Noj Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 Do you think that somewhere about his person, there is a small embossed logo of two stars in a small rectangle....... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewbacca Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 Just now, Noj said: Do you think that somewhere about his person, there is a small embossed logo of two stars in a small rectangle....... Yes 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMaxxDave Posted January 5, 2017 Author Share Posted January 5, 2017 I think when he is cut, the bleeds blue red and whiteSent from my iPad using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMaxxDave Posted January 5, 2017 Author Share Posted January 5, 2017 Some say that he can speak fluent Tamiya and that he had a 959 prototype before Tamiya had finished designing itSent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noj Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewbacca Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 All we know is: he's called XV! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz! Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 M04 was rear wheel drive, like a backwards m03l if memory serves. depending on the shell you wish to run, m03 has a hump on top so low slung bonnets are a no-no, m05 is, I reckon the most popular and therefore bits aplenty. Personally prefer the m06, rear wheel drive and all new design that does actually work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XV Pilot Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 13 hours ago, chewbacca said: Where is "The Guru"? He is nearing the end of a very busy shift cycle at work, but is looking forward to posting a nice detailed answer this evening. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post XV Pilot Posted January 6, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted January 6, 2017 (edited) 23 hours ago, rob bark said: So been a while since I been on hear but have caught the rc bug bad started with lunchbox which I have spent a fortune on an im sure for then money have spent could have brought a traxxas emaxx or something with a similar stupid price tag have also brought a nail of a mad Bull which got stripped an rebuilt!! I then thought 4x4 an tarmac so then treated myself to a tto2 chassis with a mustang shell an brushless lipo power which is amazingly fast!! My latest mission is a maverick scout!! Which was stripped with in 3days an have since rebuilt with custom chassis an new linkages an im in process of making my own shell!!! Which I'm rather impressed with!! So I'm trying to eye a new project an im thinking bout getting a rover mini!!! But when I'm looking around on eBay I'm getting different m chassis types!! So my question is what's main differences in them all an which is best?????? Cheers for any help in advance Some excellent questions with which to start your Mini project! First, the basics: There are currently 6 2WD cars in the Tamiya M-chassis lineup, numbered M-01 to M-06. The odd numbers are FWD and the even numbers are RWD. Each car has sub-types referring to their wheelbase, designated by the letters S (often omitted), M or L to indicate short, medium or long. Changing the wheelbase is usually achieved by including or omitting different spacers when building the chassis. For your Rover Mini, you want one with the short a.k.a. standard wheelbase. This puts the M-04 out of the running straight away, as it only comes in M and L wheelbases - there isn't an S option unless you start getting creative with a hacksaw and/or 3D-printed parts. As with most Tamiya chassis, you might come across other suffixes too such as R or PRO (indicating a race-oriented version supplied with some tasty hop-ups) and RA (indicating a rally version). The earliest pair are the M-01 and M-02, dating from the mid-90's. Looking very similar and sharing the majority of parts, they feature an interesting monoshock suspension arrangement that was considered quite novel at the time, although it isn't all that easy to set up. Due to this, as well as the relative scarcity of spare parts, they are not a good choice for a regular runner or race model, but being the first M-class cars, they hold a significant place in Tamiya history and are thus considered quite collectible in certain circles. Fast forward to the turn of the millennium, and another pair of M-chassis cars came on the scene - the M-03 and M-04. Although their main chassis mouldings look very different from each other, they also share the majority of smaller parts. Featuring conventional suspension with a shock at each corner, these are a lot easier to set up than their predecessors, and since spares are still easily available, some people still run and race them to this day. A decade passed, and then the next generation arrived in the form of the M-05 (although we had to wait a bit longer for its RWD sibling the M-06). Again they look very different due to their main chassis mouldings and layout, but their suspension, steering and gearbox parts are shared. Heavier and more complex than their predecessors, they are nonetheless more refined models, and most racers prefer them, although there are a few diehards who still prefer the simpler M-03 and M-04. For your Rover Mini project then, you presumably want a FWD chassis, so you have the M-01, M-03 and M-05 to choose from. And if you want to drive it rather than just look at it, you'll probably be wanting a M-03 or M-05. The M-03 is a tough little beast, very simple and rugged. The steering servo is mounted above the gearbox and the servo saver connects directly to the tie rods, making for a light and strong setup, but also making the chassis prone to bump steer and raising the centre of gravity a little. However it handles very well despite its simplicity, especially if you swap the stock friction shocks out for a set of oil-filled ones. At least a third of my race medals from back in the day were earned with my M-03. The more modern M-05 is quite a different animal. For one thing, it is a lot more complex, using many more mouldings and screw types in its construction. This obviously makes it heavier. The steering is more complex too, using a steering rack connected to the servo via a long pushrod. This introduces a fair bit of slop, however this also allows the servo to be mounted low down behind the gearbox, lowering the centre of gravity. It also improves the geometry, pretty much eliminating the bump steer issues of its predecessor. And once you upgrade the stock plastic steering rack to a ballraced alloy version, the slop is minimized too, so you have a far more race-capable steering arrangement. So which is best? That depends on what you want to do with your Mini. As a race car, the M-05 has a lot going for it with its lower centre of gravity and better geometry, but as a basher, personally I prefer the simpler, tougher, easier to maintain M-03. Both are good chassis, well-supported by both Tamiya and the aftermarket hop-up industry, so you won't go wrong whichever you choose. One factor which might decide it for you is whether or not you want to run rectangular LiPos. The M-05 can be built with version II front chassis mouldings with rectangular cutouts that allow the fitment of rectangular LiPo batteries. However the M-03 does not have this option, so is restricted to rounded LiPos or NiMH stick packs unless you take a hacksaw to it. Something to note if you choose the M-05 is that the rear chassis mouldings supplied with most kits these days are the version II ones, which feature protrusions at the back designed to engage the droop screws on the optional one-piece suspension arms. However the protrusions interfere with the Mini bodyshell and serve no purpose with the standard suspension arms, so you'd need to trim them off with a hacksaw or Dremel, or cut an unsightly hole in the boot of your bodyshell. I think that about covers it for starters. Please let us know if you have any other questions, and be sure to keep us posted with your project's progress! Edited January 6, 2017 by XV Pilot 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewbacca Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 The Guru has spoken. All hail the Guru. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Noj Posted January 6, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted January 6, 2017 I have learned much in one post 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewbacca Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 14 minutes ago, Noj said: I have learned much in one post Me too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TMaxxDave Posted January 6, 2017 Author Popular Post Share Posted January 6, 2017 I think my head explodedSent from my iPad using Tapatalk 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob bark Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 On 05/01/2017 at 21:44, TMaxxDave said: Have had to screen shot that so can read it through a few times!!! So am I better off going m06?? As I'm struggling to find earlier models anyway!!! I'm wanting the rover mini shell!! But kinda fancied tweaking my lunch box shell to fit on it too if possible!!!! Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk So been a while since I been on hear but have caught the rc bug bad started with lunchbox which I have spent a fortune on an im sure for then money have spent could have brought a traxxas emaxx or something with a similar stupid price tag have also brought a nail of a mad Bull which got stripped an rebuilt!! I then thought 4x4 an tarmac so then treated myself to a tto2 chassis with a mustang shell an brushless lipo power which is amazingly fast!! My latest mission is a maverick scout!! Which was stripped with in 3days an have since rebuilt with custom chassis an new linkages an im in process of making my own shell!!! Which I'm rather impressed with!! So I'm trying to eye a new project an im thinking bout getting a rover mini!!! But when I'm looking around on eBay I'm getting different m chassis types!! So my question is what's main differences in them all an which is best?????? Cheers for any help in advance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob bark Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 Ergh sorry don't know why it's copied all that lot!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XV Pilot Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) The RWD rear-motored M-06 chassis would not be my first choice for a model of a Rover Mini. To accommodate the motor, you'd need to butcher the shell, which IMO would look awful. The M-03 or M-05 would be a better fit, both physically and in terms of replicating the front-motored FWD layout of the fullsize. As a base for a roadgoing Lunch Box though, a M-05 would be a good option. A couple of folks across on Tamiyaclub have built such models quite successfully. Here is a link to one such build: http://www.tamiyaclub.com/forum/index.php?/topic/72937-m05-lunchbox-build/ Edited January 13, 2017 by XV Pilot Corrected typo, added link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XV Pilot Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 Of course if you did want a M-06, and fancied a small vintage rally car build, you could go for the Mini's rally rival the Renault Alpine. It fits the chassis very well, matches the fullsize RWD drive layout, and the Tamiya shell really looks the part. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atom3624 Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 Don't know which of the 2 I prefer. Lovely jobs - both of them. Al. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob bark Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 10 hours ago, XV Pilot said: I must admit I do like the Renault Alpine it looks a little different an wouldlook quite nice on a trailer behind my scout mod!!! I do like the mini but don't fancy butchering shell to squeeze it on!!! Just thought as m06 is newest chassis would be easier/cheaper to get spare parts for!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XV Pilot Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 1 hour ago, rob bark said: I must admit I do like the Renault Alpine it looks a little different an wouldlook quite nice on a trailer behind my scout mod!!! I do like the mini but don't fancy butchering shell to squeeze it on!!! Just thought as m06 is newest chassis would be easier/cheaper to get spare parts for!!! I see where you are coming from, but in the case of Tamiya M-chassis, it is not quite that simple. A higher number doesn't necessarily mean easier spares availability. Think of it in terms of generations. The first generation of M-chassis featured the M-01 and M-02. Think of them as siblings. They both came out at around the same time and they are both similarly hard to get parts for due to their age. (Although being Tamiyas, it is by no means impossible.) The M-03 and M-04 represent the next generation of siblings. Again they both came out at around the same time, but being relatively recent in Tamiya terms, they are both still pretty easy to get parts for. (Most parts are interchangeable anyway.) However since the M-03 was by far the easier to drive and thus the more popular, there are far more used examples knocking around, so you'd have an easier time finding a M-03 than a M-04 even though it has a lower chassis number. The same applies to the M-05 and M-06. Both are current generation cars, both are presently in production, neither have replacements due out any time soon if Tamiya's release announcements are anything to go by, and both have spares easily available, again because most of them are shared. However the same popularity argument applies - M-05s are generally considered easier to drive, thus more people race them, so more examples are available. The aftermarket hop-up industry is fully aware of this phenomenon too, so you'll find a greater variety of hop-ups available for the M-05 as opposed to the M-06, and for the M-03 as opposed to the M-04. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob bark Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 I have found on ebay. Mf-01x which has been built with a short wheel base an has a mini shell on it with. 210 wheelbase!! Are there any other chassis which I could use for my mini or lunchbox shell with a adjustable wheel base!! ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XV Pilot Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) All Tamiya M-chassis have adjustable wheelbase, and all except the M-04 can go down to the short 210mm wheelbase setting required by the Tamiya Rover Mini and Lunch Box bodyshells. However wheelbase isn't the only concern when fitting a Mini shell. The rear overhang needs to be considered too. The rear-motored M-06 chassis extends too far behind the rear axle and gets in the way of the Mini bodyshell, as does the MF-01X albeit to a lesser extent, so those aren't recommended for a realistic look as you'd need to cut away part of the shell to make it fit. Or I suppose you could do as the builder of that MF-01X Mini on eBay has done, and use a more "bulged" Mini shell from another manufacturer, which appears to have been fitted further back than usual to accommodate the motor: Your model, your choice of course, but to my eye it doesn't look as nice as a proper Tamiya Mini shell on a properly-fitting chassis: Edited January 11, 2017 by XV Pilot 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewbacca Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Have Tamiya discontinued the Mini kit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMaxxDave Posted January 12, 2017 Author Share Posted January 12, 2017 Yes. They arent paying for the silly rates BMW want for the licencingSent from my Galaxy S5 Neo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewbacca Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 4 minutes ago, TMaxxDave said: Yes. They arent paying for the silly rates BMW want for the licencing Sent from my Galaxy S5 Neo That sucks. BMW are taking the mick. The new "Mini" range are basically just small Beemers with Mini badges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.