found new SCX10 II trail honcho RTR @ axial website

[imthatguy]

People looking for quarterly innovations/entirely new platforms need to examine the big picture. The original SCX10 had a 8 year lifespan. EIGHT.

The SCX10II is what, a year and a half/two years into it's design cycle? If you're expecting dramatic, sweeping changes from these releases, you're kidding yourself.

Will there be refinements, subtle changes, refreshing through body shells for the next couple years? Yes. And similarly (because this is the truck most often compared), you won't see a new TRX-4 from Traxxas anytime soon either. It'll be different bodies for years to come. Not because it's the best out of the box necessarily, but because it doesn't make financial sense. The next platform in line for a complete re-tool is the Vaterra Ascender

These things are expensive to develop. Mold making is expensive. R&D is expensive. Manufacturing is expensive. Shipping is expensive. Licensing is expensive. I imagine that folks (at every RC company) are constantly working on new things that will blow consumers away. But to be fair, this is a game with very, very thin margins, so they'll leverage existing parts, platforms, molds, designs, for as long as it makes a return on investment. Even when Traxxas designed their truck, there's a lot of bits from their other platforms in it - BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND LEVERAGES THE PARTS BIN. The almighty dollar rules.

There are shortcomings in all designs, either at the expense of MSRP, performance, parts bin leveraging, what have you, with every RC truck on the market.

Bottom line, there's always room for improvement, but all in good time. ;-)

 

[meatmonkey]

They took the time and effort to design a new trans case, then neglected to use 5x11 bearings for the input shaft, or at least add another 5x10 on the slipper side. Almost as lame as the plastic gears inside.

 

[SCREAMER]

People looking for quarterly innovations/entirely new platforms need to examine the big picture. The original SCX10 had a 8 year lifespan. EIGHT.

The SCX10II is what, a year and a half/two years into it's design cycle? If you're expecting dramatic, sweeping changes from these releases, you're kidding yourself.

Will there be refinements, subtle changes, refreshing through body shells for the next couple years? Yes. And similarly (because this is the truck most often compared), you won't see a new TRX-4 from Traxxas anytime soon either. It'll be different bodies for years to come. Not because it's the best out of the box necessarily, but because it doesn't make financial sense. The next platform in line for a complete re-tool is the Vaterra Ascender

These things are expensive to develop. Mold making is expensive. R&D is expensive. Manufacturing is expensive. Shipping is expensive. Licensing is expensive. I imagine that folks (at every RC company) are constantly working on new things that will blow consumers away. But to be fair, this is a game with very, very thin margins, so they'll leverage existing parts, platforms, molds, designs, for as long as it makes a return on investment. Even when Traxxas designed their truck, there's a lot of bits from their other platforms in it - BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND LEVERAGES THE PARTS BIN. The almighty dollar rules.

There are shortcomings in all designs, either at the expense of MSRP, performance, parts bin leveraging, what have you, with every RC truck on the market.

Bottom line, there's always room for improvement, but all in good time. ;-)

You want to know what I’m expecting. I’m expecting Axial to at least try for the premium price they are asking. After switching to aluminum or the less expensive steel links they should’ve never gone back to plastic noodle links. They are garbage plain and simple and this is not an innovation compliant this is a taking a huge step back complaint. How about the truly awful shocks. These things have been in Axial trucks for a decade and have sucked since the beginning. While other companies are at least trying to use aluminum and good seals Axial is content to keep forcing us to buy throw away shocks and now we’re back to paying for throw away links.

No I don’t want Axial to bring out a game changer every two weeks but I don’t want three downgraded, rehashed, boring “new” models and a bunch of marketing blowing smoke up my ass while they continue to downgrade driveline and chassis components and try to add the adjective durable like its going to fool me into thinking powdered metal is a good idea. For crying out loud, Axials own video with the most unenthusiastic driver on the internet taking his truck on a 9 mike easy hike broke a trans gear and that’s with the weak ass parts bin 35t. I’m not expecting mind blowing innovation from Axial. I’m not really expecting anything good anytime soon to be perfectly honest. I’m expecting 3-4 minorly different vehicles with over hyped “upgrades” built with parts from a year ago, while they brag about lights, and a different shaped trans case.

The AR44 was an exciting new development. Aside from that Axial has had the same SCX for years. You think that’s enough time for R&D and a chance to listen to the customers to try and give us what we want. Axial needs more time apparently because a decade is just too fast paced of a schedule for innovation.

Edit: I also just reread the description for this new and exciting product and the front is coming with dogbones instead of the universals Axial already has. So in summation it looks like Axial’s theme for the Honcho was absolute minimum reliability and going so far as to put the R&D team to work creating new downgrades to every aspect of the vehicle possible. Back to plastic in the trans, plastic links, powdered metal ring and pinion, and dog bones in the front axle. If this is what Axial thinks of its customers, I couldn’t be more out. Yes this new Honcho will surely sell but only to those that either don’t care or just don’t know because this is about as bad as it gets for Axials RTRs. That is until the Deadbolt is released with whatever new and exciting upgrades they saved for last. Really sad.

 

[JatoTheRipper]

People looking for quarterly innovations/entirely new platforms need to examine the big picture. The original SCX10 had a 8 year lifespan. EIGHT.

The SCX10II is what, a year and a half/two years into it's design cycle? If you're expecting dramatic, sweeping changes from these releases, you're kidding yourself.

Will there be refinements, subtle changes, refreshing through body shells for the next couple years? Yes. And similarly (because this is the truck most often compared), you won't see a new TRX-4 from Traxxas anytime soon either. It'll be different bodies for years to come. Not because it's the best out of the box necessarily, but because it doesn't make financial sense. The next platform in line for a complete re-tool is the Vaterra Ascender

These things are expensive to develop. Mold making is expensive. R&D is expensive. Manufacturing is expensive. Shipping is expensive. Licensing is expensive. I imagine that folks (at every RC company) are constantly working on new things that will blow consumers away. But to be fair, this is a game with very, very thin margins, so they'll leverage existing parts, platforms, molds, designs, for as long as it makes a return on investment. Even when Traxxas designed their truck, there's a lot of bits from their other platforms in it - BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND LEVERAGES THE PARTS BIN. The almighty dollar rules.

There are shortcomings in all designs, either at the expense of MSRP, performance, parts bin leveraging, what have you, with every RC truck on the market.

Bottom line, there's always room for improvement, but all in good time. ;-)

Axial needs to revise their trucks more frequently now that there's a lot more competition. If they're not going to do more frequent revisions they at least need to get their prices inline with the competition. The third option is to get left behind and forgotten.

 

[WHITE-TRASH]

Axial needs to revise their trucks more frequently now that there's a lot more competition. If they're not going to do more frequent revisions they at least need to get their prices inline with the competition. The third option is to get left behind and forgotten.

Just buy a redcat and forget all about axial.

 

[JatoTheRipper]

Just buy a redcat and forget all about axial.

Forget about reality.

 

[imthatguy]

You want to know what I’m expecting. I’m expecting Axial to at least try for the premium price they are asking. After switching to aluminum or the less expensive steel links they should’ve never gone back to plastic noodle links. They are garbage plain and simple and this is not an innovation compliant this is a taking a huge step back complaint. How about the truly awful shocks. These things have been in Axial trucks for a decade and have sucked since the beginning. While other companies are at least trying to use aluminum and good seals Axial is content to keep forcing us to buy throw away shocks and now we’re back to paying for throw away links.

No I don’t want Axial to bring out a game changer every two weeks but I don’t want three downgraded, rehashed, boring “new” models and a bunch of marketing blowing smoke up my ass while they continue to downgrade driveline and chassis components and try to add the adjective durable like its going to fool me into thinking powdered metal is a good idea. For crying out loud, Axials own video with the most unenthusiastic driver on the internet taking his truck on a 9 mike easy hike broke a trans gear and that’s with the weak ass parts bin 35t. I’m not expecting mind blowing innovation from Axial. I’m not really expecting anything good anytime soon to be perfectly honest. I’m expecting 3-4 minorly different vehicles with over hyped “upgrades” built with parts from a year ago, while they brag about lights, and a different shaped trans case.

The AR44 was an exciting new development. Aside from that Axial has had the same SCX for years. You think that’s enough time for R&D and a chance to listen to the customers to try and give us what we want. Axial needs more time apparently because a decade is just too fast paced of a schedule for innovation.

Edit: I also just reread the description for this new and exciting product and the front is coming with dogbones instead of the universals Axial already has. So in summation it looks like Axial’s theme for the Honcho was absolute minimum reliability and going so far as to put the R&D team to work creating new downgrades to every aspect of the vehicle possible. Back to plastic in the trans, plastic links, powdered metal ring and pinion, and dog bones in the front axle. If this is what Axial thinks of its customers, I couldn’t be more out. Yes this new Honcho will surely sell but only to those that either don’t care or just don’t know because this is about as bad as it gets for Axials RTRs. That is until the Deadbolt is released with whatever new and exciting upgrades they saved for last. Really sad.

Axial needs to revise their trucks more frequently now that there's a lot more competition. If they're not going to do more frequent revisions they at least need to get their prices inline with the competition. The third option is to get left behind and forgotten.

Both of you guys completely failed to see the point. My retort wasn't about Axial, it was about common financial sense for razor-thin margins in an already super-competitive business. Nobody can afford to innovate at the rate you're hoping for.

This business (like any other) is all about volleying. Company A comes out with product X. Company B volleys back with product Y. Company A fires back with the X². And so on, and so on. But it takes time for things to develop and for companies to profit from their original volleys. You see it all the time with all sorts of products.

What you're asking for would be monumentally expensive and terrible for business, including those that are aftermarket suppliers. They'd never be able to keep up, the installed base would be furious about incompatibilities, and parts management and distribution would be hilariously out of control.

 

[Ditchrat]

Both of you guys completely failed to see the point. My retort wasn't about Axial, it was about common financial sense for razor-thin margins in an already super-competitive business. Nobody can afford to innovate at the rate you're hoping for.

This business (like any other) is all about volleying. Company A comes out with product X. Company B volleys back with product Y. Company A fires back with the X². And so on, and so on. But it takes time for things to develop and for companies to profit from their original volleys. You see it all the time with all sorts of products.

What you're asking for would be monumentally expensive and terrible for business, including those that are aftermarket suppliers. They'd never be able to keep up, the installed base would be furious about incompatibilities, and parts management and distribution would be hilariously out of control.

Axail brand ambassador? Explain to me what that means? While you reply is logical and make sense it also seems rather bias.

Again i think you points are valid, but I also think you are missing the point being discussed.

With all the competition in 2017 reducing the quality of the vehicles offered doesnt make any sence. Normally as products age the price drops making it more attractive or something new or improved gets added. Something like a fresh new body only availble with the product.

Making it less expensive by using cheaper parts doesnt make it more attractive. Except to noobs that dont know any better. Its like hobby grade is sliding backwards to toy grade.

 

[JatoTheRipper]

Both of you guys completely failed to see the point. My retort wasn't about Axial, it was about common financial sense for razor-thin margins in an already super-competitive business. Nobody can afford to innovate at the rate you're hoping for.

No, I think it was you that missed the point.

In the face of heavy competition companies must spend money to remain viable. Or, as I've stated many times, lower the prices to become more competitive.

 

[mikemcE]

Either they sell it or they don’t


Hang up and Drive

 

[lonleycreeper]

Axail brand ambassador? Explain to me what that means? While you reply is logical and make sense it also seems rather bias.

Again i think you points are valid, but I also think you are missing the point being discussed.

With all the competition in 2017 reducing the quality of the vehicles offered doesnt make any sence. Normally as products age the price drops making it more attractive or something new or improved gets added. Something like a fresh new body only availble with the product.

Making it less expensive by using cheaper parts doesnt make it more attractive. Except to noobs that dont know any better. Its like hobby grade is sliding backwards to toy grade.

Calling this truck more expensive?

If I recall correctly the og Trail honcho RTR was $350+ This one is updated with similar/more features for $20 less what 6 years later. The cost of living has gone up since then, but the truck costs less?

 

[Brake Weight]

Calling this truck more expensive?

If I recall correctly the og Trail honcho RTR was $350+ This one is updated with similar/more features for $20 less what 6 years later. The cost of living has gone up since then, but the truck costs less?

My RTR Honcho with battery and charger was knocking at $400 from Horizon, IIRC. In retrospect/hindsight/looking back, I was a fool to pay that much. The ESC has survived and all the other mechanical parts eventually spread across a few other builds. After that purchase I told myself I’d never outright buy another new RTR. Kit maybe, but not a RTR.

 

[SCREAMER]

Both of you guys completely failed to see the point. My retort wasn't about Axial, it was about common financial sense for razor-thin margins in an already super-competitive business. Nobody can afford to innovate at the rate you're hoping for.

This business (like any other) is all about volleying. Company A comes out with product X. Company B volleys back with product Y. Company A fires back with the X². And so on, and so on. But it takes time for things to develop and for companies to profit from their original volleys. You see it all the time with all sorts of products.

What you're asking for would be monumentally expensive and terrible for business, including those that are aftermarket suppliers. They'd never be able to keep up, the installed base would be furious about incompatibilities, and parts management and distribution would be hilariously out of control.

I did address what you are talking about but let me be perfectly explicit with my point so that no one misses it. Axial decided to put money into a new pointless and weird looking 3gear trans case with a plastic instead of metal motor mount. This cost money to develop for less strength. Why? Axial decided to develop new Dogbones to replace the unis they already have for the AR44. This cost money for less strength and less steering angle. Why? Axial decided to reinvent crappy plastic links and steering links. This cost money and are less strong and reliable. Why? Axial decided to develop a new one piece powdered metal ring and pinion when they already had a nice machined setup. This cost money and has less strength than the original. Why? The answer to all these is to cut cost Yet keep charging the same. They are trying as hard as they can to widen that profit margin at any cost. We’ll just have to wait and see what the cost will be to reliability, brand loyalty, brand reputation, and customer satisfaction. I sure as hell don’t see things improving with these choices Axial has made.

 

[Ditchrat]

Calling this truck more expensive?

If I recall correctly the og Trail honcho RTR was $350+ This one is updated with similar/more features for $20 less what 6 years later. The cost of living has gone up since then, but the truck costs less?

The scx10 is not the scx10ii. The comparison should be made between scx10ii rtr. As time goes on it should be less expensive for the same quality.

So my last scx10 rtr was $250.00 shipped which is exactly how it should work.

 

[BigSki]

Offset diffy for a front axle would be nice. All of the RC manufacturers seem to want a centered diff for a front axle. Why? The housings on the new AR44s are 1 piece molded, so it's not like they use the same housing for both ends, so a cost cutting argument doesn't work. Maybe I'm a scale nerd and no one else notices or cares but as the big companies jump into the "scale" market, it's a detail like this that could help them stand out a bit.

 

[WHITE-TRASH]

Offset diffy for a front axle would be nice. All of the RC manufacturers seem to want a centered diff for a front axle. Why? The housings on the new AR44s are 1 piece molded, so it's not like they use the same housing for both ends, so a cost cutting argument doesn't work. Maybe I'm a scale nerd and no one else notices or cares but as the big companies jump into the "scale" market, it's a detail like this that could help them stand out a bit.

Patience, the aftermarket is already at work. "thumbsup"

 

[Col_Sanders]

These things are expensive to develop. Mold making is expensive. R&D is expensive. Manufacturing is expensive. Shipping is expensive. Licensing is expensive. I imagine that folks (at every RC company) are constantly working on new things that will blow consumers away. But to be fair, this is a game with very, very thin margins, so they'll leverage existing parts, platforms, molds, designs, for as long as it makes a return on investment. Even when Traxxas designed their truck, there's a lot of bits from their other platforms in it - BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER AND LEVERAGES THE PARTS BIN. The almighty dollar rules.

I dont think anyone is expecting a full redesign this soon.

So as far as sharing parts, now there are 4 different transmission configurations, 3 different link materials, and 3 different AR-44 housings...What sense does that make? Wouldnt it be cheaper and easier to manufacture if they all used the same parts?

 

[txbart]

So, I wonder if they did an initial production run of the original AR44s way back when & had a bunch of them banked somewhere. That’s why they are still showing up in the XJ kits & RTRs & new JK. Did The original mold, or pieces of it, get lost during the transition thus requiring all new molds be made?
If they had to make new molds & Since it’s probably a hassle to keep up with so many different molds to make things like the original Ar44s & AX10 trans complete, they adopted this new approach seen in these new AR44 & AX10 trans sprues. I don’t know much about mold making but I’m guessing it’s cheaper to make & easier to keep track of 1 big mold than several smaller molds. The original AR44s required 5 separate molds while the new AR44s require only 3. The old AX10 required required 2 molds & had a bunch of extra stuff that, to my knowledge, never got used. The new AX10 is one mold with nothing superfluous.

 

[rockhugger]

Razor thin margins get even thinner if with every release less people buy the product. In the end, it costs more money to design, produce less desirable or unsold product.

It's like they are circling around the target avoiding the bullseye. Me personally, I'm not falling for the buy the truck and replace every internal part philosophy anymore. It's 2017, the technology is there. "thumbsup"



"thumbsup"

 

[JatoTheRipper]

So, I wonder if they did an initial production run of the original AR44s way back when & had a bunch of them banked somewhere. That’s why they are still showing up in the XJ kits & RTRs & new JK. Did The original mold, or pieces of it, get lost during the transition thus requiring all new molds be made?
If they had to make new molds & Since it’s probably a hassle to keep up with so many different molds to make things like the original Ar44s & AX10 trans complete, they adopted this new approach seen in these new AR44 & AX10 trans sprues. I don’t know much about mold making but I’m guessing it’s cheaper to make & easier to keep track of 1 big mold than several smaller molds. The original AR44s required 5 separate molds while the new AR44s require only 3. The old AX10 required required 2 molds & had a bunch of extra stuff that, to my knowledge, never got used. The new AX10 is one mold with nothing superfluous.

I don't think the original molds were lost or they would have announced an update to all of the SCX10 IIs to feature the new one-piece axles.

Razor thin margins get even thinner if with every release less people buy the product. In the end, it costs more money to design, produce less desirable or unsold product.

It's like they are circling around the target avoiding the bullseye. Me personally, I'm not falling for the buy the truck and replace every internal part philosophy anymore. It's 2017, the technology is there. "thumbsup"



"thumbsup"

Razor thin margins at Axial are a farse. Axial is selling the Honcho at $330 whereas Redcat is offering a similar rig, with more metal, for $200.

If Axial would stop wasting money licensing every stupid thing they could reduce prices while increasing profit margins. I completely understand licensing bodies and tires, but nothing else needs to be licensed. It's just a waste to do so.