trf 2wd rumor

[Fredrik Emilsson]

Originally Posted by B44&501xRacerEX

If your a tamiya factory driver, which I think you are,
maybe you can give us some insight on the upcoming trf 2wd buggy.

No, I´m not a Tamiya factory driver, only Tamiya driver.

[Pablo668]

Well, if it is a warmed over B4/RB5 type buggy then it would be a very Japanese bit of thinking.
Conservative. Take something that works, refine/improve it.

[B44&501xRacerEX]

Originally Posted by Fredrik Emilsson

No, I´m not a Tamiya factory driver, only Tamiya driver.

I see...you make those covers for the 501x and 511, I figured
you was a factory driver....but your just like me and just a tamiya driver.
I only pull out my Tamiya on big races like trophy and plaque races.
I tried to be a factory driver, but everytime I check the roster it's full.
Tamiya has Ryan Lutz and Marc Rhienard so they are plenty fast.
Those 2 would probably drive circles around me.....lol

[Mouton]

Originally Posted by Pablo668

...Take something that works, refine/improve it.

What is wrong with that? Why the need to always reinvent the wheel? ApexSpeed hits the nail right on! As long as there are not any patent issues, why care?

The 2WD buggies have been around long enough for the recipe to have set. Look at 1:8 nitro buggies, they _all_ look the same. But there is not as much fuzz about that one looking like this one as when it comes to 2WD 1:10 buggies. I really do not see the reason for this even being a problem (that a new design is new revolutionary new, but rather evolution).

[sparrow.2]

Originally Posted by B44&501xRacerEX

....but your just like me and just a tamiya driver.

Nobody is quite like you dude

[Pablo668]

Originally Posted by Mouton

What is wrong with that? Why the need to always reinvent the wheel? ApexSpeed hits the nail right on! As long as there are not any patent issues, why care?

The 2WD buggies have been around long enough for the recipe to have set. Look at 1:8 nitro buggies, they _all_ look the same. But there is not as much fuzz about that one looking like this one as when it comes to 2WD 1:10 buggies. I really do not see the reason for this even being a problem (that a new design is new revolutionary new, but rather evolution).

I didn't say there was anything wrong with it per se. It just 'is' a very Japanese way of doing things.

I also stated before that my preference would have been for a CF chassis like the 501x or even something along the lines of the DEX210.

Plastic tubs are fine as a design solution, they're just not my preference, even though I own several buggies that have them.

Like I said before, I'm just a bit dissapointed with Tamiya for making a modified B4/RB5. I still want one though.
Think of it less as a problem and more of an opinion that I happen to have expressed.

[Mr. Red]

Think a lot of people agree with you that it would of been nice to see something else than a plastic chassis. Perhaps Tamiya dont want to let us see the car just yet. If I was the one about to release a new model into the market I would not let everybody see it until it is all done and ready.
The new 2wd are still a prototype I guess. The final product may have a lot of different parts in other materials when its finally available to the public.
In Asia the Tamiya cars are huge and options parts are everywhere. Anyone fancy a Trf 2wd will be able to trick out theirs beyond recognition

[mof]

Being CF would not automatically make it better. It could even be that they tried CF but it ended up being worse than composite.

[Pablo668]

Absolutely. I just like CF chassis is all.

[fastinfastout]

well who makes a production carbon fibre 2wd? No one I guess, and for a reason.

In offroad, you need flex!

have a look at B4 team drivers, using the plastic chassis rather than the carbon composite chassis. Too stiff chassis can create handling problems on rough tracks.

[B44&501xRacerEX]

A plastic chassis might be good to keep costs down.
I'm not going for bling bling this time, just something
that drives good and doesnt handle like poo.
A little bit of aluminum doesnt hurt, but too much and
the car is too heavy to be a good track tamer.
Weight will be slowing you down.

Aluminum bulkheads(Front and Rear) would be the only aluminum part(s)
the car may need. Minus a milled motor plate.
Plastic Bulkheads are weak in a 2wd car, and you have to
have re-inforcing brackets to prevent breaking bulkheads.
Carbon fiber shock towers would be another nice option.
Although not required.

[Pablo668]

Hmmmm,

The latest Schumacher appears to be a CF chassis. I'm sure it works ok.

I can't see how a bit of flex can't be designed into that kind of chassis at any rate.

But what do I know.

[qatmix]

Originally Posted by fastinfastout

well who makes a production carbon fibre 2wd? No one I guess, and for a reason.

In offroad, you need flex!

have a look at B4 team drivers, using the plastic chassis rather than the carbon composite chassis. Too stiff chassis can create handling problems on rough tracks.

Flex just makes a car a little more passive and forgiving. Its much better to have a stiff chassis and the suspension set up properly as you then have a more precise handling car. Although obviously it will take a lot more minor tweaks to set-up.

[DaveG28]

Originally Posted by qatmix

Flex just makes a car a little more passive and forgiving. Its much better to have a stiff chassis and the suspension set up properly as you then have a more precise handling car. Although obviously it will take a lot more minor tweaks to set-up.

At last, someone who agrees that if done right, you want stiff with good suspension, not flex!!!

Now just waiting for someone to agree the same is true for weight, that lighter is better

[DCM]

Carbon doesn't mean it has to be stiff, just a different way to the same end result, it all depends on the thickness of carbon, the layup of the sheets, how it is braced etc...

[5POINTSTAR]

Originally Posted by DaveG28

Now just waiting for someone to agree the same is true for weight, that lighter is better

Lighter is better !!

[mof]

Originally Posted by DaveG28

At last, someone who agrees that if done right, you want stiff with good suspension, not flex!!!

Now just waiting for someone to agree the same is true for weight, that lighter is better

Theory is always nice, but can it ever be done "right enough" to not want flex? For example, Hupo used flex upper decks on his TRF511 at the euros 2009.

[flipside]

Originally Posted by DaveG28

At last, someone who agrees that if done right, you want stiff with good suspension, not flex!!!

Now just waiting for someone to agree the same is true for weight, that lighter is better

I agree on both statements :-)

But I also agree that setup needs to be good, and you don't always have the time to accomplish that. For example at your national series with 2x3mins of practise, you really want a stable car, even if it's a few 10ths of a second slower...

There's another CF car, Atomic Carbon CR2! It's stiff, and it rules!

[Fredrik Emilsson]

Flex in obviously important. Fullscale cars/bikes also need a bit of flex to work.
I remember when Honda replaced the single sided swing arm with a conventional swing arm to get more flex. The single sided arm was too stiff...

[Twister]

Originally Posted by Mr. Red

Think a lot of people agree with you that it would of been nice to see something else than a plastic chassis. Perhaps Tamiya dont want to let us see the car just yet. If I was the one about to release a new model into the market I would not let everybody see it until it is all done and ready.
The new 2wd are still a prototype I guess. The final product may have a lot of different parts in other materials when its finally available to the public.
In Asia the Tamiya cars are huge and options parts are everywhere. Anyone fancy a Trf 2wd will be able to trick out theirs beyond recognition

i´d like that