|
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: MAUS45 I hear you, also wonder if the same group of tech's do the SLU's that fireman Tim carries? |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
how do you order one no page to place an order
|
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: Airbrushler how do you order one no page to place an order ~ Craig ~ |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
thanks Craig
|
RE: Clark electronics TK20
buying directly from clark makes more sense.
I don't think any of the reseller can provide more professional technical advises or better after sales service |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I may be wrong but have a read down page5, maybe it looks like someone else it taking over the sales side
http://www.rctankregiment.com/rctank...=4379&start=40 |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I will not be that un-smart to buy from any of their reseller
Clark has been selling direct to customers in Asia with no problem |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: afv I may be wrong but have a read down page5, maybe it looks like someone else it taking over the sales side http://www.rctankregiment.com/rctank...9&start=40 and modeltank you are very correct ;) |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Original Quote from RCTankRegiment member: clarkmodel We pull damage simulation out from TK20-T cuz we found some HL metal gear box is not moving smoothly and may not able to start when track esc output is reduced to 25%. A software that we are going to release for TK20-T has re-included this function again as most of user are still using HL plastic gear box. Other change to this release(Named TK20, no more suffix) are: 1. To unified -T and -H version by adding Gun Flash Port Configuration function, so that user can select tamiya recoil, hl recoil or airsoft in one board. disadvantage is you will need SONY remote to configure it first. default setting for is tamiya recoil. 2. To Increase battle unit flash brightness, 3. repair mode flash light effect. All TK20-T are welcome to receive this update by sending it back to us after Oct 15th. board shipped recently is programmed with this release already. Regards, Clark The above quote was a response to an observation made by another RCTankRegiment member about damage simulation seeming to not work at all on their new Clark TK-20-T board installed in their tank. Unfortunately, from what the post implied, it seems that anyone ordering & getting the first batch of boards sent out over the first couple weeks aren't exactly getting all the features which they were supposed to get, like the damage simulation feature which Clark had showing on the TK-20 information & specification website page when the boards were ordered. This is quite disappointing & a very poor business practice with how it was handled ... It's great Clark is making some changes for the better by already updating the release, & allowing TK-20-T owners to send their boards back for re-programming or exchanging, but the methods chosen to accomplish the change were poorly executed to say the least! But why is this news only just made available now because a new owner of a TK-20 board found out the damage simulation function was not working & happened to mention it on the other forum in one of their posts? If there was enough time to update the software in all of the boards to remove the damage simulation function before the initial shipping, why weren't paying customers emailed & given the choice to either receive the cards without the function, have their orders placed on hold & shipped later after the function was restored to the boards with the new software release, or allowed the opportunity to even cancel orders for a refund? Even if a fix hadn't been found at the time of the shipping, the options should have been made available anyway. For months I was trying to decide on which electronics package I was going to purchase to replace my HL electronics. Weighing all the factors between various boards, like the SLU, DBC3, IBU, MAKO, & TK-20 ... the TK-20 seemed to have everything I was looking for right now, & at a great price. One of the main battle requirements I was looking for in a new board, was to have the damage simulation function. Without that feature, I would not have even considered the Clark TK-20 boards as a purchasing option ... & even though that feature was supposed to be on the boards which I ordered & paid for about 3 weeks ago, I'm just now being indirectly informed through a forum post that the feature was removed! Hey, I still realize the possibility that with even having to pay shipping just back to Clark, or even there & back to get updated release versions of the TK-20 board, the final costs of them will still be a great value if they eventually perform well with all their expected functionality. So in the end I may still be getting a great deal for a quality board with all the working functions it was said to contain, though that's yet to be seen. However, the way this issue was handled is still not going to help Clark in gaining customer confidence or better customer relations in my opinion. Sometimes it's better to let customers know the bad right up front & give them some choices, rather than keeping them in the dark, & this was one of those instances for sure! ~ Craig ~ |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Very powerful post here of which i would agree 100%.
ORIGINAL: B.A.D.A.S.S.Force Original Quote from RCTankRegiment member: clarkmodel We pull damage simulation out from TK20-T cuz we found some HL metal gear box is not moving smoothly and may not able to start when track esc output is reduced to 25%. A software that we are going to release for TK20-T has re-included this function again as most of user are still using HL plastic gear box. Other change to this release(Named TK20, no more suffix) are: 1. To unified -T and -H version by adding Gun Flash Port Configuration function, so that user can select tamiya recoil, hl recoil or airsoft in one board. disadvantage is you will need SONY remote to configure it first. default setting for is tamiya recoil. 2. To Increase battle unit flash brightness, 3. repair mode flash light effect. All TK20-T are welcome to receive this update by sending it back to us after Oct 15th. board shipped recently is programmed with this release already. Regards, Clark The above quote was a response to an observation made by another RCTankRegiment member about damage simulation seeming to not work at all on their new Clark TK-20-T board installed in their tank. Unfortunately, from what the post implied, it seems that anyone ordering & getting the first batch of boards sent out over the first couple weeks aren't exactly getting all the features which they were supposed to get, like the damage simulation feature which Clark had showing on the TK-20 information & specification website page when the boards were ordered. This is quite disappointing & a very poor business practice with how it was handled ... It's great Clark is making some changes for the better by already updating the release, & allowing TK-20-T owners to send their boards back for re-programming or exchanging, but the methods chosen to accomplish the change were poorly executed to say the least! But why is this news only just made available now because a new owner of a TK-20 board found out the damage simulation function was not working & happened to mention it on the other forum in one of their posts? If there was enough time to update the software in all of the boards to remove the damage simulation function before the initial shipping, why weren't paying customers emailed & given the choice to either receive the cards without the function, have their orders placed on hold & shipped later after the function was restored to the boards with the new software release, or allowed the opportunity to even cancel orders for a refund? Even if a fix hadn't been found at the time of the shipping, the options should have been made available anyway. For months I was trying to decide on which electronics package I was going to purchase to replace my HL electronics. Weighing all the factors between various boards, like the SLU, DBC3, IBU, MAKO, & TK-20 ... the TK-20 seemed to have everything I was looking for right now, & at a great price. One of the main battle requirements I was looking for in a new board, was to have the damage simulation function. Without that feature, I would not have even considered the Clark TK-20 boards as a purchasing option ... & even though that feature was supposed to be on the boards which I ordered & paid for about 3 weeks ago, I'm just now being indirectly informed through a forum post that the feature was removed! Hey, I still realize the possibility that with even having to pay shipping just back to Clark, or even there & back to get updated release versions of the TK-20 board, the final costs of them will still be a great value if they eventually perform well with all their expected functionality. So in the end I may still be getting a great deal for a quality board with all the working functions it was said to contain, though that's yet to be seen. However, the way this issue was handled is still not going to help Clark in gaining customer confidence or better customer relations in my opinion. Sometimes it's better to let customers know the bad right up front & give them some choices, rather than keeping them in the dark, & this was one of those instances for sure! ~ Craig ~ |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Quite an unprofessional and disappointing behaveour, to omit this 'detail' until someone has found it (when all the first batch was already sold and shipped.)
Now, by adding return shipping charges, the total cost of each board will rise quite a bit. I was considering ordering a board myself, but luckily I didn't manage to get one from the first batch. Now I think I will wait and see until a proper software version will be fully tested by somebody else. Doubts arise now about the problem of having a tank stopped dead in its tracks when it has received heavy damage. Darkith corrected it last year in its boards, I wonder why this new product didn't take advantage of that experience. Since "most of user are still using HL plastic gear box" (not in the RC tank club battling accordint to Tamiya standards, imho), will an heavier tank move in grass after taking hits? |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Welcome to doing business in China (Taiwan), boys! The old adage "no news is bad news" is applied very much here when one encounters a quality problem with most suppliers & its been that way for years. Most simply shrug their shoulders & claim they've not heard of problems from anyone else. Am certainly not saying that's exactly the case here, but one does get used to it as SOP.
|
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I have tested the Clark board, and think in its final release form you will have an ESC Tank control, great sound, servo recoil, independant bbl control, proportional turret rotation, Flash LED, and programmable battle system that will accept a Tamiya TBU or one of Darktihs $15 DBU kits. It will do all this for $60.00 . How can anyone touch that, and I believe the Clark system will become the system of choice. This is a very small market and I believe Clark will be able to keep up with demand as well. It will make it very hard for any other systems to compete with this for the price.
Clark is being responsive to dealing with a couple of features that need slight tweaking and when this is done this board will become a drop down first choice for all tankers. The only reason you wouldn't buy one of these is because you didn't know about it. The only thing other systems can offer you right now is the programmable sound options available on the EL MOD and the Benedini. If Clark builds a programmable board too then that advantage evaporates as well. I think we need to give Clark the benefit of the doubt. He does not have expereince dealing with 1/16 scale customers who may be slightly more demanding then the 1/35 scale electonics tinkerers he has been dealing with in the past. His pricing is also extemely helpful to budget minded tankers. There is nothing in the market this inexpensive. He could have sold these for $150 and still been $50 below the nearest competition. In this case he just said, here it is, come and get it.. I think when the dust settles that is exaclty what we will do!!!!!! Many people have the first release so we should start heairng some 3rd party reviews. I know in Britain quite a few people have their hands on these, so we should start seeing some more feedback. |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Dan, is this the same company as Clark or a different company? because they have a Big Tank controller similar to Clark's. Also this will be crazy cool if Clark does come out with a programmable board for the sound. Even if they do not it is still a cool choice for any 1/24, 1/25, or 1/16 scale r/c project because the board takes up less space then anything out there right now!!!!
http://www.35rctank.com/index.html |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Hi all,
I've got to agree with Dan, this will be the system of choice for a lot of us. I've just fitted the first gen board into a Tiger and so far I'm very impressed. Sounds 10/10 features 10/10 re-coil 12/10 still got to fit and try the battle system but so far there is nothing I can fault on this board. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZiRmBgvaTY&feature=plcp |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Where or how do I order them? <div>
</div><div>Saving up for a DBC/DBU has stalled my Stug conversion, but I have enough money saved to buy a TK20.<div> </div></div> |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Great vids frank, looks and sound the dogs!!
|
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: fynsdad Hi all, I've got to agree with Dan, this will be the system of choice for a lot of us. I've just fitted the first gen board into a Tiger and so far I'm very impressed. Sounds 10/10 features 10/10 re-coil 12/10 still got to fit and try the battle system but so far there is nothing I can fault on this board. I can easily understand the excitement & enthusiasm for the boards (I myself have it), they are so inexpensive for all the features they have on them, sound fantastic, & so far the functions that do work have been noted to work rather well. However, I thought damage simulation was an important function for most RC IR battle clubs that rely on Tamiya compatibility, & even for most people that have IR battles & wanted the best IR battle experience, I know I definitely need to have that function working properly on all my tanks with metal gears; though maybe I'm wrong, because with all the posts I've read so far from other forums which are already discussing the TK-20 boards, I've only come across one mention of that particular feature missing on the last batch of TK-20-T boards, & only 1 real complaint about it missing ... that being mine. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f.../msn/50_50.gif And I have yet to read owners of the TK-20 boards which did have the damage simulation function on them, discussing how well or how poorly it worked for their own tanks running metal gear gearboxes. Clark has since stated he restored the damage simulation function back to the TK-20-T boards being shipped, but has yet to say whether it will definitely work now with metal gears. For those that could care less about whether they have that functionality or not, I would say right now that the Clark board is the perfect option, go get one. However, my (2) TK-20-T boards will be going back, & I will not get another Clark board without fully knowing if the damage simulation function is one of the features he is guaranteeing will be on the new TK-20 or TK-30, & tweaked to working properly for tanks using metal gear gearboxes. I know it's only 1 function, but it's an extremely important function I must have, even if I have to pay more for a different electronics package to get it. Different strokes for different folks! ~ Craig ~ |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
so does this post mean you will drop the DBC and sell only the Clarks boards when they fix everything including their service issues?
As far as I know there are several things that have been on the drawing board with some people that will surpass anything you can think of right now. ORIGINAL: YHR I have tested the Clark board, and think in its final release form you will have an ESC Tank control, great sound, servo recoil, independant bbl control, proportional turret rotation, Flash LED, and programmable battle system that will accept a Tamiya TBU or one of Darktihs $15 DBU kits. It will do all this for $60.00 . How can anyone touch that, and I believe the Clark system will become the system of choice. This is a very small market and I believe Clark will be able to keep up with demand as well. It will make it very hard for any other systems to compete with this for the price. Clark is being responsive to dealing with a couple of features that need slight tweaking and when this is done this board will become a drop down first choice for all tankers. The only reason you wouldn't buy one of these is because you didn't know about it. The only thing other systems can offer you right now is the programmable sound options available on the EL MOD and the Benedini. If Clark builds a programmable board too then that advantage evaporates as well. I think we need to give Clark the benefit of the doubt. He does not have expereince dealing with 1/16 scale customers who may be slightly more demanding then the 1/35 scale electonics tinkerers he has been dealing with in the past. His pricing is also extemely helpful to budget minded tankers. There is nothing in the market this inexpensive. He could have sold these for $150 and still been $50 below the nearest competition. In this case he just said, here it is, come and get it.. I think when the dust settles that is exaclty what we will do!!!!!! Many people have the first release so we should start heairng some 3rd party reviews. I know in Britain quite a few people have their hands on these, so we should start seeing some more feedback. |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I would suggest people ensure they let Clark know you want the battle damage feature. As was mentioned the first ones out the gate did not have it, and this is very important feature to not have. My understanding is Clark is going to be adding this back onto the boards.
I do not think this 35RC outfit is tied up with Clark at all, but honestly you just never know. I backed out of commenting on any negatives as I didn't want to come across as undermining Clarks effort. I have always given my honest opinion on here, but it gets a little tougher once you start to market things. I feel I have stayed pretty objective, and I am not about to not give credit where credit is due. These could be the best darn thing to happen to entry RC taking since Heng long released low cost tanks. |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: FreakyDude so does this post mean you will drop the DBC and sell only the Clarks boards when they fix everything including their service issues? As far as I know there are several things that have been on the drawing board with some people that will surpass anything you can think of right now. ORIGINAL: YHR I have tested the Clark board, and think in its final release form you will have an ESC Tank control, great sound, servo recoil, independant bbl control, proportional turret rotation, Flash LED, and programmable battle system that will accept a Tamiya TBU or one of Darktihs $15 DBU kits. It will do all this for $60.00 . How can anyone touch that, and I believe the Clark system will become the system of choice. This is a very small market and I believe Clark will be able to keep up with demand as well. It will make it very hard for any other systems to compete with this for the price. Clark is being responsive to dealing with a couple of features that need slight tweaking and when this is done this board will become a drop down first choice for all tankers. The only reason you wouldn't buy one of these is because you didn't know about it. The only thing other systems can offer you right now is the programmable sound options available on the EL MOD and the Benedini. If Clark builds a programmable board too then that advantage evaporates as well. I think we need to give Clark the benefit of the doubt. He does not have expereince dealing with 1/16 scale customers who may be slightly more demanding then the 1/35 scale electonics tinkerers he has been dealing with in the past. His pricing is also extemely helpful to budget minded tankers. There is nothing in the market this inexpensive. He could have sold these for $150 and still been $50 below the nearest competition. In this case he just said, here it is, come and get it.. I think when the dust settles that is exaclty what we will do!!!!!! Many people have the first release so we should start heairng some 3rd party reviews. I know in Britain quite a few people have their hands on these, so we should start seeing some more feedback. |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: tomhugill Great vids frank, looks and sound the dogs!! +1. makes we want to buy one and start on my hl tiger .Thanks for sharing |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: YHR I would suggest people ensure they let Clark know you want the battle damage feature. As was mentioned the first ones out the gate did not have it, and this is very important feature to not have. My understanding is Clark is going to be adding this back onto the boards. So I agree devoutly with your advice Dan .... maybe Clark has resolved the issue, but maybe he hasn't ... So <u>PLEASE</u>, for the love of .... well, whomever you love ... everyone who has bought a board without it, or is planning to get a board, please email Clark & let him know you want a damage simulation function that will absolutely work with tanks running metal gear gearboxes too!!! If not doing it for yourself, do it out of consideration for everyone who does want it! ... even if everyone is only just me http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f...wink_smile.gif ~ Craig ~ |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I just emailed them before you posted asking about battle damage feature and metal gearboxes lol.....it would be nice if it was a plug-and-play system...Hate the thought of having to do a bunch of work to get it up and running....
I am in conversations with Kevin at RCtanks australia trying to get my hands on a "Mamba" damage sim card that plugs right into the mako.... |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: DirtyBird69 I just emailed them before you posted asking about battle damage feature and metal gearboxes lol.....it would be nice if it was a plug-and-play system...Hate the thought of having to do a bunch of work to get it up and running.... I am in conversations with Kevin at RCtanks australia trying to get my hands on a "Mamba" damage sim card that plugs right into the mako.... I know some people say ... what do you expect out of a $60 card, it's almost plug & play? ... not really the point, though I get where they are coming from ... but 100% plug & play board would still be another vote for me as well. Maybe some day another all-in-one card will come out for HL tanks & actually be that ... 100% plug & play ... pull all the plugs & wires out of the your new Heng Long tank's RX-18 board .... plug all the wires & plugs into the new electronics board ... WHAMMO ... up & running with 100% with all the original functionality + all the new features of the upgraded electronics! http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f.../msn/heart.gif mmmmmmmm, I can feel the warmth of that day already just by thinking about it. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f...unge_smile.gif Oh, so you're going to get the new sleeker & improved Black MAMBA board ... nice! I'm still keeping my eyes on Kevin & rcTABU ... he's always got things up his sleeves. ~ Craig ~ |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
You know what, I dont know why people are expecting a board to be plug and play for all tanks? I have tamiya electronics in all my tanks bar one andtouse them in my hooben tanks I had to crack out the soldering. There are so many variations in recoil etc that no card is going to be plug and play for everything...... As regards the damage simulation I think what hes talking about is how tanks with standard tus can become pillboxes at 25% power. This happenes with most systems and is why people use 3:1s and more powerful motors. As he said though he is currently away and will be able to sort all this out when he gets back. I think we should see how the damage system works fist before ruling anything out.
|
RE: Clark electronics TK20
LOL I second that Tom.
Some of the newer members on here may not realise how much this hobby has progressed in the last couple of years. We may be close to a 100% plug+play board but there will always be some modifaction needed even if it's just for your own personal preferances. As a tanker who's been in the hobby for a long time would like to remind others that it wasn't that long ago that we were all running the HL gauntlet where 1-4 new tanks didn't work, and changing a blown RX-13 board every couple of weeks was a matter of course (soldering iron needed) Now we have a choice of some great boards, el-mod, DBC etc. Now this Clark board is offering a cheap alterative which may not have all the bells and whistles yet but does look promising;) I'm sure as the product develops, and the manufacturers get feedback, it will develop into a cracking board. Frank |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I disagree with both Fynsdad and tomhugill. We need the hobby to grow more to get better stuff. ALL the manufacturers with the exception of Tamiya make getting into this hobby more difficult than it needs to be.<div>
</div><div>People won't come into this hobby unless you have that plug and play or RTR experience available. Look what is happening to aircraft as an example, it is growing because of BNF and ARFs. If everything was a kit the hobby wouldn't be where it is now.</div><div> </div><div>If you want to modify a part or whatever and take it too the extreme then you have the option, cutting a plug isn't going to stop you, Having to solder might, even go one step further and force someone to solder onto a mini pin where the consequences are a ruined board and you get the picture.</div><div> </div><div>Things ALL manufacturers need to do to grow this hobby are</div><div>1. Plug and Play</div><div>2. Clear concise instructions on use of the product</div><div>Tamiya is the best at both those requirements from what I see.</div><div> ALL board manufacturers are terrible at it, some are not near as bad as others but in general they all need to improve.</div><div> </div><div>Everybody wants new tanks and new things to mod them with, UNTIL this hobby starts to get more members and have a greater sales potential all we get is the small improvements.</div><div>Force people to break out a soldering iron or do heavy mods on available product and we will slow the growth.</div><div> </div><div>As for the comment on how the damage system works and wait and see I think you missed badasses first post, Baddass bought the boards specifically for that feature then when he recieved them the feature was removed from the boards. Baddass is trying to motivate people to tell Clark how important this function is. As for his plug and play comments well it just proves my point that we need to have easy to use product and clear instructions on how to use it to make this hobby grow.</div><div>The vast majority would prefer using the tanks to soldering the bits together.</div><div> </div><div>fyi I solder mini boards together all the time, I program radios, mod my tanks and I sell tank specific products. Mako boards being one of them.</div><div>My interest is in the hobby growing period</div><div> </div> |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I have read Baddass' post and this is exactly the feedback I am talking about.
Hopefully the clark people will take all this on board and keep developing the product;) No system will be perfect for everyone as we all have different needs and budgets. I personally would love all my tanks to run tamiya gear(I agree with it being the best) but would never be able to afford it so if I can get 95% of that with a cheaper option, that is what I will do. |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I will add my 2c. As fyn stated we all have different budgets and needs. In my situation, cost is a factor, not because I can't afford it or am cheap but just like most everyone else have other money engagements. Also I am involved with other forms of RC (short course trucks). I can't even make it to NEAD events, no time. My home is situated on 4 acres and the time it takes just for the upkeep is very time consuming, would make for a very nice battle area. With that being said my time is limited. So a board that is plug and play would benefit me. Also in my situation since I can't make it to NEAD events and have to bring the battling to my own backyard with the relatives, who can't afford the tanks leaves me with the task of having multiple battle tanks...so something affordable would be nice. Also the sound needs to be on par with Tamiya. I think Dan nailed it with incorporating the Benedini w/ DBC3, my only issue and this is just me, is it uses the RX-18, not that it is that bad, but there are better options for esc's, but once again you go to those options and the price increases. Or in my case I do not have an RX-18 so that would be another purchase, include shipping and that total cost is the same as an Elmod setup. Here is a little list of prices so far
1) SLU w/the apple included $210 2) Tamiya without apple $350ish + 3) Elmod without apple- Pro version (pro 175 + blaster 135) $310 4) DBC3 w/Benedini without apple $255 5) TK20,TK30 without apple $60/90 6) Playing with our tanks and making new friends-PRICELESS Cheers, Wade |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I am not missing Craig's point at all. I understand the frustration of buying something and not getting what you thought you paid for. How ever your missing my point. The issue clarks trying to avoid already happens with current systems (dbc2 anybody?). My point is that we should try the damage simulation with our tank (many not running stock tus) and see how they fare. This is the sort of feed back Clark needs. He has shown he is prepared to make good on the initial hickup which is a very good sign. Further more no one has answered my point about being able to make a product plug and play for all internal components avalible. As far as I'm concerned Clark has given us the excellent true recoil function for servo recoil which allows for a very low cost recoil solution compared to asiatam or Tamiya for example. Unless a common standard for internal components is agreed it will be impossible to have a plug and play system.
|
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: tomhugill You know what, I dont know why people are expecting a board to be plug and play for all tanks? I have tamiya electronics in all my tanks bar one andtouse them in my hooben tanks I had to crack out the soldering. There are so many variations in recoil etc that no card is going to be plug and play for everything...... As regards the damage simulation I think what hes talking about is how tanks with standard tus can become pillboxes at 25% power. This happenes with most systems and is why people use 3:1s and more powerful motors. As he said though he is currently away and will be able to sort all this out when he gets back. I think we should see how the damage system works fist before ruling anything out. So the ideal would still be to have exactly what makes it the easiest for a majority of the people owning tanks to be able to upgrade them, & is why many would want to ask for an actual 100% plug & play board. Therefore I see no harm with wanting or asking for it. If it's impossible to make a true plug & play board for even the barest of off the shelf stock Heng Long tanks, than so be it, I can solder too, but I'd still rather not have to if it could be avoided. If by standard tus you meant the typical HL metal upgrade gearboxes, then you could be 100% correct in that the only gearboxes affected are the gearboxes using the crappy white metal gears. Still, it would have been in Clark's & everyone's best interest to be more clear about the exact nature of the damage simulation feature not working after he first made a blanket statement that simply said HL metal gearboxes don't work. He was asked several times to clarify the issue with metal gears, & though he responded several times, he still never clarified which metal gearboxes or setups have issues, nor did he confirm that some metal gearboxes, like the 3:1 or 4:1, would be OK. Maybe he doesn't know about the different sets of metal gearboxes available, & that's why he chooses to not be more specific to the metal gear questioning, I don't know. I agree, eventually we will get reports of the damage simulation feature & how well it works or doesn't work for some people, so we can't rule out that the feature may very well work as it should as long as you have plastic gears, maybe upgraded more powerful motors, or 3:1 or 4:1 metal gear gearboxes. But one thing I definitely know already, I don't have to wait to find out, as my boards won't work with damage simulation no matter what gearbox I run, because he removed the feature altogether before shipping the two TK-20-T boards to me! ~ Craig ~ |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
I was the one who had the idea of changing and how to change the settings on the DBC & DBCRC2 to be more competitive on the Battle Field with Tamiya, as I sold these specifically for that purpose. It was the first system that offered us Heng long owners a cheap way to get on the battle field. David and I did a lot of testing and at least 3 member here had different chips to test. Here is a HINT for Clark,,, 25 percent power reduced off of the Tamiya electronics, is not the same percentage of power off of the Clark boards or the Heng long RX-18 for the same results. But the tricky part is getting the setting so it is the same as Tamiya otherwise if will be seen a board that is not on a level playing field as the standard. Phil |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
The Clark board if you use the onboard servo recoil circuit, is almost plug and play. All you have to to is resolder a couple of wires so you get direct control of the gun elevation. This is a simple straight forward thing to do with clear instruction on the website. I am not sure we can expect much better then that. Remember the two wires to resolder give you that direct control of the gun elevation. No way you are goig to be able to do that on a Heng Long any easier way
As far as being fair on the battle field, there is so much that play into this. Gearing, bearings electronics, motors, all have an effect on the "ability of the tank to move after being hit. To demand that all electroics are exactly fair, and then allow all the mechanical upgrades seems to defy logic. Yes the Tamiya, DBC, EL mod, might all have slightly different speed effects, but I think we have to live with that if we want choice on the battlefield. As long as the system produces reductions of speed as the damage is bening inlficted we should be OK wiith it. The nice thing about the DBC line, and probabably the Mako as well is that the chip can be reprogrammed and swapped out to keep the hardware in line with what people want. As Phil mentioned he worked wiht David to modify the chip for better battle perfromance, and then I worked with David to enhance the chip to utilize the Benedini. An example of the flexibility of Davids original design. I am not going to abandon the DBC3 or Benedini, as it is a functioning system that delivers the goods now with the flexibility to allow users to upload their own sound files. Clark is offering something that looks to be pretty darn good IF IT DELIVERS. Currently all of us who bought the orignal Clark boards have systems that don't have battle damage, but I have every reason to believe he now understands the importance of that and will just turn this feature back on when he programs the next batch. He has done some really good things and has looked at making sure it is compatible with Tamiya. I.e you can plug in a Tamiya TBU which is argruably the single most important thing when you discuss IR battlefield issues. This offering from Clark is going to be a real challenge. IMO once you buy one of these units and see what it does for $60............................................... .. |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Clark did offer to reprogram your boards with the damage simulation feature. Even if you have do pay $10 to send them back it's 1/3 of the cost of the next cheapest Tamiya compatable system.
Also I disagree about the point made about plug and play getting people into the hobby. Low cost will get people into IR battleing, if you can get a system 1/4 the price of the next cheapst (tk20) people will go for this over something plug and play that costs $200 (slu which it's self isn't without issues). If I can mange to rewire my tanks as possibly the worst solderer with a horrible soldering iron, anyone can. There's only so far you can go making things easy in a niche hobby such as this.<br type="_moz" /> |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Hopefully as Dan says this board will only get better, the DBC has improved over time till now it has to be the best sounding option when you use the Bendini card.
This board sounds great, runs 2.4g and is an affordable upgrade at the moment, which has got to be a good start. and IMO the re-coil alone is worth $60:D |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: tomhugill I am not missing Craig's point at all. I understand the frustration of buying something and not getting what you thought you paid for. How ever your missing my point. The issue clarks trying to avoid already happens with current systems (dbc2 anybody?). My point is that we should try the damage simulation with our tank (many not running stock tus) and see how they fare. This is the sort of feed back Clark needs. He has shown he is prepared to make good on the initial hickup which is a very good sign. Further more no one has answered my point about being able to make a product plug and play for all internal components avalible. As far as I'm concerned Clark has given us the excellent true recoil function for servo recoil which allows for a very low cost recoil solution compared to asiatam or Tamiya for example. Unless a common standard for internal components is agreed it will be impossible to have a plug and play system. Firstly I don't think I missed your point which is plug and play needs and patience for clark. Well my opinion on plug and play is out there, I feel it is of the utmost importance, even beyond some features. If you can't use the product it doesn't matter what it does. Next was the patience for the Clark board. Well I read back about all the hoopla and the features it was supposed to have and then it shipped without them or am I wrong on that? That is just plain wrong and was a deliberate action as it has been posted the feature was removed. Sothe information should have been offered to the buyers and let them decide what happens next, no excuses on that one in my book. Too many vendors of product don't care or know enough about their customer too choose what is important to them. As for the highlited line there is a truly plug and play system with ALL internal parts on the drawing board. As far as I have seen the only truly plug and play components are the Mako product. I will grant anybody they are not complete with portions of things missing like sound etc but they are inexpensive, plug and play and they work as advertised for the audience they are intended for, the part time tanker that is just entering the hobby. I have posted several times in this thread that we should all be patient with regard to the clark boards and there is proof of this in previous pages, what I won't give up and the main point behind my post was to challenge your thoughts on "why do we need plug and play" I guess in that issue I might be preaching to the choir because the real problem is every vendor has not agreed to make product to a specific standard. Opinions vary and that is all I have the same as you, an opinion. Maybe everybody should be sending mail to all the vendors saying we want an exact standard for plugs, programs etc it would be to their benefit as much as ours. <br type="_moz" /> |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
very good point tom, I stated that i would prefer plug and play because of time constraints.........but If I had to solder (which I have no trouble with) for something that was this cost effective..um well then time to heat up the iron. And even though this is a niche hobby, it has grown tremendously since I got involved 5 or 6 years ago with tanks. and as stated before, remember those of us, the rx-13 piece of ..... None of my tanks are battle ready, and with all that is out there now, I can't make a decision lol. I actually get frustrated at myself because I can't decide. And now there is this option lol.
|
RE: Clark electronics TK20
Freaky, do you care to elaborate on this "in the works" board? I would love to hear more about this.
Cheers, Wade |
RE: Clark electronics TK20
ORIGINAL: FreakyDude ORIGINAL: tomhugill I am not missing Craig's point at all. I understand the frustration of buying something and not getting what you thought you paid for. How ever your missing my point. The issue clarks trying to avoid already happens with current systems (dbc2 anybody?). My point is that we should try the damage simulation with our tank (many not running stock tus) and see how they fare. This is the sort of feed back Clark needs. He has shown he is prepared to make good on the initial hickup which is a very good sign. Further more no one has answered my point about being able to make a product plug and play for all internal components avalible. As far as I'm concerned Clark has given us the excellent true recoil function for servo recoil which allows for a very low cost recoil solution compared to asiatam or Tamiya for example. Unless a common standard for internal components is agreed it will be impossible to have a plug and play system. Firstly I don't think I missed your point which is plug and play needs and patience for clark. Well my opinion on plug and play is out there, I feel it is of the utmost importance, even beyond some features. If you can't use the product it doesn't matter what it does. Next was the patience for the Clark board. Well I read back about all the hoopla and the features it was supposed to have and then it shipped without them or am I wrong on that? That is just plain wrong and was a deliberate action as it has been posted the feature was removed. Sothe information should have been offered to the buyers and let them decide what happens next, no excuses on that one in my book. Too many vendors of product don't care or know enough about their customer too choose what is important to them. As for the highlited line there is a truly plug and play system with ALL internal parts on the drawing board. As far as I have seen the only truly plug and play components are the Mako product. I will grant anybody they are not complete with portions of things missing like sound etc but they are inexpensive, plug and play and they work as advertised for the audience they are intended for, the part time tanker that is just entering the hobby. I have posted several times in this thread that we should all be patient with regard to the clark boards and there is proof of this in previous pages, what I won't give up and the main point behind my post was to challenge your thoughts on ''why do we need plug and play'' I guess in that issue I might be preaching to the choir because the real problem is every vendor has not agreed to make product to a specific standard. Opinions vary and that is all I have the same as you, an opinion. Maybe everybody should be sending mail to all the vendors saying we want an exact standard for plugs, programs etc it would be to their benefit as much as ours. <br type=''_moz'' /> This is so close to plug and play, it might as well be. Two wires to swap on the Heng Long connector board to give you independant control of the gun elevation. As far as I know if you want to move away from the cam style, motor runs in one direction heng Long elevation, you will have to do this. The Clark servo recoil is dead easy and is plug and play. This $60 board means you don't need to buy a Tamiya recoil or any other recoil mechanism. Just a cheap analog servo, reducing the money you need to spend further. Has there been an issue with the way some things were done with this Clark release yes, but I won't comment on those. As far as standardization goes. Clark is using the Tamiya IR signal , and the pinout allows the Tamiya TBU to be plugged in. Once he gets the battle damage feature back in it will be completely built to the standards the IRCTA was promoting. No one esle is doing that except the DBC line. OH yes the DBC3 is completely plug and play as well. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:35 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.