Saito2

Do upgraded conventional oil-filled coil over shocks make a significant improvement to the SRBs handling?

drop to $200 shipped.

I like it. Its my usual go-to motor when I want to add just a little spice. Keep in mind, I'm very old school and still use Nimh packs. Things that are overly fast and uncontrollable aren't my jam. I very much like driving vintage design Tamiyas within their design limits and don't own anything faster than a Sport Tuned motor (aside from the HPI Firebolts in some of my Clods). A Torque Tuned is cheap, pretty durable and never feels out of place in old Tamiyas. Hope that helps.

Well, after nearly two weeks of rain, the sun finally re-appeared. Did some "Stomping Around" in the Blackfoot, now with the mighty power of the vaunted Tamiya Torque Tuned motor.

After my brain digested what I was viewing upon seeing the Evo the first time, I admit this was my first thought. ...and this was my second, lol.

Personally, I just prefer the Grasshopper's styling to the Hornets myself.

Someday I hope to unravel the mystery of why Tamiya used equal length driveshafts/dogbones (which bind) on the Boomer and Sabre. The Thunder Dragon's drivetrain, in theory, is more efficient but only if you take the time to clean a shave the poorly molded bevel gears by the prop shaft in the newer re-re'd models, lol. It is evolutionary in nature rather than revolutionary when compared to the HS series vs something totally different like the Avante.

I got a little on the fence about the differing wheel track and sight of the motor hanging out the back. One gets used to the look of the mechanicals of a buggy and not just its body so the Evo began to look "off". The gullwing front arms look pretty low too as others have noted. Then I watched the video above and forgot about all that stuff. Looks like a blast (with turnbuckles and bearings too!) at a great price. Now, go kick (sting?) the RC10's rear, little Hornet Evo, lol (j/k)

Correct but Thunder Tiger has 2 of those three already covered. Now there's even debate if the 2012's Classic's molds were even actually lost as Shawn Ireland claimed. Who knows. Associated priced it for a decent return on the the numbers they planned on producing. If they planned on producing it well into the future they might have risked making more over a longer period and priced it lower as a result, more in line with an Ultima for example. They took the safer way to see a more secure return on their investment. That's all I'm saying. Its not bad nor good. I'm happy people who can afford one (or multiples) are getting the opportunity as well as some spares. Its still a money making endeavor just like Tamiya, Traxxas or anyone else. They're doing it because there's a market for it.

I agree. I think this is route it will take. Purely hypothesizing here so I could be totally off base but I think Associated thought this go around was going to be about shelf queens and collectables vs the 2012 re-release which was more geared to running in vintage events. In 2012 podcast, Cliff Lett spoke of how they marketed it and improved its quality (down to them debating between making a new "one-piece" manual vs the old picture manual with separate printed instructions) to make it a more viable runner at that time. He also plugged that they were going to have spares right out the gate not only for the re-release but also for owners of older cars looking to restore theirs. Granted, back then Associated still had some original RC10 spares in stock as this was before the big Thunder Tiger purge years back that saw most original RC10 spares dropped from their inventory. The price point of $250 seemed about right too. Other manufactures in this vintage 2wd space to this current day seem to be in the $250-300 range too, like the Super Astute and Ultima. With all the special editions and bushings included in all of them, I'm guessing Associated figured this new batch would be more aimed at the collector/display market. I could be misremembering, but wasn't their a message from Associated after this ball got rolling that was along the lines of "You asked, we listened, RC10 spares coming soon."? Guessing once again that despite the higher price/collectable nature of these individually numbered tub cars, people still wanted to run them and that got us the spares we see now. They had a few floating around but slowly the numbers are up to the honestly fairly comprehensive selection we have now.

Am I misreading or are you saying the RC10s that have been released this year in various guises exceeds the amount produced in the 80s/early 90s? There is no possible way.

Other than using a steel pinion gear, the rest of the drive train is pretty robust in the Hotshot series. You may need to adjust the gear ratio (via the pinion gear) based on motor temps when running. With brushed motors, gearing down (smaller pinion) is normal for more powerful motors.

I'm fortunate that my running cost per model are relatively low. I have numerous runners which spread wear and tear out over a larger group. I like to think my overly fastidious nature during assembly and rebuilds has something to do with it but its more likely my brushed sealed can/Nimh power choices keep any crashes and/or amount of damage to a minimum. I also pick long wearing tires like terra tires on trucks and oval blocks on buggies.

I'll add, I think the Bandai Intercepter was sold in the States as the Monogram Tornado.

I couldn't have said it better myself @Mad Ax. I (and others) waited a long time for the return of the RC10. This wasn't the marketing angle I was hoping for but I previously acknowledged it was a "safer" one that wouldn't leave unsold stock potentially sitting on shelves. Now, I'm beginning to question their strategy. How many pieces can you cut the RC10 "pie" into in so short a time and expect people to be coming back for seconds, thirds, fourths and so on? The timing for pumping out all this on is unfortunate on the US end too, with corporate greed reaching disgusting levels of collusion, inflating prices on necessities like groceries. I still fear this rapid fire expulsion of product is going to come to a sharp end at the end of the year at which point Associated will fold up their re-release tent, possibly for good. Hope I'm wrong.

I see where you're going with this. I think it has to do with energy transfer and where that energy goes. In the LunchBox's case, if the gearbox could not rotate up, I'm not sure the rear shocks would be pulled down. All the energy would be transferred into the chassis. The shocks are pulled down because the whole gearbox assembly is allowed to rotate (within the travel of the slots at least). I'm not sure the simpler, fixed pivot Grasshopper rear, for example, pulls the shocks to full extension. With the Clod, that energy is transferred straight to the chassis (and as you mentioned, the center of the chassis at that). In fact, if it weren't for the Clod's low chassis weight and high unsprung weight, the rear shocks would probably compress/squat, not extend, under the load of acceleration. Typical mod Clods of our time move do squat because the shocks are moved much closer up the link toward the center of the chassis which reduces the mechanical advantage they have in their stock location. At one time in my distant past, I drag raced, and this is the theory I'm bringing to the table with this discussion. Axle rotation was an issue with the leaf sprung Novas I typically ran. I ran (and still do) old school traction bars or slapper bars to counteract this rotation (which led to axle tramp in leaf spring applications). A more extreme measure, particularly used in Gassers, was to run long ladder bars that attached much farther forward in the chassis. Now there's a whole discussion about leaf spring function, shackles, competing angles and the need for housing floaters to prevent bind on a full size application but that's getting too far into the weeds here. At any rate, once the energy was put into the chassis, raising the front end, which would aid weight transfer to the rear, causing rear squat and hopefully better tire bite on the launch.

I can not take credit for the idea as it came from a member who is no longer around. IIRC, they would start the screw, stop and touch a soldering iron to the head of it, wait for heat build-up and then send the screw home. Personally, I light a candle, hold the screw over it with small needle nose pliers (with adequate ventilation) and then insert the screw. The flame seems a bit less intense than the soldering iron and easier to hit the "sweet spot" temp-wise. That sweet spot is where the screw goes in noticeably easier but not so easy it pushes right into the hole without threading. The idea is to relax the plastic while the threads are being formed by the screw, not liquefy it (or even get close to doing so). Properly heated screws go in about as easy as a screw that's been lubed to aid installation. For suspension screw pins, I only directly heat the small threaded section near the end of the screw head. It's important to note, this is only for the hard shinny black ABS and PC plastics, not PA plastics (nylons) which a duller, softer and more flexible. Hotshot arms are hard ABS/PC while DF01 Manta Ray arms are softer PA plastic and should not be heated.

When you build enough of them, its more than likely a quirk or two is bound to pop up in your assembly methods. These can almost be a signature of the builder in a way. I could think of several off the top of my head that I habitually do... Heating screws. If its a screw that goes into ABS or PC plastic, it gets heated first. Beginning with the obvious ones like the screw pins going into Thundershot series arm mounts or the Hotshot series arms themselves, I've constantly seen these cracked in the older buggies I restore. Whether Tamiya mis-sized the hole or there simply wasn't enough material supporting the hole, I don't know but these always crack. As I've mentioned in the past, the impacts in use often just "finish the job", breaking a part that was micro-cracked during assembly. In an effort to reduce breakage down the line, I heat each screw. Its laborious but I've never had a part split/cracked around a screw hole in any of the fresh builds I've done. Heating parts. Unlike PA/Nylons that can be re-hydrated through boiling in water, ABS/PC is basically water proof/non-absorbent. ABS/PC's issue isn't one of moisture but rather the loss of plasticizers over time or through UV exposure. If I could invent a way to reintroduce plasticizers to existing plastic I'd be a happy camper, but alas, once the plasticizers have left the building, they're gone. I do slowly heat up old plastics in water I'm restoring and then slowly let them cool. This relaxes internal stresses from impacts over the years. It doesn't really fix anything but its a quirk of mine. Its affect is visibly seen when this is done to grey plastics like a Super Champ bumper. The whitish marks showing stress from impacts can be reduced or eliminated by relaxing the plastic with this method. Grease. I know there are a million post about trick greases and lubes from other sources to try on our RCs. I just stick with the Tamiya stuff. Ceramic for plastic gears, Moly for metal gears and anti-wear if I want tackiness. I just can't to the "one-dot" method of application though and running dry gears on an off-road Tamiya model gives me shivers, lol. Whether it adds some minimal drag or not, I aim for a thin coating across all the teeth. After opening previously assembled gearboxes I've done, I have a 50% success rate, meaning about half have too much grease that is visibly thrown off the gears. Oh well. Wax. I don't use grease on external parts that are exposed. I do use wax on pivot pins, dogbones ends etc. however. It doesn't seem to attract dirt like a magnet like typical grease does. Bearings. I try to use shielded bearing on the inside of gearboxes during overhauls since they are out of the dirt and have less drag. The sealed ones go out by the hubs and wheels. Gearboxes. I am fanatical about free-spinning gearboxes. I disassemble them several times, checking and shimming if need be. I hate binding. Those are some of mine off the top of my head. How about yours?

No. The Clod Buster's ladder bar suspension is linked solidly through a series of mostly ball jointed attachment points. Any axle rotation is stopped by a small anti-rotation bracket the attaches the gearbox to on of the ladder bar's lateral stabilizer links. The Clod hops and bounces because mainly (aside from issues like bouncy twin friction shocks at each corner and big tires) because of its high unsprung weight. Most of the Clod's weight is concentrated in the twin gearboxes due to it motor-on-axle design. The chassis is basically there just to hold the electronics and provide suspension attachment points. Someone even made a chassis from a coconut once which was an interesting way of displaying its limited effect on overall performance, lol. The Lunch Box's slotted axle mounts and inferior stock wound axle springs (which break in short order) allows for rotation at the axle's front end which simultaneously pulls the shocks on the opposite end to full extension. Properly locating the axle with solid connections like the Clod Buster transfers rotational energy into the chassis, which can cause a wheelie. The Lunch Box only wheelies once the slack is taken up by the gearbox mount slots (and consequently, the shocks pulled to extension) and then the energy is transferred to the chassis.

Excellent idea and one I have contemplated considering the Avante's rather unique "arm" design. Can you elaborate on how it feels to drive with the increased kick-up? One would assume it would be a significant improvement over the standard Avante's "nervous" character.

Might downsize my Kyosho Car Crusher collection a bit. This is a Kyosho Big Boss with a TBG shell done up in the German market "The Boss" livery. It will be sold as a roller, without electronics although I'm happy to toss in a fresh 540 motor. Its missing the chassis top cover as the majority of these seem to be. Tires are in good shape. In fact, except for some dust on in the chassis tub, the whole truck appears to have been used very little. There aren't very many scratches on the underside although the plastic "engine" popping through the hood could use a make-over. This has only been a shelf queen while in my collection. $230 shipped in the US. Paypal accepted.

@joeling Hi, to add to Chris's question, what number paints did you use for the dark blue/light blue Super Avante?

Hi and welcome to Tamiyaclub. Another member from the NE here as well.

Some very good answers here. Throughout my travels in Tamiyaland over the years, this is what I've experienced. Weaknesses: Fire Dragon: The aforementioned A5 part has been well covered here. All the suspension arm mounting points molded into the gear cases are prone to cracking when the stock, screw-type hinge pins are inserted during the build. Some folks replace them with E-clip type pins. Heating the screw portion of the stock screw pins before insertion can also reduce stress when assembling. The bevel gears that transfer power for the 4wd have bad molding. These can be run-in through use if you can tolerate the noise but I usually take the time with a hobby knife to trim and shape the gears. One of the latest batches of these have had issues with the blue lower suspension arms splitting and pulling free of their inner pivot pins after relatively minor impacts. The older arms didn't do this. Manta Ray: The Manta Ray has a couple alloy gears in the rear gearbox that wear like typical Tamiya aluminum pinions. The Touring Car All Plastic Gearset replaces them and fixes this. The motor mount is plastic and commonly cracks over time. An alloy version fixes this. Higher powered motors may cause the rear upper gear cover to lift. Various tricks to secure the cover better exist here on Tamiyaclub. The Fire Dragon oversteers and is more "on edge" than the Manta Ray. The MR is a very neutral handling car. What other have said about the FD being good on rougher terrain holds true but the monoshock versions (T-Shot and T-Dragon) are even better. Run very hard, I have seen FD fare somewhat better. They are build a bit more old-school with very bullet-proof drivetrains. The MR is, however, more modern with more drivetrain options as far as set-up goes.

I was surprised too until I went back and looked more closely at it. I think a lot of the footage was shot in the late 80's. The King Cab, from '89, is seen on the drafting table. The fellow working on clay modeling is working on a Vanquish, also from the late 80's. Its interesting he had the Avante sitting nearby, perhaps drawing some design cues or inspiration from it. Personally, I always saw some family resemblance between the Avante and Vanquish bodies that the later Egress body never had. Although, at the 3:38 mark there is a 3D computer image of an Avante body. The chassis mule he's carving on appears to be somewhat Avante derived. It has Avante suspension arms on it, but fabbed up FRP shock towers that emulate the position of where the Vanquish shocks would end up in production (by then on plastic towers). The chassis looks like it might be carved from wood, minimally to stretch the length to the Vanquishes longer wheelbase (over the shorter Avante) but perhaps also to approximate the basic dimensions of the plastic tub chassis to be. They seem to be testing the breaking point of an FRP chassis deck as well as impact testing mini 4wd chassis on film as well. At 4:40, there's some Madcap footage followed by a brutal shot of the Madcap's chassis-mate, the original Saint Dragon (guessing from the red shocks), being run, body-less, into a solid block. I'm trying to figure out what body is on the "TRF" 2wd buggy being run at the 5:05 mark. It looks Madcap/Astute derived with Hicap shocks and, judging on the weave pattern, a graphite chassis. It looks like Madcap rear suspension (with even the solid upper links, I think) but the metal gearbox plate from the Astute. The inner rear arm pivot looks to be a white prototype piece. I wish they'd fix the diff on the Madcap. It just seems more advanced (if less durable) than the more dumbed-down DT02/03 series of today. The QD series, again starting in the late 80's seems to feature prominently too. For some reason, they seem to be taking a Thundershot QD down to -22 degrees C