Jump to content

Mokei Kagaku

Members
  • Content Count

    1627
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1659 Excellent

2 Followers

About Mokei Kagaku

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.facebook.com/mokeikagaku

Recent Profile Visitors

10801 profile views
  1. Early eighties. Probably available around 1981-1982. 1/12 FWD had a little success at that time, but was soon gone again, not the least because of the release of the Associated RC12i.
  2. The manufacturer of the original body was Cambria. The pictured body seems to be an original, but can of course possibly be a copy too. https://www.tamiyaclub.com/showroom_model.asp?cid=111048&id=15829 The 1/12 Cambria Saab is cool for being FWD, but the 1/12 Minicars Saab Turbo looked better:
  3. More than rare enough as a NIB to keep it NIB!
  4. This is kit # 49592 and was a normal worldwide limited edition release. It wasn't difficult to find back when it was new, but NIB examples are now surely relatively rare. 49592 was based on the normal Sauber C12 kit (#58130), which is a regular F103. The hop-up parts included with 49592 are typical for the period before the release of the F103RS and F103RX. Accordingly, I would suggest keeping the kit NIB and if you want an F103 or F104 to run, building a better performing and more modern chassis is easily possible at a lower cost than what you can get for a NIB 49592. A built 49592 isn't worth much more than any F103 with some outdated hop-ups. The single part that is valuable on its own, is the manual, which is specific for 49592.
  5. He's a friend of mine and an employee of the Hong Kong Tamiya distributor. I have admittedly never met him in person, but I know him as a very polite, credible and friendly person. I'm very confident that he's absolutely safe to buy from.
  6. 2019: 47430 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra R (TT-01E chassis) 47435 Renault 5 Turbo (M-05Ra chassis) (re-release of 84227)
  7. 2019: 47429 Porsche 911 GT3 Cup 2008 (TT-01E chassis)
  8. 35 unbuilt kits that I intend to build (not counting the ones I want to stay NIB) About 50 cars awaiting restoration. 560 unpainted bodies, with actual intentions and plans for painting 519 of them. As soon as the tasks above have been completed , 1155 car model kits in 1/25 and 1/24 and about 200 other static models are ready to be built. I guess we all have too much to do to ever die.
  9. Confirmed content of 54910 CC-02 Full Ball Bearing Set: 16 pcs. 1150 2 pcs. 850 2 pcs. 1260 2 pcs. 1510 My guess how they are used: Rear axle: 6 pcs. 1150 Front axle: 6 pcs. 1150 Uprights: 1 pc. 1260 and 1 pc. 1510 each (like CC-01) Gearbox: 4 pcs. 1150 and 2 pcs. 850 (judging by the available "x-ray" view of the gearbox, it uses 6 bearings of partially different sizes) In other words: no ball bearings included in the car kit.
  10. 2019: 47428 XB Tyrrell P34 1977 Monaco GP (w/o RC Equipment) (F103RS) 23805 Volvo FH16 Globetrotter 750 6×4 Timber (Full Operation Finished Model)
  11. First, I must point out that I know very little about plastics and molding and I'm very much aware of that myself, so I'm not at all trying to play an expert here. However, the last 7 years, I've worked for an automotive supplier who primarily manufactures plastic parts. So, with my interest in RC- and static plastic models, I've taken the opportunity to speak with some of the specialists at work. Choice of type of plastic to mold parts in is not just about the cost of the plastic itself. Tough and reinforced plastics cause a lot more wear on the molds, both because they have to be injected with higher pressure and because of their abrasive effect. That isn't so relevant for (relatively) small volume manufacturers like Associated and Schumacher, but it certainly is for a high volume manufacturer like Tamiya. As pointed out here already, Tamiya use high strength plastics in their TRF-models, but not just because they are more expensive and sold to more demading customers, but also because mold wear isn't so relevant for these low volume models. For high volume models however, mold wear is of course an issue, so if Tamiya had used for instance fibre reinforced nylon throughout in the DT-02, DT-03, TT-02 and similar high volume chassises, the cost of repairing, maintaining and replacing molds would have been significantly higher and eventually handed down to the customers. Also, takt time is a factor. Generally, high grade plastics demand a longer takt time. The longer it takes to mold (heat, inject, cool, eject) a part/sprue, the longer the machine is occupied for a production run and the higher the labour cost, energy cost etc. Furthermore, shrinkage, warpage and general tolerances are critical issues that Tamiya need to have under control and some plastic materials are much more demanding than others on these issues, resulting in higher cost for monitoring the processes and for corrections whenever the tolerances start to drift. There surely are many other factors too, but just the above is in my humble opinion enough to feel confident that Tamiya are very much aware of their choices and that they leave very little to chance. That said, I don't excuse Tamiya for poor designs though. Meanwhile, Tamiya have decades of experience making RC-models of relatively fragile plastics, so they should know pretty well how to design parts to make them suitable for their specific tasks, like for instance required stiffness and tight tolerances for a gearbox housing, balance of stiffness and toughness for suspension arms, gloss, homogeneous colours and crispness of decorative parts and not the least the required wall thicknesses and dimensions. And I dare say that the design flaws are not so common anymore, and Tamiya know pretty well how to cleverly design (plastic) parts to compensate for their use of "brittle" or soft plastics. Also, outside Japan many of us may feel that Tamiya models are (sometimes) not so good value for money, but in Japan, the prices for Tamiya models and spare parts are pretty low and parts availability is probably not even remotely as good in any other part of the world. So Japanese customers possibly think they get good value for money and when a plastic part breaks or is worn out, replacement is cheap and easy to get. And after all, Japan is still Tamiya's most important market by far. And think of it, has there been any new Tamiya chassis the last 20 years with as severe design flaws (causing breakage of plastic parts) as those commonly found back in the eighties and into the nineties? I can’t think of any. The Juggernaut was an extremely poor effort for so many reasons, some of which were also related to poorly designed plastic parts, and some later chassis designs have issues, but if I’m not mistaken, none of which are directly caused by poorly designed plastic parts? (Not counting issues that affect handling).
  12. Original: SP-1109 / 5109 / 50109 Black 2002 re-release: 49222
  13. The reason why it's in the 473xx-series and not 577xx-series is because it comes without RC-equipment. Built, but not RTR, so to speak!
×
×
  • Create New...