Jump to content
Hibernaculum

Drivers/Interiors - in decline for years

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Hibernaculum said:

Another question related to everything we’ve talked about here, is this:

How many of us have ever bought an RC car purely to build from a kit, or restore, and keep as a shelf queen? ie. Do enough people do this, for shelf-queen behaviour to be considered its own mini-market segment? Has any RC manufacturer ever really thought about that?

This is strongly related to my biggest dilemma with and my very first basic misunderstanding of RC-cars. When I got my first RC-car (58001) within some months after the release, the Tamiya RC Guide Book didn't yet exist, so I'm not quite sure what initiated my misunderstanding, but possibly it was that I got into static plastic model kits about four years earlier at the age of six (my first being a Revell 1/32 Opel GT if not counting buildings for my model railroad, which my father built anyway and not I).

The mentioned misunderstanding was that when I got my RC-car, it would be suitable both for running AND displaying. Of course, the static model nature of the 58001's body, surely fueled this misunderstanding further. Quickly enough, I discovered that running it excluded the possibility of displaying it like I did with my static kits. Regardless of how much time I spent keeping it clean and repairing minor damage, the scratches and other wear or contamination that was hard or impossible to remove, made it impossible for me to display the model, even if it was only in my own room and the only ones that would see it apart from myself, was my parents, sister, some more remote family members and friends. From that moment on, I never considered a runner suitable for display anymore. And as I couldn't afford more RC-models (at the age of 11-12 at the time), it took many years before I got my first shelf queen. If memory serves me correctly, the Road Wizard was the very first RC-model I acquired with the sole intention of building it as a static RC-model.

I mentioned the Tamiya RC Guide Book in my first sentence, and the reason is that the very first guide book (if not counting the version that was only published in Japanese) and in many consecutive versions, it's stated that Tamiya RC-models are excellent mantle pieces when not running them. Having made my own experiences before that, I disagreed the very first time I read it.

So, where am I today? Well, my RC-models are either runners or shelf queens. There is nothing in between and I have never grasped the term "light runner", which to me indicates the understanding that running a model "lightly" would ensure that it stays as new built, or at least almost. This doesn't exist to me. As soon as a model has been run, it's a runner and can never be returned to shelf queen status or "new built" without replacing virtually all the parts that can potentially show signs of use, inside and out. Sure, there is a narrow grey zone. If running the model indoors on a carpet for a very short time (rather seconds than minutes) and literally no part of the model except the tires touches anything, I think it can be considered almost "new built". But then again, the gears will have been in contact, the pinion has most likely slightly discoloured the spur gear, lubrication will have flung around, dogbones and drive cups will in most cases have slight marks from contact and so on. So, in my opinion, the grey zone isn't just narrow, it's so narrow that it's virtually non-existent. The same goes for fully restored models that have been run some time in the past. Without replacing almost all parts, it can never be returned to true shelf queen status. A model is truly new built only once. After that moment, it can only stay a shelf queen for an extended period of time if a number of measures are taken to ensure that the new built condition deteriorates as little and slowly as humanly possible.

As a matter of fact, my TTG Frog is an example. It has been run for a few seconds indoors on carpet and varnished wooden floor. it didn't hit anything and after removing the minimal dust that collected, finding signs of having been run takes somebody that knows that driveshafts have been in contact with the drive cups and that the gearbox internals have rotated.  The model serves as a shelf queen together with my other TTG buggies, but ever since that short run, I've felt like replacing it with a true shelf queen, like the other TTG buggies.

Of course this attitude is insane in the eyes of most people who don't collect RC shelf queens, but I'm confident that many of you can relate. 

Similar to my view of the TTG Frog; I have built some of the Tamiya sailing yachts for customers, but never owned one myself as I don't care enough about them. A close friend of mine who's into 1/1 scale sailing and RC, has owned several of the Kyosho Seawind and Tamiya Yamaha Around the World yachts. One would think that these models, if  never hitting anything and if cared for extremely well, can be used (in sweet water only) and displayed and are more suitable for this than any other type of RC-models. My friend once pointed out that the Kyosho Seawind has a choice of materials and a design that makes it stay quite close to "as new" even if it's run, provided it's taken extremely care of, whereas the Tamiya Yamaha quckly deteriorates even with the same care. Probably because Kyosho had a lot of experience with RC-boats at the time of designing the Seawind, whereas Tamiya only had good intentions, but no experience. At least not with series production and use of RC-boats in the hands of customers. So, based on the experience of my friend, I think that not even an RC sailing yacht can serve both as a......sailor (?  :wacko:) and a shelf queen.

Regarding your question if the manufacturers are exploiting or should exploit for "displayable RC-models", I don't know. If so, it would in my understanding of displayable RC-models mean kits that are meant to be built but never run, but which are designed in such a way that they could be run if wanted, and by doing so necessarily annihilating them as displayable models / shelf queens. To me, that is an oxymoron; an RC-model meant solely for display, which can be run and thereby never can serve as a true displayable model again! :P  If so, it could just as well be a true static model and by not having the possibility of being equipped with RC-gear, battery and electric motor (or whatever means of propulsion), the true static model will always be the better displayable (scale) model to me. Don't get me wrong, I have and cherish even chassises (like the TRF touring cars) as shelf queens, so being allowed the status of shelf queen, doesn't necessarily mean that the display piece has to be a realistic or detailed model. And I deliberately used the term "display piece" rather than "display model", meaning that the "piece" doesn't even have to be a model. Like for instance the wing cars discussed earlier. If I had been into "professional" slotracing, I believe I would have wanted to build one "piece" with the intention of never running it and keeping it as a display piece / shelf queen, even if I don't think these wing cars can be considered models, and certainly not scale models.

And after writing to much already, I'd better close with the conclusive words that are valid to me; 

Do I like and appreciate:

Shelf queens: Yes, absolutely.

Runners; Likewise.

Static models: Likewise.

Something in between: Absolutely NOT!!

Is there a market for RC-models that are intended to serve as shelf queens / displayable models only, but which could be run, if so desired: Probably, despite being an oxymoron to me personally. Of course I wouldn't mind if kits like this were offered and enjoyed by others. I might even buy them myself (!), but only if I had the intention of running them (and thereby "destroying" them in the perspective of the manufacturer's intentions) or as a static model if no true and better static model of the subject existed and I was fond of the 1/1 vehicle.

Disclaimer: Needless to say really, all statements in this post reflect only how I prefer to "live" and define my hobby and the rules I apply for only myself. I want all to enjoy the hobby the way they like, combining running and displaying the same model, seeing meticulously restored models as suitable shelf queens or whatever they want that may not coincide with my preferences. :) 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've really enjoyed reading this thread so far, great to see people's thoughts and perspectives. I'm another who believes a car should at least have a driver and preferably an interior, even if the interior is sold as an optional extra. As mentioned earlier in the thread, the interiors that are currently available are quite nice but a little more variety would be appreciated. The current range of driver figures could also benefit from an overhaul as most of them are showing their age - less-than-sharp detail in some cases, imperfect joins in many. Comparing a 1/10 driver figure to, for example, a 1/35 military figure it's hard not to feel that RC figures are rather neglected! Given Tamiya's prowess as a scale model manufacturer, it's easy to imagine what they could achieve with even a relatively small range of new figures, interiors and detail parts.

I was also intrigued by the mention of slotcar racing. Slotcars were my main hobby from around 1998-2008. Not the wing cars shown in the video earlier, but the scale cars. During the late 90s and early 2000s, scale slot racing expanded massively. As mentioned earlier, Fly were a huge part of that. I think it's fair to say they took the market by storm. Sure, their cars were pretty fast, aided by stronger magnets than those used by Scalextric, Carrera or Ninco at the time.

But their real appeal was simple - their cars were beautiful! They looked almost as good as die-cast models; the cars were realistic and nicely detailed, great paintwork and liveries, and even the interiors had at least some level of detail. They made the other manufacturers' cars look very poor indeed. It didn't stop there, as they introduced new models the level of detail increased and yet the cars remained very durable. Fly also introduced new chassis layouts so their cars would mimic 1:1 engine placement - front-mounted motor driving rear axle via prop-shaft, mid-engine (motor just ahead of rear axle) and even rear-engine. Their rear-engine Porsche 911 range was one of my favourites.

Of course, Fly arriving on the scene and grabbing a huge slice of the market forced the other manufacturers to respond. Soon all of them were offering high quality, beautifully detailed models. Scale appearance became a major selling point, something the manufacturers competed over, because it was obvious that the majority of buyers wanted their cars to look as realistic as possible. Yes, people continued to build and race wing cars, that's a fine art all of its own and it remained largely unchanged. Home racers and club racers were the customer base for Scalextric, Carrera, Ninco and Fly and those customers wanted scale, detail and realism rather than outright performance.

Almost sounds like some of the views expressed in this thread... 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, personally, don't really get the 'RC shelf queen' mentality having only one model I'm loath to run: a DF-03MS. Bought NiB, built it (cos that's what they're made for) and ran two packs through it on our local BMX track, then stripped and rebuilt it replacing all damaged parts... and there were lots! It's now like new and just gathering dust until I sell it on to someone who will cherish it.

All my other cars get used and abused, cleaned, then go back on top of the bookcases where no one gets close enough to see the scars! After all, ultimately they are toys made to be played with: not fine art to be worshipped from a distance. I try to make them look reasonably realistic with drivers, real schemes etc. but wouldn't go as far as @Truck Norris detail wise as they just gotta be run!

I'm not knocking you guys who collect, it's just we have a different mindset. (Anyway, if it wasn't for the collectors where would all the NiB vintage kits come from?)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of my cars are sacred either, except maybe my Bruiser clone except I'm yet to properly run that. Usually i'm careful when driving a fresh shell, then after the first scar full send is engaged. None of my cars are rare or EOL though so if I really mess something up I can still buy a new one.

Some shells I don't think I could bring myself to drive. That Quattro A2 shell is beautiful and deserves an interior. For that reason I don't buy shells like that because they'd just sit on the shelf and gather dust :) The nicest shell I own is an R34 Skyline Z-tune and even that has made friends with a few fences and been upside down at 90km/h :rolleyes: Same thing for wheels. I try not to buy nice wheels because they will just end up rashed up. If they are plastic and round it's good to go - the furthest I'll go is buying touring car wheels that are spoked and look like popular 1:1 wheels that exist (e.g. BBS mesh style). 99% of the time they are just plain white or black plastic.

I think part of the reason for not including interiors is that many of the customers wouldn't care much for an interior and including one drives up the cost of producing the kit, which makes Tamiya less competitive with other manufacturers. Even if the interior is sold as an optional vacuum formed part, designing and manufacturing the molds is considerable outlay for what is the minority of customers. Competition in the RC market is more fierce now than it ever has been so every dollar counts for maintaining a successful rc business. 

Another reason is that the shells are now designed to fit many different chassis, and the interior may interfere with some chassis that don't leave a lot of clear space in the cockpit area

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I hate it whe I get to an interesting thread late, and it has already drifted off the original topic...

As far as driver figures go, I'll confess that I've never been much of a fan. I think it comes from my static modeling background; it just looks weird to have a driver in a car that's sitting on a shelf. So since I never put them in my static models, I rarely bothered to put them in my RC models either, unless it was something like a Wild Willy or FAV with a full interior and figure. The "floating torso with a screw through the head" figures in most Tamiya models just seemed creepy to me, so they rarely made it off the parts tree.

But because I enjoy building and detailing static models so much, I'm really loving the scale trail/crawler trucks, which frequently have an interior, even on some of the Lexan bodies. (Have you seen the new Pro-Line Dodge Ramcharger body? It's pretty impressive for Lexan.) But still, I don't put drivers in. I guess I'd rather have a "ghost car" while I'm driving than a driver figure in a car sitting on a shelf going nowhere. But I do try to put in as much of an interior as possible, even when, as in the case of my Land Rover, you can barely see it.

I think as time goes by, I will drift further away from "serious" performance-oriented RC cars, and more towards scale details. The crossover areas between scale models and RC vehicles have always been of the greatest interst to me; I miss the days when a kit box said "model kit suitable for radio control." I like the idea that if you're not careful with it, you'll break something. And I really enjoy the scale off-road trucks for another reason: they're slow. I like realistic speeds; I'm kind of done with crazy speeds and huge jumps and the replacement parts bills that go along with them. I'd rather just kick up some dust and drive over rocks.

Another very interesting development is the idea of turning static models into RC cars. There's a company called Make It RC who have designed a functional RC chassis for 1/24 and 1/25 scale static models. This opens up a whole new realm of possibilities: indoor dioramas and streetscapes you can drive around, small-scale tracks in your basement, and a nearly limitless selection of vehicles to choose from. It could be like slot cars, only without the slots...

Which brings me to another point: if you notice, all the Make It RC stuff is 3D printed, which means it can be made on-demand rather than mass-produced out of molds. This is, I think, probably the future of scale modeling. Manufacturers like Tamiya aren't going to bother tooling up for a detailed scale model with limited appeal, but if those of us who really want the stuff share designs and ideas and can use the new technology to just make what we want instead of waiting for some distant company to make it for us, the sky is the limit.

But I still probably won't put drivers in my cars. But hey, more power to you if you do. ;)

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's lobbing an odd curveball spanner in the works :) 

I prefer looking at a Tamiya built for the shelf using genuine original factory kit parts &/or option parts.

Not as particularly enthusiastic about adding 3rd party hopups nor homemade/3Dprinted bits to the shelfqueens. 

Not impossible to make or buy an interior or extra detailing parts especially in the drift/crawler circles but those bits end up on runners not shelfers.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I had the Grasshopper for the first time in mid 80's, I daydreamed about scale trucks.  I had Porsche 956 before, and I had flipped it so many times the tails were in tatters. I didn't even think about the interior for that.  But the Grasshopper's plastic body stayed unbroken (except for the headlights).  That made me think about interiors.  

Working steering wheel, doors and gates that open and latch up. Windows crank up and down in opened doors.  1/10th is big enough for all that.  I was SURE that Tamiya would do it.  Tamiya was known for little details.  If you looked at Tamiya catalogs, their RC cars do look nice enough to be static. (obviously, once you run it, you realize how easy it is to use the roof as a sled) 

Anyway, driver would have joints in the wrist, elbow and shoulder.  As the steering wheel would move, the driver would move his hand (and head) too.  We've all seen mods like that.  How about a working speedometer and gear shifter?  They could be mechanically rigged to the throttle servo.  You can't really see it, but I'll KNOW it's there, working.  The shell could be Lexan, but interior could be plastic.  Leaving some space for lexan to flex, of course.  

Alas, 30+ years later, it's gotten far more toy-like.  Konghead doesn't come with a driver.  Considering how stingy Tamiya has been on drivers, Dancing and Dual Riders each have a different driver!  But why?  As @nbTMM said, it must be the cost.  Dancing Rider costs as much as a DT02, but simpler and smaller than DT02.  The manufacturing cost must be low enough to add a different driver each.   

Instead of MAP raising the price of same old kits, I wish Tamiya had offered interiors and drivers. Then, the higher price would have made sense.  

As for self queen vs runner, if it's a gem, then you'll keep it as a self queen.  If it is a toy?  Then it's a runner.  Some people grow bonzai to look at, some people grow onions to eat.  In either case, this hobby takes time, effort and money.  Two other factors create shelf queens: the price, and the population your RC collection.  If Konghead were to cost $2,000, it's far less likely to see dirt.  Also, if you have 10 on your shelf, when you run 1 you are using 10% of your collection.  Which means each one has 90% of chance to stay on the shelf, even though they might not be shelf queens.  Combine that with the cost and gem factor (or the bonzai factor of spending weeks to create a beautiful shell), one or two may end up like static display models.  It's only a hobby, there is no wrong way to enjoy it.   

I like seeing Wild Willy 1 bouncing around.  But the cracked tires might just tear up on hard running.  I feel bad running it, but I feel equally bad not letting it do what it was born to do: Tearing up the dirt! 

You live once. Why give it to some stranger who may not appreciate it? (on my estate sale --No, not any time soon! In some distant future, hopefully)  Last week, my brother-in-law told me one of his friends had a stroke.  He could barely speak, let a lone walk.  He's 42, I think. (he recently lost like 50 pounds, but he should've done it by keto, or by fasting...calorie restriction alone seems to leave all the clogs in the arteries)  Even so, he was lucky.  My neighbor was close to the previous owner of our house.  She told us yesterday, that the previous owner's son (who was just 40) died of a stroke. She'll go to his funeral.  The kid who grew up in this very room, who was younger than me, gone so soon. RIP.   ......    I think I'll run my M38.  If tires tear, I'll get the replicas.  If the regret of seeing it damaged is greater I won't run it, but WW1 is salvageable.  I tend to dwell on "what was."  But what it IS (to me), is something to have fun with. And fun (to me) is on the dirt, not on the shelf.  Sure, I dreamt about owning M38 for years. But I have it now.  What good is owning it if I prevent myself from running it?  And I am no longer a teenager who got tiny allowances (though, I now have the wife's scorn to worry about).  I'll undo the mental boot lock and just run it.   

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really excellent, thoughtful responses. Thank you everyone. I find myself agreeing with at least a part of something that each person has said. 

We do only live once as @Juggular says. Though for me, I have some kits that will never be built, let alone run. This is due to both rarity, and the fact I just love looking at them/having them as kits. “YOLO” for me - actually includes the act of just owning these things, because I enjoy that just as much as I enjoy running or building. I really enjoy the “curating” aspect of the hobby.

Having said that, my goal (before I cark it 😁)... has gone back to being “the holy trilogy”. Who else has tried this?

One NIB. One New-Built. One Runner. Of the same car. In the next week or so I will be taking a new-built vintage Super Shot to the track. Completely 100% vintage original and box art, down to the last washer and C-ring, MSC, AM radio, original tyres, everything. And I just finished painting the driver. 

B746845F-CEF6-40C2-BFF9-1326BB3F892F.thumb.jpeg.3862b30072f9e81748e6c39e6012c883.jpeg

I stayed up till 2am last night watching the Youtube live stream of Goodwood Festival of Speed, and doing some of this Super Shot’s decals. What an awesome event Goodwood is. And it completely inspires me to build or restore R/C runners to absolute original spec and run them as pure “historics” for my own enjoyment. Essentially shelf queens that I take out for dates. I’ll even use genuine Tamiya NiCds, because......... Tamiya! 

In addition though, I want an identical shelf queen that never sees dirt that stays in my display cabinet. Plus a kit. It’s a stupid quest, but someone’s got to do it 😆 So I’m doing it. I was doing it years ago, but then I sold a lot of my runners. Now I’ve gone back to this impossible quest again. Wish my bank balance luck! On the bright side, it keeps me off the streets. 

I don’t personally like the idea that in the future everything could just be custom 3D printed. I like Tamiya, and I like brands, and I like the idea that a brand produces a kit for you - a box full of wonders and challenges created by master modelers, and even with a sense of collectability about it. If everything just becomes 3D printing on demand, brands like Tamiya could be driven out of business altogether. 

Like @WillyChang I dislike the idea of custom parts on shelfers. But also hate anything custom, anywhere at all really 😆 Even runners. Part of my enthusiasm for the hobby is the respect and admiration I have for the manufacturer. So I see each car as a “historic piece” that is only perfect to me, when its original. The same way I would see a 1:1 historic car.

I guess we all have very specific goals and preferences around all this. It’s funny how every single one of us is slightly different in how we approach the hobby and what we like to do. In 20 years of internet I’m yet to meet another person who does things quite the same as I do. And like @Mokei Kagaku its often a case of having very developed and detailed thoughts on what you like to do. 

Getting back to drivers and interiors... as a kid I used to hate them. Now they’re essential and even with my very intermediate skills, often some of the most satisfying work when building a car. To the point where (as this theead indicates), I have little enthusiasm to buy a kit (new or vintage) if it doesn’t have a driver and some decent sense of realism.

One more thing - I have always loved the idea that RC cars are realistic models that have the “potential” to run because they are “working models”. Even when I build for the shelf, I always fit full radio gear, grease and oil. I never dry-build. To me, that is also the way it’s meant to be :lol:

In conclusion: It’s all very freaking expensive. :blink: But I adore this hobby, and when I do have a stroke, I just hope it will be while sitting in my hobby room 👍 Not while sitting in Sydney traffic, or while standing in an elevator full of millenial women fondling their smartphones and making “tap tap tap” noises with their “Instagram-inspired” giant fake nails - a horror I seem to witness daily.

I’m now going to “like” all the comments above, because its been great hearing all the different viewpoints from fellow addicts. 👍

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I have the discipline (or the bank account) to do the "trilogy" thing, though it would be cool. Only for select cars, though. As much as I love the RC10, there's little sense in keeping one NIB; it's just a bunch of bags of parts. But with the theoretical lottery win (unliekly because I never buy lottery tickets), I could see myself with a Grasshopper in triplicate. And a Kyosho Optima or Javelin. Maybe a Blackfoot, too.

But I think I'd do it a bit differently: the shelfer would be box-stock, ideally built from another NIB kit just to get it right. But the runner I'd have to change up a bit. In the case of a Blackfoot or a Grasshopper, I would probably strive to match, as well as I could, the cars I had when I was younger, and they were very much not stock. For the Optima runner, I would likely build it the way I wish I could have back then: throw the entire Option House catalog at it, and paint the body to match whichever LeMans motor I decided to use. (That's another thing: why aren't motors that pretty anymore?)

And I think I have discovered another division of interests, certainly between myself and Hibernaculum, and maybe others as well: I'm much more brand- and kit-agnostic than a lot of people here are, at least when it comes to scale vehicles. If I want a Tamiya Boomerang, then it has to come from Tamiya, obviously. But if what I'm after is a scale model of, say, a Ford Bronco, I may start out with a Tamiya body. But the CC01 chassis is wrong for a Bronco, so the underpinnings would have to come from somewhere else. Probably at least partially handmade, because it has to have radius arms and coil springs on the front axle, and leaf springs on the rear. And the wheels have to be 5-lug, because that's what Ford uses. No hobby kit manufacturer in their right mind is going to go to those lengths to make an accurate chassis for every body they make, but it's those details that I'm after. I don't care who made the parts, as long as they're the right parts to make the model as correct as possible.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's so funny really.  "Realistic R/C cars" is a niche topic within R/C cars, which is a niche within R/C, which is a niche within "hobbies" generally... yet we each have our own niches relating to how we prefer to achieve that realism. A niche of a niche of a niche of a niche. :P

Which is probably why my own discussion forum is relatively quiet so far :lol: I wanted to setup a place to attract other vintage/original RC junkies, where the topics could focus just on kit-original cars, parts, restores, etc.  Thanks for posting over there already @markbt73, you are always welcome - nevermind any differences we have in our overall approaches! And if anyone else feels like delving into discussions about purely vintage-original RC cars - across any brands - you're welcome there also ^_^ ("forum" on my website)

14 hours ago, Mokei Kagaku said:

my TTG Frog is an example. It has been run for a few seconds indoors on carpet and varnished wooden floor. it didn't hit anything and after removing the minimal dust that collected, finding signs of having been run takes somebody that knows that driveshafts have been in contact with the drive cups and that the gearbox internals have rotated.  The model serves as a shelf queen together with my other TTG buggies, but ever since that short run, I've felt like replacing it with a true shelf queen, like the other TTG buggies. Of course this attitude is insane in the eyes of most people...

Amazing :D

I am pretty closely aligned with you in a lot of areas. Thought still a bit different. I have all the Tamtech Gear buggies (like you) and one thing I did was setup the Frog with all the pink option parts and drive it for 5 mins on the carpet. Then I put it back in the box. Ever since I "upgraded" it, I am tempted to buy another TTG Frog so far I can have one that is purely NIB. lol. Normally I never, ever, ever upgrade cars because I prefer box stock. But with the TTG Frog I couldn't resist all those pink anodized "optional" pieces. But they also sort of felt to me like they should have been included in the kit - just like the "optional front bumper" which I also bought and fitted. This to me, should never have been optional, hence I didn't mind adding it to the car.

But still, I have that nagging feeling that I will get another TTG Frog to leave untouched in box. And probably another one after that, to run. :blink:  Because of the "holy trilogy".

I can also relate to the idea that there is nothing "in between" a shelf queen and a runner. But here's how I like to think about it...

Playing with toy cars does involve a bit of imagination. Even if you think you're an adult, and you don't use your imagination when playing with RC cars - you're not, and you still are ;) Because just the act of watching a tiny car run around and feeling some sort of "joy" over that.... means you are in effect, using your child-like senses of "wonder" in relation to a "miniature" object. If you still get something from it, you're still a kid at heart.

Now, lately when it comes to runners I also like to think of my car and maintenance work, as almost like little "factory teams" - right now I think I own four original Hotshots in total. Two kits, one new built and one runner. The runner is maintained 100% original spec, just like the new-built car. The two look identical, except one of them has a bit of dust on it :D When I take it out for a run, if anything breaks or degrades, it's repaired to original spec. Even the rubber bag over the motor is replaced - oh yes. It's like I'm some kind of "works" outfit keeping a team car running, as per the correct livery, sponsors and running spec. And I have been saving original parts for years, just to be able to do this.

But thanks to this, it means I actually like the idea of having one new built car to display + a dusty runner (also totally original) which looks like an identical teammate, and can sit beside it. Meaning - I am ok with "displaying" that runner on a shelf, because it's being maintained to a standard that makes my sense to my insane brain.

Is this helping anyone? :lol:

THIS IS ALL VERY REVEALING. Maybe I/we should all just lie down for a bit? :lol:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy Trinity was the original collector's Grail but after re-res appeared that Triumvirate starts becoming like Douglas Adams' THGTTG trilogy in four parts. ;) 

Or five, when there's an RTR variant.

Or six, when a painted body re-re-re gets churned out.

Or does one consider the re-re a separate model (as it does have a different #); then you'd want a trio of those too :) some models are "same same but (minutely) different" it's nice to display a newbuilt one just to compare with its original. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, WillyChang said:

Or does one consider the re-re a separate model (as it does have a different #); then you'd want a trio of those too :) some models are "same same but (minutely) different" it's nice to display a newbuilt one just to compare with its original. 

To me, a remake* is a separate model due to model number change, box art change, often name change as well. And of course extensive parts differences (the more you look, the more you find). Obviously it's a related model to the original, but still separate. They are even indexed separately in Tamiya's catalogues, Perfect Albums, etc. It's obvious Tamiya did things this way in part so as not to show they were different to the original. (They could have just re-release the originals without any alteration whatsoever if they wanted, but instead they made a bunch of changes - sometimes even to the model name)

When the remakes first appeared, I bought a bunch of them thinking I would collect them in addition to the originals.

But then I bailed out of that idea, and for the reason was..... the cost of 3 remakes = 1 original in some cases (that's a broad generalization and it depends on the car, but you get the idea!). And for me personally, I just realized that owning 1 original was more fun than owning 3 remakes. So it was a financial choice mainly. The remakes left me cold from a vintage perspective... of course they are fun to run! And have lots of other advantages. But for vintage nerd Hibernaculum... they're not vintage at all. They're like "tributes".

But that's just me :P   And these day I often tell other new buyers to buy them, in order to a) Support Tamiya, and b) Because they can bash them guilt-free.

When it comes to other "related" models though - e.g. Tamtech-Gear Frog, and now the Comical series. I'm somewhat more tempted to collect these since they're at least on totally different chassis and offer something fresh as far as tribute models go. But I would still put my spare dollars toward something vintage first, as that's where my heart lies...

Rob.

* The reason I keep (annoyingly) using the word "remake" in place of "re-release", is this:

If a "Back To The Future" cinema re-release was announced, would you expect to see

  • a) The movie from 1985?  (<-- my answer)
  • b) Some new version of the movie? 

If a "Back To The Future" cinema remake was announced, would you expect to see:

  • a) The movie from 1985?
  • b) Some new version of the movie?   (<-- my answer)

Re-release implies the exact same thing is being released again. The Tamiya remakes are not exactly the same as originals, they are updated versions. Therefore, technically they are "remakes". And I'm sticking with that even if it makes me Robinson Crusoe :P 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Hibernaculum said:

If a "Back To The Future" cinema re-release was announced, would you expect to see 

  • a) The movie from 1985?  (<-- my answer)
  • b) Some new version of the movie?

c) the 1985 movie but somehow ruined by distracting changes.

I never saw E.T. when they re-released it in 2002 but they altered it in seemingly pointless ways, like digitally removing the guns from the police.  I can't think of anything they'd need to change in Back To The Future, although I'm sure something would be altered for the worse.  Perhaps the terrorists couldn't be described as Libyans anymore?  I'm not a big Star Wars fan however the first three movies I'd watch again if it weren't for the changes that George Lucas did when he re-released them.  For me those movies were rendered unwatchable after the significant changes.

I think changes in Tamiya re-releases are almost inevitable so it becomes a matter of how much gets changed before it isn't faithful to the original.  I would've bought the recent HKS Skyline re-release but once I added up the changes it just wasn't worth it.  There's not even the original box art.  On the flip side, I am tempted by cars like the Super Astute and Top Force since they seem to be close to the original.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thread - and like @markbt73 I wish I’d read / joined in earlier. 

@Juggular started a debate on drivers and teams last year - with conclusions / views that, for me, still hold true.

And isn’t the remake vs re release question actually driven on what’s inside the box - because the originals themselves were neither re-made or re-released with 100% accuracy ... more simply reimagined for modern use ?

Beyond that, I can’t help admire @Hibernaculum going for 3 of each vintage kit but (a) it’s too rich for my blood and (b) I don’t see as big a distinction in what constitutes a shelf queen to make owning triplets fun.

Yes NIB has to be precisely that - and doesn’t include boxed compilations of NOS piece parts or any modern accessories - but are period correct Tamiya NOS hop ups desirable ?

They are for me because Tamiya wouldn’t have offered them for the sake of it and one day I hope to build my collection.

And even if I carp it before then someone else will still get the chance to enjoy these kits to the full - assuming I confess to my wife how much I’ve actually spent ... or the whole lot may unwittingly go to a charity shop 😳

Each kit I build is then lightly run (normally indoors) once a year with legacy r/c to complete the experience I craved back in the day.

The same holds true of every painstaking boxed restoration I’ve done - where everything is either renewed to mint condition or replaced with NOS.

After a run, each car is then stripped, cleaned, regreased and rebuilt (again replacing any perishing parts with NOS for 100% originality) before returning to shelf queen duty - either on quality stands or off their wheels inside sealed perspex display cases.

Are they any less shelf queens because they’ve done what they were always meant to ?

Not for me :) 

And 2 of each reduces the length of conversation I’ll one day have to have with my wife 😂

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In guitar circles, the term is "reissue," shortened to RI. It's been around for years, because most guitar designs have been around for years. (You think Tamiya beats the "Special Edition" horse to death? Check out Fender and Gibson.) I have one; in fact, it's my favorite guitar: an Epiphone Les Paul Studio, made in China in 2007. It didn't come from Michigan, and it doesn't say "Gibson" on the headstock, but it carries the full weight of the Gibson trademarks, and it looks, feels, and sounds like a "real" Les Paul, because it IS a "real" Les Paul.

I tend to think of the new versions of old RC cars in the same way. I like the term "reissue" a lot, actually. It implies that it came from the same company; "remake" sounds more removed from the source. The only one I have to which I would apply the term "remake" is the RC10 Classic, and that's because the company has changed hands and I don't think the new management is really interested in the history; they just wanted to cash in on the nostalgia wave. But I tend to think of the Subaru Brat I'm building right now more akin to the reissue guitars. It's real; it's just not old.

"Reissue" is also the term used for music, though it's often also "remastered," and maybe that applies here as well. It's the origiinal recording, but they've gone throguh and cleaned it up and fixed a few rough spots (sort of like switching to an ESC and beefing up steering linkages), so maybe it doesn't quite sound the same if you really listen closely, but you know it's the real deal. The packaging is usually the giveaway: my reissue LP of Fleetwood Mac's "Rumours" has the same jacket, the same liner notes, the same label on the record as the original... except for the addition of a URL.

So if you're after the originality, the reissue won't cut it, but if you want the music, it's the best way to get a nice clean recording. I tend to think of the reissue (I'm going to settle on that term, I think) RC kits in the same way: the packaging isn't "right," but the build and drive experience is 99% the same, for half (or less) the cost.

But in the end they're just toys, it's just semantics, and we're all supposed to be having fun...

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for derailing my own topic about driver figures :P  And of course I agree that words are just semantics. And of course, this can easily be dismissed the moment someone says "It doesn't matter - they're just toys!" :D  But on the other hand, semantics do matter in the world. Pluto is no longer a "planet" because according to the definition of what a planet is, it doesn't fit. People didn't like it. And it doesn't change Pluto. But a definition was still needed in order to distinguish one thing from another, and to write and describe and study that subject.

Similarly (in our tiny, and relatively unimportant world of toy cars!)... It's not my opinion that when Tamiya released the Tamiya Frog #58354, the kit was changed from the Tamiya Frog #58041. It's a fact.  So what's the best word for the reappearance of something in changed form?

Well that's what dictionaries are for.  Over to Oxford...

(this does not imply any change at all)

  • "Reissue" https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/reissue   Make a new supply or different form of (a product, especially a book or record) available for sale. ‘the book was reissued with a new epilogue’ A new issue of a product. ‘a welcome reissue of a classic film’

(this implies some change, like an epilogue)

  • "Remake" https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/remake  Make (something) again or differently. A film or piece of music that has been filmed or recorded again. ‘a remake of the classic horror tale, ‘Frankenstein’’

(this implies change)

To bring the topic back on topic though...

What was the last kit Tamiya released that had a styrol resin body, and a driver, but wasn't one of the remakes? My "perfect album" is out of date, and I haven't been keeping up with all the new models. But I'm wondering just how rare it has now become, for Tamiya to include a driver/interior?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So by those definitions, the kits in question are reissues, like the guitars I mentioner earlier. Substantively and functionally the same, but with some slight differences in the details. Parts are interchangeable, and only a trained eye can spot the differences when they're side-by-side.

But the WIld Willy 2, Honda City Turbo, DT02 Holiday Buggy and Sand Rover, and cars like that are remakes.

As for the question of hard bodies and driver figures... um... Blitzer Beetle maybe? But even that was a re-use of the Monster Beetle body. I know my first TA01 (Lancia Delta) came with an interior and driver/co-pilot, but the TA02 I bought a year later (Mercedes C-Class) did not. With the exception of the F1 cars, it seems to me that drivers disappeared in the early-mid 1990s, and only reappeared with the reissue of the Hornet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reissue is better than Rerelease.  ;)  But I still think Remake fits best. The car's parts, artwork, decals, and even model number has changed, and in some cases even the model name has changed. Even the mold-stamps/molds were changed. Similar to being "filmed or recorded again". I'm using Oxford's analogy, not the guitar one (which is yours)...

From earlier:

9 hours ago, markbt73 said:

"Reissue" is also the term used for music, though it's often also "remastered,"

That to me, shows why reissue and remaster aren't quite right either. No way to me, are the Tamiyas "remasters". A remaster is the exact same content - cleaned up. Tamiya changed whole kit parts, electronics, name, body, and even box art. That is far beyond a mere clean-up. The answer surely lies in the words themselves:

  • issue --> reissue
  • release --> rerelease

Both imply only the act of outputting something --> repeated. They don't say anything about the thing itself changing.

Only Re-make implies change. To make, is to create. To remake, is to recreate.

But hey, if I can get at least one person to at least use reissue instead of everybody going "re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re" all the time, I should probably quit and retire :lol:   Rerelease = people saying "ATM Machine".

Blitzer Beetle - there must be something more recent than that, with a hard shell and driver? :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol... you guys are giving me a headache.

"Re-make" makes better sense.  But I think of Kyosho--which is almost completely re-made.  98% of Tamiya parts are, however, from the same mold.  If only to distinguish from Kyosho's "remake," maybe the less precise "Re-issue" might work better (though it really isn't reissue, which is practically same as release!  lol... Maybe Tamiya's should be called "2% redesigned-remake." I'm starting to confuse myself...). 
 
Words are important.  Currently, I'm quite bothered by "accessories" being pronounced as "esse-sorries."  Maybe some people think it's spelled as "assessories?"  I don't know.  But if everybody else pronounces it like that, I'd eventually have to follow it (kicking and screaming).  Such is the nature of language.  

As you say, Pluto is still Pluto!  It makes no difference (to me) if it's called a planet or a rock.  Those who have been living Tamiya long enough, would know what Tamiya's "Re-word" entails.  I suppose it's  are more important to people who are new to Tamiya's re-makes (or re-re, re-issues, or "the newer kit that looks like the old thing").  

Recently, I am learning to enjoy by doing less.  There is a youtuber for scale kits, "Andy's Hobby Headquarters."  He sells T-shirts that has "Mediocre Modeler's Club" written on them.  His point was to make fun of himself, saying, "just build it, enjoy it, who cares if other people think I'm mediocre? I'll only get better if I keep at it."  That hit me like a brick. Not that I ever wanted to be best at it.  But I always aimed for some notion of perfection, which turned into a bit of a burden.  

I do Respect perfectionists. I take the shields off of ball bearings so I could have the least rolling resistance achievable. It's just that now, I'll do it when it's fun. It's not a duty anymore.  At work, I used to think, "when I go home, I'll put new pinion on XX."  When I didn't do it, I went to bed feeling bad.  Who does that?  No more of that!  I've seen bigger bore piston forced into skinny shocks (the shock didn't work, obviously). Short of committing such sin, I decided that everything else is cool.  (I will still cringe if I were to see a never-run Willy's M38 mounting 3D printed hinges for the windshield!  So close to being worthy of worship!)  But for my runner M38, I decided to let it go.  If Willy's head breaks off, I might install a barbie head! (no, I'm kidding. I really won't be able to sleep if I did that, lol... and I won't be loitering around the Barbie aisle like some creep)  

It all depends on what "fun" is for each person.  Some like everything aluminum, some like it exactly OEM--vintage spec.  I'm not saying anything I do is right or wrong.  Just that the semantics reminded me of relatively recent change in myself.  RC is like writings about the Moon.  Some people may focus on the sound, counting iambic pentameters and rhymes.  Some may write stories about summer nights with their dads and a telescope.  There is no wrong answer.  I decided (for myself) that I'll have more fun giving myself less rules to follow.  But I do like the idea of trifecta of NIB, shelf queen and a runner.  I might steal that idea.  

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^_^ Great way to sum it up @Juggular  And despite everything I carry on about... reality for me is I have collected for years, and for a long time I rarely actually ran anything. But right now, I'm getting the most enjoyment from prepping (perfectionist) runner builds... to actually run. As part of that crazy trifecta/trilogy goal. So in my own way, this is also a sort of "cutting loose" time for me, and I'm loving it.

I already posted this in another thread, but because this thread probably needs some pics to break up all our short novels... I just finished this one last night. MSC, Sanwa Saber AM radio.... Mint, new built, 100% original/vintage. I went with number "3" based on the 1987 catalogue, and the next one will be number "2" as featured in the guide book.... But the point is, this car is not headed for the cabinet. It's headed for the track with it's virgin Technipower. And it will race for fun against a mate's no-name 2018 4WD chinese brushless shambles (which is very fast, but he can't control it to save himself, and he regularly snaps bits off it).

Ah...how I love this kit...-_-

image.png.fe806294692032f53abd2a6294bccfcb.png

image.png.6cb8ecdae9f77509f3be53e0e8d6c4eb.png

image.png.1e99b239f9a8f8a4b8ab20d60b903331.png

image.png.1e552c7cc9e521d10842da2f29af5e4a.png

Let's see how a kit-fresh 1986 Super Shot performs.... as I stop curating and arguing semantics with you guys for at least an hour or so, and put my money where my mouth is :D  Several others are also in the pipeline after this one, as I have boxes of projects here that have been saved for far, far too many rainy days... some I had even forgotten about :wacko:. I think I've got the vintage spares to back them up, so it should be quite interesting to really put the "trifecta" aka "trilogy" system, to use where I can.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid if I had a Super Shot in pristine condition, I might not let it see dirt.  And that's not what I want to do.  Perhaps that's why I prefer buying used runners.  I can run them guilt-free.  

But your trifecta is a clever loophole to have it both ways.  "Yes, I have shelf queens, but I also run them (stunt doubles)!"  

If I may be so bold to make one suggestion to add to your perfection...  

M33fNrS.jpg

Filing the ends of the clips, maybe?    

Otherwise, "SUPER SHOT" could look like "SUPLR SHO1" after few scratches on the sticker.  

Ve1RMVc.jpg?1

I decided not to care about stuff.  And I automatically get into the weird perfection thing again!  I tell you, my mind has a mind of its own, and it's an uncontrollable monkey mind! (some meditation person said that, I think)  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2019 at 10:01 AM, Juggular said:

Unimog is a good example of false sense of scale.  

TBbRDKR.jpg

Unimog looks like a regular truck. 

But you pile on people--quite literally-- on Unimog, you see how big it is.  

kRY7s5y.jpg

Your basic point is valid.

But those aren't Unimogs in the bottom picture, they're L-series trucks, significantly bigger still.  A Unimog has more in common with a farm tractor.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StrokerBoy said:

they're L-series trucks

Wow, I did not know that.  I would have stayed ignorant, if you didn't mention it.  I thought it was one of many variations over the years.  I like the 60's design on this L series as well.  Amazing how the tire size make all the difference too! 

9PGB8sI.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Juggular I had never thought to file the ends of the pin - good idea!  Every removal and refit of the body does have me press the body down carefully - below the level of the pin hole - to ensure the pin has plenty of room to gracefully slide into place with scraping the decal it sits over.... :wacko:  However, filing them sounds in keeping with the Tamiya rubber seals I put under the pins on my Bear Hawk (they came in the Bear Hawk kit I think, but were leftover... and seemed appropriate for this).

"What did you do on the weekend, Rob?"

"Well, I..."

Tiny details. But what is R/C, if not a world built from tiny details?

20 hours ago, Juggular said:

But your trifecta is a clever loophole to have it both ways.  "Yes, I have shelf queens, but I also run them (stunt doubles)!"  

Stunt doubles is very accurate :P 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2019 at 6:20 PM, Hibernaculum said:

Random question - what's the best way to do a simple "wash" (to darken creases/crevasses) over the basic Tamiya flat flesh? Do you guys mix one up, or is there an off-the-shelf Tamiya product I can use? :) I've always had trouble when messing about with that, and usually try to mix something.

I'm late to the party, but I recommend Games Workshop paint system for faces.  I've had good results with their base/shades/layers.  I'd consider myself to be fair-middling in the painting arena but this stuff helps me pass as decent.

https://citadelcolour.com/#techniques

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...