Given the feature has been on the team cars for quite a while (at least the last few ETS races).. nup. Just because VBC released the CAD images doesnt mean they had the idea first (plus speaking to lucas at the world's, they had only just started to play around with it).

Regardless... i would say the inspiration is actually more awesomatix than anything else..

Been a lot of that going on lately.

Oh I see what you are saying, the chassis is stiffer torsionally by having more screws or vice versa. I was thinking the motor mount was a floating one and needed bracing front to rear.

Thank you both, seems similar to what the AE TC4FT had. Not surprised to see ways to limit flex in the current cars.

I wonder why they kept the battery slot cuts in the chassis if they're pursuing absolute symmetry in chassis flex.

It is an oddity Xray are sticking with under and over tape.

So easy to copy one of the current solutions from the others.

Don't expect there is much in that though. Flex at the extremity of the chassis wouldn't be as important as the flex down the centre.

I heard the translator budget was cutted for this year's release.

, okay I'm out.

Does anyone know yet if the body posts are at the same location on the 17 car as with the 16 car?

Yes they are.

I ran my car for the first time today. Car was out of the box just as fast as my year old 16. I'm pretty pumped to go even faster this coming year.

anyone know who has these in stock in the US?

SpecR did it a few years ago.

Great Thanks
Its always easier convincing the misses when you can recycle the bodies...

Say what?!

Flex is impacted by the chassis width. Cutting those slots basically takes anything from the slot inner end out of the flex equation.

You can still use tape without slots. I do.

I just found it strange they go to the trouble of milling the motor cut out on the opposite side, but leave the battery slots as they are.