Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by speedy_w_beans

  1. @Superluminal, I know this sinking feeling well. I was building my R91CP kit years ago, and the body did not come with any masks for the front headlights. I was absorbed in masking the windows and went outside to spray the first color, then realized the headlights were now blue instead of clear. I was lucky enough to find another body set, but it was still frustrating to forget something so simple. Happens to all of us at some point.
  2. Look at steps 7 and 14 in this TA05V2 manual: here I see 1050 bearings in the front and rear uprights. Steps 9 and 15 in the TA05-IFS manual show 950 bearings: here Do you have a mix of TA05V2 and TA05IFS parts in the same chassis?
  3. Most everything else will be 80% complete or RTR (ready to run) and not a kit, and some of this might be a little beyond your budget. Some ideas for cross-shopping: ARRMA Granite 4x4 BLX 3S RTR - $300 USD HoBao Racing Hyper TT-e 80% - $245 USD Kyosho Fazer Dirt Hog RTR - $210 USD Pro-Line Pro-MT 4x4 MT 80% - $300 USD Quanum Vandal 4x4 RTR - $130 USD I don't own any of these, so you'll have to research what others say about them. I'm heavily invested in Tamiya because: I like RC kits; they're an extension to the static model kits I built as a kid. They stand for "precision" and "passion" in their logo, and their tagline acknowledges their static model roots, "models suitable for radio control." They have a long history and have stayed true to themselves (i.e., not bought by someone else, profitable, still as quirky as ever, same business leader with enthusiasm for models). Tamiya is not "the fastest name in radio control," however. Making it indestructible is not what they're about. For crazy driving, I have a 1/8 scale truggy that keeps on ticking and some 1/10 scale Chinese onroad chassis I'm not heavily invested in.
  4. And here I thought the discussion would be about 58001 Porsche 934 Turbo RSR... It was kit #1, after all...
  5. I think my only peeve is when Tamiya does something halfway and it tarnishes what they stand for in their double-star logo -- "precision" and "passion." I think you see examples of this when gearboxes strip, dog bones fall out, suspension parts or tubs crack, etc. in certain models. Sometimes the re-releases are a little too faithful to the originals and carry over some of those faults. You also see this when people groan about yet another TT01 or TT02 release; where's the passion in throwing a new body in the same box of chassis parts over and over? I've been buying some static model kits lately; some AMT/MPC from Round2 Corporation, and some from Tamiya. If you're looking for precision and passion, definitely look at Tamiya's static models. The parts are nearly perfect and have such fine details; the chrome is so uniform and mirror-like. Being static models of real subjects, they all have proper sponsor logos and correctly-proportioned wheels and tires. After going through some of their kits and marveling at the injection moldings, the RC models look so crude in comparison. The other thing I think about when the topic of character and scale details comes up is the question about scale driving. If you're trying to drive a CC01 over a tree root that is half the height of the model, is that what you'd do in real life in a 1:1? I doubt it; more likely, you'd find a different way around the obstacle. In some respects the quest for more articulation in the suspension and more steering angle is inaccurate to what the 1:1 does anyhow. So I think the challenge is to take a 1/10 model and try driving it on 1/10 terrain and obstacles, and appreciate how it fails to perform when trying to make it handle 1/3 scale terrain. I'm not sure I'm communicating this properly except to say some of the character we talk about comes from using the model in ways the designers may never have considered. I'm suggesting "scale driving" is possibly a weakly-explored facet of "scale RC" overall. The character I'm seeking is that precision and passion; anything done halfway won't convince me to buy. I know they are doing it in their static models; I want to see more of it in their RC lineup.
  6. @Munkeyfeet, yes, all the DF02s are the same except for the shell and maybe the color of the wheels. Pick the cheapest and go from there. I had suggested getting the aluminum center prop shaft, full set of ball bearings, and some 2.2" DF03 wheels to start. I ran a DF02 with pretty much that combination and a Castle Sidewinder SCT 3800kV system for a good summer of bashing around the street and the yard. It was about twice as fast as the standard kit silver can motor and showed no issues with the drivetrain parts. DF03 wheels with Pro-Line Dirt Hawg tires: The kit CVA dampers with the kit oil are a little soft, but you could always source some 500 or 600 cst oil to firm them up some. Or, get some aluminum dampers; they'll include threaded collars for setting ride height, and the pistons will have smaller holes which will improve the damping some. The upper suspension arms are solid plastic as you can see; there's a DF02 turnbuckle kit available which will replace the upper suspension arms and the kit steering turnbuckles with something beefier. That'll let you adjust camber and toe. There are aluminum steering rack upgrades available which will remove some of the slop from the steering. A stronger servo saver wouldn't hurt, although buggies aren't touring cars and I just left it stock for myself. I'd avoid aluminum suspension arms and aluminum uprights/knuckles. They just transfer the shock of an impact right to the chassis. It's better to let the soft kit suspension arms soak up some of the forces. Since this is a 4WD buggy it has 12 mm wheel hexes all the way around. If you get tired of buggy wheels and tires, you can always get some 2.2" truck wheels and tires and run them instead. At that point you'll want to consider a smaller pinion; instead of the kit 19T 0.6 mod pinion I think a 17T or 16T 0.6 mod pinion will work better with the same motor. The smaller pinion compensates for the larger tire diameter. I cut and joined two Lunch Box bodies at one point and mounted it on a DF02; a 16T pinion worked well. Then I went the other direction and cut and joined two DF02 chassis, and threw a Pro-Line Flotek short course truck body on top of it, also with a 16T pinion. So if you have the time and ambition, there's a lot you can do with one or more DF02 chassis. Good luck with your choice!
  7. Nice! Even though the TA05 is an older chassis, mid-motor/equal belts are back in vogue again. There are conversions now available for high-end race chassis to replicate the layout of the TA05, and 3Racing has announced a similar layout for their next Advance chassis. What's old is new again. Enjoy!
  8. In my view the DF02 is the winner. Metal pinion gear, metal pinion/ring/spider gears for the diffs, metal dogbones. Just add an aluminum center prop shaft, some ball bearings, 2.2" size buggy or truck wheels and tires, maybe some 5mm longer aluminum dampers, and you're good to go. Some will suggest the lower suspension arm mounts are weak, but if you make your own U-pin with longer legs, you can tie it into the main chassis tub and make it indestructible. The front and rear damper stays might benefit from some upgrades, like carbon stiffeners, as well. The DF03 is a technical delight and is fun to drive, but it suffers from an uncommon pinion gear pitch (0.5 mod), soft-as-butter layshaft gear, weak rear ball diff, front diff joints that chip out, and a weak front damper stay. The motor doesn't get a lot of air flow and needs heat sink bars added. It does have better ground clearance than a DF02, but it also comes with 2.2" buggy tires by default. Slap some DF03 wheels on a DF02, and that improves the situation for the DF02. The DT02 makes you think you're getting an Associated B4 on the cheap, but it is nowhere near as capable. Gearing choices are limited and there is no slipper clutch option. The car tends to understeer quite a bit unless you add weight to the front end. I have no experience with a DT03, but it uses the same gearbox as the DT02. If you're looking for a 2WD buggy with lots of hop-up options you can buy over time, look for a DN01 Zahhak instead. It's a decontented TRF201, so you can source the slipper clutch, the CVDs, the better turnbuckles, the big bore dampers, steering rack upgrades, different front camber options, different rear toe options, etc. from the TRF201 family and use them. Even better, if you can find a used TRF201 for a good price, it comes with everything including stiffer plastics. You really don't have to upgrade it except to select springs and damper oils to your preference. So, look for a DF02 for 4WD, or look for a DN01 for 2WD. The TT02B replaces a lot of the metal drivetrain parts of the DF02 with plastic. Plastic pinion/ring/spider gears in the diffs, plastic dogbones. The diffs are problematic with larger tires and more powerful motors. Many people upgrade their TT02Bs with DF02 drivetrain parts, or source third-party solutions from GPM. I'd avoid the hassle, in my opinion.
  9. Awesome! When will the 2-4-0 body be available in your store?
  10. I would guess the car seems more planted with the extra weight of the larger battery, not the preparation of the dampers; it's typically a 100 gram difference between full-size and shorty LiPos. It's kind of the same reason F1 and Group C cars do better with older NiMH packs than modern LiPos. The extra weight affects the ratio of unsprung weight to sprung weight. Tamiya designed those cars when NiMH and NiCd were the main battery technologies. I guess I'm not sold rebound is a bad thing given rebound forces are so small compared to spring forces. It should hardly make any difference, at least mathematically. If there is anything measurable to worry about, I would tip the shocks in one more hole on the stays and that would cover it.
  11. Nope, thanks for providing the details. Seems like the rear end and a few bearings are the main sources of the extra wear and tear experienced. If no bearings had failed, and the rear end had held together, maybe the car would have shown very little wear overall. Frankly, putting 275 km on a RC car in one go is quite a feat; thanks for sharing all of this information!
  12. This is neat to see; @GooneyBird, can you talk about how the car was prepped prior to the enduro run? For example, what sorts of lubricants did you use? How much shimming was used for the pinion and ring gears for the diff? Was the motor pinion's teeth polished at all? The results are interesting and knowing the prep/setup context would be beneficial as well.
  13. Submitted my "monster" competition entry on the main site page. From the entry (here): "I always found the scariest monsters to be those from the afterlife or other dimensions. Unlike temporal monsters who destroy or are destroyed, interdimensional monsters never seem to die and they invent the most heinous ways to prolong a person's suffering. Cold, rational, and absolute, from my childhood the monsters who scared and fascinated me the most included Ghost Rider and Pinhead, leader of the Cenobites, from the Hellraiser movie series. The extremes of good vs. evil, pain vs. pleasure, existence vs. extinction, choice and consequence were perhaps easier to grasp in my head and therefore scarier than random gore and slashing." "In the RC industry Tamiya is one of the few brands eternal. With every opened kit box, the extremes of pain and pleasure can be experienced. Screwhead, prodigy of the Cenobites, taunts with a fundamental build vs. drive question each one of us must answer. The fishhooks, chains, dismemberment, and red damper oil are merely physical representations of the scarier intellectual, emotional, and skills torment each one us must face."
  14. Looks like a squished CR01 to me. Similar chassis rails, similar four link suspension, axles defined by what is attached on the ends, and a non-cantilever suspension setup. I guess the question is, how many variations of a truck chassis are there, really? This looks like it will serve the purpose just fine.
  15. I'm holding out for any RM01/F1/Group C releases...
  16. Beware all ye who enter: Black Hole Sun's Tamiya Site Edit: Also some lengthy articles on chassis history Let us know when you file for bankruptcy...
  17. I'm starting to feel smug... Am I right? What did I win?
  18. I wouldn't worry about it. Wipe them off with a paper towel, and enjoy. Virtually all ball bearings are shipped with some grease in them, and no one has ever posted here about plastics failing from using them.
  19. I can't say I've experienced a "cycle of life" in RC yet where I've lost all interest, or sold everything off, and then come back again. But I also haven't stayed tightly focused on just building, just bashing, just racing, or just restoring either. What has happened, for me at least, is I've paired a number of other interests to RC and that has kept it fresh over the past 9 years. The DSLR camera, camcorder, GoPro, GPS, airbrushes, 3D printer, CNC engraver/router, vinyl cutter, laser printer, tools, computers, software packages, etc. all stand on their own merits, but they get paired with the RC hobby in the quest to learn new things and develop more capabilities. RC was cool on its own at the beginning, but now it's more of an excuse to buy a new tool or toy and give it a try in a build. My energy for building waxes and wanes, but the opportunity to learn new things (not specifically RC) is what keeps it fresh for me.
  20. @acprc You're definitely a man on a mission! Nice work.
  21. There just won't be another TRF off-road car... If you look at where Tamiya has actually won, it's on-road (IFMAR table here).
  22. Would building this without the portal axles be better in the sense it would outclass the re-re Monster Beetle? That is, the gearbox won't spread and click, the dogbones won't fall out of the joint cups, it has 4WD, and yet it could still pull a wheelie? Can't say I'm interested in it either way, but undoing the "TR" aspect of it might make it more fun.
  • Create New...