Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Racing Forum
Tamiya Championship Series >

Tamiya Championship Series

Like Tree818Likes

Tamiya Championship Series

Old 06-25-2013, 07:57 AM
  #18076  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Auburn, Wa
Posts: 2,265
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

I'm surprised that you have the newest F1 with a surge in popularity and the busiest buying time for Tamiya sales and you aren't allowing the kit.

Almost everyone serious about TCS Finals will buy a new kit to go in with the freshest equipment. Yes it may be faster but it is also a new setup and it may take time to find the sweet spot, that falls to the racers though not Tamiya America. Someone with a dialed v2 or even X1 may be the winner because they know their car better then so be it. I know locally we have quite a few who are either frustrated because they have bought or have now backed away from a sale because there is no reason to buy the kit to participate in TCS. Some of those sales were going to be people new to TCS and excited to give it a try with the new sexy hot F1 kit.

On the Retail Hobby shop side, how many have committed to buying kits to gather dust on the shelf because they were TCS loyal shops and had customer beating their doors down to buy the newest surely TCS legal kit?

Hopefully you'll reconsider Dave.
Difuser is offline  
Old 06-25-2013, 02:20 PM
  #18077  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 141
Default

I can understand that some of you are frustrated with the TRF101 not being legal for the remainder of the 2013 TCS season. So I’ll try to explain a few things in hopes of adding perspective to a decision that was not made lightly. The majority of new chassis releases such as the F104 X1, V2 etc. tend to be gradual evolutions. In addition, existing owners can “upgrade/convert” their chassis (or purchase the new model if they chose) while remaining compliant to the TCS regulations. However, sometimes there are new products that aren’t as easy to integrate for one reason or another and the TRF101 is one of those cases. At a glance, the TRF101 may look relatively similar to the F104 line. However, it features adjustments & geometry that could make its performance beyond the capability of the F104 chassis. If it has such and advantage, drivers with the F104 would have to by the TRF101 in order to be competitive. No, I don’t believe that most people serious about TCS are going to buy a new car for the finals anyway.

To highlight some of the advantages of the TRF101, the front end may look simpler than it really is. It features a “flex” upper arm system that provides camber change like the F104 front suspension, while being much more solid thus more stable than the F104. This paired with the conventional coil spring, should provide and very versatile range of rate/movement which can be adjusted via the upper arm screw. It also has much more caster angle (about 8 deg) which is a key geometry feature and something the F104 is in need of but not capable of. Moving to the rear, the side link ratios options allow for a significant increase in range/tuning. This is another area that the F104 is limited. In my opinion, the links are too far inboard on the V2 which not only reduces the resolution of the side springs but it also amplifies free play and fragility. The differential is also much better on the TRF101. It features twice the number of diff balls which reduces the assembly tension by half, resulting in a much more consistent and longer lasting differential. That’s just the way in comes out of the box. Then there’s the hop-ups (that won’t be compatible with the F104) coming. No, we can’t allow the use of components to be swapped from the TRF101 to the F104. “Hybrids” are not allowed in TCS and would create a far bigger can of worms.

Furthermore, “TRF” cars are prone to “high rates of evolution”. This means frequent new variants in a short period of time. For example, we’re on our 5th version of the TRF417 in about 18 months VS our 2nd version of the TA05 in about 6 years. Should the use of TRF cars be allowed in GT-2 and GT-3? I believe this would hurt these classes long term. Unfortunately, it’s not practical to create a separate F1 class at this time. As the race director, I have to consider all factors and the long term effects on the class. Is it counterintuitive in terms of sales to not allow the TRF101? Probably, I’m sure allowing the car would generate sales….short term. However, I believe that what’s best for the participants is what’s best for the series and I think overall sales will reflect that….long term.

In light of these factors, this late in the season (8 out of 11 regional’s complete), I don’t believe it’s in the best interest of the participants and the F1 class as a whole, to allow the use of the TRF101 chassis until a further review can be made. I can only offer my apologies for any frustration this decision has made to our customers. For this, I sincerely apologize.
David J. is offline  
Old 06-25-2013, 04:30 PM
  #18078  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (24)
 
BP SHADOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: In the LAB paintin' bodies!!!!
Posts: 2,324
Trader Rating: 24 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by David J.
I can understand that some of you are frustrated with the TRF101 not being legal for the remainder of the 2013 TCS season. So I’ll try to explain a few things in hopes of adding perspective to a decision that was not made lightly. The majority of new chassis releases such as the F104 X1, V2 etc. tend to be gradual evolutions. In addition, existing owners can “upgrade/convert” their chassis (or purchase the new model if they chose) while remaining compliant to the TCS regulations. However, sometimes there are new products that aren’t as easy to integrate for one reason or another and the TRF101 is one of those cases. At a glance, the TRF101 may look relatively similar to the F104 line. However, it features adjustments & geometry that could make its performance beyond the capability of the F104 chassis. If it has such and advantage, drivers with the F104 would have to by the TRF101 in order to be competitive. No, I don’t believe that most people serious about TCS are going to buy a new car for the finals anyway.

To highlight some of the advantages of the TRF101, the front end may look simpler than it really is. It features a “flex” upper arm system that provides camber change like the F104 front suspension, while being much more solid thus more stable than the F104. This paired with the conventional coil spring, should provide and very versatile range of rate/movement which can be adjusted via the upper arm screw. It also has much more caster angle (about 8 deg) which is a key geometry feature and something the F104 is in need of but not capable of. Moving to the rear, the side link ratios options allow for a significant increase in range/tuning. This is another area that the F104 is limited. In my opinion, the links are too far inboard on the V2 which not only reduces the resolution of the side springs but it also amplifies free play and fragility. The differential is also much better on the TRF101. It features twice the number of diff balls which reduces the assembly tension by half, resulting in a much more consistent and longer lasting differential. That’s just the way in comes out of the box. Then there’s the hop-ups (that won’t be compatible with the F104) coming. No, we can’t allow the use of components to be swapped from the TRF101 to the F104. “Hybrids” are not allowed in TCS and would create a far bigger can of worms.

Furthermore, “TRF” cars are prone to “high rates of evolution”. This means frequent new variants in a short period of time. For example, we’re on our 5th version of the TRF417 in about 18 months VS our 2nd version of the TA05 in about 6 years. Should the use of TRF cars be allowed in GT-2 and GT-3? I believe this would hurt these classes long term. Unfortunately, it’s not practical to create a separate F1 class at this time. As the race director, I have to consider all factors and the long term effects on the class. Is it counterintuitive in terms of sales to not allow the TRF101? Probably, I’m sure allowing the car would generate sales….short term. However, I believe that what’s best for the participants is what’s best for the series and I think overall sales will reflect that….long term.

In light of these factors, this late in the season (8 out of 11 regional’s complete), I don’t believe it’s in the best interest of the participants and the F1 class as a whole, to allow the use of the TRF101 chassis until a further review can be made. I can only offer my apologies for any frustration this decision has made to our customers. For this, I sincerely apologize.
Dave,
Being the guy that has to make/enforce the rules is not the most desirable job, I understand that . My question would be, why for such a niche segment would you release a high end kit like this? From how you describe it , the 101 will never be legal for TCS because it will be far superior to any 104 that has been or will be available. Also, as special as this chassis sounds , the fact is it still uses the stock 104 lower front arm, which sets up the whole front end of the car. So if that is all true, then the 101 upper suspension should drop right on to any F104 save the W with NO modification. You might consider the 101 an entirely new car, but most everyone I have talked to sees it as another 104 derivative. Additionally, if the 104 is in need of so much development, why would they not develop parts to fix it instead of doing a whole new car? I realize that Tamiyas business objectives is to sell kits, as well as parts, but as popular as F1 is at the moment, it can dead and buried if it turns into chassis of the week. It happened on Touring car, and F1 is more fickle than TC.
BP SHADOW is offline  
Old 06-25-2013, 06:22 PM
  #18079  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 141
Default

Originally Posted by BP SHADOW
My question would be, why for such a niche segment would you release a high end kit like this?
Tamiya America usually has very little to do with what is released. We (Tamiya America) had no input with the release of the TRF101.

Originally Posted by BP SHADOW
From how you describe it , the 101 will never be legal for TCS because it will be far superior to any 104 that has been or will be available.
I simply described the advantages the TRF101 potentially has over the F104. Yes, it's possible the TRF101 is superior to the F104 which is why it's legality in TCS is being held for further review.

Originally Posted by BP SHADOW
Also, as special as this chassis sounds , the fact is it still uses the stock 104 lower front arm, which sets up the whole front end of the car. So if that is all true, then the 101 upper suspension should drop right on to any F104 save the W with NO modification. You might consider the 101 an entirely new car, but most everyone I have talked to sees it as another 104 derivative.
The entire suspension system of the TA05 is identical to the TRF417. Yet I don't think many people consider the TRF417 a derivative of the TA05.

Originally Posted by BP SHADOW
Additionally, if the 104 is in need of so much development, why would they not develop parts to fix it instead of doing a whole new car?
Every chassis is in need of development, including the TRF101. Look how many TRF417's there are. Most likely, the F104 will either continue to evolve and/or, there will be a F105.

Originally Posted by BP SHADOW
as popular as F1 is at the moment, it can dead and buried if it turns into chassis of the week. It happened on Touring car, and F1 is more fickle than TC.
Then why the hurry to ruin it? This in one of the reasons for the decision to further review the TRF101.
David J. is offline  
Old 06-25-2013, 06:50 PM
  #18080  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (24)
 
BP SHADOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: In the LAB paintin' bodies!!!!
Posts: 2,324
Trader Rating: 24 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by David J.
Tamiya America usually has very little to do with what is released. We (Tamiya America) had no input with the release of the TRF101.



I simply described the advantages the TRF101 potentially has over the F104. Yes, it's possible the TRF101 is superior to the F104 which is why it's legality in TCS is being held for further review.



The entire suspension system of the TA05 is identical to the TRF417. Yet I don't think many people consider the TRF417 a derivative of the TA05.



Every chassis is in need of development, including the TRF101. Look how many TRF417's there are. Most likely, the F104 will either continue to evolve and/or, there will be a F105.



Then why the hurry to ruin it? This in one of the reasons for the decision to further review the TRF101.
All reasonable answers, and believe me I am not trying to get on your bad side ( I still need to make it through tech at Nats) Not sure though that the TA05/417 comparison is Apples to Apples since the 104 V2 and 101 are both carbon plate cars vs. Plastic Tub/Double Deck for the TC chassis. I have built ,owned, raced, crashed, fixed every version of F1 chassis that Tamiya has made since the Lotus 99T and I still own a majority of them. Believe me I will own the 101. But others are not as fanatical as I am about this stuff and if the 101 evolves and the price goes up, along with alot of other chassis on the market it will not bode well for the class. When you start knocking on the $400 door for a chassis that still needs a body and wheels and tires, the class becomes less appealing. I have contact with a large portion of the F1 community so I get a lot of feedback about a lot of things, as I know you guys do too , but they might be a bit more vocal to me. Hope to see you at the end of August
BP SHADOW is offline  
Old 06-25-2013, 07:34 PM
  #18081  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (34)
 
F N CUDA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mission Viejo, So Cal
Posts: 5,908
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

We'll take what we like and skip what we don't, as always.
No V2 for me but I did try to win one.
Will the 101 be top prizes for podiums at the Nats?
I'm glad Tamiya Japan keeps rollin the dice for us all and USA has to make the decisions as to what gets to run. Can't please all the people... David J makes great observations and we can respect that.
If the 101 is it, we'll race em even if TCS aint feelin it. (yet)
F N CUDA is offline  
Old 06-25-2013, 07:39 PM
  #18082  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (34)
 
F N CUDA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mission Viejo, So Cal
Posts: 5,908
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

2x
F N CUDA is offline  
Old 06-25-2013, 08:00 PM
  #18083  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (22)
 
robk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
Posts: 8,202
Trader Rating: 22 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by F N CUDA
No V2 for me but I did try to win one.
You don't seem to need one to be fast
robk is offline  
Old 06-25-2013, 08:05 PM
  #18084  
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 141
Default

Originally Posted by BP SHADOW
All reasonable answers, and believe me I am not trying to get on your bad side ( I still need to make it through tech at Nats) Not sure though that the TA05/417 comparison is Apples to Apples since the 104 V2 and 101 are both carbon plate cars vs. Plastic Tub/Double Deck for the TC chassis. I have built ,owned, raced, crashed, fixed every version of F1 chassis that Tamiya has made since the Lotus 99T and I still own a majority of them. Believe me I will own the 101. But others are not as fanatical as I am about this stuff and if the 101 evolves and the price goes up, along with alot of other chassis on the market it will not bode well for the class. When you start knocking on the $400 door for a chassis that still needs a body and wheels and tires, the class becomes less appealing. I have contact with a large portion of the F1 community so I get a lot of feedback about a lot of things, as I know you guys do too , but they might be a bit more vocal to me. Hope to see you at the end of August
Brad,
I know you’re not trying to be combative, it was not taken that way. I know you’re an avid enthusiast (a good thing), and you’re just voicing your concerns. I don't want to come off like I didn’t want to hear them, because I do. I just want to shed some light on some of the reasons for the decision regarding the TRF101 and the concerns I have moving forward next season. The tricky thing about making something legal is once you do, it’s really hard to go back.

My point about the TA05/417 was regarding the statement that because the lower arm on the TRF101 is the same as the F104, makes it a derivative. I disagree, considering the TRF101 has significantly wider range in suspension geometry from the F104 which cannot be matched on the F104.

I feel the TRF101 was developed primarily to compete with the “other” F1 brands on the market. It’s just difficult to incorporate it into the TCS series at this time without further evaluation of it’s potential. I think it’s a great car and I’m sure we’ll see what it can do in the weekly club races starting this weekend.

See you in August!
David J. is offline  
Old 06-25-2013, 09:19 PM
  #18085  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (34)
 
F N CUDA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mission Viejo, So Cal
Posts: 5,908
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by robk
You don't seem to need one to be fast
Wow, thanks again Mr. K.
It's amazing what a lucky setup can do for an average driver.
I feel I'd struggle trying to match this car with a new one but hope to try sometime.
F N CUDA is offline  
Old 06-26-2013, 06:41 PM
  #18086  
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Richmond,Va
Posts: 367
Default

Originally Posted by David J.
I can understand that some of you are frustrated with the TRF101 not being legal for the remainder of the 2013 TCS season. So I’ll try to explain a few things in hopes of adding perspective to a decision that was not made lightly. The majority of new chassis releases such as the F104 X1, V2 etc. tend to be gradual evolutions. In addition, existing owners can “upgrade/convert” their chassis (or purchase the new model if they chose) while remaining compliant to the TCS regulations. However, sometimes there are new products that aren’t as easy to integrate for one reason or another and the TRF101 is one of those cases. At a glance, the TRF101 may look relatively similar to the F104 line. However, it features adjustments & geometry that could make its performance beyond the capability of the F104 chassis. If it has such and advantage, drivers with the F104 would have to by the TRF101 in order to be competitive. No, I don’t believe that most people serious about TCS are going to buy a new car for the finals anyway.

To highlight some of the advantages of the TRF101, the front end may look simpler than it really is. It features a “flex” upper arm system that provides camber change like the F104 front suspension, while being much more solid thus more stable than the F104. This paired with the conventional coil spring, should provide and very versatile range of rate/movement which can be adjusted via the upper arm screw. It also has much more caster angle (about 8 deg) which is a key geometry feature and something the F104 is in need of but not capable of. Moving to the rear, the side link ratios options allow for a significant increase in range/tuning. This is another area that the F104 is limited. In my opinion, the links are too far inboard on the V2 which not only reduces the resolution of the side springs but it also amplifies free play and fragility. The differential is also much better on the TRF101. It features twice the number of diff balls which reduces the assembly tension by half, resulting in a much more consistent and longer lasting differential. That’s just the way in comes out of the box. Then there’s the hop-ups (that won’t be compatible with the F104) coming. No, we can’t allow the use of components to be swapped from the TRF101 to the F104. “Hybrids” are not allowed in TCS and would create a far bigger can of worms.

Furthermore, “TRF” cars are prone to “high rates of evolution”. This means frequent new variants in a short period of time. For example, we’re on our 5th version of the TRF417 in about 18 months VS our 2nd version of the TA05 in about 6 years. Should the use of TRF cars be allowed in GT-2 and GT-3? I believe this would hurt these classes long term. Unfortunately, it’s not practical to create a separate F1 class at this time. As the race director, I have to consider all factors and the long term effects on the class. Is it counterintuitive in terms of sales to not allow the TRF101? Probably, I’m sure allowing the car would generate sales….short term. However, I believe that what’s best for the participants is what’s best for the series and I think overall sales will reflect that….long term.

In light of these factors, this late in the season (8 out of 11 regional’s complete), I don’t believe it’s in the best interest of the participants and the F1 class as a whole, to allow the use of the TRF101 chassis until a further review can be made. I can only offer my apologies for any frustration this decision has made to our customers. For this, I sincerely apologize.
Dave,
I agree with your decision, it is best for the 2013 season. If we were
early into the current season then maybe it would be feasable?
Would you not think McLaren would not want to put a brand new car out there this weekend at the British GP based on their current performance so far?
There has to be Rules to Keep it Competitive.
Steve
hickmeister is offline  
Old 06-26-2013, 07:25 PM
  #18087  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Auburn, Wa
Posts: 2,265
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Uh Steve, there's nothing stopping them... The chassis aren't homologated anymore. At this point they really need a B-Spec car and are damn near there with all the revisions.
Methinks Steve has a car he very happy with too and doesn't want to learn a new car
Difuser is offline  
Old 06-27-2013, 04:55 PM
  #18088  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (11)
 
Kevin CBR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: "Racing Budget" is an oxymoron
Posts: 3,984
Trader Rating: 11 (100%+)
Talking

Dave, I think you have taken the right course with the TRF 101 for this season. At our local carpet track, we get 15-20 F1's for a Club race and there are guys running the Tamiya F104's in stock, X1, W GP in 180 trim and V2's against Top, TRG, VBC cars as well as Roche and Exotek conversions. I don't see people running out to buy a 101 just for Tamiya races only and not also using for their local races. If they do, they have a pretty good racing budget. When you look at the 101 closely, there are very few parts interchangeable with an F104. For those that already bought a TRF 101, they can still run at their local tracks club events and gain a lot of development time they can put too good use at their local races and potentially TCS 2014.

Cuda - since you won't come play carpet with us anymore, I built an outdoor car to start running with you.

Panda
Kevin CBR is offline  
Old 06-27-2013, 05:50 PM
  #18089  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (34)
 
F N CUDA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mission Viejo, So Cal
Posts: 5,908
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

It'll be good to see you on asphalt again and just in time, next race is at Tamiya, another of your homes.
I really like Sean and TQ raceway but the last few times out there I've had miserable times with traction rolling and breaking my stuff, F1 and VTA and the things take forever to get settled back down again. I get rid of the snap roll and the car is a pig so it's just not fun for me.
I think carpet gives me turrets syndrome, I'm cussing involuntarily all day long and it's gotta be annoying to the other drivers.
F N CUDA is offline  
Old 06-28-2013, 03:18 AM
  #18090  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
KA2AEV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tottenville, NYC
Posts: 2,350
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

"I think carpet gives me turrets syndrome, I'm cussing involuntarily all day long and it's gotta be annoying to the other drivers."


THATS IT!!!
Man we gotta notify the Mayo Clinic or somebody of our findings!
My Driver and myself suffer the from the same syndrome!
Its gotta be!!!
KA2AEV is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.