Geek Gifts 2008: The RC Battle Tank Type 90
The full review is published in the ""="" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/geekend/?p=1439">TechRepublic Geekend blog.
The packaging makes us anxious to get at our new toy.
Vivid simulation of an actual tank -- this is going to be cool.
Looks like we have all of the pieces -- lets load the batteries and get to tanking.
It looks sort of like the M1 Abrams, but the box and documentation got to great lengths to be non-committal on exactly what tank is being simulated.
Here are all the pieces laid out on the table.
It turns out our tank, because of cheap construction, lacks longevity.
Poor translation is not confined to bad Japanese video games.
These detailed pieces have to be cut out and added to our Battle Tank.
Brings back memories of my model making years. The little plastic pieces that never fit just right, the smell of the glue -- ah, childhood. I think the USS Missouri battleship I made when I was a child would hold up better than this tank.
It is my contention that a RC Tank should be constructed in such a way as to be able to cover reasonably difficult terrain. I have seen RC vehicles crash into curbs and still keep going so I know it is possible.
I say the Battle Tank Type 90 is cheap and here is why: This is the drive mechanism for the left track. Notice the plastic spines of the gear. That is what transfers power from the drive shaft (metal) to the tread. The left assembly is still intact.
The right assembly is gone at this point. The arrows mark where the spines of the gear should be.
From this angle you can see the holes were the missing gear spines were supposed to lock and drive the right tread.
I was excited about reviewing the RC Battle Tank Type 90 for the ""="" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/focus/Geek" gifts="">TechRepublic Geek Gift Guide, but after only a few minutes I was terribly disappointed. You can read the ""="" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/geekend/?p=1439">full review in the Geekend blog if you want the ugly details.