Jump to content

TurnipJF

Members
  • Content Count

    5952
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7698 Excellent

7 Followers

About TurnipJF

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Lincolnshire, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The hex pattern on the chassis tub says TA-01/DF-01, with the black gear cases saying DF-01, and the narrow arms pointing towards a narrow scale body rather than a buggy. Hummer is a good call - I'd go with that.
  2. Indeed. The flex has its advantages as well as disadvantages. What you lose in terms of precision, you gain in terms of resistance to damage.
  3. It depends on the dimensions of your servo I guess. I used a Savox SC-1252MG, and needed a pair of 3mm spacers to drop the tie rod mounting balls downwards a bit. But that was with a high torque servo saver and hop-up tie rods. I think you may not need them with the stock tie rods and servo saver, but I don't know for sure as the F103 I have fitted with the stock rods uses a standard servo with trimmed tabs.
  4. A standard servo mounted vertically with trimmed tabs or a low profile servo mounted on its base with tabs intact are the two main ways of doing it for an F103 F1 model. The sideways orientation really only works on the Tyrrell because of its width and non-standard front suspension. Such an orientation on a standard F103 would interfere with the front arms and bodyshell. Personally I prefer the look of neatly trimmed tabs, but I also want the ability to swap the servo into a chassis that uses the tabs for mounting, so I buy a spare servo case and have one with tabs and one without.
  5. The Type S suspension as fitted to the S, SR and SRX really boosts the potential of the chassis, so personally I would go for one of those rather than the R which is more akin to a base spec model in the suspension department. It is the same as the suspension that is fitted to the TB-03 and FF-03, and with a few tweaks, you can have yourself a TT that performs like a TB. As for additional hop-ups, ballraced steering is a great idea to eliminate slop, and the slotted Yeah Racing motor mount opens up your gearing options especially when used with the alloy spur gear mount. The carbon fibre chassis braces designed by TheRCRacer and manufactured by Fibre Lyte allow you to fine tune chassis flex. And if you are rallying, a set of DF-02 metal diff gears will allow you to tackle jumps without damaging the diff ring gears and input pinions.
  6. I think it will take a lot of tuning for an MB-01 to keep up with a TT-02, even a standard one. However any sort of formal racing would put them in different classes, so it's doesn't really matter. For me, the challenge would be to get it to the point where it could challenge one of the other M chassis.
  7. This might sound dumb, but did you turn it on? When I first dealt with the TLU-01, I didn't see the tiny little black power switch, and was wondering why it wouldn't power up when plugged in. 😀
  8. 4WS is pretty much essential for a competitive racing teapot, for which this chassis appears well-suited. 😀
  9. It looks like it uses the same parts, just in different configurations, so yes, you ought to be able to choose between RWD and FWD when you put it together.
  10. Others may disagree, but I think the GF-01 Is a fine candidate for a significant power upgrade. It has proper suspension, a low CoG (for a stunt model) and a rugged drivetrain. It will easily flip on its lid under hard acceleration and braking, but if you accelerate and brake within it's limits, it should remain controllable at significant speeds. Drive it as you would ride a superbike and all should be well.
  11. To me it looks very much like the TT of M-chassis, a mobile display platform for some nice bodyshells, but leaving a lot to be desired in terms of performance. However that is why I'd like to get one. I look forward to the challenge of turning it into a half-decent performer. I already have a ludicrously heavy steel-geared alloy-bodied servo which ought to offset the motor weight, and it looks like 50mm dampers will be a straight swap, as will the TT-02 hardened pivot balls for the kingpins. I bet Yeah Racing will have an alloy steering rack available for it before long, and probably a motor mount too. The ability to adjust rear toe without any extra parts is a nice plus. It will probably take a bit of fiddling to get it to the standard of my well-sorted M-05, and I don't see it ever rivaling my M-07, but I think it will be fun to see how far it can be taken.
  12. I do hope so! If that happens, it will rise several places in my "gonna get one someday when the economy allows" list.
  13. My M-chassis fleet runs from 03 to 08 + an 01X in scaler trim. Favourite is hard to decide. It is definitely the 07 or 08 - both are superb - but there is so little to choose between them. Both are fast, reliable, easy to tune and easy to work on, with excellent materials and a good spec out of the box. Least favourite is the M-04. I know that some people have mastered it, but I just don't have the tuning or driving skills to make it behave on a track.
  14. My concern with the MB-01 Is that it appears that the whole chassis and drivetrain are flipped to change from FWD to RWD. Or another way of looking at it would be that the steering apparatus is moved from one end of the chassis to the other. Great for making it 4WS - you just get a second set of steering apparatus and attach it to the non-steering end, as with the WT-01 for example. However they took this approach with the M-01/M-02, and it had the drawback that you needed a zero timed or reverse timed motor half the time, since in one configuration the car went forwards with standard rotation, and in the other it went backwards. I hope there is some wizardry in the gearbox that allows standard rotation and timing for both configurations. Maybe by flipping the diff?
  15. Something you may want to bear in mind is that unless the model is destined to sit on the shelf as a display piece, the bodyshell is best treated as a consumable item. A stunt vehicle like this one will look a bit worn after its first enthusiastic run, and the shell will likely become unusable long before any other component has suffered any noticeable wear. So I would say don't put to much time, effort or expense into finishing the shell, at least not the one that you will use for running. If you want it to look nice when not in use, I'd recommend a second shell for display. This you can finish to a high standard, knowing that your work won't be spoiled within 5 minutes of use.
×
×
  • Create New...