[Ecurie Martini]

Nice to see the 50's being revisited (Where are the Scalextric Vanwall & 250F) but, judging from the top-side view, I believe that the rear track is too wide and the tires certainly are. Assuming that the body dimensions are correct (which involves a lot of work), one wonders why manufacturers can't get the basic track and tire measurements right.

EM

 

[Ecurie Martini]

QUOTE I think the rear wheels and axle look fine without getting too picky. Lets not get back on those tracks again of 'the body is 2mm too long' etc etc.

2 mm here or there on the body is not really my point. Without the model in hand and reference material I can't tell. I was simply raising the question of why, assuming an accurate body that took some effort to model and produce, did not someone check something simple like axle length ( a very easy spec to meet - just cut it in the right place) or tire width - (might require a mold revision).

There are three ways to respond if a manufacturer is close but not quite spot on - vote with the purse and don't buy, buy and modify to taste or provide some feedback into the supply chain in hopes that it will get back to the source and they will do better next time.

With the exception of club racing classes, I mostly "roll my own" so it is a matter of some indifference to me.

EM

 

[Ecurie Martini]

QUOTE PPS and I would also agree with Mac P. The model railway world suffers from rivet counters and one of the joys of the slot car world is that it doesn't (yet!). The soul of the car and how it is remembered matters much more than whether it is 2mm too long!

As a one-time model railroader, a sometimes shipmodeller and a car modeller, I agree with Mac in all respects save one: He has the demonstrated credentials to comment on any modelling efforts!

This elusive "look" was exactly my point. I do not have the specifications of the Merc chassis at hand but the typical GP car of the era had a track measurement of 50" (1.27 m) or less and the Mercedes cars of that and earlier eras had a markedly "crabbed" track - the front track was wider than the rear. In addition, and especially when seen from today's perspective, the cars rode on very narrow tires, rarely exceeding 6.5" rim width.

If you look at the photos taken in that era, one striking thing about the Mercedes is the fact that the rear wheels/tires are very close to the body reflecting not only the width of the body which was lower and wider than the others of the time but also the fact that the brakes were mounted inboard so there was no need to have the drums out in the airstream for cooling.

As far as counting rivets is concerned, I can no longer even see them in 1/32 scale!

EM