TOPIC:

Sounds like me, doesn't he...
Other than some of the body shells, I'm gonna disagree with you on the realism though. Some of the early cars had bits that reflected the mechanics of the real thing, eg front end on an SRB is pretty much what you find under a VW beetle body, rear end's nothing even close. Same with the hilux, front axle & leaf springs/shackles are very similar to the 1:1, rear axle setup is nothing like. As for the High-lift version, what were Tamiya seeking to achieve there? Was it a mission to use up some excess tractor-truck parts? Cheetah chassis looks similar to a Humvee, & I'm surprised they didn't re-re it with that shell on it. I'm very particular about things like that & believe that if you're gonna do a scale model, it wants to be an accurate representation, otherwise come up with something that isn't like anything else & sort it out to work perfectly. In my opinion, Tamiya are trying to do both at the same time, then copping out when it gets too complex/expensive for them, or it didn't work as expected etc. I know lots of people will disagree, but being an engineer I look at the models closely & all I've seen have major design flaws &/or corner-cutting somewhere or another. For instance, can anybody think of 1 model that doesn't have a part of it that is renowned for breaking or a part of it that really doesn't work well?

Tamiya wrote:

The major draw to Tamiya RC for me was the Realism. I could deal with the spacy looking buggies and such that they would produce here and there because they handled the rough stuff so well. The hobby also has to attract the young un's.
I accept that every car could not be as true to life as a 3 spd. or a Sand Scorcher.

That said, I always thought the chassis of the original rover needed some help. However the body of Rover 1 was a "Show Stopper" (Anybody remember Rachel Welch?). They were both popular around the same time.
My point is they had the chance to get it right here. Instead they sold out.
There was a 1:1 rover that Tamiya miniaturized. It didn't have holes in the hood. It was built on a VW chassis. The shocks fit under the fenders.
Re-re's have cut the collecting value of the Original's off at the knees.
I could remember paying as much as $100 US for a Hot Shot front bumper if I could find one.
I had to develop a business plan just to acquire a NIB Sand Rover in the late 90's.
Many re-re's do justice to there predecessors (Hotshot, Super shot, Sand Scorcher, ect...).
Sorry fellas, Tamiya missed the boat on this one.
I have a really shoddy example of Rover 1 I found on the Bay.
Paid about $100+ shipping years ago. When I opened the box I was upset. It looked like it was from the bottom of the Bay.
I wrote the prior owner and informed him of my disappointment. (Nicely).
After that I placed it in the parts pile and considered it an Ebay lesson.
Hopefully the seller used the funds to attain some spectacles to aid him with his "Descriptions".
But this rant is over. A new perspective has been taken.

I announce I shall take the the two wrongs done and turn them into a right.
Motivated by the mutilations done to Re-Re Rover and the cost overruns of Ebay Rover 1.
I will take my left for dead Rover and create Re-Do Rover.
It shall be built of all Tamiya parts, after market parts designed for Tamiya and self fabricated bits as needed.
The goal is to have the finished product to be recognizable to the 1:1 owner and Tamyia fan both.
It must also out perform either version released by Tamiya.
I will document the project on this site.
Suggestions and comments welcome.
I need a foamy beverage...

Let's put away the rose-tinited glasses of nostalgia & look at the Sand Rover a bit more objectively ...

I like the body - but I don't 100% agree it's realistic - it's a stretched version of the Manx buggy, and the chassis is longer still - the wheels are too far apart front to back, and arguably too wide.

The chassis is also very flawed - although the suspension is superficially like that of the Scorcher (& therefore a VW), there's no damping, the front shock tower tops are very fragile, the rear "spring" is a cost saving kludge - and the open gearbox is a laughably bad idea.

Moving on to the re-hash (I bought one, but I really can't call it a re-release)... the DT-02, once you put oil shocks on it, is actually a very capable 2WD chassis - double wishbone suspension all round, the wide track makes it very stable, steering geometry (unusually for Tamiya) works pretty well, the "fastest" motor I've put in so far is a 23T Sport Tuned and it easily handles that, the gearbox is pretty tough & I'm sure will take a lot more too. I don't see how you'll be able to make a chassis that works as well at all, let alone one that's more realistic _and_ works better, and I think the "cheap to buy" ethos of both cars will well & truly go out the window.

Realism though - should be easy to do something about though - all the above are not realistic, the distance between the wheels (both track & wheelbase) is even sillier than the original ... plenty of people have modified the width issue on the new one with off the shelf parts, or using the front & rear ends off an SRB with a cut-down original Rover tub in the middle also seems to be a popular mod.

The holes in the re-hash though - I will agree with that, personally I find them inexcusable - the ones in the front are the most offensive, but don't forget the huge cutout to clear the rear shock tower, and the huge gaps between the body & the chassis

If someone with my lack of skill & facilities can fix those fairly quickly & easily, it's inexplicable that Tamiya could leave the job 1/2 finished in the way they did - don't they care about what people think of their engineering?


Looking forward to seeing what you do with this project though

I haven't seen the DT chassis up close, but on the face of it, it looks pretty good to me, assuming it's gonna be used & not shelved. I think the Holiday buggy shell looks better on it than the Rover, bu tlike I said, I haven't seen one up close. I agree with Jonny about the shell-fitting though - hacking holes in a shell to make it fit is something you do when you're skint & lacking the skill to make a good job of it, & just need some bodywork so you can run in the next race. It's not what you expect from a new model out of the box. Having worked on the 1: VW-based dune buggy kit cars, I can tell you the front & rear setups are nothing like the mk1 Rover & Holiday Buggy, & yes, plonking an SRB front end on would be a good start. SRB rear's still wrong though, Frog/FAV would be closer. I had thought about doing a better scale model of a VW-based Buggy, but seeing that other people have had the same idea, I probably won't bother.
Jonny, re lack of dampers - are you forgetting the rubber grommit "dampers" up front?