that's standard on TRF416 cars, and I think the TA05 IFS v2 and TA05R. You need to buy the appropriate swing shafts for the kit, and then you have CVDs in the bargain too.

#54083 Lightweight Short Reversible Suspension Set

There is an older upgrade set too, part #53899, that has the EVO4/TRF415 style suspension. This kit states it's compatible with the TA04, TB02 and TA05, again you need the swing shafts.

#53899 Lightweight Reversible Suspension Set

There's an ever older upgrade set for the TB02/TA04... Part #53794... It includes the swing shafts, but doesn't have the hex wheel adapters, or the EVO4 stainless suspension shafts... Otherwise I think the other suspension parts are the same as the #53899 set.

#53794 Lightweight Reversible Suspension Set

- James

[ideal2k 3]

Well, I don't mean to sidetrack the discussion, but it made me think.

If I wanted a touring car today, which one should I get? TRF, TCX, TC6, X3'11, Photon?

[WillyChang 1814]

Serpent S411 but still not convinced on their quality since offshoring production to China.

Tamiya for easy global parts support.

That is exactly my point; I use only very lightweight LiPos, so the 05 lost it's advantage over the 04. And going TA06 will add two gears compared to the TA04...

with lipos you can buy 5000 or 6000 to get ~300g worth, if headroom is not an issue.

Bigger capacity doesn't need as high 'C' to maintain sufficient current.

Having put foamies on it, I have to admit it handles better than the TA04.

foam tyres are easy... bolt them on, run the car

the more weight you put on them the more grip you get. Need different grip balance, use different shores F:R.

if they wear more on 1 corner just rotate/true/replace

and if they wear coneshaped adjust your camber until they wear flat (nb true the coned tyre flat before each adjustment)

rubber is different... they only work within a certain temperature, outside that range grip drops off.

Put too much work on 1 tyre and it'll overheat, grip drops. A flexy chassis spreads the load better.

But I noticed you mentioned that the TA05 was revised with new A-arms at a point. The one I have (Item 58378**18400, Ferrari FXX) is probably one of the first releases, and I wonder which would be the most cost effective hop-ups for me? As mentioned, it runs on foamies, a protoform body, and a LRP X11 9.5T brushless. Are new A-arms on the to-do list?

the TA04 vs Reversive vs Short Reversible are complete systems, should not be intermixed.

the earlier & later Short Reversible differ in the knuckles, early cars took 950 bearings and later TB03 introduced 1050s.

all kit-with-body TA05s without IFS use TA04 suspension (1150 bearings). The IFS & R uses 950 short reversible. TA05v2 uses 1050 short reversible.

(nb every size of bearing needs its own different length of stubby axle... so the CVDs are unique for each too)

Best thing is to run the car first... it might work as well as you need. It'll tune up competently.

If not then decide what you need improving on... eg more steering, more corner grip, more agility... or just more practice

with TA04 suspension also check the knuckles & read their markings... is the C1/C2 upright or flipped?

Swap them until the words are upsidedown then adjust your rideheight back to what you intend... car has more steering.

btw TA04 also has "Racing Front Suspension" pack with the extra drag link; link reduces foldback slop

and the c-hubs have less camber than stock (i think stock TA04 is about 6deg).

TA05 gets these 4deg later parts as std.

Reversible c-hubs have option of 2 or 4deg caster.... in either TB EvoIV or TB03 flavours.

[qatmix 794]

Serpent S411 but still not convinced on their quality since offshoring production to China.

Tamiya for easy global parts support.

Serpents are nice, no spares available in the uk though. Xrays are very nice, expensive parts though, all top end cars are good, obviously I go for TRF cars.