Know some of the gaps in our model data? subscribers can now help

[netsmithUK 488]

Great to see all the new car data going in  - and Im not forgetting all the great and ongoing work that @TWINSET and @acprc have already put into this area - thanks!

And thanks to all these people that have helped in the past

stulec52
synchrocnc
RETRO R/C
robysoldtamiya
AJ
Jimbo
PandaBear
njmlondon
miramar
urban warrior

Stefan

[taffer 948]

Thanks I have copied most of tamiyas own description from their website even though its a bit wacky most of the time!

Can HTML codes be used to space out the text better? its not a big issue but its a bit clumped together and I didnt want to lose it all after typing it in! (ie kumamon tractor)

[netsmithUK 488]

think you've already discover <br> is supported.

[beefmuffin 1156]

OK so @netsmithUK - one other Q: one thing I've noticed when trying to research for projects is that alot of the recent chassis type details are missing.  I went to try to start filling in a few (the WR-01 / WT-01) and I can't see how to link the models to the chassis types so that they show up in the chassis type's list.

Here are the examples of what I've tried:

http://www.tamiyaclub.com/chassis.asp?id=96&desc=WR-01

http://www.tamiyaclub.com/car.asp?id=1214

[matman 1499]

2 minutes ago, beefmuffin said:

OK so @netsmithUK - one other Q: one thing I've noticed when trying to research for projects is that alot of the recent chassis type details are missing.  I went to try to start filling in a few (the WR-01 / WT-01) and I can't see how to link the models to the chassis types so that they show up in the chassis type's list.

Here are the examples of what I've tried:

http://www.tamiyaclub.com/chassis.asp?id=96&desc=WR-01

http://www.tamiyaclub.com/car.asp?id=1214

1st one you have , you have got  ( If you which to try a different chassis type then please click on the chassis tab above.  ) 

Mate , i think you wanted,  If you  ( wish ) to try ,  not " which " , BAD Beef   .  Great job any way Mr Beef . 

[beefmuffin 1156]

On 4/30/2016 at 10:22 AM, matman said:

1st one you have , you have got  ( If you which to try a different chassis type then please click on the chassis tab above.  ) 

Mate , i think you wanted,  If you  ( wish ) to try ,  not " which " , BAD Beef   .  Great job any way Mr Beef . 

Mr Mat - I know you speak New Zeastraliandish but sometimes I have no idea what you mean.  LOL

[matman 1499]

23 hours ago, beefmuffin said:

Mr Mat - I know you speak New Zeastraliandish but sometimes I have no idea what you mean.  LOL

Oh !! Come on Bro , "sweet As " , Have you seen my Deck   < funny Ad .  

[matman 1499]

On 30 April 2016 at 10:14 PM, beefmuffin said:

OK so @netsmithUK - one other Q: one thing I've noticed when trying to research for projects is that alot of the recent chassis type details are missing.  I went to try to start filling in a few (the WR-01 / WT-01) and I can't see how to link the models to the chassis types so that they show up in the chassis type's list.

Here are the examples of what I've tried:

http://www.tamiyaclub.com/chassis.asp?id=96&desc=WR-01  << In this you have <<<( which )>>>  In the description . 

http://www.tamiyaclub.com/car.asp?id=1214

That is what i was talking about Cuzzy Bro ! .  Should it have been ( wish ) ??.    

[beefmuffin 1156]

6 minutes ago, matman said:

That is what i was talking about Cuzzy Bro ! .  Should it have been ( wish ) ??.    

Aha, gotcha: " If you which to try a different chassis type then please click on the chassis tab above.  "

Yeah, that's not something I wrote.  That's coded on the page.  @netsmithUK

[kontemax 1725]

The Astute came in the gold era of Tamiya design and it was the 2WD pair of the 4WD Egress with whom share some parts, the design and the style.

Astute was the first attempt of Tamiya to have a pure 2WD buggy racer. In fact Tamiya developed many innovations on this car even if most of them didn't obtain the hoped result.

Astute had the first ball differential from Tamiya and it was the first failure, maybe the biggest, of the model. This differential didn't manage hot motors whom that the model was intended for because it slips.

The problem was not the design but the poorness of the pot metal differential housings. In fact the same differentials, even if rough, worked well on the 4WD brother due the high quality ergal housing.

Other new features of the Astute were the fully adjustable upper arms, the adjustable front toe and for the first time, and the last one, the fully adjustable rear toe. All arms and hubs worked on bronze bearings to eliminate sloppy movements but the result was to have an too heavy model with many sloppy movements all around. The idea of Tamiya was to replace the bronze bearings with 24 optional ball bearings, lighter and more precise but the cost of the replacement was so high at the era that 99.9% of the Astute users never didn't do it.

The conclusion is that the Astute is absolutely pretty but too much engineered, heavy and prone to breakages. Other weak points were the rear hubs and the rear arm blocks, the front bulkhead that with the slipping differential did turn the model frustrating to use.

All these problems arose from the lack of experience by the Tamiya engineers and designers and the tentative to keep down the price of the kit. Probably a simpler design would allowed some higher quality materials all around and that would fixed the weak points. There were too much material were not needed, the 4 mm rods for the upper arms for example, and too little in the rear arm blocks or the front bulkhead.

The lack of a slippery clutch was another missing opportunity for this model and the absence of carbon fiber plates, universal joints, ball bearings and Hi Cap dampers, present onto the 4WD brother, is a real shame.

Some of these problems were fixed with the following Super Astute that lost many of the bronze bushings, had a slippery clutch, a new front brace to reinforce the bulkhead, new rear hubs with fixed toe and some lighter and simpler upper arms but kept the weakness of the rear arm blocks and the poorness of plastic CVA dampers and FRP plates.

The astute is anyway an highly collectible model because is actually one of the more beautiful 2WD buggy ever made and the design of it's body made it an unique example of good taste of design, style and aerodinamic concepts.

Tamiya did learn the lesson and after the Astute other models will follow the line. The enhanced Super Astute and the lighter, cheaper and simplified Madcap with its almost unknown brother, the Saint Dragon.

The Astute anyway is a very very fast and beautiful model, well balanced and fully adjustable that, aside its frailty, gives many satisfactions to the driver. The tight and rough ball differential makes it understeerer and the mini spiked front tires don't help. Tamiya tried to solve this problem with the adjustable rear toe but solved it at the end with the Super Astute that has a completly free gear differential, bigger front wheels with better tires and fixed toe hubs at the rear end. With some modification, using some Super Astute parts or Madcap parts the model becomes reliable and very funny to drive.

At the end Astute is a must have for any Tamiya collector.

[beefmuffin 1156]

6 minutes ago, kontemax said:

The Astute came in the gold era of Tamiya design and it was the 2WD pair of the 4WD Egress with whom share some parts, the design and the style.

LOL Max you put this in the wrong thread! 

[kontemax 1725]

Sorry mates, I'm making 5 things all together...

 

Max

[Truck Norris 2237]

You might want to make it clearer what is fact, i.e statements that are verifiable through research -  "Astute had the first ball differential" etc, and what is your own personal opinion - "All these problems arose from the lack of experience by the Tamiya engineers", which is speculation unless you can cite references, such as an interview with the engineers where they actually state that.

You could preface those statements by saying something like "Perhaps these problems arose from the lack of experience by the Tamiya engineers".

Sorry if it sounds like I'm taking this too seriously but this site is a source of information to thousands so we should be sure to either stick to facts or make it very obvious when this is the author's point of view 

 

[kontemax 1725]

5 hours ago, Truck Norris said:

You might want to make it clearer what is fact, i.e statements that are verifiable through research -  "Astute had the first ball differential" etc, and what is your own personal opinion - "All these problems arose from the lack of experience by the Tamiya engineers", which is speculation unless you can cite references, such as an interview with the engineers where they actually state that.

You could preface those statements by saying something like "Perhaps these problems arose from the lack of experience by the Tamiya engineers".

Sorry if it sounds like I'm taking this too seriously but this site is a source of information to thousands so we should be sure to either stick to facts or make it very obvious when this is the author's point of view 

 

Concerning the ball differential I know that it was the first one Tamiya ever made. There is no other model, in my memory, that has a ball differential. There are the Avante and the Toyota Celica Gr.B that have a center ball differential but there's no model before the Egress and the Astute that has a ball differential between the wheel axles in my memory. Anyway, at the end, keep in mind that the Egress is a fully optional fitted Avante at the end and the Torque Splitter Set was designed in the same time with the Avante so both differentials (the central and the other one) had been designed at the same time but fitted onto the models only with the Astute and the Egress. So I believe that is correct to say that the Asute and Egress ball differential was the first ever designed from Tamiya.

Astute was the first racing oriented 2WD buggy from Tamiya. All previous 2WD buggies were made of plastic parts, plastic bathtub chassis, no ball differentials, no adjustable upper arms, no slippery clutch. For sure the Astute had been a new generation with a totally different and new concept and design. The errors on the Astute design, I'm sorry, but are under the sunrays, everyone that used an Astute knows them very well. The choices made by the engineers were often totally wrong because the model was not able to survive to its own weight during a simple crash, its running life on a track was made of minutes before some breakage so I believe it is absolutely normal to speak of lack of experience and errors. And Tamiya made these errors many times in its history (do you remember the Juggernaut?). Astute has been an experimental model and, in fact, has been replaced after some months by the Super Astute. The winning model was at the end the Dyna Storm, very competitive but concerning the reliability... I'm sorry, another failure.

These arguments are not my point of view but facts.

 

Max

[netsmithUK 488]

Its all good interesting stuff max, its a good example of a knowledgeable car review. There are a few points I feel it moves too much towards opinion (which I know, is an opinion many will agree with) as opposed to what we are looking for in the actual model descriptions (I'm not sure if that is where it was intended), which I want to keep to public domain facts.

In the new design, 'reviews' will have almost has much prominence as the descriptions themselves. The reviews can be as opinionated as you like and will offer the scope for people to challenge or agree. (Its exactly this need for discussion out of the descriptions)

To all 'description writers' - I can lay out some more details for what I am looking for if it helps? Some rule of thumbs that I work to, I avoid words like pretty, ugly, dull, failure, success, throwaway stats like 99.9%, and also inferences like, 'tamiya decided to stop doing x because of y', the same with reference to cost reasons for change, unless you can point to 'official' sources. Good stuff is pointing out physical uniqueness of parts, the first time something was done or the last, Mentioning competition wins is another great thing.

All the other stuff about real personal experience, common thoughts on the model, even overheard gossip about any aspect of the models life are great and we really want them on the site, which is why I'm currently beefing up the review section.

Cheers

Chris

[GregM 1109]

nice review Max! But one thing puzzles me, isn't it called slipper clutch than "slippery" clutch?

[kontemax 1725]

17 hours ago, GregM said:

nice review Max! But one thing puzzles me, isn't it called slipper clutch than "slippery" clutch?

Yes, it's slippery, I missed the Y on the keyboard, sorry.

 

Max

[kontemax 1725]

18 hours ago, netsmithUK said:

Its all good...

.... beefing up the review section.

Cheers

Chris

Ok, I understood the point.

What must I do now? Must I rewrite the piece or simply cut it?

 

Max

[GregM 1109]

kontemax, I meant it the other way around. Everywhere else on the web, I read "slipper clutch", it is just your post where I heard "slippery clutch" for the first time. Since English is not my native language, it's not up to me to decide what's right or wrong though.

[beefmuffin 1156]

Yep it's "slipper' clutch.

I just want to say thanks to Max for being the first one to give it a go writing a juicy original description for those that are missing!  You guys are a bit of a tough crowd, LOL.  

That being said @kontemax maybe try another version of your piece taking into account all the input so far and let's see what people think?  Or I could try an edit of it... but it may be a few days till I could get to it.  Up to you!

Just remember to put it into the other thread to keep that list of missing descriptions together...

[Grastens 2795]

If you are still recruiting, I am interested in joining: http://www.tamiyaclub.com/member.asp?id=36210

Not much web experience, but I do have some detailed data on some specific models that may help.

[netsmithUK 488]

@Grastens Excellent - log out of the main site and back in and you should have access - see notes on first page of this thread for tips

 

cheers

Chris

[taffer 948]

the only concern I now have is say kontemax does a nice long description and say I see a typo and I correct it, it will say last edited by me and kontemax wont get the credit as it were?

if this is correct I suppose either email the person who did the original description or make reference to kontemax? Ie [original text by kontemax]

 

[netsmithUK 488]

I'd just drop them an email, probably easiest.

[kontemax 1725]

On 8/5/2016 at 10:29 AM, beefmuffin said:

Yep it's "slipper' clutch.

I just want to say thanks to Max for being the first one to give it a go writing a juicy original description for those that are missing!  You guys are a bit of a tough crowd, LOL.  

That being said @kontemax maybe try another version of your piece taking into account all the input so far and let's see what people think?  Or I could try an edit of it... but it may be a few days till I could get to it.  Up to you!

Just remember to put it into the other thread to keep that list of missing descriptions together...

Will do it asap, I'm busy again with my webmovie these days.

 

Max