Super Bit Char-G….Gimmick or God Send??
Home › Forums › Bit Char-G, Digi-Q and other Micros › Bit CharG and Micro Radio Controlled – Discussion › Super Bit Char-G….Gimmick or God Send??
- This topic has 26 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 7 months ago by
micro_Amps.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
October 15, 2003 at 2:30 pm #11395
Hey, just wondering what u guys think of the new SBCG as opposed to the old Bits.
I have mixed feeling about this baby, so here goes:
Pros:
-Beautiful packaging and a collector card add to the eye candy.
-Low COG makes handling great. Even easier to race.
-Revised circuit feeds more power to the motor.
-Similar sized wheels make it look better.
-New TX has telescopic antenna.
-Changeable front knuckles…innovative, but useless until we get front wheels sets.
Cons:
-Due to low clearance, racing on a flat smoothe surface is a must.
-Comes with a 1.6……slow as.
-Tyres are odd sizes so option tyres arent compatible, untill the SBCG tyres arrive.
-TX controls ‘stick’ (strange!)
Thats about all i could find on this, feel free to add your 2c worth.
-
October 15, 2003 at 3:02 pm #30076
My SBCGs have arrived at the post office today, I just have to collect them, so the following is being said without having used a SBCG yet…
I can see the ‘stick’ (which is that the car continues with the last instruction given my the controller, until it hears from the controller again. Might be a pain where reception is poor, or when you go out of range.) being a problem.
As for the motor, many BCGs come with a 1.0, so a 1.6 is an upgrade.
Parts, like knuckles and tyres etc. should have been released at the same time, true, but they can’t be too far away, surely.
Ppersonally I think it’s not worth it to try and run these cars on anything other than a flat surface (though your rally idea on flour or sugar sounds like a lot of fun). The grit, fluff, and junk that gets picked up means cleanout out the car takes the fun out of a run…. for me anyway.
My $0.02 worth.
-
October 15, 2003 at 4:12 pm #29023
OK, more cons….
– dual cell barely fits, very tight lots of chopping needed.
– not able to be fet modded due to reverse ultra low voltage switching, major :sad:.
– runs on when out of range, what crap idea this is, :sad::sad:.I think I’ll be using the chassis and body shells, but putting fet modded booster pcbs in them to get the best of both worlds.
:)uA -
October 15, 2003 at 4:31 pm #28948
micro, Thats majorly crappy, i was thinking a fet modded SBCG would be sweet.
The PCB is a weird shape too, sort of hexagonal.
Personally i dont like dual cell cars, too heavy.
One thing I noticed about the SBCG is, that when i chuck my lucifer rotor (favourite little motor) in a normal bit, it is sluggish and has zilch torque.
I put the 3.0 in the SBCG and its insanely torquey and fast….weird, im guessing a better FET or something is being used….The cell, a sanyo NiCad N50AAA…..aaaarrrrrgh TOMY stop being so fucken stingy and give us a 150mAh NiMH cell!!!!!
The reverse logic system is (my guess) so you cant drive the old bits with the New TX. There is the 2 buttons on the new TX, i guess one is booster/function and the other is…..hmmmm maybe tomy will release something new that uses the other button??
I had a peek inside the chassis and TX, the PCB in the TX is soldered directly to the battery teminals (annoying!!!) -
October 15, 2003 at 7:16 pm #28971
Yes thats true Jamie, the solder holds it all together. Tomy have ditched the old (better) Rxc/Txc series of chips for a PT (Pericom Tecnologies) chipset. BamBow, big mistake. It may be cheaper for them to produce these, but the hardcore fans are going to stay away from them because they just dont function as good as they should.
I can only guess that the extra buttons on the top of the Tx will be boost and another function once they release cars that have these functions. But if they are using the same type of controls then forget it.
:)uA -
October 16, 2003 at 12:12 pm #28889
I wonder if we can mod and fit something to do the booster function to the buttons on these TXs? It’s only got to pulse the signal to tell the motor to spin after all.
-
October 16, 2003 at 1:24 pm #28896
Dave, those buttons in the Sbcg Tx are already in circuit, they are connected “Function 1” and “Function 2” , there is even an unused “Function 3” in there as well. But the info is just not available on the Tx at this stage. Also the car pcbs are not the fully optiones version that require these extra signals.
Once these are sold in the US, the Tx circuit diags will be available from the FCC, but until then it remains a mystery.
:)uA -
October 16, 2003 at 3:05 pm #28906
So does anyone kow what Function1 and Function2 are?
-
October 16, 2003 at 3:19 pm #28908
I am assuming one wil be boost and the other could be a function like the wild char-gs hook/scoop idea.
:)uA -
October 16, 2003 at 3:47 pm #28913
Thats what i was thinking. I am truly disappointed in those stupid buggers changing chipsets.
-
October 16, 2003 at 4:28 pm #28926
The two buttons on the controller seem to do bugger all on the Ferrari and Lambo sets. I can’t see any difference when I press them.
-
October 16, 2003 at 4:37 pm #28927
maybe its booster and extra functions or something.
-
October 16, 2003 at 5:03 pm #28931
As far as I can tell the buttons are non-functional in the super bits that are released to date. I think that they just made a universal controller that can handle the 3 channels per freq and the buttons will only work on future superbits. This allows Tomy to make 2 controllers (27 and 40 Mhz) for all future superbits. Cuts down on production and retooling costs IMO. Maybe not the best deal for the consumer but at least you won’t have to worry about matching the right controller with the right car as much:) I am just supprised that they didn’t put out one multi purpose controller like a beefed up and improved 4 band contoller??
Edited by – Impreza on 16 October 2003 13:05:23
-
October 16, 2003 at 5:03 pm #39150
they wont do anything until the cars that have those functions are released. The current cars dont have the functions for those buttons.
:)uA -
October 16, 2003 at 5:05 pm #39146
Beat me by 20 seconds Impreza, yep, I reckon you are spot on.
:)uA -
October 16, 2003 at 5:16 pm #30020
he he. Jamie, sorry I didn’t give my two cents worth. Visually, I really like the Superchar-g. I like that they are expanding the car selections into a more international market ie Europe, for now. I also like the wheel proportions as well, although I have a tonne of tyres that I can’t use now from the origional tyre sets. As for the negative, I guess that will come as I tinker more with them. Don’t really like the run-on out of range though:(
-
October 16, 2003 at 5:40 pm #28814
I think it was a shame to leave out a function thatthey already have in some of their cars (the booster function), as all it needs is a pulsed signal. Very easy to do, surely. Can’t understand why they left it out. It’s the best feature of any of their cars really.
-
October 17, 2003 at 6:06 am #28566
Yeah I agree, but it will be interesting to see just what functions these new buttons control once the cars come out.
:)uA -
October 19, 2003 at 3:57 am #27992
I would love the SBG, but that damn glitch where it just keeps going, grinds on my nerves to the point that I rarely use mine.
It would be nice to know FEts are an option, but I’m not too worried about it, because the SBGs acceleration is adequate for me, and ideal for my little track. I actually been half FETing a few cars to have a few cars on even ground with the SBG, and I think I make fatsre more consistant laps with those cars than a fully FETed car.
That’s not to say I don’t love my stacked FET dual cell Zip Zaps. I like to set my cars up for several different situation, and for racing on a tight technical track the SBG is perfect, except for that stupid, silly, annoying glitch.:angry:
-
October 19, 2003 at 4:43 am #28359
I agree with you 100% crazydave, if it wasnt for the ‘run on’ mine might get a bit more use.
I like the shells though.
:)uA -
October 19, 2003 at 12:33 pm #39126Quote:I agree with you 100% crazydave, if it wasnt for the ‘run on’ mine might get a bit more use.
I like the shells though.
:)uAI forgot to mention, I love the new shells. Cars like the Countach and 911 are some of my all time favorite cars, and the detail on the new bodies is top notch
-
October 19, 2003 at 3:22 pm #27836
You guys saw how quickly I got rid of my 27mhz sbcg 911. That’s how unhappy I was with the product.:angry:
I beleive the 40mhz doesn’t suffer the carppy range and command stutter that is widely known. not sure on this though.
The shells are bloody brilliant, just ordered some of the sbcg pullbacks from toyeast for the bodies alone!
ph2t.
-
October 19, 2003 at 4:47 pm #27837
Yes the bodies are nice, not sure on the cars themselves as mine has yet to arrive. But we will see 🙂 I do know that one car was was very impressed by was the LXX beetle with built in lights. For an LXX this car is nice (dave try her out B4 you do anything to it 🙂 ).
-
October 19, 2003 at 6:17 pm #27871
in my opinion, the SBCGs are more of a racing bit. My theory is taht tomy came out with a car that was just meant to be driven around in an open space and now that they are sure epopel want to race with their bits, they made a bit that withh handle better and (I think)will be able to put full power into teh motors. the range thing is just a glich and I think it will be repaired in the near future. however, who really needs all that range to get around on a track?
I guess that the bottom line is that SBCGs are for actual “competieive” racing and BCGs were just an “experimental popularity test”
-
October 19, 2003 at 9:10 pm #27874
nice point titaniumonkey:) I have two 40 mhz sbcg’s ph2t and the range doesn’t seem to be a problem. What is the command stutter?? sry:blush:
-
October 20, 2003 at 1:15 am #27878
woh thats a relief, but not really. I thought my sbc was a factory fcukup or something with it goin all crappy when it goes outta range,i love those new bodies too. Cant wait till the enzo maricello or whatever it is and the maclaren gtr are released. is it possible to fix that crappy range thing ?
-
October 20, 2003 at 1:16 am #27879
i ment enzo and maracello or whatever it is
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.