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

Tamiya Championship Series

Like Tree828Likes

Tamiya Championship Series

Old 10-11-2005, 07:48 PM
  #2191  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (57)
 
snopro31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: yorkton sask
Posts: 2,250
Trader Rating: 57 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Hebiki
at Nats... all 10 of the A-main drivers were using the NSX

GT1. B4 all the way since its legal

dont know anything about minis. sorry

Hey thanks alot this helped alot i guess the NSX is the body i will get for GT2 and i will run the B4 for GT1 .


Now if anyone knows if the M04M can compette well ,even with the gearing disadvantage that is has against the M03 i would be all set.
snopro31 is offline  
Old 10-11-2005, 11:50 PM
  #2192  
Tech Master
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: West of Crook County Illinois
Posts: 1,979
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Doc
Jeff: I made a bet with Demory while we were at the TCS race in Atlanta. His argument was that Jun's analysis of the F103 vs F201 showed that 4WD was better when you ramp up the horsepower.... My argument was that removing two cells from the F103 reduces the weight dramatically from a percentage standpoint and improves handling by reducing inertia and moving the CG forward. IIRC, those laptimes would have easily been good enough for the GT1 finals, and with a little tweakin' and fresh foams, a 4cell 19T F103 would give GT1 a good workout......(with 10 minute run times)bruce
Doc Bruce,
Sounds like it could be a cool class for TCS. Something a little different but very powerful. I was reading the TCS Canada rules and it looks like they do have a "C" class. I wonder if TamiyaUSFred will add another class (insert cricket noise here)? A cool direction for the F1s would be to reduce the size sorta like mini or 1/12 scale cars, keep the foams and do it with 4 cells/19t motor. They probably don't want to do that because Johnsons would be tooo sloooow and Tamiya does not sell a 4 cell pack. So are you going to TCS Canada...?


Originally Posted by F1Jet
Which is the outright fastest in your opinion? (same motor)

Open-wheeled F103 with foam tires
Open-wheeled F103 with rubber tires
LeMans chassied F103 with foam tires
Group C with foam tires

I haven't ever driven a Tamiya Group C car, so I say the LeMans is the fastest.
Fastest F103 foam. I tried racing F1 rubber against F1 foam and there is no chance, even with a perfect rubber race. Just like sedans foam will rule over sedan rubber. Lemans would be slower than F103 foam due to the downforce, it is not as nimble through the corners and lack of power in the Johnsons. Lemans foam still probably would edge out F103 rubber. Although if the Lemans had a beefyer motor it might be able to beat the F103 foam. If the C car is a little heavier with foam it probably would be slower than F103 foam but faster than rubber. In any configuration the car still will be, as rccardr said "....they'd be freakin' ballistic!"
A-Ko is offline  
Old 10-12-2005, 04:34 AM
  #2193  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (8)
 
rccardr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Secret Underground Laboratory
Posts: 2,353
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Casey-
Don't know if any of the rubber Tamiya tires and rims will fit the Group C hub pattern. Maybe the 'old' F1 tires would fit, but they're hard to find and pretty crappy. Might be too short as well. I'm thinkin' Group C on foam. I'm pretty sure that the Mazda 787B is/will be available too. That's the one I want! And the opportunity to run four cell packs and a 19 turn motor on the asphalt in the HW series would be verrrrrry tempting.

Jeff, it would be great if Tamiya added a "C" class to this year's US TCS series but I suspect it would be six cells (gotta be a stick pack) and the black motor that comes in the kit. They'd still be mighty stout.

SnoPro, the M04M is plenty competitive on the right (i.e. tight, twisty, main straight not too long) track layout. Steve Key won Milwaukee with one last year, and an 04 won there (and RCO) in 2004 too. But on the larger, more flowy kind of tracks like Atlanta or Memphis (or Aliso) they get killed in the straights. Which is why Fred was talking about separating the Mini classes into 04 and 03 for 2006.

Later
Doc
rccardr is offline  
Old 10-12-2005, 11:16 AM
  #2194  
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

Keep in mind the "C" cars are 102 and not 103 based. The wheels are way bigger on the C chassis than the 103. I think that they should be run out of the box with the black can Mabuchis, because to me its not how fast they are, it's how they look and how close the racing is.
BP SHADOW is offline  
Old 10-12-2005, 09:30 PM
  #2195  
Tech Master
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: West of Crook County Illinois
Posts: 1,979
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by rccardr
Jeff, it would be great if Tamiya added a "C" class to this year's US TCS series but I suspect it would be six cells (gotta be a stick pack) and the black motor that comes in the kit. They'd still be mighty stout.

Doc
Doc,

That would be very cool to have 2 F1 classes that are different. I do agree with Brad and others who have said they should keep it box stock.

Although down the road they could have a mod 19t 4 cell class that uses any Tamiya hopups, you know hopups will be coming, its not a limited item. Just think a possibility of 3 F1 classes...

Jeff
A-Ko is offline  
Old 10-13-2005, 07:15 PM
  #2196  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (8)
 
rccardr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Secret Underground Laboratory
Posts: 2,353
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Jeff- Do we see a rainbow flamer #24 Mercedes in our future?

Brad, even though the Group C cars are based on the 101/102 platform, they still have the same hub pattern as the 103's. You are correct that the C's used larger diameter rims than the F1 cars...but I think the same size (and same foams) as the 103L Indy series cars.

In terms of hop-ups the only ones I can remember are the metal (cast pot-metal) motor mounts - great because the plastic ones would break- bearings, graphite driveshaft and fine pitch gears. They come with an oil shock but you can upgrade to the aluminum bodied one (no performance gain there). That's about it, I think.

Later
Doc
rccardr is offline  
Old 10-14-2005, 10:10 AM
  #2197  
Tech Master
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: West of Crook County Illinois
Posts: 1,979
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by rccardr
Jeff- Do we see a rainbow flamer #24 Mercedes in our future?
I do have a rainbow flamer #24 porsche from our past...

Currently team Dupont/Gordon/Hendrick is into their contract with Ferrari and is looking to stay with classes that will get them to the TCS Nats podium in 06. Although the Lancier Rally racing in 05 was never mentioned to Ferrari. shhhhh... LOL and there might be a new sponsor for the #24 Busch series ride.

The funny thing is I have no luck with getting into new classes. They come out a year, the 2nd year I get in on them, the next year they are gone. Had a few classes that I really liked that either drastically changed or disappeared like that.

I vaguely remember these cars from the 1st or 2nd TCS years ran as F1 cars. They seemed a little klunky although it could have been the drivers and lack of tuning they did on them.

Jeff
A-Ko is offline  
Old 10-14-2005, 04:51 PM
  #2198  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (8)
 
rccardr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Secret Underground Laboratory
Posts: 2,353
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Yes, they were part of the series the first two or three years...when the tires had to run dry (without any sauce on them) with stick 6 cell packs and black can motors. Given our lack of knowledge back then regarding 1) how to run unsauced foams, 2) low-frquency speed controls and 3) how to prep/clean asphalt surfaces, it's astounding that they lasted that long.

Compared to 101/102 F1 cars, they ARE somewhat clunky due to the heavier weight and larger wheels/tires. But with good tire sauce and today's cells and esc's...freakin' ballistic! Betcha' faster than GT2.

Later
Doc
rccardr is offline  
Old 10-15-2005, 03:35 PM
  #2199  
Tech Master
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: West of Crook County Illinois
Posts: 1,979
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Doc, is it February yet? ? ?
A-Ko is offline  
Old 10-15-2005, 04:43 PM
  #2200  
Tech Master
iTrader: (5)
 
Casey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Md
Posts: 1,833
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Doug,
imagine,
C class cars, foam tires, 6 cells, indoor asphalt,
I would give up touring for that,

But The MINI will Live on, and on, and on................
Casey is offline  
Old 10-15-2005, 06:56 PM
  #2201  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (8)
 
rccardr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Secret Underground Laboratory
Posts: 2,353
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Casey-
A boy can dream...
Nowmake it closer than two hours from my house/work so that I can go have fun on weeknights.
Later
Doc
rccardr is offline  
Old 10-16-2005, 05:16 PM
  #2202  
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%+)
Default

Group C cars can use the same front rims as the F101-103 cars, but the rear hubs are completly different. The wheel bolts to the hub with two screws per side. I did not check closely, but I believe the rims are the same diameter to use the HBR type foams from the F103. However, the Group C foams are a much larger diameter than the F103 foams.

Dry foams worked great at a prepped tracked (Tamiya Alieso), but were horrible at my local parking lot track with no spray on the track.
Kevin CBR is offline  
Old 10-17-2005, 04:47 AM
  #2203  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (8)
 
Herc Driver's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 658
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Any pics of these cars? I'm having trouble getting the idea of this new chassis...need the visual

Paul
Herc Driver is offline  
Old 10-17-2005, 10:40 AM
  #2204  
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

The hubs are the same, its the insert that mounts different, the Group C cars are a 102 with a plastic bathtub main chassis. When I say insert I am referring to the center of the rim that makes it a 5 spoke, lace wheel, etc. Doc, you are correct on the hop ups, although I think any of the aluminum motor mounts will work based on the fact that the cast aluminum one will work on the 103. I still believe that mounting the rubber 103 tires on that chassis would not only look ridiculous, but would come up short on ground clearance
BP SHADOW is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 06:24 PM
  #2205  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (8)
 
rccardr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Secret Underground Laboratory
Posts: 2,353
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

...and don't the Group C cars use the larger 1150 bearings instead of the smaller 850's?
rccardr 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.