speedy_w_beans

Nimrod is not a name I would choose for a business... Definition 3 is what I normally associate with this : http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nimrod

Staring at the TT02 more... You know, the TT02 could make a nice poor man's rally car just like the TT01... People used to trim the lower bumper mount to get some suspension arm clearance, then use the longer eyelets on the shock shafts, and get about 20 mm of ground clearance... I did this to a TT01R Type E and made a dirt filter from a shop towel and some velcro; it worked pretty well as a budget rally chassis... The TT02 lower suspension arms have upper and lower ball connector holes, so it seems like the chassis could be raised by installing the ball connectors in the upper holes. I'm not saying it would be better than an XV01, but at least you could bash it in the dirt for less money...

I was curious about the differences between the TB02 and TB03, especially where the TB02 has weaknesses, and found some interesting things in the manuals: - The TB02 diff has the spring under the thrust bearing, and there is no plastic holder for the nylock nut on the other side. The TB03 actually has a plastic holder for the nylock nut, and the spring is under the nylock nut holder, not the thrust bearing. The TB03 diff is consistent with DF03, DB01, and other Tamiya diffs I've built; it's almost like Tamiya tried to cost reduce the TB02 diff and failed. The nylock nut floats in one of the outdrives. I also don't like the spring under the thrust bearing as it may unequally load the bearing through its rotation. I wonder if the spring might tilt the thrust bearing and cause it to drag on the outdrive, which would then spin the bolt and undo it from the nut? Anyhow, relative to what I'm used to the TB02 diff looks deficient. - The TB02 instructions show one shim for each side of the diffs and no shims on the bevel pinion gears. The TB03 has multiple shims on each side of the diffs and shims on the bevel pinion shaft. The instructions talk about removing/adding/moving shims around to optimize the gear mesh, which I did while building. The TB02 instructions don't say anything about optimizing the mesh. - The TB02 prop shaft is a single piece unit that engages the bevel pinion gears directly, and the bevel gears float on the ends of the shaft. There's only one bearing per bevel pinion gear. In the TB03 the prop shaft floats between two outdrives; the outdrives have double bearings per gearbox, and the bevel pinion is secured to each shaft with an e-clip. The TB03 has a better design because the bevel pinion gears are secured in place and the prop shaft allows for some chassis flex without pushing the pinion gears into the diffs. The TB03 is better with shimmed/optimized/consistent mesh, double bearings per gearbox, and floating prop shaft. - The TB03 spur gear attaches to a holder with a few screws; it's not as proprietary a design as the TB02's spur which engages the cross pin directly. - The TB03 motor mount is slotted and acommodates a large number of pinions; the TB02 has four mounting positions. - The TB03 captures its hinge pins with grub screws instead of e-clips. - The TB03 pinion/spur cover is sealed. So, if you own a TB02 and had some bad experiences with it I can understand given the construction of the diffs, inconsistent pinion/ring gear mesh, one-piece prop shaft, open gear cover, and limited pinion/spur options. I definitely like my TB03; the drivetrain is much improved and it shares the suspension with the TA05IFS/TA05V2. For the $140 I paid for it NIB, I've been very satisfied.

I can't compare TB02 to TB03 as I don't own any TB02s, but I can say this about the TB03: - I've had no problems with the ball diffs using 17.5T and 13.5T brushless systems with dozens of battery packs. I did readjust them after initial break-in, but they don't loosen or disintegrate on their own. - The pinion and spur are sealed and not exposed to pebbles/dirt - I've not had any problems with steering, dogbones, or O-rings I don't know the history of the TB02, but everytime the TB-series comes up the TB02 seems to have left a bad taste in many people's mouths. My experiences with the TB03 have been very pleasant and satisfying so far.

You forgot to add in an aluminum prop shaft and metal out drives/dog bones/axles... By the time you do all that, just buy a TB03...

If any RC manufacturer was going to work a deal in American-style motorsports, my guess would have been Traxxas considering their CORR short course trucks, NHRA dragsters, Monster Jam monster trucks, NASCAR trucks, and rallycross vehicles... Doesn't matter... The Agrios is hot and prime for some customization!

Good find on that Bigfoot. Like I said earlier, just swap the tires/wheels for TXT1 pieces, go your own way with the paint/decals, and it will be a very nice truck...

RJ Speed Digger: RJ Speed '46 Power Wagon on a HPI Wheely King. I know this isn't an on-road hot rod, but I still really like this "old school" American truck shell. It's gives off a lot of attitude on the right chassis: Parma '56 Nomad on a RJ Speed Sport 3.2: Parma '61 Impala on a TT01R Type E: HPI '70 AAR Cuda on a TB03:

Does your throttle need to be reversed on the transmitter? If that works, then you may have to swap two wires on your motor to get the correct rotation...

For me, the highlights from Tamiyablog's photos include the TXT2 and RM-01X. Even if the center gearbox and axles are the same as the TXT1, I do like the new frame and double shock setup as it is more realistic to the 1:1 vehicles. I also like the new body as it has some bulges/features to it, although the decals don't do much for me. If I bought one I'd fit some TXT1 wheels and tires, and go my own way with the paint and decals. The RM-01X has all the nice goodies to go with it...

Thanks, DaveB, for your post. I'd really like to read your build and drive experiences after you get the kit. I tend to run 10.5T and 8.5T in my 1/10 buggies.

Do you absolutely need a NiCd? NiMH pretty much took over for NiCd a long time ago because of no memory effect and better environmental qualities (no cadmium). They charge with the same peak charger tech. There are still plenty of stick pack NiMHs available.

Unfortunately that air duct looks like part of the gear cover molding... Mr. Air Duct, meet Mr. Dremel...

I'm not seeing anything really innovative or competitive here... The price has to be very good, or they're going to lose sales to the other chassis I mentioned earlier... Spec R S1, Sakura Zero S, TC4 Club Spec, even JL10e all have a leg up on this chassis...

I like the tube frame detail on the TXT2... I also like the legitimate sponsor decals on the side panel. I'm going to guess $600 street price on this truck as the TXT1 kit was around $440 when it went out of production...

Forum T: "Re-re's are killing the hobby!" Point... Counterpoint... Countercounterpoint... Countercountercounterpoint... Forum R: "Re-re's are killing the hobby!" "Use the search function before starting a new thread!" Forum U: "Re-re's are killing the hobby!" "Which one should I get or have my parents get me?" C'mon, laugh with me a little...

I have two Turnigy GTX3s (similar to GT3Cs) and look forward to seeing more information on this.

So far the arguments against re-res seems to include: 1) Re-res flood the market with copies of the original to the point that they are no longer rare. 2) By no longer being rare (since few people care to nitpick between vintage and re-res), those who own vintage feel like they are losing something. That something might be a formerly rare link to childhood, the joy of hunting for rare parts, bragging rights over one of just a few examples left, a focused shared sense of value with a small group of like-minded collectors, and let's be honest--a significant time and money investment in some cases. I get it. No one denies it. Nowadays anybody can give any model the Jun Watanabe treatment if they want to, even the beloved Sand Scorcher is not safe. There's just no respect or love for vintage anymore because it's all so common in the form of re-res. That's certainly one point of view. On the other hand, re-res have made vintage accessible to the masses (again I'm not nitpicking between vintage and re-re) at a reasonable price without fear of destroying something rare. The overall market can treat these models casually, tinker with them, run them hard, destroy them, and rebuild them over and over again without fear. Isn't that how these models were treated before they achieved vintage status? Why treat them any differently now? Whether it's true vintage or re-re, drive it like you stole it for crying out loud. Don't imprison it in a glass case. This is another point of view. Finally, I would argue without re-res Tamiya does not have anything unique in the market (ignoring tractor trailers at the moment). All of their modern chassis overlap with other manufacturers' products whether it be buggies, trucks, cars, tanks, etc. At least with the re-res they have something distinct in the market, just like Traxxas claims fastest everything, Associated claims 26 IFMAR championships, etc. Re-re's are Tamiya's calling card in the marketplace. In the end, I think Tamiya made the right move by recognizing demand and capitalizing on it. Maybe they wouldn't have re-released anything if the vintage market hadn't created an artificially inflated bubble to begin with. Who knows for sure? I think more people have benefited from re-res than vintage collectors have lost overall.

That's great they stand behind their product and seem to be making continual improvements to it. I needed one of those for my son's first car, a DF03. I broke so many shock towers and hinge pin mounts those first few months!

I once used some CA glue to hold a steering knuckle screw pin in place on a Lunch Box front suspension arm. The glue worked on the screw threads, but a little bit crept down the pin itself and caused the knuckle to bind to the point the servo saver was flexing while steering. To loosen the knuckle back up without loosening the screw, I was able to apply a drop of nail polish remover (acetone) at the bottom of the pin and then work the knuckle back and forth a few times. It dissolved enough of the CA to make the steering function , but it also left enough glue behind that there was no slop between the knuckle and the pin. It actually worked really well. If you're getting any appreciable binding between the ball connector and cup, you might swab just a little acetone on the ball connector, pop the cup on, and work it back and forth a few dozen times. Then let it dry again.

To me this sounds like sour grapes over a bad investment choice.

Well, the DB02 function/performance/durability sounded grim at first, but with qatmix's post and the TRF blog, it's starting to sound like a mixed result... I'm still interested in more experiences from other people if they have any to share...

Here: http://mygadgetblogspot.blogspot.com/2009/12/tamiya-db01r-chassis-kit-manual.html

That's a really nice piece of kit. The center slipper and gear diffs are pure quality. I really like the rubber boots over the shafts and shocks. The body is beautiful!

A year later... Have you driven or raced this buggy? How do you like it? Thanks for all the pictures and writing this up in such detail. There are quite a few nice design elements here. I like the swiveling front end, droop screws, adjustable caster, captured CVD pins, and big bore shocks... I'm not sure the exposed slipper adjustment is an advantage, and I'm not sure why they didn't stick with a more conventional ball diff assembly. You mentioned the front end seemed a little heavy compared to the TRF201, but that may not be a bad thing as Tamiya released a heavier front suspension block themselves. As for the big bore shocks, it's interesting to see Associated has released their B4.2 kit with larger diameter shocks as well. I think if I didn't have a B4 or a TRF201 I'd give this buggy some serious consideration. It looks great!