R/C Tech Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-23-2005, 02:30 PM   #61
Tech Master
 
Soviet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Littleton, CO - USA
Posts: 1,708
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thepitcrew
Well this thing can't be under weight. The Pro4 is under weight and it does not have all that baggage of Aluminum posts or Aluminum camber link mounts and it has a smaller top plate and the lightened steel diff is not light. If this car is under weight it by a few grams.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lickrim
AE when is the belt TC BARRY BAKER car coming out? maybe HUDY could make it L8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe B
How funny, Associated years back was always on the cutting edge of technology with it's car designs, like the ahead of it's time TC-3...... then they finaly introduce the TC-4 after many years of "supposed" research.....and It ends up having the battery moved twords the centerline of the car at the "exact" same location as the BMI TC-3 that's been out for well over a year......now it has even more borrowed traits from the BMI line of kits......like Seaball said...talk about struggling to keep up......several year old technology at work,all the way around.....Dont' get me wrong Im not saying associated's new car wont work....ofcourse it will,the BMI TC-3 works great


BRING IN THE CLOWNS!!!

Gimme a break people.

I love how many of you call it "old technology" and claim that AE is "behind the times."

The AE gearbox for the TC3 was and still is a radical design. It is proven, its on multiple platforms and is tough as nails. Who gives a flying diddily flip if they didn't engineer a box cover with an integrated shock tower mount.

Actually if any of you thought like an engineer you would realize just why that would be a poor idea anyhow. If you were to break a tower and possibly a mount, you then would have to buy a $10.00 box cover as opposed to just a $2.00 tower mount

So...just what is with the "times" now anyway? Oh yeah...cars need to have tons of needless aluminum bling and carbon fiber to go fast. Plus they need to be radically underweight when loaded with electronics, even though when racing at ANY sanctioned race the cars that are underweight will be saddled with ballast.

Utter silliness.

Just because a company doesn't release a new car every month doesn't mean they aren't competitive. If anything, AE cares MORE about their customers because once they develop a platform they stand by it and develop upgrades, as opposed to junking designs and leaving customers high and dry like Tamiya.

Dollar for Dollar, AE products are just as "fast" (whatever that means) and cost far less to maintain than the competition.

Now stop hating and go drive your Xray, Yoke BD, Tam415, Cyclone, JRXS or whatever car you were tricked into buying this week because of all the hype.

In 4 years I'll still be lapping you with my SLOW and OVERWEIGHT TC4.
__________________
"You don't get hurt racing little cars..."

-Me
Soviet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 02:31 PM   #62
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: FT Washington
Posts: 588
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Still looks like a pile to me.. AE should of just came out with a hole new design..
John Q is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 02:40 PM   #63
Tech Master
 
Soviet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Littleton, CO - USA
Posts: 1,708
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Q
Still looks like a pile to me.. AE should of just came out with a hole new design..
Why???

The USA has been using variations of the same fighter aircraft since the early/mid 1970's. Yet we still can claim air superiority anywhere at anytime.

There is nothing wrong with evolving a proven platform. It just isn't as sexy or exciting as a new design every year.

Oh and BTW...

"hole" new design?
__________________
"You don't get hurt racing little cars..."

-Me
Soviet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 02:45 PM   #64
Tech Adept
 
lastplace's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Va. Beach, VA
Posts: 237
Send a message via Yahoo to lastplace
Default

calm down comrade, it's only a hobby

BTW the TC3 is still awesome.
lastplace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 02:45 PM   #65
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,960
Trader Rating: 70 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Q
Still looks like a pile to me.. AE should of just came out with a hole new design..
__________________
SpeedZone Batteries
steve eaves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 02:47 PM   #66
Tech Master
 
Soviet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Littleton, CO - USA
Posts: 1,708
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lastplace
calm down comrade, it's only a hobby

BTW the TC3 is still awesome.
Hey Chris...
__________________
"You don't get hurt racing little cars..."

-Me
Soviet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 02:52 PM   #67
Tech Adept
 
Charles Leto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Q
Still looks like a pile to me.. AE should of just came out with a hole new design..
with all due respect the TC4 is an ALL NEW DESIGN they have added to it and upgraded it to make it even better,
Charles Leto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 03:05 PM   #68
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,154
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Tony P....In our earlier comments,to answer your question about what I find similar between the cars , rather than listing piece by piece what I feel is very similar and how it will have a similar effect and you responding with their "suttle" changes.....let me just say that the problem is that there is no solid advantage (aside from associated selling cars) between this new addition and whats already been available in the aftermarket for years.....The same held true for most "if not all" people going from a BMI TC-3 to a newly developed associated "team kit" TC-4, even with all the expensive factory team options.....matter a fact , it's was a pretty big disadvantage for most people Including myself because of the "huge" weight issue....mine was close to 4 oz different.....this as you know is major advantage on a car this size compared to having a "new car" with a vertical camber adjustment ......and like the other guy mentioned....most club races don't weigh the cars....so the ability to have the car super light must be possible.....and like I mentioned in my first post, the new factory team car looks good, (just similar). but my question to you...will it be an advantage for the regular racer over whats already been available for years now.....or just an advantage for the associated team drivers who couldn't obviously do enough with the other design's limitations and weren't allowed to run drastic aftermarket change'd cars.......oh..oh...I know the answer J/K........
__________________
1/8 Scale: Tekno EB-48.2... Tekin RX-8 GEN-2 W/2050kv... Airtronix M11-X Radio... HiTec HS-7954SH Servo...

1/10 Scale: Associated B-5(rear motor)...Tekin RSX Gen-2 W/8.5t... Savox SC-1258-TG Servo
Joe B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 03:09 PM   #69
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 164
Default

this new kit has come as a bit of a blow to me as ive bought the graphite kit and many hop ups and now theyve gone and changed it all!!!

its so much like the bmi tc4 kit !!!
and this has made me laugh because some peaple on this site was slagging the bmi kit(they know who they are)
and now associated have gone the sameway

and for those smart asses i know its not identical etc

i think id rather buy bmi than the ft kit but thats just me so chill

cheers gaz8
gaz8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 03:13 PM   #70
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,154
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Jeez Soviet...calling people clowns because you don't agree with them...many of which have been racing much longer than yourself and "could" very well be much more intelligent than yourself .....ever hear of an intelligent debate......try not to be a mindless poster defending the car you run.....Iv'e run associated cars for close to 20 years..I still run some of them........everyone has their opinions and you have 0 right to attack them in anyway......HMMMM Soviet..communism?
__________________
1/8 Scale: Tekno EB-48.2... Tekin RX-8 GEN-2 W/2050kv... Airtronix M11-X Radio... HiTec HS-7954SH Servo...

1/10 Scale: Associated B-5(rear motor)...Tekin RSX Gen-2 W/8.5t... Savox SC-1258-TG Servo

Last edited by Joe B; 05-23-2005 at 03:39 PM.
Joe B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 03:14 PM   #71
Tech Regular
 
JevUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Dover, UK
Posts: 310
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soviet
The AE gearbox for the TC3 was and still is a radical design. It is proven, its on multiple platforms and is tough as nails. Who gives a flying diddily flip if they didn't engineer a box cover with an integrated shock tower mount.

Actually if any of you thought like an engineer you would realize just why that would be a poor idea anyhow. If you were to break a tower and possibly a mount, you then would have to buy a $10.00 box cover as opposed to just a $2.00 tower mount

So...just what is with the "times" now anyway? Oh yeah...cars need to have tons of needless aluminum bling and carbon fiber to go fast. Plus they need to be radically underweight when loaded with electronics, even though when racing at ANY sanctioned race the cars that are underweight will be saddled with ballast.
I have owned a team tc3, factory team tc3 and now a tc4, I really like the cars. But some anoying things still exsist, and it's our job as customers to demand the best car for our money and loyalty. Not become fanboys...

I can't remember the last time I broke a part on the car so I wouldn't be worried about the shock mount be a little more expensive. I would prefer less parts on the car so that working on it is easier. I don't even see the need for the carbon plate for that part, I rather stick with the graphite ones. I've never broke one and they seem plenty stiff enough. I guess they did it just for the bling effect . Why does it need an engineer to work out that braking an intergrated shock mount would cost more than the extra one?

I would prefer if all the alloy parts were anodised black as this would dissipitate heat better

The tc4 is not underweight. IT'S A FREEKIN BUS! The new 3800 cells are gonna way around 405g per pack. A fully kitted tc4 with avarage radio gear and speedo are going to way around 1600g! Ok so compared to the old car it's not that much heavier but times have moved on and cells have got heavier, ae need to look into this as a serious problem(I guess the factory team is their solution). Also brushless motor are heavier so the latest small brushed speedo's and radio gear won't help much. I would love to be able to move some lead weight around the car for fine tunning, but I'm just wishing my car wasn't 40grams too heavy instead.

So my dig at the tc4 for being too heavier is not so bad for ae because it looks like the factory team car is trying to address this.

You might be lapping him in your slow and overweight tc4. But the guy 5 seconds ahead of you might be laughing at you with his 100g lighter hpi pro6 that parts don't wear out half as quick.

Let's all just get along and see things for each others perspective. I don't think AE need anymore fanboys, most people realise there are cars just as good out there but maybe not as good value for money
JevUK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 03:25 PM   #72
Tech Regular
 
Ortiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NC
Posts: 255
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Juho L. seems to have no problem going fast with this car. I don't seem to have any problem either. My car actually stunned everyone this weekend when it weighed in at 52.8 oz.(No dremel work, and I still use the Battery brace) So I was illegal! But it's cool because our track doesn't really check weight, and I know some others were light as well.

Anyway, not only did I TQ , I also managed to get the fastest 5 min run on the track so far.

So if you don't like the car, dont waiste your precious time reading up on it!!
Ortiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 03:26 PM   #73
Tech Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,549
Default

All I can say is that the car is sweet! I think its a step back in the right direction for team AE. I'm glad to see them put this out. I can't wait to see it run!
punkboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 03:34 PM   #74
Tech Elite
 
TPhalen's Avatar
R/C Tech Charter Subscriber
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Brookfield, CT
Posts: 2,793
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Joe. A big ADVANTAGE of our kit is that you only have to buy ONE car now, not two (by this I mean the TC4 AND a BMI conversion). It is also an attempt to make a MUCH more tuneable vehicle (chassis flex) as well as a lighter one. Could we have made it lighter?? I'm sure we could, but to make something lighter (for this example, a one-piece gearbox/shock tower mount) means MORE expense for us...new tooling, new testing, etc...meaning MORE cost for you. Our 'bolt-on' tower mount is pretty inexpensive (in relation to a one-piece unit) and might make the car a teensy-bit heavier, but is that a problem to you if you don't have to PAY much more??? Cost is a big issue here. Notice ALL the dual-deck CF cars are so much more expensive???? It's not cheap to make one of these cars so cost is a BIG issue for us. It's just our time to make one...even if it IS following the release of other conversion kits.

As far as the battery situation, I think EVERYONE is wondering what to do about that! You can only make a car SO light....with the addition of those heavier cells to ANY vehicle, I guess adding weight to the opposite side is just gonna have to be the answer.
__________________
Tony Phalen
UF1 Team Lotus/Renault
RCDriver.com
CompetitionX.com
R Sector / F1 Paint Labs
TPhalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2005, 03:41 PM   #75
Tech Rookie
 
dgr81bm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 18
Default

JevUk heres an option: dont crash then you wont have to worry about buying parts.

To all you other people crying that the TC4 is overwieght. Take the Novak Super Rooster out of your car and then you will come down in weight like everyone else. I always have to add weight to my TC4.
dgr81bm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
***Factory Sealed 12L4 Factory Team kit*** EZRC R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 0 11-05-2006 06:53 PM
FS: Factory Team NTC3 with Sirio Evo 2 World Champ Engine, K Factory, MX3-S Radio.. R3VoLuTiOn R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 11 09-23-2006 08:37 AM
F/S Team Associated Factory Team RC18T with Mamba Comp X Brushless and Extras ZeroCool101 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 7 01-07-2006 01:54 PM
Trading Factory Team B4 for Factory Team T4 jamescam R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 2 08-14-2005 09:35 AM
factory team rc10t4 and factory team rc18t for sale Zac R R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 28 05-26-2005 05:42 AM



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 05:15 AM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net