Factory Team TC4 from RCX
05-23-2005, 02:41 PM
#76
AE rocks for sure! I was never disappointed by any product nor the service.
I really appreciate the efforts done to minimise the costs for the customer, and man, those shocktower adapters look nice.
I´m wondering what the street price will be?Any estimation?
I really appreciate the efforts done to minimise the costs for the customer, and man, those shocktower adapters look nice.
I´m wondering what the street price will be?Any estimation?
05-23-2005, 02:47 PM
#77
There will be a conversion kit. So all you curent TC4 owners will not be left out in the cold. It will be released after the kits obviously but never the less there will be a conversion.
05-23-2005, 02:56 PM
#80
I like the new design and I like AE keeping it cheap. X-ray Nation spring set $70 
If there is a demand for diff case/shock towers some after market company will come up with them for $65 each.
Any chance for a stock to "Team Kit" TC4 upgrade kit?
What's the steering system, TC4 or TC3?
If there is a demand for diff case/shock towers some after market company will come up with them for $65 each.
Any chance for a stock to "Team Kit" TC4 upgrade kit?
What's the steering system, TC4 or TC3?
05-23-2005, 03:04 PM
#82
Originally Posted by Ortiz
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!!
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!!
Now it feels like I'm banging my head against a wall here, the tc4 is way too heavy. I don't know what cells, servo, receiver, esc, transponder and bodyshell you were using but they must be very light.
These days you can weigh the car with a personal transponder so that adds weight. I'm using the novak brushless but will be upgrading to the nosram and they are both a bit heavier than a brushed combo. Also the ib3800 cells are around 40g heavier than gp3300. So I need a nice light chassis to get me to the weight limit or below. So far I'm at 1545g with gp3700, but would like to run ib3800 in the future. I'm using the plastic outdrives that wear out after a few meetings
. Titanium tie rods, titanium ball joints. The old hollow center shaft. Alloy and titanium screws. About the only things left to get are titanium turnbuckles and driveshaft axels.
Originally Posted by Joe B
.....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 changed cars.......oh..oh...I know the answer 
J/K........
J/K........
Originally Posted by dgr81bm
JevUk heres an option: dont crash then you wont have to worry about buying parts.
:
Originally Posted by Soviet
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.
Originally Posted by TPhalen
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.
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.
05-23-2005, 03:05 PM
#83
Thanks "T" and thanks for your help with my TC4 earlier this year.
05-23-2005, 03:06 PM
#84
Just wondering if there....
Will be any changes to the tub chassis tso I can run the 3700 cells?
05-23-2005, 03:17 PM
#86
so Associated should be condemned because battery manufacturers cant keep the weight of the cells down? at least with the Associated you can get the cells IN the car unlike another car i know....
by the way...i dont think the FTTC4 being the "heavy" car it is will have a problem running with any other car....
by the way...i dont think the FTTC4 being the "heavy" car it is will have a problem running with any other car....
05-23-2005, 03:23 PM
#88
Tech Adept
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sao Jose dos Campos - SP - Brazil
Posts: 207
Trader Rating: 21 (100%+)
Originally Posted by Soviet
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.
Dollar for Dollar, AE products are just as "fast" (whatever that means) and cost far less to maintain than the competition.
And the FT TC4 looks very good! Now it's the next item on my shopping list!
05-23-2005, 03:26 PM
#89
Originally Posted by TPhalen
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)
With regards to the shock mount, from my understanding of plastics molding I would have thought there would have only been a small difference between altering the existing gearbox half design and producing a mold than designing a whole new piece and and making a mold as well.
But looks like I was wrong, I guess you guys looked hard at the numbers and decided against it for cost reasons.
05-23-2005, 03:33 PM
#90
Originally Posted by losi jon
so Associated should be condemned because battery manufacturers cant keep the weight of the cells down? at least with the Associated you can get the cells IN the car unlike another car i know....
by the way...i dont think the FTTC4 being the "heavy" car it is will have a problem running with any other car....
by the way...i dont think the FTTC4 being the "heavy" car it is will have a problem running with any other car....
The cell weight is the same for people driving the other chassis, and they enjoy the luxury of being able to tune their cars by moving lead around.
Stop being so on guard against anyone that might critisise ae. I've already said I think the FT looks like a good and obvious step in the right direction I will probably get the upgrade kit myself if it doesn't cost the earth.
As far as I'm concerned no kit is perfect and I could just as easily be picking holes in an xray or a hpi. But I have a particular fondness of the tc3/tc4 so I want all the problems sorted.
Originally Posted by Sedanfahrer
I agree with you 100%! That's one of the reasons I drive AE cars!