markbt73

It seems like it happens over and over again to Tamiya: They have a stroke of genius, come up with something that takes off like crazy, and have a brief time in the sun as "competitive," because their vehicles are the only ones in the class. Then the rest of the industry plays catch-up, improves dramatically on the concepts, and leaves the Tamiya originals in the dust in terms of performance. And anyone running a Tamiya car at that point has to put up with it being called "slow" or "rubbish." It happened with the 2WD buggies vs the RC10 and Ultima, the 4WD buggies vs Kyosho and Yokomo, the Blackfoot vs all the buggy-to-truck conversions, and the TA01 vs all the later touring car designs. And now it looks like Axial is poised to steal a good chunk of their solid-axle crawler/monster thunder. They innovate, the rest of the industry perfects. It's annoying, but what can you do? Fortunately, for those of us who don't compete, Tamiya vehicles are exceptionally durable and reliable, and they have a "soul" that other manufacturers' vehicles lack. I love RC10s, but they're appliances, made to perform. My Lunchbox bounding awkwardly over a speed bump makes me happy in a way that no optimized Ackerman angles ever will. Now, Kyosho is unique in that they were able to live in both worlds; the Super Wheelie Boogie Box came from the same factory as all those sleek race-winning Ultimas and Lazers. They have had more than their share of duds over the years (take it from someone who owned a Raider), and their gambles haven't paid off as well as Tamiya's have, but I think a nice Shadow would probably excite me more, at a vintage meet/race, than any Tamiya at this point, just because of its rarity. But if you're going to run it, do yourself a favor and get an ESC. Kyosho mechanical speed controls were outlawed as torture devices years ago in most civilized nations.

I had a 15 turn double in an RC10B3 a few years ago and it was just about right. It felt really powerful, but not out of control. The same motor was a bit much for a Wild Willy 2, however...

You can buy carbon sheet, but it's murder on tools. It's very abrasive. You're probably better off with fiberglass sheet, or if it can be flexible, maybe Kydex?. What are you going to use it for? Oh, and congratulations.

I finally got around to painting my Grasshopper:

Nitro-powered cars don't need a BEC, because they run a small 6V battery for the receiver and servos. Since a large market segment for high-end radios is nitro-powered racers, and most ESCs do have BEC already, I assume it's a cost-cutting or simplification measure on their part.

No, they're all 7.2 volts. The higher numbers mean higher capacity, so they last longer on a charge. What they allow, however, is the use of hotter motors or lower gearing, for more speed without sacrificing run time. But in a back-to-back test, in the same car, you won't notice any speed increase just from a higher mAh battery. The older 8xAA cars were slower because they had much smaller motors and were very conservatively geared.

A useful guide: (OOPS! Some not-too friendly language at the link I posted... sorry... Guess you'll have to Google anything you don't understand.)

Yes.

Funny, I was just going through some old photos the other day and found one of me in my grandparents' driveway in Chicago, driving my Grasshopper... age 13, full of pride of ownership, with my old Airtronics stick radio and the frequency flags flying because no one was around to tell me it wasn't cool... I had mowed grass and painted fences and walked dogs all summer to save up the money. Now, 35, married, just moved to Portland, Oregon from Los Angeles, and once again having a ball with the Grasshopper. It's a re-release now, controlled by a well-worn Magnum Junior that feels like an extension of my arm. The more things change...

Not useless, just old technology. Think of MSCs as carburetors and ESCs as fuel injection. You can keep a carb on an an old car and it will work fine, but there's no reason to except originality. If you convert to FI it will drive better.

Not a Jensen, and it was a production car. Based on the chassis of another vehicle.

This is a really cool idea! I love the thought of taking beginner-level cars and hopping them up. It reminds people that you don't need massive quantities of carbon-fiber and purple aluminum to have fun with an RC car. Could you possibly post a photo of the chassis when you get your photo problem sorted? I don't know anything about these "boy's RC" kits, and I'm curious.

I have an old Novak Rooster that has been in about 10 cars. I only use stock motors now, but it has seen 14 turns before and been happy. The limit is supposedly 15, but what they don't know won't hurt them, especially with an 8 year old ESC. I even used it with dual 540s in my Clod. (I think next it's gonna go in my Hotshot if it will fit, since the TEU101 keeps thermaling out inside that little plastic prison of a chassis.) The equivalent to the Rooster today is called a GTS, it's rated down to 12 turns and retails for around $70.

No, no, and no. Hint: the maker is much better known for sports cars.

OK, I found this one. Might be simple, might not; I'd never heard of it:

The ones I've put the most "miles" on, without substantial repairs, have been a TA01 Lancia Delta, a TL01 (I forget which shell it originally came with), and a Super Hornet. I also had a Blazing Star that ate front shock towers but was otherwise indestructible.

Nice car! Looks a lot like my old one, except mine was a big ol' pile of rust...

Unless I'm mistaken, that's either a Scirocco or a Rabbit/Golf, MK1.

Ooh, a Scrambler! My uncle taught me how to drive in one of those... I might have to get one of those shells and do it up in memory of that old Jeep: Silver, black top, with red/orange "SCRAMBLER" letters on the hood sides, chrome wheels, and the wood sides along the bed.

If it's NIB, it's not supposed to be in one piece yet. (sorry, couldn't resist)

You'll post a video, right? This I gotta see...

OK, I think I can safely eliminate Marcos and Alpine as well, right?

It does have kind of a slightly "wrong," kit-car sort of look, doesn't it? The glass looks like it comes from a different car, especially the side door... And there's likely no way there's an engine under that low hood (err... sorry, "bonnet"). So probably mid or rear engine?

I just hope they stick around long enough for me to convince my wife that I "need" a Brat...

Oh sure, I miss out on the boring old Pontiac that I could have identified in my sleep, and now you've moved on to this.