288LikesTamiya mini cooper
04-10-2014, 09:50 PM
I was also tempted to get a 4WD Mini the last month, but came to the same conclusion. I wouldnīt want just a smaller touring car with a shrink TC body.
My M06 beetle and M05 Renault 5 convinced me easily, that itīs good how it is.
Realistic bodies with 2WD plastic chassis, thatīs real Mini Fun (at least for me).
Last weekend we had a fun Mini Race, where we had to setup the tech rules quickly, so we partly adopted our spec class rules. We run Carson CE-4 brushed motor, no gearing limitation, and Lipo square or round shape, but not bigger than 4000mAH and max. 25C Rating. Total fun, and the winner was me in the end with 3000mAh Lipo (LRP stick pack) with a 18t gear ratio in my M05.
Best thing was, I only consumed about 850mAH in 5 minutes from the pack, so recharging was quick. In fact you could drive the whole race day with one battery, thatīs cheap racing, especially for beginners. I never would want to go back to NimH, never.
Kind regards,
Matthias
04-10-2014, 10:02 PM
Tech Regular
Run a mini shorty pack in mine. 380 motor I have is PLENTY fast... It's never going to get sold...
04-10-2014, 10:20 PM
Tech Regular
So 3/3 owners loved it...
the rest could not get past the 380 motor and the whole "you have to use this special life battery that we actually don't sell in your country thing"
the fix is #84289, shorty pack and novak three-80
04-11-2014, 01:09 AM
I wish I could get myself the Novak three-80. Can't find them anywhere. 
I did find another motor from Hobbyking which may work but we shall see...
I did find another motor from Hobbyking which may work but we shall see...
04-11-2014, 01:12 AM
Top Sabre steering fix...with floating servo mount. Over at our local track, we run 4WD mini with blinky 21.5's. Still very, very fast...
04-11-2014, 04:35 AM
58593 1/10 R/C M-05 Ver.II PRO Chassis Kit
Tamiya is pleased to announce the release of a new face in the class of M-chassis cars. The M-05 Ver.II PRObuilds upon the original M-05 chassis, which was released in 2009. It features a number of upgrades, to improve balance and lower the chassis’ center of gravity, using a variety of option parts to make it a highly drivable unit.
Option Parts Included
- Aluminum Steering Post
- Aluminum Horn For Hi-Torque Servo Saver
- Full Ball Bearings
- DF-03 Heat Sink Bar Set
- Aluminum Turnbuckle Steering Rod
- CVA Oil Shocks
- Semi-Gloss Black Plated Wheels
- Aluminum Servo Mount (Blue)
About the Model
- This is a 1/10 scale R/C model assembly kit.
- The chassis is compatible with square-shaped battery packs.
- Tamiya designers have made numerous adjustments to make this as lightweightas possible, without
sacrificing durability.
- A new aluminum motor mount was designed specifically for this chassis.
- Chassis, D parts (arm stays and damper stays, etc.) and wheels have a Semi Gloss Black metal-plated finish.
- Please note that separately sold body, motor and tires are required. Some bodies may require modification
Tamiya is pleased to announce the release of a new face in the class of M-chassis cars. The M-05 Ver.II PRObuilds upon the original M-05 chassis, which was released in 2009. It features a number of upgrades, to improve balance and lower the chassis’ center of gravity, using a variety of option parts to make it a highly drivable unit.
Option Parts Included
- Aluminum Steering Post
- Aluminum Horn For Hi-Torque Servo Saver
- Full Ball Bearings
- DF-03 Heat Sink Bar Set
- Aluminum Turnbuckle Steering Rod
- CVA Oil Shocks
- Semi-Gloss Black Plated Wheels
- Aluminum Servo Mount (Blue)
About the Model
- This is a 1/10 scale R/C model assembly kit.
- The chassis is compatible with square-shaped battery packs.
- Tamiya designers have made numerous adjustments to make this as lightweightas possible, without
sacrificing durability.
- A new aluminum motor mount was designed specifically for this chassis.
- Chassis, D parts (arm stays and damper stays, etc.) and wheels have a Semi Gloss Black metal-plated finish.
- Please note that separately sold body, motor and tires are required. Some bodies may require modification
I have a M05 and I like it alot , it always brings smiles to everybodys faces when used...
04-12-2014, 09:42 PM
Very interesting day at the track today. There was much speculation about the new M05 Version 2 and what the layout of the car would be. Almost all were not concerned about being able to use the square battery packs. They had forgotten that they didn't see the "pain" the new 21.5 B/L motor rules cause. Some people don't actually feel the pain until the hammer makes contact with their skulls. There are a few that can see the hammer coming and I'm telling you, it's gonna be painful. Not as bad as the 21.5 rules, but it's gonna hurt.
The other topic was the guy who posted that Mark Brown's Mini was slow down the straight and looked like it had a 25.5 motor. No one thought that was true, so you're alone on that one. Also as good and serious or competitive, if you prefer, a racer as Mark is, he would not have a slow motor.
Also reinforced my conviction that too often we start making changes in spring rates and shock oils before fully exploring what that particular set up can give us. My cars had gone from being among the "best" set up cars to being pretty awful and were far off pace. I had done what many of us might do when you're in full panic mode and was copying set ups and getting totally screwed up. So decided last week to stick with my base set up, and start adjusting. Managed to knock of 0.5 sec/lap just with ride height, rear camber, and front toe out adjustments. Then a front spring change and front and rear droop changes plus a rear shock oil change and a rear block change cut nearly another 0.5 sec. The car has gone from a difficult, has it's own mind, driver to something that's much easier to drive. My lap times are competitive with those of much better driving abilities than mine. Now I have a new base set up, and will start working with that.
Certainly, what you do is important, but how you go about doing it is just as important. The what varies from driver to driver cause we all drive differently and the venues we race on are different. The how is the same cause you should logically go from one adjustment to another until you're ready to make a change to your base set up. Then you start all over again.
Just sharing what is presently working for me. Probably not for everyone, but this is how my mind works.
The other topic was the guy who posted that Mark Brown's Mini was slow down the straight and looked like it had a 25.5 motor. No one thought that was true, so you're alone on that one. Also as good and serious or competitive, if you prefer, a racer as Mark is, he would not have a slow motor.
Also reinforced my conviction that too often we start making changes in spring rates and shock oils before fully exploring what that particular set up can give us. My cars had gone from being among the "best" set up cars to being pretty awful and were far off pace. I had done what many of us might do when you're in full panic mode and was copying set ups and getting totally screwed up. So decided last week to stick with my base set up, and start adjusting. Managed to knock of 0.5 sec/lap just with ride height, rear camber, and front toe out adjustments. Then a front spring change and front and rear droop changes plus a rear shock oil change and a rear block change cut nearly another 0.5 sec. The car has gone from a difficult, has it's own mind, driver to something that's much easier to drive. My lap times are competitive with those of much better driving abilities than mine. Now I have a new base set up, and will start working with that.
Certainly, what you do is important, but how you go about doing it is just as important. The what varies from driver to driver cause we all drive differently and the venues we race on are different. The how is the same cause you should logically go from one adjustment to another until you're ready to make a change to your base set up. Then you start all over again.
Just sharing what is presently working for me. Probably not for everyone, but this is how my mind works.
04-12-2014, 10:02 PM
Around here the M06 is king... The fastest m05s are about 0.5-1s off pace(14s lap)
We've been running square packs for years. The battery wars will regulate themselves very quickly. The few extra millivolts gained from a full sized pack are negated by the extra wight. With a light shory, tekin Rs, revtech, etc I can barely make 1300. I could shave another ~15g off the car if I tried(alloy screws/driveshafts/etc)
Most of us run $35 hobbyking shorty lipos. A few run SMC.
I've been wining nearly every week and took 4th at the local TCS race(would have been 2nd but I broke a thrust bearing) I use a 6m old $35 HK shorty and an $80 revtech.
Going from a silver can to 21.5 requires a completely different setup. The powerband is different, and they are faster.
We've been running square packs for years. The battery wars will regulate themselves very quickly. The few extra millivolts gained from a full sized pack are negated by the extra wight. With a light shory, tekin Rs, revtech, etc I can barely make 1300. I could shave another ~15g off the car if I tried(alloy screws/driveshafts/etc)
Most of us run $35 hobbyking shorty lipos. A few run SMC.
I've been wining nearly every week and took 4th at the local TCS race(would have been 2nd but I broke a thrust bearing) I use a 6m old $35 HK shorty and an $80 revtech.
Going from a silver can to 21.5 requires a completely different setup. The powerband is different, and they are faster.
04-13-2014, 02:06 AM
The other topic was the guy who posted that Mark Brown's Mini was slow down the straight and looked like it had a 25.5 motor. No one thought that was true, so you're alone on that one. Also as good and serious or competitive, if you prefer, a racer as Mark is, he would not have a slow motor..
Where it was insanely quick was getting through and coming off the corner. Mark would lose a couple of car lengths on the straight, and then put ten on the same car the first turn in the infield.
My point was: Concentrate more on setup, people. The motors are about equal, more equal now than what I saw last season in silver cans.
04-13-2014, 08:22 AM
Frankly, I thought the field was more fair this go around now that you have to lift.
Mark Browns mini looked like it had a 25.5 in it on the main straight compared to everyone else. But it had mad corner speed. At least for four minutes. When he kept the body from dragging. I kid, but just about the body dragging.
Mark Browns mini looked like it had a 25.5 in it on the main straight compared to everyone else. But it had mad corner speed. At least for four minutes. When he kept the body from dragging. I kid, but just about the body dragging.
That was me, and I stand by what I wrote. I watched every lap of every heat and main he ran, and most of his practice on Saturday. His car was never the fastest one on the front straight in front of the drivers stand. Neither was Orlando's. That's not to say his car was slow, it just didn't had the rip that some of the others in the class did.
Where it was insanely quick was getting through and coming off the corner. Mark would lose a couple of car lengths on the straight, and then put ten on the same car the first turn in the infield.
My point was: Concentrate more on setup, people. The motors are about equal, more equal now than what I saw last season in silver cans.
Where it was insanely quick was getting through and coming off the corner. Mark would lose a couple of car lengths on the straight, and then put ten on the same car the first turn in the infield.
My point was: Concentrate more on setup, people. The motors are about equal, more equal now than what I saw last season in silver cans.
You implied that his car was the slowest car on the straight. After all, if his car looked like it had a 25.5 when the rest were all 21.5's, that would have been the situation. That was the original post. In your second, now he's losing a couple of car lengths to the fastest motored cars, which is true. That he made most of his speed thru the corners was apparent to anyone with two eyes. Now that was true, the motor stuff was not.
All of us have been victim to hyperbole at one time or another. It's usually due to an excess of enthusiasm. In those cases, it's better to SFU. There's an old saying about that.
As far as your statement about Silvercans goes, partly true. The motors are very close in performance, but how people treat them is the problem. I've "worked" on hundreds, if not a thousand or more of these motors. I've proven it over and over again that routine maintenance can improve motor performance by several hundred rpms and in some cases over a thousand. The disparity in motors came from dirty, ill cared for motors competing against clean, well maintained motors. The fast guys all took care of their motors, many of the "slow" guys didn't. Simple as that. Sorry, have to back of of that a bit, cause about 10%, or maybe a little less, of the motors were true "duds" that nothing would help.
04-13-2014, 11:34 AM
Everyone would agree with your second post, but as you can see, that's not what you posted. Most of us are literate, have a reasonable comprehension of the English language and your two posts aren't even close.
You implied that his car was the slowest car on the straight. After all, if his car looked like it had a 25.5 when the rest were all 21.5's, that would have been the situation. That was the original post. In your second, now he's losing a couple of car lengths to the fastest motored cars, which is true. That he made most of his speed thru the corners was apparent to anyone with two eyes. Now that was true, the motor stuff was not.
All of us have been victim to hyperbole at one time or another. It's usually due to an excess of enthusiasm. In those cases, it's better to SFU. There's an old saying about that.
As far as your statement about Silvercans goes, partly true. The motors are very close in performance, but how people treat them is the problem. I've "worked" on hundreds, if not a thousand or more of these motors. I've proven it over and over again that routine maintenance can improve motor performance by several hundred rpms and in some cases over a thousand. The disparity in motors came from dirty, ill cared for motors competing against clean, well maintained motors. The fast guys all took care of their motors, many of the "slow" guys didn't. Simple as that. Sorry, have to back of of that a bit, cause about 10%, or maybe a little less, of the motors were true "duds" that nothing would help.
You implied that his car was the slowest car on the straight. After all, if his car looked like it had a 25.5 when the rest were all 21.5's, that would have been the situation. That was the original post. In your second, now he's losing a couple of car lengths to the fastest motored cars, which is true. That he made most of his speed thru the corners was apparent to anyone with two eyes. Now that was true, the motor stuff was not.
All of us have been victim to hyperbole at one time or another. It's usually due to an excess of enthusiasm. In those cases, it's better to SFU. There's an old saying about that.
As far as your statement about Silvercans goes, partly true. The motors are very close in performance, but how people treat them is the problem. I've "worked" on hundreds, if not a thousand or more of these motors. I've proven it over and over again that routine maintenance can improve motor performance by several hundred rpms and in some cases over a thousand. The disparity in motors came from dirty, ill cared for motors competing against clean, well maintained motors. The fast guys all took care of their motors, many of the "slow" guys didn't. Simple as that. Sorry, have to back of of that a bit, cause about 10%, or maybe a little less, of the motors were true "duds" that nothing would help.
Of all the cars in the A, the TQ Mark Brown had the slowest one on the straightaway. It looked like he had a 25.5 in by comparison.
I'm not implying anything, I'm saying exactly that.
Others may disagree, but that's what I saw. Daniel mentioned the same thing to me on the way home so I know I'm not alone,
04-13-2014, 02:20 PM
Let me clarify:
Of all the cars in the A, the TQ Mark Brown had the slowest one on the straightaway. It looked like he had a 25.5 in by comparison.
I'm not implying anything, I'm saying exactly that.
Others may disagree, but that's what I saw. Daniel mentioned the same thing to me on the way home so I know I'm not alone,
Of all the cars in the A, the TQ Mark Brown had the slowest one on the straightaway. It looked like he had a 25.5 in by comparison.
I'm not implying anything, I'm saying exactly that.
Others may disagree, but that's what I saw. Daniel mentioned the same thing to me on the way home so I know I'm not alone,
Incidentally, Chuck Leslie was the TQ.
04-13-2014, 02:54 PM
Tech Master
I had this chassis for briefly a long time ago. If only Xray had used the Mini-sized tires and rims instead of the TC sized tires. It was great fun on really small indoor tracks (carpet or asphalt).
04-14-2014, 01:05 AM
Ahh, the good old X-Ray. I had the Yokomo version. With 4 cells and an 8x1 motor, sounded great and was fun to drive!
I converted it to use a 6 cell and run in 540 with the touring cars ... it had the pace, but the front knuckles were weaker than the original M03 knuckles :-)
Interesting idea, but another class that didn't really take off.
I converted it to use a 6 cell and run in 540 with the touring cars ... it had the pace, but the front knuckles were weaker than the original M03 knuckles :-)
Interesting idea, but another class that didn't really take off.
04-14-2014, 11:38 AM
+1
I was also tempted to get a 4WD Mini the last month, but came to the same conclusion. I wouldnīt want just a smaller touring car with a shrink TC body.
My M06 beetle and M05 Renault 5 convinced me easily, that itīs good how it is.
Realistic bodies with 2WD plastic chassis, thatīs real Mini Fun (at least for me).
Kind regards,
Matthias
I was also tempted to get a 4WD Mini the last month, but came to the same conclusion. I wouldnīt want just a smaller touring car with a shrink TC body.
My M06 beetle and M05 Renault 5 convinced me easily, that itīs good how it is.
Realistic bodies with 2WD plastic chassis, thatīs real Mini Fun (at least for me).
Kind regards,
Matthias
I am looking forward to the M05 V2 new parts.. I hope the knuckles and C hubs are carbon reinforced.. The current ones are peanut brittle lol.