R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-23-2004, 05:05 PM   #331
Tech Champion
 
RCGaryK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 7,331
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Sorry Izzy, I still think the SS arms on the Evo or the TB02 is wrong, but I guess I am in the minority
__________________
Site Content Specialist- Surface
HorizonHobby.Com

Horizon Hobby is on YouTube with hundreds of different videos! Visit us at
http://www.youtube.com/HorizonRCdotCom
RCGaryK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2004, 07:35 PM   #332
Tech Rookie
 
Coach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Memphis
Posts: 6
Default

Just built a TB-02 Nismo model. Great car. Handles like a MF'r. 58311. Totally great model. Almost as good as a TB Evo III.
Coach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2004, 08:21 PM   #333
Tech Fanatic
 
dsrbltoys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Renton, WA
Posts: 890
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Duh Gary,

I think you are right! BUT I see their point, and I hope your wrong. In all reality, the box does state that the TA04 option parts are OK. But it does say TA04 not TA04ss...

Now, can anyone tell us what Tamiya Japan is doing on this subject. It would be stupid to do all the testing with it as a short, win the trip, and go to japan, only to find you have to reconfigure the car, and its setup...

Ah, the delema continues.
Kevin
dsrbltoys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2004, 08:34 PM   #334
Tech Adept
 
C5R01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The D!
Posts: 147
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Send a message via Yahoo to C5R01
Default

from the photo on the tb02( on page 11), fred has said that the the holes on the hub carriers that are for the torque rods on the ta04 are not tcs legal. i have ask him twice and he said no way.
C5R01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2004, 08:36 PM   #335
Tech Elite
 
izzyracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,729
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by dsrbltoys
Duh Gary,

I think you are right! BUT I see their point, and I hope your wrong. In all reality, the box does state that the TA04 option parts are OK. But it does say TA04 not TA04ss...

Now, can anyone tell us what Tamiya Japan is doing on this subject. It would be stupid to do all the testing with it as a short, win the trip, and go to japan, only to find you have to reconfigure the car, and its setup...

Ah, the delema continues.
Kevin

If Japan rules are applied exactly here... I think every US Tamiya owner will start there own picket line.
__________________
Izzy
izzyracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2004, 08:40 PM   #336
Tech Elite
 
izzyracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,729
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by C5R01
from the photo on the tb02( on page 11), fred has said that the the holes on the hub carriers that are for the torque rods on the ta04 are not tcs legal. i have ask him twice and he said no way.
Torque rods? what torque rods. Will it give my car more torque?
Can someone tell us that it is actually a disadvantage to run them!

Heehee. I wont worry there easy to take off.
__________________
Izzy
izzyracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2004, 11:10 PM   #337
Tech Champion
 
RCGaryK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 7,331
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Well that's quite hypocritical, because after all the Torque rods ARE a TA04 option part, are they not? And if the arms are legal, why not the torque rods? See the can of worms that has been opened here?
__________________
Site Content Specialist- Surface
HorizonHobby.Com

Horizon Hobby is on YouTube with hundreds of different videos! Visit us at
http://www.youtube.com/HorizonRCdotCom
RCGaryK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2004, 12:16 AM   #338
Tech Adept
 
jiggen5354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by izzyracer
Torque rods? what torque rods. Will it give my car more torque?
Can someone tell us that it is actually a disadvantage to run them!

Heehee. I wont worry there easy to take off.
I had torque rods on my evo 3 and I ended up breaking the ballend kingpins. this particular part is quite difficult to get hold of as well
jiggen5354 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2004, 06:57 AM   #339
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Springfield, IL
Posts: 111
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Arrow

Quote:
Originally posted by izzyracer

Can someone tell us that it is actually a disadvantage to run them!

Heehee. I wont worry there easy to take off.
Ok. I've been watching this thread for a while now and have a few things to share:

Leave the torque rods off, even if they are legal. Ever seen what happens to them when the front of the car takes a nice shot? They bind, severely depending on the impact. I have an 04R and haven't ran with them on the car in a long time. Just one less thing to take you out of a race, especially a TCS race.

I haven't seen anyone mention the binding in the drivetrain of this car (tb02). So far, I have built two of these things and I can't seem to get the 'crunching' out of the bevel gears. I have filed, sanded, profiled, you name it, to the bevel gears and I simply cannot get them to run as smoothly as I like. Anyone else have this problem? For a car that is supposed to be a tub version of the Evo III, I am somewhat disappointed in it's parasitic driveline drag.

I have a problem with the diffs. The springs used to hold tension on the diff screw are not ground on either end. This results in uneven diff action because of the uneven pressure it applies to the diff hub. Also, you have to run the screw down so tight to keep the diff from slipping, that the diff is not smooth and free at all. I can only hope that the 'white' diff outdrives may address this problem, but with the same spring.......

Gary, have you any experience with the TB02 yet? Let us all know if you have experienced similar problems.

Tommy Dale
Racinrc14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2004, 08:20 AM   #340
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: NY/FL
Posts: 3,376
Trader Rating: 24 (100%+)
Default

Shame on Fred M. for allowing this argument to be taking place !!!! I must say that this is a slap in the face for all of us who try hard to promote TCS style racing.
First...just because the TB02 box say's 04 parts are"compatible" does not throw open the door for those parts being "legal" for TCS.
Part of the common sense approach in TCS relates to the "spirit" of how a part is used. The basic premise of TCS is standardization!! NOT MODIFICATION. The 04 was produced and marketed in a SS version. Common sense allows that the SS parts could be used on any 04 chassis because it is within the "spirit" of that chassis factory designed changes.
A TB02 is not offered in a SS version. THERE IS NO STANDARD for this car having that hop up. Therefore it should never have been allowed.
No offense to anyone who tries something new,but that does not mean it should be allowed in the program.
This kind of "stretching the rules " is only going to cause severe confusion and ,as can already be seen, will get worse. Parts commonality between the various chassis will probably become more common and if strict adherence to the "SPIRIT" of the rules isn't maintained,TCS will become a huge bitch session !!! Personally, thats not what I want from TCS. DO YOU???

Last edited by Evoracer; 01-24-2004 at 11:47 AM.
Evoracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2004, 10:02 AM   #341
Tech Master
 
f1larry's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Buffalo Grove, IL
Posts: 1,773
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to f1larry
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Evoracer
Shame on Fred M. for allowing this argument to be taking place !!!! I must say that this is a slap in the face for all of us who try hard to promote TCS style racing.
First...just because the TB02 box say's 04 parts are"compatible" does not thrown open the door for those parts being "legal" for TCS.
Part of the common sense approach in TCS relates to the "spirit" of how a part is used. The basic premise of TCS is standardization!! NOT MODIFICATION. The 04 was produced and marketed in a SS version. Common sense allows that the SS parts could be used on any 04 chassis because it is within the "spirit" of that chassis factory designed changes.
A TB02 is not offered in a SS version. THERE IS NO STANDARD for this car having that hop up. Therefore it should never have been allowed.
No offense to anyone who tries something new,but that does not mean it should be allowed in the program.
This kind of "stretching the rules " is only going to cause severe confusion and ,as can already be seen, will get worse. Parts commonality between the various chassis will probably become more common and if strict adherence to the "SPIRIT" of the rules isn't maintained,TCS will become a huge bitch session !!! Personally, thats not what I want from TCS. DO YOU???
With that being said Here is rule #17 which I feel backs up the above argument.

17. If a driver finds a loophole within the rules, that exploitation will be deemed illegal.

The loophole here is that the SS arms are for the TA04 but not for the EVO 3 or TB-02. Just because the box says TA04 parts can be used on the TB-02 does not mean it is legal and that is the loophole argument making it illegal.
__________________
Windy City RC Raceway & Hobbies, Arlington Heights, IL
Exotek F1R3|X-Ray T4 16|CRC WC-Xti|TT02|TA05|TL01|
f1larry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2004, 06:23 PM   #342
Tech Champion
 
RCGaryK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 7,331
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
17. If a driver finds a loophole within the rules, that exploitation will be deemed illegal. The loophole here is that the SS arms are for the TA04 but not for the EVO 3 or TB-02. Just because the box says TA04 parts can be used on the TB-02 does not mean it is legal and that is the loophole argument making it illegal.
THANK YOU!!! I posted that a number of pages back and it got poo-pooed. I'm sorry, but if you are going to allow one, why not the other? And again, if you are going to allow SS arms on the TB-02/Evo3 "Because they fit", by that same arguement the Use of a TA03 one way in an M03 mini shoud be allowed because it "utilizes the same parts".

Tommy, I don't have a TB-02 yet. I have the chassis on order to convert my surikarn into a TB-02 Surikarn but I don't know if it will be here before the Trackside TCS race. I talked to "Mr.....Anderson" and Gary Demory yesterday and the tub itself isn't even in the country yet. I sure hope they come out with a reinforced one like the 04r's though. And as far as the torque rods f go, I run them on my 04 on carpet, but the car was faster in California with them off.
__________________
Site Content Specialist- Surface
HorizonHobby.Com

Horizon Hobby is on YouTube with hundreds of different videos! Visit us at
http://www.youtube.com/HorizonRCdotCom
RCGaryK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2004, 08:30 PM   #343
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: NY/FL
Posts: 3,376
Trader Rating: 24 (100%+)
Default

Gary, I commented on the SS arms when this argument first started and I must say...I may have been willing to give in a little because it seemed that if Fred made allowance, there must be a good reason for it. Maybe some hop up situation that would become more clear to us BUT....that never happened and as far as I can tell, there is no good reason for this mod to be allowed. Also, the more I looked in to it, the more I realized how much this could effect future rulings. Like I said in my most recent comment...I believe parts commonality between the current and future chassis' will happen more often. If Fred starts making vague rulings now, it will get really weird later on !! I, like many other TCS fans, appreciate the program because it's structured to make the cars more equal and puts the emphasis back on the driver. I think we need to keep the big picture in mind and make sure it stay's that way. Let's put the argument where it should be...with the people making the decisions !! I really don't think Izzy or anybody else would care to much if Fred reversed his decision for the greater good of the TCS program. I'm sure he's just as fast with a standard wheelbase car.
Evoracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2004, 09:10 PM   #344
Tech Champion
 
RCGaryK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 7,331
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

I just want some consistency. These ruling seem really abritrary to me. If you allow one, how can you not allow the other. At the same time if you disallow one, how can the other still be legal? The rules have always been clear in the past. The hop ups are legal if used on the chassis they were designed for. the SS arms were DESIGNED for the TA04. Tamiya has recycled the 04 arms on a few different cars now to reduce tooling costs (imho). Just because those arms are utilized doesn't instantly mean they meant for them to be used on the Evo/TB 02. Again, if they ment for these arms were meant to be hop ups for these chassis, they would have listed them as OP parts in the manuals for the respective chassis. The arms have been out longer then the cars, so they could have listed them.
__________________
Site Content Specialist- Surface
HorizonHobby.Com

Horizon Hobby is on YouTube with hundreds of different videos! Visit us at
http://www.youtube.com/HorizonRCdotCom
RCGaryK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2004, 10:03 PM   #345
Tech Elite
 
izzyracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,729
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Default

To be honest, I think all of us here needs to get a life and I say again... All of us!
Anyway, in any situation that has Laws or Rules you will always find loopholes. That's why we have the Law benders, Lawyers, Judges etc...In our case the Judge is Fred. The law bender is me and the wanna be lawyers are you guys.
I still think it is a situation where both sides have points. That's why we need a Judge to make the decision, and at the moment the Judge said yes.
You being the lawyers can present the case and if the Judge changes his mind, then it shall be and I have no problem with that. But if it stays, I hope you can also let it be and move on. Gary, can you move on?
__________________
Izzy
izzyracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Selling Schumacher Mi2, Tamiya M02, Tamiya TA04-S, Tamiya TB Evolution 3 Surikarn Ltd st_rob Australia For Sale/Trade 4 12-23-2008 07:37 PM
Tamiya 415 MSX, legacy 2.0, NIP Type A tires, Tamiya towel for sale or trade Fastburn R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 16 09-06-2008 12:45 AM
FS: Tekin Rebel 2 ESC w/ Tamiya GT Tuned Motor & Tamiya AM Radio & Receiver wrxnfx R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 6 06-10-2008 06:40 PM
Tamiya M03 / Trinity Brushes / Muchmore Battery Cooler / Tamiya M Chassis Wheels bluejays R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 2 12-16-2007 09:31 PM
Hpi rs4, tamiya tt01, tamiya tg-10, tamiya sprint! MORE!!!!! Genuinekid R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 10 09-10-2007 04:21 PM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 04:18 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net