Saito2

Oh, I understand now. Yeah, I'm with you on that one. I'm not big on the comical releases myself (I'd rather see new, fresh buggy designs over an essentially rehashed WW2 with an awkward buggy body, but that's just me). This thing, I'm completely clueless about. It has portal axles (for one would assume crawling-type activities) on a wheelie vehicle (somewhat unstable for crawling) with an old QD Monster Beetle body. Maybe they threw darts at a board to pick the parts they'd mix and match for this endeavor?

The difference in the tire treads? The Monster Beetle's spike sit on top of the tread bars. If you drive on paved surfaces too much, they quickly wear flat. The Heavy Dump tires have spikes in the "low" part of the tread pattern, between the tread bars. While they do protrude somewhat, the tread bars protect them from being wiped completely flat if you run on multiple surfaces including paved ones. Or there's a joke somewhere in all this and I'm missing it because I'm too literal .

Glad someone got that reference . I've read a lot Stephen King and that little movie based on the short story wasn't bad. Bought it new for about $130 back in the day. I assembled it and never ran it (the alloy gear issues had begun to crop up by then). I sold it for about $90 or $95 IIRC, which really wasn't bad considering how badly "non-collectible" Tamiyas depreciate (you can actually hear the sonic boom as they scream downward in value in the US, lol). I paid $125 for it this time plus the RC10 Team Car I was initially after. All in all, I'm quite happy. Looks like it was run only once or so. It didn't even get scratched on the bottom. When I got it home, I was thinking whoever did the bodywork, used the correct paint and did it up as per manual (a rarity in my experience) Then, I noticed that there were some small creases in the "side pod" decals which are hard to apply and that some decals were left off, like the window tint (which I always leave off). So, I ran back though the old ad pics I posted in 2012 on my computer and all the creases and such were exactly the same. There's some idiosyncrasies in my build methods I saw on the chassis too.

sorry, double post, please delete

I've bought and sold an excessive amount of old cars (1:1) in my lifetime and not once have ever come across one of them after they've left. Its like they disappear, never to be seen again. Now, in the world of RC, I'm far more likely to hold onto things, but I've certainly left a few go. Back in 2012, around the birth of our daughter, money was tight. I let go of a DF03 Avante MK2 for some extra cash. In those days, I was just collecting one buggy from each evolution of Tamiya shaft-drive 4WD. I've been moving away from Tamiya of late and was actually scanning the local Craigslist for an RC10, having just purchased another one from @markbt73 (Thanks Mark!). Shockingly, I found one for sale with, you guessed it, a DF03 Avante. It wasn't until I got it home and went over it, comparing it to the old pics I took in 2012, that it became clear my actual DF03 had returned to me. Makes me oddly happy.

Good point. I always liked that aspect of the QD/WR-02 tires as the spikes last longer. It doesn't take too many excursions onto the asphalt to start wiping out the spikes on Monster Beetle tires.

I'm noticing a trend. It seems that outside of say, scratch building or dedicated running (like racing/competition) there seems to be a cycle. We buy the kit and enjoy the kit (building, then running). Then we upgrade/tune/hop-up. Next we run some more to see the improvements we've made in action. At some point, there's nothing left to upgrade, so its just running and maintaining. This is the point where the cycle starts anew as we start looking at new kits. I'm guessing in the early early days before hop-ups were plentiful, hobbyist did much more running and maintaining as hop-ups weren't as plentiful unless they were scratch-built which another rabbit hole to go down.

Running does become a frustrating challenge when equipment fails. I've replaced virtually all the plastic on my Blackfoot and still find things I missed/didn't consider. Today, the tip front body post came off (one of the few original plastic pieces left), but not before the body clip tore a hole in the hood. Then the servo saver disintegrated (not sure of its age). At this point, its so expected, I'm not disappointed anymore. If I truly want to run, I think (subconsciously), those are the days I grab the Stampede for hassle-free fun. I can understand @nbTMM point. As a kid with tons of energy and time but little money, running becomes the attraction. As an adult with less time and energy, its easier to slip into the hobby room whenever possible for some build time.

I was out with my daughter at the playground this morning and, as usual, she coerced me into climbing over the playground equipment with her. Up ladders, down tube slides over monkey bars etc. I can't say I felt he same thrill I did when I was 6. In fact, in the end, I was tired and sore, but it made her happy so it was quite worth it. I did bring my Blackfoot along (which broke, as usual) and began thinking (as usual). This subject has been touched on before. When I was young, there was a bit of rush to get the kit assembled to go out and see it come alive. After being assembled, that model would be run nearly daily for years. Of course when grown-ups or other kids showed interest, there was a bit of pride in saying "I built that". Even in the 80's, not every kid could do that (whether due to skill level, or simply patience) Now, running becomes much more sporadic, maybe once a week. The build though, now that is something to be cherished and enjoyed (far more than in the rush of youth). So, many of us find the enjoyment factor flipped in our older years. I think we always liked both the build and the run, but one more than the other (they've just changed places for some of us). Anyone else feel this way or care to comment on why the change in priority for the whole RC kit experience?

I know exactly what you mean. I've been badly nearsighted for most of my life but had excellent "close" vision. I was under the dashboard of my MG one day and realized what I was focusing on was too close with my glasses on but I couldn't see it over my glasses either. Bifocals are in the near future. Don't feel bad. Spectacles make you look wise.

Glad someone else noticed that . Tamiya and/or Japan must be a place of great aggression. There seems to be much "fighting" going on. Are we far off from seeing a "Fighting Fighter"? The flippant flying Fighting Fighter flew floppily over the the jump, flailing about upon touch down drawing frowns from the fanatical followers?

I'm a big fan of the Hot Shot series myself (Super (Hot) Shot being personal favorite). They don't really have any glaring durability issues and were designed when "off road" really meant Off Road. I kinda wish Tamiya would bring back the Thundershot series. Aside from their "spaceship" bodies, they're a good mix of old school Tamiya with a dash of more modern touches. Barring those classics, I'd agree with @Juggular. The DF01 works quite well. Tamiya actually did reuse the chassis a bit with the Dirt Thrasher, Blazing Star and Terra Conqueror (as well as the upscale Top Force and Top Force Evo) all of which had more "normal" bodies vs. the Manta Ray.

What I was referring to is the "ring" of needle bearings pictured above between the thrust washers and multi-lip seal. They ride inside the 4 bearing cups on the trunnion surface of the cross. Without any angle, the needles just sit there and eventually wear out. They need to process. The nifty pic @Juggular has is of a spherical roller bearing which IIRC allows some degree of angular misalignment.

Which kits are in question? I've noticed on the CR01 it can matter as the shaft angle is too steep. If you pick it up and allow for full suspension droop and gun the throttle, the whole model shakes badly. Overall, I'd say its less crucial on scale models. On full size cars, I aim for roughly equal transmission output yoke to pinion +/- 3 degrees unless I'm setting up for drag racing, in which case I sometimes angle the pinion downward a bit with angled shims on leaf spring cars. Full size cars should never have the driveshaft set up with no angle like the first "prefect-inline" drawing in @Juggular's post. Automotive U-joints contain needle bearings and some angle is required to allow the needles to process (rotate within their cups). Even a fixed rear diff IRS cars like the Corvette have a little bit of angle built in. This isn't a consideration in RC.

Yes, the Top Force ones should work. A quick look at the re-re Boomerang manual shows the original knuckles on the C sprue as unused just like the Hot Shot re-re. Like the Hot Shot re-re, the Boomer re-re includes the new geometry "DF/TA" knuckles on their own sprue to be used instead. The confusing issue with the Boomerang involves the dogbones. The Boomer has equal length dogbones on all four corners, while the Hot Shot/Super Hot Shot has different lengths front and rear. The equal length 'bones evidently cause issues so I went with 'Shot bones on my Boomer from the get-go. I still have never gotten a concrete answer on exactly which universals fit the front of these cars,