New buggy look

[kontemax]

Hi Folk,

do you like new buggies like Gravel Hound and his brother?

I don't like them, don't like the bodies and don't like the chassis.

I think the chassis is an ugly copy of the ugly Asso chassis.

The bodies are minimal, the decal graphic is old and "naif", no sponsors and the worse from the 80ies, the flames.

I think Tamiya isn't spending a lot with licences (for the sponsor reproductions) and designers, don't you think?

I preffer old buggies...

Cheers

Max

[Wireless]

Hi Max. An interesting opinion. I'm the opposite and really like the look of the Gravel Hound. It goes very well for the price and is extremely durable. I do agree though that the appeal of the modern buggies is completely different to the older ones.

I think it's Tamiya trying to get a slice of the action in these days of the 'Playstation Generation'.

Given the choice, I do prefer the older buggies, but the new ones are nice too.

[rcracerpete]

I prefer the look of the vintage buggys,not the current "high-tech" space aged shape things like the gravel hound that we see today.

Its kind of going back to the thundershot/thunderdragon series where they tried to make them "futuristic" i remember reading in a guidebook something like "with its futuristic shape it glides easily through the air"

Probably supposed to try and make the gravel hound etc look like they look futuristic so maybe people think they are ahead of the competition ebcause they look advanced.[?]

Cheers,

Pete.

[bmwe46330]

hi, I kind of like the gravel hound because it has the feel of the top force. the new release kyosho does look ugly though, I still think top force looks the best through all these years!

[Bigwheels_inc]

i like the gravel hound and wouldnt mind one the shape is like a more modern hornet etc but its to low to the ground i like alot of the oldder hard bodied cars with loads of detail but think alot of the newer tamiya buggys are just made to echo the past look at the window shapes etc and there very similar to the older buggys just more swept back etc

[TWINSET]

I'm not too keen on the new buggies, although the Rising Storm has to be the best looker.

I think many manufacturers are going for 'speedy' as opposed to realistic now, just look at the new Associated and Losi buggies - there's no way a driver would fit in that []

Also, for some reason, 'closer to the ground' seems to be a big selling point now too, not a lot of good off-road then?

I think Tamiya are still spending good money on body licences, but from the decal side of things, I can't see the point when so many companies offer 'sponsor' decal sheets already, and the Sand Scorcher repro sheet has a fair few on too []

Courtesy of Tower;

And my favourite

[rcracerpete]

quote:Originally posted by TWINSET

I think many manufacturers are going for 'speedy' as opposed to realistic now, just look at the new Associated and Losi buggies - there's no way a driver would fit in that []

Also, for some reason, 'closer to the ground' seems to be a big selling point now too, not a lot of good off-road then?

---

id="quote">id="quote">

I think thats because they want good handling,and low centre of gravity,so they need to compromise between good handling and clearance.

Often off-road tracks are also sort of dirt and other terrains and jumps with no rocks or anything like that that they need to climb over...so high ground clearance is not needed.

[Hibernaculum]

G'day,

I agree 100% Max.

Cars like the Gravel Hound are a dime a dozen, and only further dilute Tamiya's buggy design toward the generic, boring performance-buggy look.

It amazes (and saddens) me to think that the once great and innovative Tamiya now produces cars that look like just like all the other brands - who have churned out junk (from a classic, realistic buggy design perspective) for over 15 years now. These modern body designs have not changed in those 15 years, which proves that it's all a dead end for the hobby.

I don't buy the idea that RC car manufacturers have to sacrifice realism to create cars that look 'exciting' to the RC-buying demographic of today. After all, we (the peeps on this club) exist too.

Unfortunately, I think the RC buggy market is so tiny nowadays, that most of Tamiya's sales probably come from people who take their cars racing. Therefore, Tamiya are forced to churn out characterless junk that goes fast, just like everyone else.

The only new buggy in the Tamiya stable that looks like it could even carry a person, is the Mad Fighter.

Aside of that, I do have some admiration for the fact that they tried to make the Desert Gator take on a slightly Aligator look about it. Good idea, good name. But it's a pitiful effort compared with the hey days of the 80s.

Once upon a time there was something unique about each buggy design. Now, by basing everything on a numbered chassis platform, there's a culture of 'genericism' anyway.

Tamiya spend more time talking about the chassis of a particular car, than the car itself. It's as if the chassis is what the car really is.

We all know the chassis is important. But the way things are going, Tamiya might as well just release nothing but chassis's, and make every body shell fit to every chassis. Then there will be no cars at all - only chassis and shells, which you can mix and match. Ooh, how convenient for the buyer to have a 'choice' of both shell and chassis, and design their own combination! Is this the way of the future?

To me, this idea completely misses the point of what made Tamiya great in the first place - unique, interesting, and realistic RC model kits.

I know a lot of old Tamiyas shared their chassis with other cars. But the cars themselves still had some unique design elements, and retained some autonomy over other kits that shared the same components.

After all, what would people rather walk into a store and buy?

A 'Tamiya Frog kit'?

Or something called, say, a TXF010 Chassis kit, plus something called a 'frog' body shell to sit on top? If someone asks you what your car is called, what in badword will you say?

Watering everything down, in design, definition, decals, name - everything - is what killed RC in the early 90s.

It took away the charm, and diluted the branding by making cars harder to name and recognise - which is an extraordinary collective screw up. It's the reason why kids in playgrounds at school don't talk lovingly about getting something like "a Hornet" for Christmas. These days, they'd have to say they're getting a "TXF13#$-2 chassis" or some such nonsense instead.

Bring on the re-releases, so we can at least bask in the good old times for another little while, before 'RC buggy modelling' continues it's relentless march toward meaninglessness....

cheers,

H.

[kontemax]

Yes,

Today off road tracks are more similar to touring tracks. They are flats and you need extremelly high speed, something similar to the off road 1:1 competitions in Italy. Before they were called "autocross" (car-cross), now they are called "velocità su terra" (speed on dirt) and the tracks are flat without jumps. So the cars need low clearance and the dampers are stiffers.

Then new tamiya off road buggy haven't the driver, no lights and so on.

One of the ultimate fantastic buggy remains the Egress but if you see it by side you can see the bodyroof is higher then Top Force or Dyna Storm.

Don't know what I can say... I preffer old cars.

Max

[Live Steam Mad]

quote:Originally posted by Hibernaculum

...

---

id="quote">id="quote">

[^][^][^][][8D] Well said, that was a great post, yeah that's exactly what I have been thinking about all along mate, it's the MAGIC of Tamiya and the reason that we here tend to have a strong bias towards the Vintage cars.

For example I look at yet another TL-01 chassis touring car with yet another generic looking bodyshell and almost cry at what my hobby has become.

In comparison when I look at my Ford Ranger XLT my eyes widen, my pupils dilate and I get a warm fuzzy feeling and a big grin on my face looking at all those metal parts on the chassis and the incredibly realistic Styrene bodyshell.

Still Tamiya can still melt my heart with the modern releases like the incredible 1/14th Euro Tractor Trucks and the 1/16th Leopard 2 A6 state of the art R/C model tank. Jeez it's INCREDIBLE.

Cheers,

Alistair G.

[terry.sc]

quote:Originally posted by Hibernaculum

Tamiya spend more time talking about the chassis of a particular car, than the car itself. It's as if the chassis is what the car really is.

We all know the chassis is important. But the way things are going, Tamiya might as well just release nothing but chassis's, and make every body shell fit to every chassis. Then there will be no cars at all - only chassis and shells, which you can mix and match. Ooh, how convenient for the buyer to have a 'choice' of both shell and chassis, and design their own combination! Is this the way of the future?

...

After all, what would people rather walk into a store and buy?

A 'Tamiya Frog kit'?

Or something called, say, a TXF010 Chassis kit, plus something called a 'frog' body shell to sit on top? If someone asks you what your car is called, what in badword will you say?

---

id="quote">id="quote">

This already exists and has been around ever since Yokomo released the first competition touring car, the YR4, about 10 years ago. 1/12th scale and 1/8th scale on road has also been this way since the beginning. Tamiya is the only manufacturer that sells cars by the bodyshell rather than the chassis under it. If anything selling by the body is more confusing to the uninformed. If someone said they had a Ferrari 430 it could be a TT-01 or a TA-05, confusing if you break a wishbone and ask for parts for a 430 at your LHS.

In touring cars everyone buys the best performing chassis they want, such as the TRF415. If the car you bought is a Focus or Impreza is irrelevant, if you break something and A lot of performance tourers now come without a body, wheels or tyres. This is you can buy whichever tyres and jellymould body that work best on your local track without wasting money on a body provided with the car.

If anyone asks me what touring car I run I say an RcLab (the actual car), after all it runs a Stratus, Stratus Aero2 or Mazda 6 body depending on the track.

As far as buggies go the cars have developed over the years to give the best performance possible. Design has remained static for many years as once the manufacturers worked out the best design they have stuck with it. They use a moulded chassis as that has been found to be the best design to get the best performance from the car. Years ago every high spec buggy had a carbon fibre chassis, but the moulded chassis has several advantages so everyone moved to moulded tubs.

Race tracks are usually smoother than they used to be, this is down to track owners wanting the race to be between the drivers rather than being lucky to get around without hitting a bad bump in the surface. Smoother tracks are also easier to maintain. If the track is smoother you will get around faster if the centre of gravity of the car is lower, this is why bodies are low and aerodynamic.

Regarding decals, in the 80s sponsors were happy to have their name plastered all over model cars, after all it was free advertising. These days though they see it as a way of making more money by licensing their logos, if Tamiya makes a sticker sheet with lots of logos on it every single company would want paying of the use of their name. For example if Tamiya wanted to release the Frog with the same sticker sheet they would have to negotiate a licence with every single sponsor on the sheet. If the manufacturer refused to licence their logo then they cannot be used.

BTW flames are very fashionable in the R/C car world at the moment.(and my tourers have a flame design on them!)

[kontemax]

Licences for logos isn't a problem. Tamiya could invent some unexisting logos and put them on the cars (let's make work these graphic advertisers!!!). Race logos increase the appeal of the car in my opinion.

Today there are a couple of chassis and a lot of bodies.

Vintage buggies was uniques, a car means a body and a chassis.

Chassis design become part of the car and give it personality.

When I was young I always remain stunned by the Falcon rear end, with his long yellow shock absorbers and yellow rear cage. Every car was a mistery to discover. I collected a lot of buggies or trucks (55) to discover their chassis too. So I always seen the Fox in pictures, when I owned it immediatly I disassembled it to understand how it is inside. Now if I buy A Focus or an Impreza there's no more mystery to discover. Put the bodies on the chassis or on a piece of wood with 4 wheels is the same thing, no more fashination. And then people, **** to performances. I discovered again the glad to drive my Boomerang, to ear his rumors, to see its driving style. Yes, its driving style cause I cannot set up it, just switch on the button and go. It rules, I must adapt my driving style to it. No problems with set ups, oil damper, stiffen or softer springs, toe in, toe out, camber, caster, ackerman... just switch on the button and drive! A liberation!!!

Max

[Hibernaculum]

G'day,

quote:Originally posted by terry.sc

This already exists and has been around ever since Yokomo released the first competition touring car, the YR4, about 10 years ago. 1/12th scale and 1/8th scale on road has also been this way since the beginning. Tamiya is the only manufacturer that sells cars by the bodyshell rather than the chassis under it. If anything selling by the body is more confusing to the uninformed. If someone said they had a Ferrari 430 it could be a TT-01 or a TA-05, confusing if you break a wishbone and ask for parts for a 430 at your LHS.

---

id="quote">id="quote">

Thanks for the insight terry.

But that's basically my point too, I suppose.

Traditionally, RC cars were always identified by what they were - i.e. their kit name.

In a world where the hobby of RC cars was founded and popularised on the back of recognisable kit names and recognisable cars, the trend toward identifying everything by chassis numbers has done the hobby few favours at a grass roots level.

I've no doubt that the chassis system works wonders for RC Touring car racers.

But I'd suggest that it's less essential or exciting for the 10 year old boy in his backyard, to whom imagination and adventure plays a large part in the enjoyment of his new toy.

If it's confusing to ask for Ferrari 430 parts nowadays, then that's a result of the industry shifting toward chassis based identification to suit the needs of the racing fraternity. It's a bit of reverse-logic to say that selling parts based the body shell is now more confusing. I do understand what you mean terry, but alternatively, if all kits today were still named and identified like they were in 1985, there'd be little confusion in the first place. A Frog is a Frog is a Frog.

Alternatively, if there were no complete kits at all in the world - just chassis and various body shells - perhaps there would be less confusion then also.

But I suppose the point I am making is that this system mainly facilitates the racing community. It ain't where the hobby was born, and it ain't ever going to attract new kids to the hobby in quite the way the old recognisably-branded Tamiyas did. I'd also argue that neither will it engender quite the level of nostalgia that we see on tamiyaclub, in years to come. How many people will be inspired to become lifelong fans of Tamiya thanks to the TT-01 kit, versus how many thanks to the Sand Scorcher kit?

quote:

In touring cars everyone buys the best performing chassis they want, such as the TRF415. If the car you bought is a Focus or Impreza is irrelevant, if you break something and A lot of performance tourers now come without a body, wheels or tyres. This is you can buy whichever tyres and jellymould body that work best on your local track without wasting money on a body provided with the car.

---

id="quote">id="quote">

I've no doubt that most racers will agree with you on this. (And so would I if I was into racing).

Alas, I'm terribly old school [] To me, the notion of building and racing RC cars without caring much about what the car actually is, defeats the purpose of building them. It seems as though the demands of modern racing mean that people are entirely focussed on speed, and any aesthetic/detail/bodywork is really just a matter of people clinging to the bare minimum amount of 'modelling' required to make their car look something like the shape of, well, a car.

Without this minimum level of modelling, RC racing would probably go to the next extreme - why have a car shaped body shell at all? using bodyshells shaped like completely featureless wedges might give even greater aerodynamism, performance and speed.

That's exactly where the grandfather of the RC car hobby, Tethered Car racing, ended up. So I wonder if RC will end up there too one day...

To me, the joy of RC simply comes from assembling recognisable, interesting, detailed, realistic little working model cars - ones that can also go fast and have a race.

The hobby was once all about this - creating precise miniature scale model cars based on real cars.

Since then, much of the hobby has wandered off into it's own fantasy world where only scale performance matters, and the only echo of it's true origins (in many instances) comes from the fact that enthusiasts still refer to their charges as 'cars'. And they still have 4 wheels. []

cheers,

H.

[DJTheo]

Very nice posts above, I also miss the good old unique designs and think they never come back as:

a) Cost reduction is very important nowadays in all industries and to achieve it you need many similar parts or platforms like in 1:1 cars, where an Audi is the same with Skoda.

Current youth grows up much faster then we did (something very dangerous according to many educationists) are more realists and less "dreamers" and thus facts like performance appeal more to them

c) Wild action is more important to the youth due to the influence of the media (movies, cartoons)

d) Due to the fast speed of life people like more ready to runs and thus the magic of unique chassis is unimportant as many never look at the chassis, just buy it ready and trash it when its broken.

Its a shame but those golden RC car 80s are gone and will never come back... []

Cheers

[3doorpete]

I quite like them for looks alone, but they have no personality and nothing that shouts 'Tamiya'. I have just bought a Desert Gator, but that is because I've never owned a 2wd buggy and it looks pretty sleek with most hop ups already on it....

[scoobs]

And many people that get to their 30's look back on stuff from their childhood as 'better', which is a sentimental view.

Kids who are 14 today will probably look back at Savage's et all and see them as the 'golden age of R/C'.

I like some of the old vintage stuff, I like some of the more modern stuff, but for different reasons. In fact I'm amazed that Tamiya still sell things like Hornets etc - not many other companies sell 20 year old products, especially toys... so if you don't like the modern stuff, you can also go retro.

Best of both worlds!

[kontemax]

quote:Its a shame but those golden RC car 80s are gone and will never come back...

id="quote">id="quote">

NEVER SAY NEVER!!!

Max

[terry.sc]

Actually thinking about it the old cars were sold by the chassis like they are now, it's just they gave them proper names back then.

The Sand Scorcher and Rough Rider were actually Special Racing Buggies, supplied with different bodies. They were built for racers, hence the SRB name. Racers bought the cars, junked the bodies and fitted a light lexan shell like Kamtecs repro ones. People who didn't race bought them because of the body not being concerned about what was under it, such as all of Tamiyas cheaper touring cars these days.

In the mid 80s Tamiyas range of 'unique' buggies was actually limited to the Grashopper/Hornet chassis and the Frog/Brat/Lancia chassis.

Also people bought the Frog for 2 reasons.

1. People bought for the chassis, the body was irrelevant and replaced with something that lasted longer. It was the high performance chassis in Tamiyas range with the oil dampers, diff and 540 motor.

2. People bought it for the looks. These didn't care what the chassis was and would have been happy with a Brat chassis with the Frog body on it.

A Frog was a Frog, but also a Brat and Lancia with little changes. The main difference was which body you had. Surely the Frog chassis was the ultimate platform engineering with the Frog/Brat/Lancia chassis also being the Blackfoot, Monster Beetle, Mudblaster, Buch Devil, Super Blackfoot and King Blackfoot.

And the cars will always have a vague resemblance to full size cars as buggy racing rules state they must have somewhere for a driver to sit.

[Hibernaculum]

quote:Originally posted by terry.sc

In the mid 80s Tamiyas range of 'unique' buggies was actually limited to the Grashopper/Hornet chassis and the Frog/Brat/Lancia chassis.

---

id="quote">id="quote">

Actually, Tamiya also released the Fox, Wild One, Boomerang, Hotshot, Falcon, Super Champ, Bigwig...all with unique chassis/suspension, and all available between 1983 and 1987.

quote:

Also people bought the Frog for 2 reasons.

1. People bought for the chassis, the body was irrelevant and replaced with something that lasted longer. It was the high performance chassis in Tamiyas range with the oil dampers, diff and 540 motor.

2. People bought it for the looks. These didn't care what the chassis was and would have been happy with a Brat chassis with the Frog body on it.

A Frog was a Frog, but also a Brat and Lancia with little changes. The main difference was which body you had.

---

id="quote">id="quote">

Yes, but you're generalising a bit here. First, who's to say people didn't care if they had a Frog body on a Brat chassis? Some cared, some didn't care. I cared. Anyone who cared about building their kit to spec, cared. A lot of people are more fixated on hop-ups, but a lot of people also like things to be 'original', especially nowadays.

Second, the Frog had a 540 motor, oil shocks, and different wheels and tyres to the Brat. These are important differences, so a Frog body simply plonked on a Brat chassis built from a Brat kit, does not make a Frog.

There were enough differences between the kits for the cars to retain some autonomy, and for each different kit to deserve a proper name. And most importantly, there were enough differences for each kit to gather it's own little fanbase in the years to come.

In contrast, being a fan of modern, pure RC chassis kits with numbers, is something I suspect may never result in a website called www.chassisclub.com. But never say never I suppose.

quote:

Surely the Frog chassis was the ultimate platform engineering with the Frog/Brat/Lancia chassis also being the Blackfoot, Monster Beetle, Mudblaster, Buch Devil, Super Blackfoot and King Blackfoot.

---

id="quote">id="quote">

Totally agree with you here though. Those two space-frame halves are now legendary for their versatility and re-use.

quote:

And the cars will always have a vague resemblance to full size cars as buggy racing rules state they must have somewhere for a driver to sit.

---

id="quote">id="quote">

I didn't know that, and it's good to hear.

Although one wonders what the point is when no plastic driver figure needs to be in the car. The actual volume of the body shell isn't measured in millilitres I'm sure. So it seems like a grey area - all it must amount to are the presence of 'windows' in the lexan. But still, I guess it's something.

cheers,

H.

[DJTheo]

Completly agree with Hibernaculum, only would like to point out that the 4wds you mention are actually very similar chassis if not the same (Boomerang with Super Sabre and HS2 just different dampers and colours), also BigWig has same gearboxes and Super Champ is more a hopped up SRB like today a TAxx pro vs. TAxx stock, but the rest are pretty much unique and that is definetely missing today, where chassis without personality are combined with all fitting bodies.

Cheers

[kingeddie]

i prefer real models based on real cars be it monster trucks, done buggys, baja bugs or sand rails, i dont do sci-fi buggys, whats the point? prefer model motorsport[8D]