Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Reports on the new site HERE!!!

Reports on the new site HERE!!! 1 month 4 weeks ago #54299

An option I found just now which makes it easy to share the any topic on Social media.

stingray-63 wrote: And what are the links above index?

Signature now gets correct formatting if you edit it in your Profile. Use normal BBcode if you want.
www.tamiyabase.com was formatted automatically.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Reports on the new site HERE!!! 1 month 4 weeks ago #54300

Dude!!!!

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Reports on the new site HERE!!! 3 weeks 2 days ago #54767

I've been doing some surfing in the chassis database. Is there a good reason that the ORV chassis is listed as its own thing instead of being grouped with "Vintage 2WD Chassis"? If just surfing through the vintage chassis like 2WD, 4WD, Big Wheel, On Road, etc., ORV never shows up because it is grouped as its own thing.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Reports on the new site HERE!!! 3 weeks 2 days ago #54768

Good point! Now fixed :-)

blakbird wrote: I've been doing some surfing in the chassis database. Is there a good reason that the ORV chassis is listed as its own thing instead of being grouped with "Vintage 2WD Chassis"? If just surfing through the vintage chassis like 2WD, 4WD, Big Wheel, On Road, etc., ORV never shows up because it is grouped as its own thing.

Signature now gets correct formatting if you edit it in your Profile. Use normal BBcode if you want.
www.tamiyabase.com was formatted automatically.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Reports on the new site HERE!!! 1 week 2 days ago #54962

The 58654 Lancia Rally should probably be flagged as a re-release of 58040 and 58278.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Reports on the new site HERE!!! 1 week 1 day ago #54967

I'm currently thinking of how to do the reissue part of the database.

In my mind the 58654 and 58278 only has the body in common. Are they then reissues or releases?
The 58040 has a unique body and chassis compared to the two, so in my mind has not been reissued or re-released.

So, I'll take any input from you guys on how to do this. In general terms, that is. How should I revamp the model Database wrt reissues?

What makes a reissue? Chassis, body, both, separate or combined or something else?
Is it a reissue or remake, or release?
What defines the differences?

:-)

blakbird wrote: The 58654 Lancia Rally should probably be flagged as a re-release of 58040 and 58278.

Signature now gets correct formatting if you edit it in your Profile. Use normal BBcode if you want.
www.tamiyabase.com was formatted automatically.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Reports on the new site HERE!!! 1 week 1 day ago #54970

For me it is like the super clod buster and the mud blaster 1 and 2.
Different chassis so different car.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Reports on the new site HERE!!! 1 week 7 hours ago #54972

larbut wrote: I'm currently thinking of how to do the reissue part of the database.

In my mind the 58654 and 58278 only has the body in common. Are they then reissues or releases?
The 58040 has a unique body and chassis compared to the two, so in my mind has not been reissued or re-released.

So, I'll take any input from you guys on how to do this. In general terms, that is. How should I revamp the model Database wrt reissues?

What makes a reissue? Chassis, body, both, separate or combined or something else?
Is it a reissue or remake, or release?
What defines the differences?


That's a tough one and I can see both sides of it. The problem with only categorizing something as a re-re if it meets certain criteria is coming up with the criteria. The criteria can't be identicality because virtually none of the re-re's are actually identical to the original. That means you need to draw a line somewhere between the Dyna Storm, which is a virtually identical re-re, and the Sand Rover, which has nothing in common with the original except the body. But where is the line? And even if you could define it, then you have the overhead of evaluating every single re-re and trying to figure out which side of the line they are on. Sometimes the answer will be grey.

I think the solution is driven by the purpose of the database. Maybe it means different things to different people, but ultimately it is a source of information. From that point of view, I think everything that could remotely be considered a re-re should be flagged as such just to help people searching for similar models. I myself used the database for exactly this function not long ago. I wanted to understand the history of Tamiya's re-release strategy which started in 2001-2004 and the database was a primary source of information. If some of them were not flagged because they were too different than the original, then I may not have found them. A database should always err on side of too much information, rather than not enough IMHO.

A reasonable compromise seems to be what the database already does, which is list the differences on the re-re page. This makes it clear exactly what type of re-re it is.

There are always going to be problem children. Is the Super Blackfoot a re-re of the Blackfoot or is it a different model? Will everyone ever agree on the answer? Suum cuique . The nice part about owning the database is you can do whatever you want. :laugh:

With respect to my original comment, my point was that IF 58278 is listed as a re-re, THEN 58654 should be as well. They are both body-only re-re's so either they should both be listed or neither should

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Last edit: by blakbird.
Moderators: Jonny RetroAndyAus
Time to create page: 0.367 seconds