[Guest]

I received a sample Fly Daytona from Pendle Slot Racing this morning, the first thing that hit me is the shape is wrong as this is shape I know well.

This is long bonnet short cockpit car in real life but not in the Fly Model. I will next week post a full review. To me it look like a Daytona that has been stepped on as looks far to wide. It's a nicely detail model though.

RR.

 

[58fury]

Yours come with disc brake details?

 

[Guest]

Yes It did, This is one real car I would like to own.

RR

 

[Gaugemaster Controls]

There always seem to be someone who thinks that the shape of the latest Fly BMW/Ferrari/Lola/whatever is wrong, and the reasons for some of the differences have been well documented in another thread, but with this particular car, I am priviledged to know one of the engineers who worked on the real car, and in his opinion it is a very good replica of the real thing. Now, whether this means that it just 'looks like the real car' or whether it means that it is 'exactly the same dimensions in every detail' as the real car, I cannot tell you, because although he purchased one of these models I very much doubt that he sat with a steel rule and micrometer and checked all the measurements.

Personally, I admit to not being an expert as far as the exactness of a model is concerned. To me, it looks like the car I have seen in photographs of the real thing and so for my requirements that is good enough. To this end, I do not know if there was a difference between the two real cars as far as both the model Fly Ferraris are concerned, as quite obviously the mould used for both of these models is the same, and we can hardly expect Fly to make an additional moulding just to (for instance) raise the roof height by a millimetre.

Thanks to the quality of Fly, companies like Scalextric, SCX and other were made aware that they had to increase the quality of their product to compete, and over the past few years they have done exactly that. As much as I appreciate that some collectors are more 'enthusiastic' than others, I also think we have to remember that at the end of the day it is a toy car - nothing more, nothing less - and it has become somewhat of a habit to kick out at Fly for one reason or another just because they exist.

Aaron

 

[jonny s]

Oh no! Not again. We`ve done this to death haven`t we. IT`S A TOY

Aaron, to be fair there a few others that have come in for some flak too, could be worse you could also distribute VMG!! They are also toys but just happen to be slightly larger than the rest of the toys in the play pen

 

[Guest]

Aaron,
The shape is wrong, end of story this has nothing to do with Fly making this model (if Slot Classic had made this Daytona I would still say it's wrong) I like the model. I had my own Classic Car Garage and have a picture of My son and daughter next to a Blue Daytona.
This is not against Fly just writting what I find. I wrote that Carrera got the 1/24 E type shape wrong. It's not that important.

RR

 

[Gaugemaster Controls]

You are obviously entitled to your opinion, but I prefer to trust the words of someone who actually worked on the car, and therefore has proper experience of the real car. Glad to see that Jonny S agrees with me - at the end of the day it is just a toy car.
Aaron

 

[GBMark]

I am more pissed off that my A652 arrived with a scratched BP tampo than the roof line being too low (which it is when compared to the side on photo I took of a Daytona at the last NEC Classic car show

)

 

[jonny s]

There are hundreds of cars produced by all manufacturers that wouldn`t stand up to close scrutiny. I know we want the models to get better and they are, but placed in context we are talking about slot cars and not model engineering . We pay a fair price for a decent toy car based on the real thing. It`s a matter of perception not measurements and you have got to remember that Fly have raised the game for others to aspire too.

I once stood at a wargames convention and watched a table top battle going on. It was fantasy based and was geting very heated, one player turned to his opponent and shouted " But in reality my Giant would easily kill your Orc!" Oh my, we are playing with toys , just toys. I know RR doesn`t mean to go over board and he knows his stuff but I can understand Aaron and Co. getting pig sick of the moaning too. I`m happy with my latest Fly purchases but then I place them on my toy road with toy trees and toy figures and toy buildings and play racing games with other big and little kids....and I`m happy

 

[Routemaster]

I have to say that I like my model, too. It has good detail, the interior is awesome and the printing is excellent. And it even ran out of the box.

But I agree with Rail Racer. The shape is wrong. The roof is too shallow, the whole car seems to be too wide. Alright, I have not worked on the real car but I know it very well, it's one of my favourite Ferrari cars. If I compare it with my excellent Kyosho 1:18 Ferrari Daytona Competizione the mistakes are even more apparent (and after all even this masterpiece is just a toy). It does not capture to look of the real thing.

While it my be right that Fly is one of the companies responsible for the resurrection of slotracing it is also ok to say that they got it wrong this time. And it is also ok to mention that these mistakes that were hardly known at Fly in the past are occurring with most of the new castings. Compare the new GT 40 MkII with the real thing (or with the Scalex car - also just a toy) - they've got it wrong. The BMW 320i ETCC looks like a coupé with four doors but it should be a sedan, the CSL is pretty good but the front lights are much too big and spoil an otherwise great model. I've got both BMW's and they are nevertheless great models but it seems Fly is not setting the standards any more. But all this is just my personal opinion.

I am very much looking forward to the next releases from Fly and I do hope that they sort out these problems.

 

[David Lawson]

Fly cars are not toys as Gaugemaster suggests, they are almost £40 collectors limited run slot cars. A toy would be, for example an IRL Scalextric for £15.

The shape of the Fly Daytona is wrong when compared to all photographic evidence of the 1 to 1 vehicle and I see nothing wrong with considered criticism being levelled at any manufacturer.

It isn't relevant who is responsible for raising the quality of slot cars what is relevant is the issue of the customer having to decide if they wish to part with their hard earned cash when anyone releases a product that doesn't meet those current very high standards.

David

 

[Doug]

Lets please not perpetuate the sport of Fly bashing.

I'm sure Rail Racer will pull out his callipers and do it right, setting our minds to rest.

Talking of body shapes, Aaron is kindly finding out for me why Fly built my 50th AE Corvettes from the wrong body.

 

[Guest]

In the not to distant past I have been criticized for not stating what I think is wrong with review slot cars. I only write what I find reguardless of which manufacture has made that slot car, to do anyless would be not doing my job.

The shape is clearly wrong that is a fact not an opinion.

RR

 

[astro]

I like Fly cars, not bashing the company, but I have to agree with David Lawson, with cars costing £40-£60, and some even more, constructive criticism as a model is fair. The price and market position for slot cars says 'quality', not 'toy' and we have a right to wish for better in terms of scale accuracy.

And yes we can vote with our wallets, and I have done so, if the models were better I would have bought every available livery of the GT40, as it is I have stopped after the gulf teams set.

 

[Guest]

I am very please to say that the Fly Daytona sample performed very well straight out of the box in the track test and was a pleasure to race.

RR

 

[jonny s]

It is difficult to do a good job of a review and I am sure that RR will do a good job. No question he knows his stuff it just appears hard on the manufacturer when the criteria is not set. For me I would be happier to see the reviewing on SF controled and I`ll explain why. The NSCC experience should prove the point that a group of well meaning slot racers can at times get a little bit carried away and a falling out with a manufacturer is then a matter of course. The word Scalextric is now missing from the NSCC title.

This Forum is in a position to set standards,in fact it`s already doing exactly that and I would consider it a wise move to shape the reviews onto a more positive footing. A revue is only ever one man`s opinion and we are all able to chip in with any points concerning any topic we see fit so it doesn`t gag the remainder of us but each revue could be set out in a set style with a poll to accompany it so we can vote in line with a structure. In short to set a standard so that we are taken more seriously and what is posted has more meaning. just an idea?

These cars , sets, accessories etc. belong in the toy domain that`s why we have been banging on about Toyfair and Nuremburg. Just because they cost more than a Dinky car don`t mean they get elevated status. They are what the manufacturer intends them to be , not what we do with them. That goes for racing too i.e. they are made to be raced by mainly kids on a home circuit so it`s unfair to judge by a club racing criteria UNLESS that`s what the manufacturer intended or sold a model as fit for.

 

[astro]

I know what u mean, Jonny, we want this hobby to grow and its good to show the positive side.

Also I agree that the reviews should be kinda professional and presentable, which so far I have found to be the case here.

But I don't agree the reviews should be angled positively or looking on the bright side. Reviews of this kind, often fair but definitely looking on the positive side, can be found on good web-stores. What to me is great about the posts and the reviews here, are they are not from people who are selling or making the things, but from people who are buying the stuff, and DON'T have anything to gain by looking too much on the positive side.

Again, I think 'balanced' and 'honest' and 'complete' reviews are good, not ones that just pick something to pieces.

Also - I have yet to see statisics that show that most Fly saleens in that £65 quid livery are owned by mostly kids - a very nice car and livery, not dissing it at all, just not convinced by the 'kids toy' argument

 

[Guest]

An interesting idea but it would not work what makes a good review it not facts. Years ago I was asked to co-write car reviews for one company magazine the other person was technically brilliant but incredibly boring and I was asked to breath life into his reviews. If you write all review to a formula this is what you will get boring reviews.

RR

 

[jonny s]

Not so I feel. First of all I would rather see a review that covered all specific points, covered in an objective manner and not `Silly Slotters` mad ramblings be it a list of salient points written in an interesting manner or top ten features or similar. It has to be objective and not just an opinion and needs a criteria I believe. I`ve been writing reviews for over twenty years and a close friend of mine,the editor of Military Modeling for over thirty years. His style is firstly informative, then factual and also a considered comparison based on facts. He is a very good writer and his reviews are not boring. He is widely respected and always manages to write objectively and he has so far,retained the respect of manufacturers around the world.

To clarify I am not suggesting that a review is `doctored` towards being all positive, but feel that a review can be taken more seriously by manufacturers and collector/racers when the manufacturer/collector/racer feels it is accurate,fair,balanced and dealt with profesionaly. Very soon the only reviews worth reading will be those posted on SF.

The point about boxed collectors cars is a fair point, but like everything in life someone can state an example. Young racer at Phoenix, Gareth,rich dad,Fly 512 boxed set bought for his birthday from club shop and on the track within minutes! Still only a toy top him and one to be raced to destruction! In general terms this is about toy cars.

 

[Routemaster]

@jonny s: If Fly regards its products as "toys" and wants them to be treated this way, why do they offer loads of limited editions, why do they include loads of fragile detail, why do they put more effort in the outer appearance of the car than in quality control on the technical side?

Fly was in fact the first manufacturer to recognize the greatest group of people that could be interested in slotracing if being offered a suitable product: grown-ups! Their cars have never been aimed mainly at kids (not saying that there aren't any kids around that are having fun racing or collecting Fly cars), these models (and they are models) are aimed at grown up enthusiasts willing to part with the money necessary for all those great offerings they presented us in the last years. They (together with Ninco) resurrected slotracing because they took it away from the pure toylike character it had for years. So as I wrote it's sad to see that they seem to fail the standards they themselves set years ago (and which, I have to say, are still being set by most of their models).

I would say that you have a point in asking for balanced reviews, though. I definetely have to say (and I think I did so in my original posting) that I like the Daytona as it is great to have a relatively good model of this great car and it is a model that offers loads of fun when being put on the track. But I have to say that the shape of the car is wrong. It looks wrong. I could offer you some pictures to see the differences but I don't want to take pics from other sites. I have worked in a model shop for sometime and I know the owner if the real thing (well, one of the real things) and he did not buy the model because it looked wrong. I think it is perfectly correct to point this out if it's the case. On the other hand I mentioned the outstanding level of detail on the model, even in the interior. I think that's pretty balanced.