Heng Long V 7.0 vs Taigen/Torro tanks

[DHarper]

I currently have 9 H.L.and two Torro tanks. My view is H.L. are superior aside from costing half the price for the Pro version
What am I missing as to whether to get more Torros..
Other benefits over the Torro besides price:

• Much superior progressive acceleration and turns. This is huge. Torros are way too sensitive, especially in turns..
• More radio controlled functions such as Volume and Lights On/Off to name two of many.
• Capabile of both I.R.and BB shooting
• Metal robustness where it matters in gears and road wheels
• As a result of the above,is lighter for longer battery running time
• On/Off switches more accessible on top
• Version Control, currently 7.0 so know what you are getting. My Torro Sherman and Pz Mk III have differences but no version references
• Accessories fit better; some parts for my Mk III were too big to fit in the slots
• Excellent instalation instructions, whereas almost totally lacking for the Mk III
• Turret can go up or down whereas Torro cycles in one direction
• Option to choose 3 levels of more steel parts but trade off of more weight and higher price.

Benefits of Torro over H.L

• I hear robustness is better but curious why and how if compared to H.L. Pro version where key components are metal.
• Turret capable of 360 degree rotation.
• Nice muzzle flash on firing, but at a cost of no BB option in the I.R. version
• I.R. version can be adjusted to be compatible with H.L.
• A nice wood box, seem too good to throw out but not sure what to do with them.

So what am I missing that might persuade me to buy more Torros. I prefer RTR over kits. My preference is WW2 tanks and have most of the H.L. versions. I have both versions of the Sherman as guns quite different between the two. Two Torros that might be of interest are the Mk IV and late Tiger. The Torro versions are camoflagged whereas the H.L. versions are steel grey..

[SoCalBobS]

Just some things to include in your evaluation:

If you are comfortable opening up the hull, the HL turret ring gear can be quickly converted to 360 degree rotation by removing the "stop tab". I use a Dremel for this. You then bring all the turret wires together with a zip tie so they don't jam the gears. This done, you have full rotation. Just don't rotate 12 times in one direction without unwinding the cables! I don't use the slip ring accessory, since some of my wiring is non-standard, and some have had reliability issues with them.

As far as HL versions go, I prefer the level with metal gears, sprockets, idlers and tracks, but the rest plastic. This gives a lower center of gravity and some weight for traction without adding dead weight. I had one Mato all metal tank simply capsize because of the high CG. It broke the barrel.

[DHarper]

Thanks for the tip re converting H.L.turret to 360 degree rotation; one less plus for the Torro. Having said that,,the 360 benefit did not seem all the significant unless are in I.R. battles.
But if use a Torro in I.R. battles, have disadvantage that barrel only cycles in one direction. One reason I see the pluses favoring H.L. is the improvements made with Version 7.0 such as moving On/Off switches from the bottom to the top under a hatch or the back. Being a newbe at this , I only have 7.0 versions of H.L. tanks.

[Rubicon99]

I currently have 9 H.L.and two Torro tanks. My view is H.L. are superior aside from costing half the price for the Pro version
What am I missing as to whether to get more Torros..
Other benefits over the Torro besides price:

• Much superior progressive acceleration and turns. This is huge. Torros are way too sensitive, especially in turns..
• More radio controlled functions such as Volume and Lights On/Off to name two of many.
• Capabile of both I.R.and BB shooting
• Metal robustness where it matters in gears and road wheels
• As a result of the above,is lighter for longer battery running time
• On/Off switches more accessible on top
• Version Control, currently 7.0 so know what you are getting. My Torro Sherman and Pz Mk III have differences but no version references
• Accessories fit better; some parts for my Mk III were too big to fit in the slots
• Excellent instalation instructions, whereas almost totally lacking for the Mk III
• Turret can go up or down whereas Torro cycles in one direction
• Option to choose 3 levels of more steel parts but trade off of more weight and higher price.

Benefits of Torro over H.L

• I hear robustness is better but curious why and how if compared to H.L. Pro version where key components are metal.
• Turret capable of 360 degree rotation.
• Nice muzzle flash on firing, but at a cost of no BB option in the I.R. version
• I.R. version can be adjusted to be compatible with H.L.
• A nice wood box, seem too good to throw out but not sure what to do with them.

So what am I missing that might persuade me to buy more Torros. I prefer RTR over kits. My preference is WW2 tanks and have most of the H.L. versions. I have both versions of the Sherman as guns quite different between the two. Two Torros that might be of interest are the Mk IV and late Tiger. The Torro versions are camoflagged whereas the H.L. versions are steel grey..

Torro /*Taigen make a nicer stock painted tank if you do not want to paint or don’t have the skill set. Metal hulls and turrets being “better” is subjective to ones personal tastes. Torro has a better stock transmitter, but IMO does not drive as nice as the newer HL 6.0-7.1s system now available.

HL tanks can be upgraded with servo recoil, elevation and flash (loss of BB function with flash) simply by upgrading to a 6.1 or 7.1 systems (flash can be added to 6.0/7.0) and adding the recoil system. They can also be upgraded with metal road wheels, tracks and sprocket/idlers as ones interest and budget allows. All simple processes for anyone with RC or model building experience.

Cost vs Cost with all the upgrades a HL will be roughly equal in price to a stock Torro. The “X” factor between the two is HL allows for a “growth” so people can start small and work up as their interest grows. With Torro / Taigen (and Tamiya) you jump in with both feet first and the higher expense that comes with them.

So if you like the Torro / Taigen tanks and can afford them, then buy a Torro tank as they are reasonably tough and reliable.

*Taigen is the other name Torro tanks are sold under here in the U.S. by Amex.com

Instagram @ Fsttanks for a great look at a number of brands and paint themes.

[DavidN]

Here are my additional inputs:

Torro makes the Panther F, Tiger I late version, Tiger I mid version, Jagdtiger, JS-2, M4/76, M4/75, Panzer IV Ausf G, and SturmTiger. These are the tanks that HL doesn't make so I have no choice but to get them.

For the Torro tanks, it is quite easy to open the hull up to work on the inside. I can switch the Torro transmitter over to the better transmitter to run the tank. It means that I can store as many Torro tanks as I want into my Spektrum DX9 transmitter. The new Torro tanks also have smoke coming out of the muzzle brakes upon firing. Accessories in Torro were molded more accurate in details.

For HL tanks, we are stuck with their toy-like transmitters.The idlers in some of the HL tanks have a tendency of falling out after being run multiple times. The accessories look less accurate. Some parts on HL tanks are also less accurate in scales and details. And the plastic quality of HL the tanks are low compared to Torro tanks.

HLs are cheaper for sure. But for me (only for me), I feel that with the upgrades that I did, the prices on some of my HL tanks went up to about the same as the Torro and even Tamiya tanks.

[DHarper]

Thanks for the feedback I am curious why you say the Torro transmitter is better and why the "toy" reference? In terms of functionality, I believe the H.L. transmitter is far superior due to all the additional functions it has compared to the H.L. The Torro's only adjustment function is trim. The gun can only be cycled in one direction as the "Up" is used to fire the gun. A major disappointment I have with the Torro is the lack of adjustments that can be made by the transmitter.. I assume a universal transmitter would be no better as assume number of functions is tied to number of channels.
And secondly, even if thru upgrades spent as much on the H.L. as the Torro, still have the Torro's major deficiency as almost no progressiveness to acceleration or turns. IT is "slow" that too quickly becomes "fast".
That is a good point re tanks or versions that Torro has that H.L.doesn't. It is reason I have both shermans as the H.L is the 105 "artillery" piece vs the 76mm on the Torro..

[761st]

In my world I like all for what they offer and do not offer. Progressive on the Torro is a challenge especially in my village's narrow streets. I much prefer the barrel movement on the HL The HL plastic hull does have flex issues with my aggressive driving. But this affords an opportunity to "FORD" it. There are mods and upgrades to remedy this. I like Torro's metal hull and sound card. HL 7.0 is limited to two sounds?

Quite honestly, I view all my tanks as potential projects. My favorite is the MATO (and the crowd goes, WTF). The Clark board is truly progressive. It's so easy to maneuver. Yet they too have their challenges. My next tank will be whatever I can combine for the buck or rework an existing unit. While the HL Tiger does well in the village, the Mato Tiger has a bit more finesse. However the transmitter takes some getting used to.

[DHarper]

Slow speed driving and slow turning even more so, is a areal challenge with Torros; yet slow speed is the real world of tanks as your photo demonstrates. Lack of good progressiveness is my biggest gripe about Torros. While have heard of,,am not familiar with MATO's. Thanks for your comments....

[761st]

To open the can of...gear ratios. My next pursuit will be to determine if a specific ratio can/is more in line with proportional speed. Many discussions have been had on this topic. I tend to move towards a 5:1. Simply put. This hobby offers many variations on a theme. All worthy of investigation. Kinda like dating Cheerleaders.

[DHarper]

My initial tanks were all Heng Longs. Have been very pleased, indeed spoiled by how well their progressive acceleration and steering worked. I had an interest in the Torro Sherman as had the 76mm gun, while the H.L.version had an "artillery 105mm gun. That and curiosity about Torro tanks, bit the bullet on price. Was and am very disappointed with the lack of real progressiveness; really can't move and concurrently turn slowly.
Then bought a Torro Pz Mk III as feature specs in this site and at RCMotion indicated transmitter adjustable progressive steering. But then found out those specs were wrong and no different from the Sherman.
I am not one to get into a lot of customization. So am wrestling with whether to acquire more Torro's, specifically the late Tiger and Pz Mk IV..

[Rubicon99]

My initial tanks were all Heng Longs. Have been very pleased, indeed spoiled by how well their progressive acceleration and steering worked. I had an interest in the Torro Sherman as had the 76mm gun, while the H.L.version had an "artillery 105mm gun. That and curiosity about Torro tanks, bit the bullet on price. Was and am very disappointed with the lack of real progressiveness; really can't move and concurrently turn slowly.
Then bought a Torro Pz Mk III as feature specs in this site and at RCMotion indicated transmitter adjustable progressive steering. But then found out those specs were wrong and no different from the Sherman.
I am not one to get into a lot of customization. So am wrestling with whether to acquire more Torro's, specifically the late Tiger and Pz Mk IV..

If you like the HL driving feel simply swap out the Torro systems for a HL 6.1 or 7.1 system. It’s not a difficult swap and most people have it completed in under 30 minutes. Sure it adds cost but you now would have a tank that drives to your liking.

[sclui56]

DH, sounds like Rubicon's suggestion is a route you could take. Another way to enhance the driving characteristics on the Torro is to use a hobby-grade Tx where you could fine-tune the start-up & slow-down, but because of the proprietary mix they use on CH 5, you will not be able to trigger the MG.

[DHarper]

Like the idea of a swap though have never taken on customization myself. Have wondered why Torro doesn't address this progressive issue along with more transmitter controlled functions.
Seems like Heng Long.is doing a better job in advancing the capabilities of their tanks such as progressiveness and transmitter controlled functions. And then you know what you are getting with version control which Torro appears to lack. Have noticed a number of differences between my Torro Sheman and Pz Mk III such as locations of On/Off switch and Volume controls no longer being on bottom of the tank for the Mk III. Just not impressed with Torro on these fronts.
The one design plus for at least my two Torros is ability to get at the inside of the tank along with battery access; no need to screw/unscrew a plate on the bottom of the tank... .

[cpt.chaos canada]

Hi, I am a HL only owner for about a year now.
12 tanks

I think you are scratching a somewhat sore spot in the established Tanker community.
I'm quite happy with my basic versions that still includes the steel gearboxes.
So far I had two chances to meet other tank club members besides some great conversations here in Hobbysquak and on RCG.
Given a rather bad history for the HL brand in terms of reliability and options, I can understand the mostly negative response when meeting other tankers in real life events.
The only thing left in my opinion is that the stock IR receiver on the HL tanks is really bad in sunlight.
I could shoot all others with an improved IR receiver, similar to Legodei, from about 5 meters distance while they could only get me under 2 meters and only if I placed my tank in a shadowed area.
Which means I couldn't participate in the IR battle.
I'll be changing that in the near future.
Just accept that there have been good reasons in the past for people to look down on HL as a toy.
I think as well that the new HL versions have undergone massive improvements.
CCC

[SoCalBobS]

A little gas on the fire, so my apologies in advance.

The 6 and 7 HL boards are quite versatile. What I’m curious about is the negative feelings towards their “toy” transmitters. I’ve used them at large scale battlefields, with tanks at more than 100’ away with no range issues (unless batteries are low). Cannon fire is simple, two buttons simultaneously, no having to flip a stick fast or it becomes a direction/speed input. This is because It’s a 10 channel transmitter. I have one other system that is 4 channel and I have to perform those non-intuitive stick gyrations to get the same result. Because of the multiple channels and buttons, selecting customizable functions can be done onsite, especially with the 7 series.

Maybe HL could make a “deluxe” tx version, with some bling and heft to make them more appealing?

[DHarper]

Thanks for that feedback. I have only had tanks generally and HL specifically since early this year, so only have Version 7.0; I have 9 H.L.s so far; all but one the Pro version. I have been quite happy with them, though was not aware of the I.R. limitation in sunlight. That is not a big deal as not involved in any clubs for I.R. battles.
By contrast, have mixed feelings about the two Torro tanks I have, only recently acquired - especially lack of progresiveness and lack of transmitter options; surprising to me given their prices.
So from what you say, looks like Heng Long has done some catching up and even better than Torro in some respects - well almost all respects for me. The one design benefit of Torro's is ability to get at the interior including battery change. Other Torro benefit is some WW2 era tank versions, H.L. does not have; thus why considering further Torro buys..

[sclui56]

I suppose the standardization in HL comes with the economy of scale, I would imagine HL sells more units than Torro does, But the same standardization also limits us to 2 sound sets in the latest revision.

I run both and can see pros/cons with either one. I do prefer to buy Torro’s/Taigen’s when the model is available, primarily for the metal chassis and suspension, I do think the suspension implementation is superior to HL’s for the majority, save for their T34.

As a side note, I still cannot understand why Torro is still using the piston type smoker, what a waste of time, or not disclosing the "secret" mix on CH5 by now.....

[Rubicon99]

A little gas on the fire, so my apologies in advance.

The 6 and 7 HL boards are quite versatile. What I’m curious about is the negative feelings towards their “toy” transmitters. I’ve used them at large scale battlefields, with tanks at more than 100’ away with no range issues (unless batteries are low). Cannon fire is simple, two buttons simultaneously, no having to flip a stick fast or it becomes a direction/speed input. This is because It’s a 10 channel transmitter. I have one other system that is 4 channel and I have to perform those non-intuitive stick gyrations to get the same result. Because of the multiple channels and buttons, selecting customizable functions can be done onsite, especially with the 7 series.

Maybe HL could make a “deluxe” tx version, with some bling and heft to make them more appealing?

Bob I think its the light weight plastic “feel” of the TX that people think is toy like not so much the functionality. Personally I don’t mind the HL stock TX it does the job well and if it gets dropped or damaged is cheap and easy to replace.

[SoCalBobS]

Yeah, I have a LOT of HL Tx’s, even after giving away a couple. I usually bind three or four tanks to one Tx. I guess I could bind all of them to one! Also, they apparently don’t use much current unless they are being used. More than once I’ve left one on overnight to no apparent loss in current. Most of mine still use their original batteries. I always have spares though, in case.

[tank_me]

I suppose the standardization in HL comes with the economy of scale, I would imagine HL sells more units than Torro does, But the same standardization also limits us to 2 sound sets in the latest revision.

I run both and can see pros/cons with either one. I do prefer to buy Torro’s/Taigen’s when the model is available, primarily for the metal chassis and suspension, I do think the suspension implementation is superior to HL’s for the majority, save for their T34.

As a side note, I still cannot understand why Torro is still using the piston type smoker, what a waste of time, or not disclosing the "secret" mix on CH5 by now.....

It's funny because I love the T34 suspension on the Torro/Taigen, but hate the KV-1 suspension from Torro because it's a maintenance nightmare for me. My modified T34 hulls take a beating and just keep truckin' along. I've never even had to adjust the idler.

I love the way the Torro KV hulls run (I have three of them), but they require a lot of attention from their owner. I can't even count the number of times my SU-152 on a Torro KV hull has had a suspension arm part has needed to be adjusted or failed (sometimes the bar, sometimes the bar holder, sometimes something just comes loose, or broken metal suspension arm). Fixing it requires me to remove the six standoffs holding the styrene platform all the electronics are mounted to. Takes me at least an hour to fix a simple issue with the suspension when it malfunctions. Depending on the issue I may have to remove multiple suspension arms, the tracks, and usually pull the electronics. When the suspension is running well, it appears to move and run like the real thing.

I dump every smoker from every tank so I have like a box of them. Keep telling myself I'm going to Ebay them one of these days.