R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-11-2012, 01:31 PM   #16
Tech Elite
 
303slowdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Rapid City SD.
Posts: 2,299
Trader Rating: 24 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Armand View Post
Oh please, spare me... Yes, there are subtle differences. Yes, the quality is not the same. Yes, the colors are different. Yes, the suspension geometry may be slightly tweaked from one to another. From a design engineering standpoint, the foundation for all these 2 belted cars are the same. Awesomatix is very different.

Maybe unless you've driven each of those 17 cars, then maybe you have a right to make that posting. Otherwise, you yourself do not have any foundation to know what you're talking about. Then again, reading by your signature, your attention may be onto something else other than RC.
You post a thread like this you have to expect some criticism.
I personally have drove Xray t2,t3, yokomo bd5, robitronic avid v1 and v2, tc6, and tamiya 417 and i can tell you none of them handle the same. So even though they look similar they are not the same.
__________________
Ryan Borgheiinck
303slowdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 01:43 PM   #17
Tech Elite
 
nf_ekt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Posts: 4,632
Trader Rating: 113 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Armand View Post
In another thread, it looks like there's about 17 manufacturers of higher end touring cars. But looking at all of these, they're all the same 2 belt design!!! In fact, I chose my TCX based on the anodizing color!
So that's what gave you the warm-fuzzy feeling... so be it.

After years of development, and testing, it's fair to say that common themes re-occur amongst the majority of manufacturers not because they are trying so much to copy each other, but because certain designs just work, plain and simple. As many have stated, two cars may look the same but how they drive is a different story. Same for full-sized cars. And in the end, belt cars have mostly proven themselves to be a bit easier to drive. Some may disagree, but for me even if it was the minority design I would choose a belt car.

Now if Losi could just get back into on-road with a revised version of the XXXS (single belt), I would be happy. But not likely to happen.
__________________
Up the Irons \m/

Powered by Hotwings, Rolling Rock, and the urge to race toy cars...
nf_ekt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 03:16 PM   #18
Tech Regular
 
M3Armand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 263
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkiiina View Post
I think the same could be argued in the 1:1 scale world. Look at a Ferrari, Corvette, Porsche, Viper. All follow a similiar formula but its details that make each different.

Heck even going from an Xray T1-T3 ('10) and testing a friends T2 007 and a T3 '12 they drive different. In addition we have at least 1 local that now uses a T3 for one class and a T4 for another and the differences are enough that you can tell with a blind taste test.

I think it would be easy to argue that you can take any basic setup and then from there tweak to to your satisfaction but the bottom line is you WILL need to make changes.
I have difficulty in agreeing where you state Ferrari, Corvette, Porsche and Viper having a similar formula. I'm not sure where the similarities would be among those cars aside from 4 wheels. Ferrari = mid engine rear drive, Corvette = front engine rear drive, Porsche = rear engine rear drive, Viper = pure brute force. I think it may have been better to compare similar drive trained cars.

But I would agree with the latter part of your comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 303slowdown View Post
You post a thread like this you have to expect some criticism.
I personally have drove Xray t2,t3, yokomo bd5, robitronic avid v1 and v2, tc6, and tamiya 417 and i can tell you none of them handle the same. So even though they look similar they are not the same.
Since this is coming from you who have presumably owned them, then this is certainly good feedback. Curiously, which one was your favorite?

On the other hand, I would argue that 2 of the same manufacturer's car with the same setup but with 2 different radios would also feel very different. And this is coming from 35+ years of RC experience. There are way too many factors that would contribute to cars feeling different. But everyone must admit, aside from the Awesomatix, they all seem to be copies of each other. It goes with the saying, "you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig". Not saying that these cars are pigs in anyway. The point is, regardless of how many tuning, change in geometry, etc., the foundation of the car is the same: 2 belts with the motor in the same location. You can play around with the weight transfers, shock lengths, whatever. When it comes down to it, once the owner has properly setup the car to his/her liking, they would get the same exact laptimes from one car to the other. Also, when I see people who run HB or Tamiya or Yokomo, etc, being able to interchangeably swap parts (arms, hubs, cups, driveshafts, carriers, diffs) with each other with slight tweaks here and there... that also tells me something. It tells me it's the same car with slight variations. It's like the GM badge engineering. People would argue that the Buick is not the same as the Chevy or GMC. But take the body panels off and some suspension components and you have the same exact car!

If you look at all the "comparison" threads in these forums, everyone pretty much says "You can't really lose by choosing any of these cars. You can win with any of these. It comes down to parts availability and customer support... and your color choice..."

So I know many of you disagree. And that's ok since everyone can have their opinion. But to me, that analogy of GM badge engineering is very applicable here: same car, same manufacturing line, different suspension setup, different body and different interior.
__________________
Durango DEX210, SpeedMerchant REV4, HB TCX, Traxxas EMaxx, HPI RS4 Pro, Tamiya TA02, Yokomo YZ10, Associated RC10 Team Car, Bolink Eliminator 10, Kyosho Optima, Tamiya HotShot, Tamiya Grasshopper
M3Armand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 03:26 PM   #19
Tech Elite
 
NolanP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Westmont
Posts: 2,426
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Armand View Post
Oh please, spare me... Yes, there are subtle differences. Yes, the quality is not the same. Yes, the colors are different. Yes, the suspension geometry may be slightly tweaked from one to another. From a design engineering standpoint, the foundation for all these 2 belted cars are the same. Awesomatix is very different.

Maybe unless you've driven each of those 17 cars, then maybe you have a right to make that posting. Otherwise, you yourself do not have any foundation to know what you're talking about. Then again, reading by your signature, your attention may be onto something else other than RC.
I havent driven 17 but I have driven enough to know there is a big enough difference to where you can get everything to change even with the similar setups. If there weren't changes in the cars we would all be running the same damn thing with the exact same setups.
__________________
Mod Touring Car
Mod 12th
Nitro TC
Nitro GT
Wheeler and Mod Buggy
NolanP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 03:33 PM   #20
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Central Washington State
Posts: 131
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Armand View Post
I have difficulty in agreeing where you state Ferrari, Corvette, Porsche and Viper having a similar formula. I'm not sure where the similarities would be among those cars aside from 4 wheels. Ferrari = mid engine rear drive, Corvette = front engine rear drive, Porsche = rear engine rear drive, Viper = pure brute force. I think it may have been better to compare similar drive trained cars.

But I would agree with the latter part of your comments.
More like Subaru Impreza WRX STi vs. Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution in their respective primes. Virtually the same car purely by specs (2.0L 4-cylinder, turbo, mechanical AWD, compact class, both built for rally racing), but vastly different when put to the paces.

RC Chassis are the same. On paper, they're all copies of one another, but put to the paces they are all unique animals.
__________________
HPI Sprint 2 Flux - GPM and OEM hop ups
AE RC10TC6.1FT - partial WC conversion, RSD hop ups
3Racing FGX - IFS, OEM Aluminum, Exotek hop ups
Vostok 7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 06:36 PM   #21
Tech Elite
 
mkiiina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Frisco TX
Posts: 2,339
Trader Rating: 69 (100%+)
Default

Front engine, rear wheel drive was what I was referring to specifically. All make variants on this same formula (and yes they do have other drive train configurations). This also shows how narrow you are on your view.

For examples:
Viper and Corvette have all been this configuration.
Ferrari FF, F430
Porsche - Cayman, Boxter

Also the setup window for each car is different, some are not as forgiving, no matter how much you play with it. Another item you have neglected to mention is cost of ownership, specifically durability. I have a TC4, a T1 and, a T3. The T1 was raced for about a year and the only parts that were replaced due to breakage were 1 front arm and the front upper bumper support. The TC4 has had the front and rear end build a few times and alot of front arms replaced.

While touring cars look similiar, there are alot of differences and for someone with 35+ years of experience in the hobby, this should be readily evident.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Armand View Post
I have difficulty in agreeing where you state Ferrari, Corvette, Porsche and Viper having a similar formula. I'm not sure where the similarities would be among those cars aside from 4 wheels. Ferrari = mid engine rear drive, Corvette = front engine rear drive, Porsche = rear engine rear drive, Viper = pure brute force. I think it may have been better to compare similar drive trained cars.

But I would agree with the latter part of your comments.



Since this is coming from you who have presumably owned them, then this is certainly good feedback. Curiously, which one was your favorite?

On the other hand, I would argue that 2 of the same manufacturer's car with the same setup but with 2 different radios would also feel very different. And this is coming from 35+ years of RC experience. There are way too many factors that would contribute to cars feeling different. But everyone must admit, aside from the Awesomatix, they all seem to be copies of each other. It goes with the saying, "you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig". Not saying that these cars are pigs in anyway. The point is, regardless of how many tuning, change in geometry, etc., the foundation of the car is the same: 2 belts with the motor in the same location. You can play around with the weight transfers, shock lengths, whatever. When it comes down to it, once the owner has properly setup the car to his/her liking, they would get the same exact laptimes from one car to the other. Also, when I see people who run HB or Tamiya or Yokomo, etc, being able to interchangeably swap parts (arms, hubs, cups, driveshafts, carriers, diffs) with each other with slight tweaks here and there... that also tells me something. It tells me it's the same car with slight variations. It's like the GM badge engineering. People would argue that the Buick is not the same as the Chevy or GMC. But take the body panels off and some suspension components and you have the same exact car!

If you look at all the "comparison" threads in these forums, everyone pretty much says "You can't really lose by choosing any of these cars. You can win with any of these. It comes down to parts availability and customer support... and your color choice..."

So I know many of you disagree. And that's ok since everyone can have their opinion. But to me, that analogy of GM badge engineering is very applicable here: same car, same manufacturing line, different suspension setup, different body and different interior.
mkiiina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 07:38 PM   #22
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,059
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Certainly the majority of cars are very similar in design.

Difference in lap times are minimal between the top 10 cars when new but I have to agree the quality is not.

Some cars use better materials and tend to last longer. Cars that wear out need more new parts to keep them fast.
frozenpod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 08:30 PM   #23
Tech Regular
 
M3Armand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 263
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkiiina View Post
Front engine, rear wheel drive was what I was referring to specifically. All make variants on this same formula (and yes they do have other drive train configurations). This also shows how narrow you are on your view.

For examples:
Viper and Corvette have all been this configuration.
Ferrari FF, F430
Porsche - Cayman, Boxter
To be fair, you can't possibly fault me when you didn't specify front engine RWD in your original post... And I still don't understand your post since you say front engine RWD yet the only cars in your example above that fit this is the Viper and Corvette. The Ferrari's, Cayman and Boxster (with an "s") are all mid engine RWD. When people say Porsche, people typically think of 911 (and don't say people think Cayenne). Also, the Cayman and the Boxster are the same car with the latter being a convertible. I.e. - I can take probably 95% of the parts (except roof and body panels) out of my Boxster and put it into a Cayman of similar vintage.

So again, to be fair, don't tell me I have a narrow point of view when you weren't/aren't clear. I'm certainly not trying, or is it my intention, to insult you in anyway. I just wanted to point out that the post wasn't clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkiiina View Post
...Also the setup window for each car is different, some are not as forgiving, no matter how much you play with it. Another item you have neglected to mention is cost of ownership, specifically durability. I have a TC4, a T1 and, a T3. The T1 was raced for about a year and the only parts that were replaced due to breakage were 1 front arm and the front upper bumper support. The TC4 has had the front and rear end build a few times and alot of front arms replaced...
This is certainly true and I agree. I.e. - that the setup window for each car is different. But the fact that you could use Xray or Tamiya parts on your TC4 when it breaks adds credit to my thinking. Like I wrote previously, I understand the quality difference in the parts. In fact, if my local hobby store carried Xray, I'd have the T4 right now due to me favoring parts quality and the least amount of slop. But the foundation for each of your cars was always the same 2 belt design with a different chassis. If the foundation was different, you shouldn't be able to use other manufacturer's parts on your car. I think it's funny that TCX's can run Xray, Tamiya and Yokomo parts, but still be called a TCX (just because the chassis and bulkheads are). In fact, if you spray painted all the anodized parts of these cars black, unless you work on these cars every day, there is no way in hell that you'd be able to tell them apart without very carefully looking for that "special" feature or special "geometry". Tell me I'm not right in this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkiiina View Post
While touring cars look similiar, there are alot of differences and for someone with 35+ years of experience in the hobby, this should be readily evident.
Lame, non-value added attack. Obviously with this many years experience, I can have my opinions on the matter and not be phased by someone who thinks I should share theirs.
__________________
Durango DEX210, SpeedMerchant REV4, HB TCX, Traxxas EMaxx, HPI RS4 Pro, Tamiya TA02, Yokomo YZ10, Associated RC10 Team Car, Bolink Eliminator 10, Kyosho Optima, Tamiya HotShot, Tamiya Grasshopper
M3Armand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 08:36 PM   #24
Tech Regular
 
M3Armand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 263
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frozenpod View Post
Certainly the majority of cars are very similar in design.

Difference in lap times are minimal between the top 10 cars when new but I have to agree the quality is not.

Some cars use better materials and tend to last longer. Cars that wear out need more new parts to keep them fast.
I've worn so many parts on my TCX that it's not even funny. Now that it's colder, the parts have gotten very brittle. I've since stocked up on non-HB parts that may be "softer".

If I had to start over, I think I'd consider getting the T4 for the parts quality and the seriously awesome customer support. The setups and explanations in their website appears to be the best hands down compared to any other manufacturer. Kinda bothers me though that they seem to release a new car every year.
__________________
Durango DEX210, SpeedMerchant REV4, HB TCX, Traxxas EMaxx, HPI RS4 Pro, Tamiya TA02, Yokomo YZ10, Associated RC10 Team Car, Bolink Eliminator 10, Kyosho Optima, Tamiya HotShot, Tamiya Grasshopper
M3Armand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 08:54 PM   #25
Tech Champion
 
DARKSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nashville-Memphis
Posts: 8,573
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

have any of you noticed the change back to the old stuff....Im sitting hear re-building a TC4 for a local racer...and was looking at my TC6.1 WC and wow!!...vertical ball studs, servo with "ball cranks" ect...maybe things are just on rotation...

the Awesome car is truly different...by a long shot
__________________
Myron "BATTMAN" Kinnard
Team Associated/Reedy Powered/PROTOform/OTT/1UP
Apex Raceway and Hobbies
1172 Park Ave, Murfreesboro, TN 37129
DARKSIDE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 09:28 PM   #26
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Central Washington State
Posts: 131
Default

I think a big reason there's so much similarity is due to rules organizations. Look at F1 or NASCAR, the cars are all virtually the same but still manage to be largely different. Any time you build something to be best under a certain set of rules, you are going to see a lot of similarities as all the manufacturers rush to be at the top of the rules pyramid. Granted, ROAR and EFRA and the others don't make specific chassis rules in general, but to push the envelope within a specified set of rules, the manufacturers still have to design the cars in that specific way.
__________________
HPI Sprint 2 Flux - GPM and OEM hop ups
AE RC10TC6.1FT - partial WC conversion, RSD hop ups
3Racing FGX - IFS, OEM Aluminum, Exotek hop ups
Vostok 7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 10:22 PM   #27
Tech Champion
 
snoopyrc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tunnel Hill GA
Posts: 5,046
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Armand View Post
Oh please, spare me... Yes, there are subtle differences.
A subtle difference is still a difference and one that can matter a great deal. If it didnt matter then a lot of racers are spending a ton of money to keep up with the latest, greatest, not that much different, chassis.
__________________
www.battlefieldraceway.com Racing videos at http://www.youtube.com/snoopyrc
snoopyrc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 11:47 PM   #28
Tech Fanatic
 
cementsurfer86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B-town, WA
Posts: 939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DARKSIDE View Post
have any of you noticed the change back to the old stuff....Im sitting hear re-building a TC4 for a local racer...and was looking at my TC6.1 WC and wow!!...vertical ball studs, servo with "ball cranks" ect...maybe things are just on rotation...

the Awesome car is truly different...by a long shot
Vintage is the new "New"! I rocked a TC4 with a few mods for the first part of the indoor season in VTA, and now with my Schuie deal, I thought It'd be cool to rock the Mi1 for the remainder of the season (basically an old Mission car).
Last weekend was the first weekend on the "New" old car, and I equaled my best time ever on our layout. Not saying that car design will EVER go back to that, but for cost of ownership/performance, you can't go wrong.

It is cool to see most of the comanies come back out/release competent sport-level kits. I don't know if anyone's noticed, but top level kits are through the roof...

A company, in order to turn a profit, and stay alive, must produce a kit that works. It so happens that at this point, the design you see on most top-level kits, is the design is what works. Being different is a good thing, and often being different is what spars a new "standard", so long as "different" works.
__________________
Jesse Anderson / JROY386 / R_
ThreeEightSix / Sticky Kicks RC / Schumacher
theRACERunderground - "Budget Champions"
www.theracerunderground.blogspot.com
cementsurfer86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 01:01 AM   #29
Tech Addict
 
Luke Hobson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: newark, nottinghamshire, UK
Posts: 526
Send a message via MSN to Luke Hobson
Default

The best comparison you can make to TC cars would be F1, they all look similar, and if you don't really have much of a clue then they'll look the same. But there's good reasons why the likes of HRT, Marussia and Caterham are further behind than even the midfield.

Same with TC except on smaller level (in both ways), I've driven & owned the top end cars from each manufacture (AE tc6.1, Kyosho tf6, TOP photon, Tamiya 417, Yokomo bd5, Schumacher cxl, HB TCX , Xray t3-12, Spec R)
And they all drive totally different, even with the same geometry on them, I have a note book sat here with all the measurements for each car, very well documented, and can assure you the similarities end with how they look.

Yes a few parts are interchangable between cars but that's because of the rules we currently run to. We all know roughly how big gear diffs need to be to fit everything inside them, then work out how wide the car is supposed to be (187-189mm) and naturally your going to end up with a 44-52mm driveshaft.... While the rules for TC are as they are now, you'll not see much revolution, it's all evolution. Rubber TC has been about for about 15 or so years now, it's about at its peak with regard to design.

Look at 12th, they stayed the same basis of design for years and years until lipo came along (with the occasional exception) just like TC is right now. Unless there is a major change to batteries then you'll not see much difference.
A major reason we've seen TC develop and change so much over the years is because of changes with batteries and motors, batteries getting higher capacity and lighter, motors getting faster. It's as simple as that.
__________________
Luke Hobson
Awesomatix - Xenon - Godzilla Paint - Moorespeed - ToniSport - MBmodels

http://luke-hobson.blogspot.com/
Luke Hobson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 05:12 AM   #30
Tech Fanatic
 
alcyon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: kuala lumpur,malaysia
Posts: 954
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

As for me i hate the looks of the 415 type clones you see so prevalent since well.. the TRF415. I much prefer the 414 /Pro2 type layout. I still drive my vintage Kawada. Its just a bonus that modern parts will fit in without modifications i.e gear diffs/ layshaft pulleys, belts..Since I dont like the way cars are designed these days, i just go my own way and do my own thing.
__________________
http://kawada-alcyon.blogspot.com/
http://superturbooptimamidspecialzx-5.blogspot.com/
kawada sv10 alcyon 3-sanwa mx3x-orca vx v4.1 software-team powers 13.5 motor-turnigy 4200 shorty lipo-savox 1251 servo RIDE RE32
alcyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



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 02:20 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