rc10 b5
11-13-2013, 02:57 PM
#151
many people would have been happy with a b4 with better plastics. The b4 still wins a lot of races, nothing really wrong with it. Rumor has it Kurt Wenger is/was designed an alum chassis for the b4. That would make a lot of people happy. I always felt like the b4 needed more weight down low for outdoor racing. But in any case, the b4 is still a solid performer for the club racer and sponsored guy. But everyone wants something new. Look at the TLR guys, they cried and cried and cried for a new wheeler. They got an updated xx4, lol. Many people thought the xxx4 just never really was better than the xx4. Watch the b5 come out people hate it and come out with a really updated b4, with better parts and an alum chassis with super big bores, lol. Newer does not always mean better, it just means newer. My only grip these days with AE is the cheap and poor QC coming out of Asia. I still blame TT.
11-13-2013, 03:10 PM
#152
many people would have been happy with a b4 with better plastics. The b4 still wins a lot of races, nothing really wrong with it. Rumor has it Kurt Wenger is/was designed an alum chassis for the b4. That would make a lot of people happy. I always felt like the b4 needed more weight down low for outdoor racing. But in any case, the b4 is still a solid performer for the club racer and sponsored guy. But everyone wants something new. Look at the TLR guys, they cried and cried and cried for a new wheeler. They got an updated xx4, lol. Many people thought the xxx4 just never really was better than the xx4. Watch the b5 come out people hate it and come out with a really updated b4, with better parts and an alum chassis with super big bores, lol. Newer does not always mean better, it just means newer. My only grip these days with AE is the cheap and poor QC coming out of Asia. I still blame TT.
11-13-2013, 03:26 PM
#153
Tech Master
Based on a cursory look at the TC6.2; I'm guessing they will probably just copy and update their platform with features seen on the competition.
11-13-2013, 03:28 PM
#154
11-13-2013, 03:58 PM
#155
11-13-2013, 04:40 PM
#158
I raced the NT, not the GT, back in the day. Remember, we also had that heavy A$$ rx battery hanging on the rear bumper - lots of weight. Overall, they were that hard to drive. They were harder to drive and more fragile that the 1/8th scales. They were also the 1st 1/10th vehicles to run on blown out 1/8th scale tracks. Running them on a 10th track was like running a normal e10th Truck.
They ONLY people I heard complain about traction & hard to drive, were the newbie 1/8th guys trying to drive 10th trucks.. bcz they only new full throttle/Brake/Hit everything & everyone on the track.
I switched to a Jato right before 1/10th nitro died, and you could move the rx batt from the rear bumper to in front of the motor. I tried that 1x.. it was the equivalent of going from RM 22, to MM 22 or a slick dry blown out track... BAD IDEA!! lol
goodtimes!
They ONLY people I heard complain about traction & hard to drive, were the newbie 1/8th guys trying to drive 10th trucks.. bcz they only new full throttle/Brake/Hit everything & everyone on the track.
I switched to a Jato right before 1/10th nitro died, and you could move the rx batt from the rear bumper to in front of the motor. I tried that 1x.. it was the equivalent of going from RM 22, to MM 22 or a slick dry blown out track... BAD IDEA!! lol
goodtimes!
Correct the Rx batt weight was heavy and behind the rear axles. Still not enough to over compensate the rest of the weight in front of the rear axles. Still mid is mid any way you look at it. Plus not all RX batts weighed the same, so there was room for weight to be played with. Look at the option weights for the Dingo and 22, for some tracks that may be ideal, others not so much.
I guess my point is that based off those trucks in the GT class, it's not a question of wether nor not a MM setup can do well on less than high traction, but given the right approach with weight added (if needed) in the right place, it will work. On the new 2wd MM's, will it be enough to be all the difference from that of RM? Probably not in all cases, but with time, I think it can be pretty comparable for most. We all know, given the right talent behind the wheel, a brick with wheels can look good. LOL.
What ever AE decides to bring out, I'm sure it'll be good and on par with most cars in the class.
11-13-2013, 04:40 PM
#159
I think its funny that we are now up to 158 posts on no news. Everyone knows its coming and we don't know when. Same as 3 days ago.
11-13-2013, 05:53 PM
#161
They really need to focus on fitment and QC. Parts will wear. Its a given. But let's eliminate some slop. Hell I rather buy a reamer and/or polish to free things up instead of putting something together and its sloppy from the get go.
11-13-2013, 08:50 PM
#162
I completely agree with you there. Well either way if it is 6 months they have a LOT of time to get it good/perfect, also how many ae cars have a .3 after them? IF non then its going to be a b5 if some it might be a b4.3
11-13-2013, 10:09 PM
#163
now, metric is certainly more widely accepted and for that reason is probably less expensive (for them) for hardware like screws and such.
11-13-2013, 10:13 PM
#164
they will always continue to produce the lowest quality pieces they can sell. if people are willing to buy junk, sell them junk.
11-13-2013, 10:48 PM
#165
The B4 is really just an updated B3 anyways. AE has had the same arm lengths from kingpin to kingpin complete with the exact same shock mounting points on all of their cars since the mid 90's and this geometry was determined by the Stealth cars of '89 and '91. It's the same on the B3, B4 and B44 and probably will be the same on the B5 as well. Sure the B4 did some different things from the B3 that were better. It moved from a 30 degree front kick to a 25. We started to see vertical ball studs and the end of e-clips to hold kingpins on. The gearbox ratio changed a bit. There were a host of other things as well. They basically took a proven geometry design, refined it, then renamed it. They didn't reinvent the wheel compared to what they had already done. They take what they have and improve it. Others take what they have and then completely redesign/replace it or integrate things that competitors have done. That doesn't always work out for the best. The B5 will probably be along the same traditional and proven AE mindset. They'll take what worked well in the B4 and will keep the geometry behind it. Let's face it, it works. It is the most copied geometry out there. The new car may look different visually but many things will fundamentally be the same. Other things will change of course but again, these are refinements. My question is what addition features will they decide to integrate in and how much of a lead from the competition will they decide to follow?
look at the Serpent car, but with a modular chassis like the SC104x4.