Differences between originals and re-releases - a summary?

[Hibernaculum 933]

G'day,

I dread starting new threads if something has already been covered (we really need to start aggregating threads round here []), but here's 3 pressing questions I had about the re-releases that have been bugging me....

First I was wondering if someone could post a nice, concise list of all modifications/differences in the re-release versions of each kit? So...the Grasshopper, Hornet, Frog, Thundershot, Manta Ray, Top Force. And feel free to include any other previous re-releases if you've got the knowledge (Lancia, Tyrell, etc)...

Or if someone has already done this, can someone post the URL?

I just think this would be really handy, as it's a bit of a grey area in some respects. In my case, I'm familiar with the differences in the Frog. But for the more recent cars like the Top Force, I assume there must be very minimal differences between the original and re-release kit, in which case the value of the original kit may be more inclined to fall?

Secondly, has anyone noticed a difference in the quality of materials in the re-releases? I had a look at the Frog kit last weekend in Sydney, and I got the impression that the plastic parts trees in the kit might have had more 'flashing' (offcuts caused by leaks in the mold) than in the original kit? I'm only speculating, and I hope I'm wrong. It's easy to trim it all off, but it gives the impression of falling quality standards...

Thirdly, how on earth do we now determine whether a set of vintage tyres on eBay are really vintage tyres or simply re-release tyres put in vintage boxes? And should we care? i.e. Are the re-release versions of, say, the Buggy Spike Tyres exactly the same as the ones that came in the original kits? Or are there differences to look for in the labelling or compound? I for one hope they are exactly the same - it will save a lot of headaches and help to simply bring the price down.

And fourthly - are all the re-releases still Made In Japan? Tamiya just wouldn't be Tamiya to me if they moved their manufacturing offshore to some second-rate-manufacturing hovel (not naming any names, but eventual  manufacture in say... CHINA.... would pretty much destroy a lot of Tamiya's mystique for me, especially when that's the place pumping out cheap Tamiya clones and ripoffs). I had trouble finding "made in japan" on some of the Frog parts I looked at in the re-re kit. And we know that some stuff is made in the Phillipines (some RTR kits or something?). So here's hoping it stays in Japan where it was born, evolved and belongs.

Thanks in advance lads and ladies.

cheers,

H.

[pleiku68 24]

I have used the re-release Hornet tires on the Rear of the Super Champ.Same spike tire..Now I know I am getting old but If you ever put the Original tires on the wheel it was a chore. Man it took longer to get the center piece through the tire than to build the kit...These seem to go on a lot easier...Maybe the originals are just so old and hard and these new ones a soft..Don;t know but seem different to me...They just seem to be lighter..but I DO NOT KNOW FOR SURE. Have not seen the RE Top Force but like all the others I would bet on cheaper materials or I should say different materials that are easier to manufacture..... ....regards jerry

[Hibernaculum 933]

I know what you mean Jerry, those tyres used to require some muscle. It was when trying to get the inner third piece to go inside the tyre...eventually I remember I figured out a knack to it. Just pushed the piece inside - curved side first. Then swivel it around once it's inside [].

Anyone else want to add to this thread?

I'm kinda surprised no one else has answered so far as I thought this would be something all the diehard collectors would enjoy just to be pedantic.....

I'm happy to leave it if this has already been covered and someone can point me to another thread where the differences are summed up. But I just thought it would be useful if we aggregated our knowledge in one place...even if everyone adds a little bit. Rather than trawling 20 different threads to find out what all the differences between the new and old kits are.

I'll start.

Frog Re-release differences

- Decal sponsors changed.

- ESC instead of mechanical speed controller

...what else?

And what about newer cars like the Top Force and Manta Ray - do they contain any differences at all, apart from the inclusion of an ESC?

And my other questions...

1. Are all the kits and parts still made in Japan?

2. Does anyone see any reason to buy vintage tyres and not re-release tyres?

The reason for all this is something you might call "That old vintage feeling" - it's that inexplicable  feeling many people get from owning a vintage Tamiya, that makes it different to owning a Re-release. By knowing exactly what's changed, it becomes easier to know where the re-releases "fit" in your collection (aka your imagination) and decide whether to swap parts around, and so on.

Which brings me to an eternal question for collectors now that these re-releases are in abundance:

If two parts are identical and their only difference is that one was manufactured in 1983 and the other in 2006, do you feel differently about using them?

cheers,

H.

[TheSteve 2]

I don't see too much difference in terms of quality between the original and rerelease Frog.

However there are quite a few differences between the original Frog and the rerelease, my list so far:

#1 chassis - side battery post length, front re-enforcements - On the first issued frog chassis the battery mount side posts were both short. A year or two later they extended one side, on the rerelease both sides are now extended.

#2 bumper - original bumper has narrower front center support rib

#3 screws - almost all have been changed to black on rerelease, no brass sleeves used anymore, its built into the new screws

#4 locknuts - only 2 nylock nuts on the original, many on the rerelease

#5 wheel nuts - brass on original

#6 counter gear - brass on original, aluminum on rerelease, c-clip to hold the gear is black on the original, silver on the rerelease

#7 shocks - plastic ends on rerelease, no flapper valves or progressive springs

#8 drive line - halfshafts on original, dogbones on rerelease

#9 motor - endbell is on the outside of the original

#10 front bumper stiffner - green on original, black on rerelease

#11 MSC stay - no MSC stay on rerelease

#12 resistor mount - no resistor mount on the rerelease

#13 MSC - no mechanical speed control with the rerelease

#14 uprights - original uprights have pressed brass ballstuds, new ones are heavier with threaded ballstuds

gearbox housing - metal hexes can fall through on original, not on rerelease

#15 antennas - loops on the top end are nicer on the original(perfectly round)

#16 body mounts - black on original, silver on rerelease

#17 decals - color slightly different(darker) on rerelease, many have been changed

#18 body - the same once trimmed except rerelease has no switch mount in rear window

[Tamiya King 1]

I believe the Grasshopper and Hornet are about the same except different decals. I haven't seen much difference besides that.

I know the Frog has different drive shafts and it does not have the Metal plate to house the MSC as it has an ESC now and it also has different Decals.

One difference between the Pumpkin Metallic body is the front body mounts are black instead of metallic like the original, and it does not say ford on tailgate.

Hope this ads some more info.

[DJTheo 2]

GH and Hornet re-re chassis has not a complete cutout for the old hump pack. Also the tires smell different then the vintage ones, don't think its just old stock as it wouldn't be enough and it wouldn't be so fresh. Re-re Hornet is made in Japan [H], others I need to check at home. Luckily no Tamiya kit is yet made in China, the cheaper ones and usually the RTRs are made though in the Philipines. You are right though, some of the plastic moulding of re-res seems poorer, on the other side the finish of the metal Frog (SRB) uprights is far superior to the old ones! [H] So Tamiya still hasn't lost the art to cast/manufacture  quality metal parts? (wink, wink, nudge, nudge [])

Cheers

[Saito 5]

 My re-re Top Force looks unchanged from the original.  You don't get an esc with it, but then again you didn't get one with the original either.  The decals appear unchanged (the Top Force never did have a bunch of sponser decals like the older buggies) and it says 1991 on the sheet to boot.  In fact, other than the internal box layout and the "1991-2005" printed on the box (in very small type), I'm hard pressed to see any differences from the original.

[DJTheo 2]

I believe the Grasshopper and Hornet are about the same except different decals. I haven't seen much difference besides that.

http://www.tamiyaclub.com/xforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=18111 and some more small ones (uprights etc.)

Cheers

[Bigwheels_inc 11]

One difference between the Pumpkin Metallic body is the front body mounts are black instead of metallic like the original,

Hope this ads some more info.

the original pumpkin body mounts were white

the other difrences on the pumpkin chrome edition are the rear axel springs and steering rods the springs have curved ends and the steering rods are thicker with diffrent ends (the reason tamiya give for changing the steering rods on the pumpkin and lunchbox reissues is it allows more backwards movement so the servo mount for the steering doesnt brake as easily as it used to)

the lunchbox also shares these diffrences on the reissues along with the changes to the decals

the hornet has a rear window and changes to the decals and the front uprights now have a pin running through them instead of a grub screw holding them on

pete

[Guest DImblum]

I've compared my re-re GrassHopper with my old beater. The differences I have noticed include:

1. Upright pins for the front arms have been replaced with a screw based replacement pins. These are "way" better since the original pins were held in by friction and would eventually fall out after running the car for a while. You pretty much had to get new uprights to keep running the car - fixed in re-release.

2. As mentioned earlier, the opening in the chassis for the 7.2v battery hump is gone.

3. Although the battery door appears the same, it looks to hook in better to the bottom. You can actually snap down the locking hinge better.

4. Decals are now pre-cut and include these changes:

* Decal on top roof is changed from "Weber Carburetors" to a "Tamiya" decal - Large "W" replaced with a checkered flag design and solid red bar under the "W" is replaced with multiple red stripes.

* Decals on headlamps have changed from the "Marchal Cat" to "Brite Lite"

* Decals for "Pro Gas" on the front have changes to "Progrear"

* Decals for "Recaro" are gone from the front

* Decals for "Jackman Wheels" that are near the rear tail have been replaced with "Joker Customs"

* Decals for "Gumout" on the rear tail have been replaced with "Tamiya"

5. The directions also recommend painting the lower portion of the rear back tail 'black'. The original directions did not include this step.

6. They also made a change to the drivers helmet. Original was "Royal Blue", new helmet is White with Tamiya decals.

All other parts appear identicle.

[Hibernaculum 933]

Excellent works guys, thanks for all the responses. Here's hoping people keep adding stuff here as it's discovered.

cheers,

H.

[SonicCJ5 0]

GH and Hornet re-re chassis has not a complete

cutout for the old hump pack. Also the tires smell different then the

vintage ones, don't think its just old stock as it wouldn't be enough

and it wouldn't be so fresh.

I agree %100 about the smell I think they are made out of a different type of material.

here is my take on the differences on the frog

ED

[Hibernaculum 933]

G'day,

Figured I ought to revive this topic, rather than start a new one....

In all the discussions about the differences between the originals and re-releases, no one seems to have mentioned the differences in the polycarbonate bodies?

I recently got a re-release Frog, and when I took one look at the polycarbonate body, I knew something was up...

The lexan/polycarbonate on this particular re-release is very different to the original. It's a lot less "clear" and suffers from a very obvious "milky" look when compared to the original Frog body. If you have both, take a look.

When painting it from inside, I have no doubts that this will mean the paint will appear less sharp than with the original body.

In fact, even looking at re-release Frog pictures on the net prior to actually getting one, I was a bit suspicious at times.

The shape of the body is also slightly different - I think a different mould was used. The corners of the re-release body are rounded, rather than being square. Obviously this does not matter once the body is cut out. But certain other contours on other parts of the body also appear different.

If anything, I think the re-release body might be a fraction less detailed. Controversial claim perhaps, but there's something "softer" about the appearance of the whole thing, compared with a certain sharpness to the original. Even if I'm wrong, then I think there's no doubt that the "milky" appearance of the re-release body makes the original one better. IMHO.

Anyone else noticed?

cheers,

H.

[HunterZero 76]

The lexan/polycarbonate on this particular re-release is very different to the original. It's a lot less "clear" and suffers from a very obvious "milky" look when compared to the original Frog body. If you have both, take a look.

Hi there to a fellow Sydney-sider!

I have about 5 frogs, including 2 re-re kits. The re-re Frog body looks milky because it has overspray film on the outside, which the original did not have. When you remove the overspray film, the body is perfectly clear.

The Frog re-re body doesn't have the arch for the motor pre-cut either.

The plastic used to make the C parts seems different - the plastic on the original Frog C parts is a bit softer and more flexible. The rear arms on my original Frog runner have 'bowed' out a bit as a result of the softer plastic. Doesn't affect the car at all, just gives it a bit of toe-in on the rear!

I have a re-re Top Force too, and from what I can tell it's unchanged from the original except the presentation of the kit in the box.

- James

[Hibernaculum 933]

Thanks James!

I will have to take a closer look tonight, but if it's just film, then sincere apologies for the false alarm. []

I did suspect film, but I couldn't see any on there. I suppose I was looking for loose-fitting film, like what came on the body in my NIB Fox kit, and others.

I'll have to pick at the corners and see if it will come off.

cheers,

H.

[DJTheo 2]

That happens when we "live" in the vintage past [H], Tamiya has been using this film since over 10 years [] As said the milky appearance is due to the overspray film, which is also shown in the manual, good you didnt decal yours yet. Btw, didn't you notice a major difference, that the re-re body has no cut out in the rear window for the Rx switch?

Cheers

[Hibernaculum 933]

You're exactly right there Theo. I do live in the vintage past. The most recent Tamiya kit I have is the Mini Cooper (new version), which I haven't finished building (so I haven't yet examined the lexan for spray film . Other than that, I have the humble Super Hornet. And the next "newest" cars I own are a Bearhawk, and a Nissan King Cab. My collection is centred roughly around the year 1986, and if anything, seems to be getting even older! (focussing on Sand Scorchers, Super Champs etc).

As soon as people start talking about things like "TA-02" chassis, I tend to tune out. (What fun is there in collecting chassis numbers?)

And yes, I did notice the absence of cutouts.

All these little differences kind of build up in my mind, diminishing my confidence about the "originality" of the re-releases (even the parts that look the same as the originals), and making the real original parts even more valuable. What I mean to say is - I become more and more hesitant about the idea of interchanging parts - e.g. using new re-release parts to supplement restorations of original cars.

But I can only speak for the Frog, Grasshopper and Hornet in this respect.

It's nice to hear that the Top Force is identical to the original, aside of the packaging.

But it's also frustrating. The new Top Force has a new serial number and different packaging. Why? Why didn't Tamiya simply re-release the Top Force EXACTLY as it was before, including packaging and serial number? That would have been a true re-release of something that was once released before. I'm sure there are some sound business reasons for the tweaking, but it still seems absurd.

Instead, these re-releases are better defined as being more like re-imaginings or reincarnations of the originals. If you're mad keen on originality, all these little modifications and tweaks are a nuisance. And people who really want to own an original Top Force, may not be satisfied until they own a truly original NIB Top Force - #58100, complete with blister packs.

At the end of the day, owning these toys is all about what makes you happy. Personally, it's all about getting to build, own, drive and display the cars I grew up longing for, but could never afford. It's a bit like I'm setting things right - achieving a childhood dream. And the only way to truly satisfy that dream is to own the things that were actually around when I was a kid - back in the 80s.

It may seem crazy, but if I had to choose between two seemingly identical parts, one made in 1983 and the other in 2006, I'd always go for the vintage one. Who knows, maybe the plastic compound is different....?? Or maybe not. Perhaps it's just the "spirit" of knowing that a particular thing is 23 years old, as opposed to being fresh off the conveyor belt in Shizuoka.

As I said, it may seem crazy. But where would collecting be, without the inexplicable element of "spirit" that inspires our love of such old toys.....

cheers,

H.

[DJTheo 2]

Guess the differences have several reasons. I think Tamiya didn't want to step on the collectors shoes with them, thats why the subtle differences, the first re-release (XR311) had even the original number and possibly this annoyed many collectors and also created listing problems (even in TC). This way they kept both original collectors happy as well as most "normal" Tamiya which wanted to get the car of their childhood without paying a fortune and not caring about subtle differences. From the fans I personally know most don't care about the differences at all, are just happy to build and drive again the car of their youth. I am more like you, for me a re-release isn't a replacement of the original, so I try to get both, the original for my shelf and the re-release to enjoy again the build, drive and usually also to try some modifications, hopups, non boxart scheme. So I am actually happy the re-releases aren't exact the same as for me still they wouldn't be the old kit produced in the 80s having the materials of that time as well as the degradation/patina of 20+ years. [H]Btw, it seems blistering isn't done in any Tamiya kits anymore, guess due to cost and/or enviromental reasons?

Cheers

[Scorpn 18]

I would guess the differences are to make the cars a bit stronger and able to take a bit of punishment, kids today are heaps rougher

As far as I can tell alot of the re-re differences fix small weaknesses in the originals eg lunchbox steering, frog driveshafts, rib on bumper (those bumpers always broke at that rib!), and esc's are much more reliable than msc's

Just my 2 cents

Glenn

[DJTheo 2]

That too, very correct! [H]

Cheers

[Live Steam Mad 17]

<P>The Frog re-re body doesn't have the arch for the motor pre-cut either.</P>

Sorry to drag up old posts but...

I will add a difference that I noticed in the re-re driver tree (Z parts) that I got in my NIB re-re direct from Stella Models, compared to the Z tree that I got from the USA in the same package as my Kamtec repro. shell, I have pictured the difference below ;-

...the difference being that the re-re Frog's Z parts has the number "6" 'tag' the correct way up and located 'above' the 'body' of the driver, whereas the other Z parts that I got has the "6" turned UPSIDE DOWN and is now 'below' the driver figure and hence looks like a number "9". Very Odd!!

Cheers,

Alistair G.

[Live Steam Mad 17]

Something else I just noticed! In the original Frog manual Version 1 there is no part 8 shown on the Z tree on page 15. However on page 15 of the Version 2 manual for the original Frog there is a part number 8 shown as being present, which is not used.

The re-re tree also has this part number 8 present. My "number 6 reversed to become number 9" parts tree also has the extensions on it for the part 8, and indeed I got part #8 with the parcel with the parts tree (the driver's 2 helmet parts were painted and put onto this 'alternative driver body' which is the #8 part itself).

Cheers,

Alistair G.

[Live Steam Mad 17]

I don't see too much difference in terms of quality between the original and rerelease Frog.

However there are quite a few differences between the original Frog and the rerelease, my list so far:

#1 chassis - side battery post length, front re-enforcements - On the first issued frog chassis the battery mount side posts were both short. A year or two later they extended one side, on the rerelease both sides are now extended.

On this point #1, can you tell me please why Tamiya originally extended the battery mount side posts like you mentioned, on the original Frog, part way through production?

On my re-re Frog chassis there is a 1/3 inch gap between the battery retainer "protrusions" and the side of my hump pack when I use a Tamiya Hump pack battery completely pushed towards one side. This is kinda annoying and I might well remove the extensions!

Also what is the exact length that these battery mount side posts should be, both on the left and on the right, in mm ?

Cheers,

Alistair G.

[markbt73 5311]

On this point #1, can you tell me please why Tamiya originally extended the battery mount side posts like you mentioned, on the original Frog, part way through production?

On my re-re Frog chassis there is a 1/3 inch gap between the battery retainer "protrusions" and the side of my hump pack when I use a Tamiya Hump pack battery completely pushed towards one side. This is kinda annoying and I might well remove the extensions!

Also what is the exact length that these battery mount side posts should be, both on the left and on the right, in mm ?

Cheers,

Alistair G.

If memory serves from my old Blackfoot, you can install the side covers for the battery compartment (part A1) in one of two ways. If you put the bumps on the bottom facing in, towards the center of the chassis, the compartment is the correct width for hump-packs. If you turn them around so the bumps are facing outwards, you have the proper space for a stick-pack or side-by-side battery. Check the original (not re-re) manual for the Frog (or Blackfoot) and you should see what I mean.

[Live Steam Mad 17]

If memory serves from my old Blackfoot, you can install the side covers for the battery compartment (part A1) in one of two ways. If you put the bumps on the bottom facing in, towards the center of the chassis, the compartment is the correct width for hump-packs. If you turn them around so the bumps are facing outwards, you have the proper space for a stick-pack or side-by-side battery. Check the original (not re-re) manual for the Frog (or Blackfoot) and you should see what I mean.

Err yes but one thing is wrong. If you put the battery mount side posts with their pips / bumps facing inwards, on both left and right battery mounts, there is still 1/4 inch gap between the Tamiya hump pack and the bumps. I just tested it with my partially built BlackFoot (was a NIB).

BTW the posts look to be extended on the left hand side of the chassis only on my Blackfoot.

Does anyone know please why there is still 1/4 inch gap with a hump pack, on the BlackFoot? What is the reason for this?

Cheers,

Alistair G.