Joined
·
5,438 Posts
I probably am in the worst position to address a critic to a company that has done so much to re-invigorate the hobby, while now possibly hurting it seriously, since we are ourselves a manufacturer of slot car bits, and that we produce bodies of the type that some purists call "blobs", a critic justified in many cases.
Regardless and because I love this hobby, I would like to point out what I believe is a very valid critic, and it is one of accurate SHAPE. The latest outings from FLY are so far off, one has to seriously question the talent of the pattern makers. I am talking about the latest important important FLY releases: the Ford GT40 and the Ferrari Daytona. I have seen here a comparison of the GT40 by Scalextric and FLY, with the conclusion that the FLY was better. I also saw great praise for the Daytona.
As a person who has direct and daily access to both, I can only conclude that the fellows embracing these models need new glasses. The Daytona is SO FAR OFF, it does not even capture the look of the real car and looks more like a "custom" job. It is a full 10mm too wide and 8mm too low on the roof line, the hood is too short by nearly 10mm, the cabin too long by 6mm. Multiply this by 32 and see the problem. When I showd the model to Tony Adamowicz who of course drove the most famous of the Daytonas, he could not even recognize the car.
I also pointed out somewhere else that the FLY GT40 was WAY off, with too low of a roofline and WAY to high of a back end. Looks to me like one of those horrid fake GT40 kit cars made by FiberFab in the 1970's, of which the patterns were built by a person with no sense of proportions and dubious taste. The Daytona and GT40 by FLY brings us right back to the dark days when Scalextric cars looked like toys for toddlers.
A great disappointment indeed.
Regards,
Mr. Pea
Always a critic.
Regardless and because I love this hobby, I would like to point out what I believe is a very valid critic, and it is one of accurate SHAPE. The latest outings from FLY are so far off, one has to seriously question the talent of the pattern makers. I am talking about the latest important important FLY releases: the Ford GT40 and the Ferrari Daytona. I have seen here a comparison of the GT40 by Scalextric and FLY, with the conclusion that the FLY was better. I also saw great praise for the Daytona.
As a person who has direct and daily access to both, I can only conclude that the fellows embracing these models need new glasses. The Daytona is SO FAR OFF, it does not even capture the look of the real car and looks more like a "custom" job. It is a full 10mm too wide and 8mm too low on the roof line, the hood is too short by nearly 10mm, the cabin too long by 6mm. Multiply this by 32 and see the problem. When I showd the model to Tony Adamowicz who of course drove the most famous of the Daytonas, he could not even recognize the car.
I also pointed out somewhere else that the FLY GT40 was WAY off, with too low of a roofline and WAY to high of a back end. Looks to me like one of those horrid fake GT40 kit cars made by FiberFab in the 1970's, of which the patterns were built by a person with no sense of proportions and dubious taste. The Daytona and GT40 by FLY brings us right back to the dark days when Scalextric cars looked like toys for toddlers.
A great disappointment indeed.
Regards,
Mr. Pea
Always a critic.