RC10Talk - The Net's Largest Vintage R/C Community

Which is a better runner. i have a wks 93 im finishing up a restore on and have acess to the mr4-bc

mr4-BC,

But the 93' is such a cool car

Works 93 for sure!

lee

for hard-running.....MR4-BC ......

for leisure show-off parade......Works 93'.......

I've never actually driven a 4wd off roader in anger but ever since I completed my WCS build I have a real desire to run a vintage Yokomo, the WCS will probably never be run, but I'd love to obtain either a Works car or 94 YZ10 to get an idea how these beasts drive. Racers who tried both seemed to prefer the earlier car... so a Works 93 gets my vote!

DerbyDan.... The 93 works and pavidis drive so smooth. . And with new lighter batteries and mor powerful smoother motors its only better. ...

The YZ10 works and world versions are very smooth and pleasant to drive.
But for more performance (like more break for example), and a easiest way to find parts, I'll choose the mr4-bc for runner

mr4bc is touring-car based.... yz10 is a pure offroad design.

Anyone remembers XXX4 vs. XX4 and what the TLR guys currently run???

By the way, anyone here racing a Pavidis or 93/94 in "modern" trim?

Paul

The YZ10 is really an evolution of a touring car design. This is not an uncommon theme with 4wd buggies and we still see it today. The B44, one of the best 4wd buggies **ever**, came from the JConcepts BJ4, which is based directly off of the TC3. The X-Ray and Tamiya buggies are essentially copies of the B44 geometry and so by association are based on a touring car chassis. That Losi failed with this approach on the XXX-4 is a testament to Associated just being plain old better

Haven't run either of my '94 chassis in modern trim yet. The non-brand-spankin'-new one will get the runner treatment, though...

I think id like to run a YZ with modern electronics, but i just love vintage gear i guess, may ponder brushless for the 91 in time, but just something about using period gear in the 94. That said, reckon we can get our heads together and get a dedicated set of lipo trays made for these things?

lee

At least on my 870C, I just cut some bits of carbon fiber and glued them to the chassis, using a lipo saddle pack as a template for positioning. One could use a B44 lipo tray, but the holes are in the wrong place (although it is almost perfect for a vintage CAT). For my '94, I am tempted to pick up a carbon fiber plate and trace/cut my own lipo tray. Lots of carbon dust when cutting, though...very dirty...need a mask...

stickboy007 wrote:The YZ10 is really an evolution of a touring car design.

uh?!?

[quote="stickboy007]The B44, one of the best 4wd buggies **ever**, came from the JConcepts BJ4, which is based directly off of the TC3. The X-Ray and Tamiya buggies are essentially copies of the B44 geometry and so by association are based on a touring car chassis. [/quote]

the only thing left of the tc3 in the bj4 is some bits of the transmission... suspension is b4-based (originally) and chassis is bespoke...(which means ruona was right, not AE... by the way the b44 is not based off the bj4 but is purely ripped off !)

link between xb4 and tc3 is more than minor. unless you consider that both of them being shaft driven is it, in which case the xb4 can also be considered as hotshot based

Lonestar wrote:[quote="stickboy007]The B44, one of the best 4wd buggies **ever**, came from the JConcepts BJ4, which is based directly off of the TC3. The X-Ray and Tamiya buggies are essentially copies of the B44 geometry and so by association are based on a touring car chassis.

the only thing left of the tc3 in the bj4 is some bits of the transmission... suspension is b4-based (originally) and chassis is bespoke...(which means ruona was right, not AE... by the way the b44 is not based off the bj4 but is purely ripped off !)

link between xb4 and tc3 is more than minor. unless you consider that both of them being shaft driven is it, in which case the xb4 can also be considered as hotshot based [/quote][/quote][/quote]

Ok, let's take a step back. The early YZ10 (870) was just a YR4 with off-road arms. Same bulkheads, layshaft...etc. --> same drivetrain. The '91 works added longer arms to reduce tire scrub. Still fundamentally a touring car chassis, though. The '94 YZ10 was the same drivetrain (ok, smaller diff pulleys, but otherwise the same drivetrain) and same motor mount. Front and rear bulkheads were changed to nylon, front chassis was given a kick-up, and suspension arms were given a drop-down to increase ride height at full droop. But the foundation is the same - it is an evolution of a touring car chassis, adapted bit by bit over time to perform better on off-road tracks. That the '94 made several changes compared to the '93 Works and prior models does not detract from its roots.

So this is really a matter of perspective. How do you define a "pure" off-road design? How many or how few parts must it share with its predecessors before you can say it is "completely different?" It's a fair question and I think it's a bit of a gray area. An alalogous case is made for the B44 (technically, AE bought the rights to the BJ4 design, so it wasn't ripped off, but I get what you're saying), which shares its gearboxes with the TC3. Or we can look at the Tamiya DF01 and compare it to the TA01. Same gearbox, but not much else.

you are completely backwards on the assumption, actually. The 870C is the early evolution TOWARDS the typical belt drive touring car. Not the other way around. the yr4 was born out of taking the 870c and making the chassis narrow to become 'correctly' scaled to 1/10 sedan bodies.