MK 1.5 Rough Rider?

[scootmike]

Just received a Rough Rider and it looks like it is a MK 1.5

It has all the early parts except for the black bumper and early gearbox.

Had planned on using it with a CRP Butterfly chassis and rollbar but think it will get a stock resto, I think it is too unique not to restore stock.

I do believe it is all original, chassis wise it is in very nice shape.

Body is in pretty good shape, missing the spotlights and has a couple of cracks here and there.

I really like these old srb's.

[Mokei Kagaku]

I have never really accepted the "Mk.I" vs. "Mk.II" distinction as many of the modifications during the production runs of the RR/SS/FR were introduced as running changes and not as "packages" in specific generations of kits.

"Early" SRBs with screw spring stoppers for the front suspension and "non-solid" rear cage lower mounts were box-stock available both with grey and black bumpers.

"Early" SRBs with "sharp" knurling on the brass damper parts that easily cut through the skin when tightening, which was replaced with "blunt" knurling long before the first changes were done to the gear box and front suspension.

"Late" SRBs with the molded in stub spring stoppers and "solid" rear cage lower mounts were box-stock available with radio boxes, gear- and motor-covers with and without venting holes.

"Late" SRBs with 2mm single slotted screws, changed to phillips screws not long before end of production.

"Late" Sand Scorcher with front body post with hole (rather than "tapered waiste" that broke off) for the body clip was introduced pretty late and not long before end of production, so "late" Sand Scorchers existed with both body post versions.

My cousin and I bought our first SRBs right after the launch and both got "early" kits but grey bumpers and then in the spring of 1982 he bought a "late" Rough Rider and I a "late" Sand Scorcher at the same time

and he got "double bearing"- whereas I got "single bearing"-suspension arms although the kits were otherwise identical (except for bodies, wheels and tires obviously).

Just to mention a few of many examples of parts combinations in the kits and why I think considering "Mk.I" and "Mk.II" as strict specifications is impractical. It's rather a case of multiple different combinations of "early" and "late" parts. Obviously, a Ford Ranger kit with black bumper, early gearbox and early front suspension hardly ever existed, but apart from that many different combinations are possible and neither "wrong" nor particularly rare.

[scootmike]

My MK1.5 description was meant with some humor

I do see your points.

I wouldn't say it is rarer or wrong either, I just think it is neat to see the changes on these cars during production.

Perhaps more than one casting company was making the parts, again I just like seeing the differences in them.

[Mokei Kagaku]

My MK1.5 description was meant with some humor

Thought so too! My comment wasn't intended as criticism either.

I wouldn't say it is rarer or wrong either, I just think it is neat to see the changes on these cars during production.

Fully agree! It's just that some seem to believe that early and late SRBs can be categorized clearly into Mk.I and Mk.II, which I think isn't possible at all. "Early" and "Late" with a very fuzzy transition between and variations within "Early" and "Late" too are however evident.

Perhaps more than one casting company was making the parts, again I just like seeing the differences in them.

It has been discussed many times whether Tamiya molded the die cast parts themselves or outsourced this part of the production. I can't see why Tamiya would outsource the molding of metal parts of relatively soft alloys with low melting temperature when they mold plastic parts themselves, but I don't know for sure either. I thinks it's rather likely though that several tools of the same parts were used simultaneously as demand was very high at the peak. If so, it's not unlikely that different spec tools to some extent were used simultaneously too. We'll probably never know, but it's an interesting topic!

[Shodog]

Looks like it would clean up nicely. If it were me, I'd do a nice box stock restore. Save the CRP chassis for something not as nice

[redzone]

Are the manuals different between early & late?

[Mokei Kagaku]

Are the manuals different between early & late?

Several versions exist, also depicting combinations of parts considered "Mk.I" and "Mk.II" by many.

Just a few examples:

"Early" type gearbox combined with "Late" type front shock towers in the same RR-manual:

"Early" type gearbox combined with "Early" type front shock towers in the same SS-manual:

"Late" type gearbox combined with "Late" type front shock towers in the same SS-manual:

[scootmike]

Thanks for posting that!

Pretty cool to see it in the manuals.

I plan on doing a stock resto on it, I like em stock and I like em hopped up

[Team Rawlings]

I tend to agree with M K. I recall my original SS came with a grey bumper, screws for the front springs and solid rear gear box. But my friends RR was exact Oposite black bumper, moulded spring luggs and hollow rear gear box. Both brought with in weeks of each other. I reckon you'll have fun either way you go. :-)

[Flat_Out]

So does anyone have a confirmed example of an MK1 SS with a black bumper? Or was the MK1 black bumper only found on the RR?

[OldSchoolRunner]

Anyway you look at it a really nice find! I agree. I would save this for the shelf!

OSR

[redzone]

My "mk1" unrestored sand scorcher has the black bumper, I'll have to check the rear gear case though, never noticed the difference before.

[becbec]

I have never really accepted the "Mk.I" vs. "Mk.II" distinction as many of the modifications during the production runs of the RR/SS/FR were introduced as running changes and not as "packages" in specific generations of kits.

"Early" SRBs with screw spring stoppers for the front suspension and "non-solid" rear cage lower mounts were box-stock available both with grey and black bumpers.

"Early" SRBs with "sharp" knurling on the brass damper parts that easily cut through the skin when tightening, which was replaced with "blunt" knurling long before the first changes were done to the gear box and front suspension.

"Late" SRBs with the molded in stub spring stoppers and "solid" rear cage lower mounts were box-stock available with radio boxes, gear- and motor-covers with and without venting holes.

"Late" SRBs with 2mm single slotted screws, changed to phillips screws not long before end of production.

"Late" Sand Scorcher with front body post with hole (rather than "tapered waiste" that broke off) for the body clip was introduced pretty late and not long before end of production, so "late" Sand Scorchers existed with both body post versions.

My cousin and I bought our first SRBs right after the launch and both got "early" kits but grey bumpers and then in the spring of 1982 he bought a "late" Rough Rider and I a "late" Sand Scorcher at the same time

and he got "double bearing"- whereas I got "single bearing"-suspension arms although the kits were otherwise identical (except for bodies, wheels and tires obviously).

Just to mention a few of many examples of parts combinations in the kits and why I think considering "Mk.I" and "Mk.II" as strict specifications is impractical. It's rather a case of multiple different combinations of "early" and "late" parts. Obviously, a Ford Ranger kit with black bumper, early gearbox and early front suspension hardly ever existed, but apart from that many different combinations are possible and neither "wrong" nor particularly rare.

do you have pics of sharp knurling on brass parts of dampers or could you explain more as I am trying to restore a very early mk1 and was not aware of this variant

thankyou Rob