Senton Really Arrma?

[Exc3l]

Appreciate the reply, I expected you to say exactly what you did. You are not the first.
I started RC back in the 1980's. I watched the transition from Kits, the norm, to RTR's, which dominate this Hobby now. RTR's were created to get more exposure to those unable or even willing to build from scratch. I Know how these are produced and sourced. I see you don't quite like Arrma as much as other brands. Good to be open about other brands out there. Likewise. I am no fanboy of any brand. I left that behind with my TA racing days.
That aside. We can argue this issue further, just keep it in a civil tone.
JD is Arrma Uk. HH tells him what to design. not the other way around. But he is the father or founder of the Arrma line. He knows very much about what it takes to get a RTR model from design phase to box.
Team Durango was the Kit variant of Arrma. DEX8 compares to the legacy Typhons.

If you observed the many layers of producing an RTR vs a Full kit, you would understand better. This is not about Tamiya vs Serpent or Schumacher and Arrrma. Who does it better. A brand that has a Kit and an RTR option of the same model rarely equates to the same product. Features are changed. You don't necessarily pay less for the kitted version. Look closer at both for comparison.
Building a RTR has way less QC layers than assembling a kit. A kit designed brand will fail very easily if QC is off. There is no room for error. Not one part can be missing. Need to spend $$ on experienced tech support. I am not talking about making sure the kit will be a good running model. That bis a given. Not that type of QC. I am talking about creating a boxed set of parts and precise instructions. Labled and sequenced bags of checked over parts that have no flaws. RTR's can be slammed together real fast without regard for this. Defects are in abundance with RTR's because of this.
Yes a manual is made once then printed. have you looked at a Tekno manual for instance The illustrations and procedures take a lot to create. Not just written by one person. It requires designers, editors, writers, photography. To get it right. Fail with just the manual alone and you have a failed product.
High end brands rely on quality parts, so the builder will not have assy issues. Can't fail here either. It is much cheaper to slam a RTR rig together at the factory super fast and disregard parts QC. More labor is required for kit boxed parts. Seems counter intuitive. But is not.
I have built many kits. I can see the level of QC that is needed for it. Overseas sourcing uses assembly line building of sub components in RTR's. Cheap unskilled labor is all that is needed. An RC brand that builds RTR's can hide QC much more easily than a Kit brand.

Damn, you stand your ground! That's impressive. Honestly, it's not even worth arguing/teaching people like these.

 

[morrjr71]

Appreciate the reply, I expected you to say exactly what you did. You are not the first.
I started RC back in the 1980's. I watched the transition from Kits, the norm, to RTR's, which dominate this Hobby now. RTR's were created to get more exposure to those unable or even willing to build from scratch. I Know how these are produced and sourced. I see you don't quite like Arrma as much as other brands. Good to be open about other brands out there. Likewise. I am no fanboy of any brand. I left that behind with my TA racing days.
That aside. We can argue this issue further, just keep it in a civil tone.
JD is Arrma Uk. HH tells him what to design. not the other way around. But he is the father or founder of the Arrma line. He knows very much about what it takes to get a RTR model from design phase to box.
Team Durango was the Kit variant of Arrma. DEX8 compares to the legacy Typhons.

If you observed the many layers of producing an RTR vs a Full kit, you would understand better. This is not about Tamiya vs Serpent or Schumacher and Arrrma. Who does it better. A brand that has a Kit and an RTR option of the same model rarely equates to the same product. Features are changed. You don't necessarily pay less for the kitted version. Look closer at both for comparison.
Building a RTR has way less QC layers than assembling a kit. A kit designed brand will fail very easily if QC is off. There is no room for error. Not one part can be missing. Need to spend $$ on experienced tech support. I am not talking about making sure the kit will be a good running model. That bis a given. Not that type of QC. I am talking about creating a boxed set of parts and precise instructions. Labled and sequenced bags of checked over parts that have no flaws. RTR's can be slammed together real fast without regard for this. Defects are in abundance with RTR's because of this.
Yes a manual is made once then printed. have you looked at a Tekno manual for instance The illustrations and procedures take a lot to create. Not just written by one person. It requires designers, editors, writers, photography. To get it right. Fail with just the manual alone and you have a failed product.
High end brands rely on quality parts, so the builder will not have assy issues. Can't fail here either. It is much cheaper to slam a RTR rig together at the factory super fast and disregard parts QC. More labor is required for kit boxed parts. Seems counter intuitive. But is not.
I have built many kits. I can see the level of QC that is needed for it. Overseas sourcing uses assembly line building of sub components in RTR's. Cheap unskilled labor is all that is needed. An RC brand that builds RTR's can hide QC much more easily than a Kit brand.

Well said, especially about the manuals. The manuals that are put into RTR vehicle boxes are minimalist, and often don't include exploded views. In many instances you have to go the manufacturer's web site and download the exploded view. And the exploded views don't include step-by-step instructions. A manufacturer of a kit must identify every step required to assemble the kit and then each task must be clearly laid out so the average person can understand it fully. And then the manual has to be verified, usually by giving it to a person who has never assembled the kit and having them assemble the kit correctly. And then required changes have to be made before the manual can be released. All this costs time and money.

 

[SrC]

+1
Kit manuals are more costly and time consuming to make than most think. It is the backbone of any kit. Essential to the success of any kit brand. The kit manual is where a brand starts first. The parts all need to be precise better QC, or the builders will be pulling their hair out and the Brand's tech support dept. will be indundated. A fail. Costly by itself needing more $Technical trained$ staff on hand. HH just throws parts at you and never explains how to assemble. A kit brand must explain/answer how parts should fit if there are any valid issues that arise. I think Tekno is one great example. Industry wide well known for their manual and quality parts. Among some other high end kit brands. An RTR brand's business model is completely different than a Kit brand. Each target different RC markets/consumers.