SlotForum banner
1 - 20 of 52 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,863 Posts
Maybe we've been spoilt lately. The new Stratos looks gorgeous and then there's been the M3, Sierra, Javelin and all sorts of other morsels to be thankful for. Perhaps I was too optimistic to hope that there would never again be a curiously shaped MGB, frankly terrible DB5 or even slightly dodgy Lancer Evo.

But then this happened:

Tire Vehicle Wheel Car Hood


And then to complete the tale of woe it's got a skinny motor in it!

I'm not a GT40 fanatic - and, yes, I know that the Mk.IV I a J-Car and not a GT40 - but this is like a 'Greatest Hits' for all the things that Scalextric has got wrong over the last 15 years. Mr. Blobby is back, so are the tractor tyres on tiny hubs, the nose looks off - it's like Scalextric used the NSR Ford Mk.IV as its starting point and made a bad copy. Here's the real thing:

Wheel Tire Sky Cloud Car


I know that the MRRC is too long, but to me it looks like several million dollars in comparison. After all the genuinely great things that Margate has been responsible for recently, this is wildly disappointing.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,620 Posts
I have seen better, but it must also be noted that I've also seen worse .... FAR WORSE! I think we can all agree to label this as a slice of mediocrity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: steveaca

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,294 Posts
Hi Nick

The only thing I can see is that there something wrong with the size of the front wheel or wheel arch ?

I know that it has been taken from a different angle but it looks ok to me

please tell us more .

regards Adrian.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,719 Posts
Errrm...... I think it looks ok. Yes, the wheel/tyre combo may be a bit lacking in scale, but I quite like the look of the car.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,942 Posts
IMO the worst bit is that it's an inline with the skinny motor. That means it will drive completely differently to the Scalex P4 Ferrari and Chaparral 2F, which are it's natural stablemates. The P4 also has that silly rear wheel/tyre problem, it beats me why they get things so wrong so often.

Andy
 

·
Circuit Owner
Joined
·
5,928 Posts
Looks like it could have been made as a sidewinder and that would have allowed a full interior too.

The designers obviously dont consider the big picture or the context of the car.

Hornby seems to be ready-fire-aim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
746 Posts
But then this happened:

post-1355-0-97792300-1508831280.jpg

Hey, what is that thing?...is it a VW van?...maybe a '47 Buick?...boy, who would think it was a Ford Mk. IV...nah, couldn't be...maybe some kind of truck?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,863 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Little game of spot-the-difference:

Here's the real car - I flipped around the image to fit with the slot car images, but it's representative enough.

Vehicle Car Tire Hood Automotive design


Here's the NSR version:

Car Vehicle Tire Wheel Hood


Here's the Scalextric again:

Vehicle Car Motor vehicle Hood Toy


And here's the MRRC:

Vehicle Tire Car Hood Automotive design


1) The nose should be short and round with big, sexy arches. MRRC gets in best. NSR is comical.

2) The sills should curve under the car a bit and although the Mk.IV is flat-sided there shouldn't be obvious angles onto the horizontal surfaces. None curve under, but the Scalextric looks too angular going to the top surface.

3) The windows should be pretty tall. NSR gets this best. MRRC looks a bit awkward.

4) The roof should have a slight curve. Only MRRC got that one.

5) The engine cover and rear arches should curve downwards. NSR sort of does but it's too short and ends too high on the rear, possibly compensating for the massive schnoz, Scalextric lacks curve and finishes way too high. MRRC looks right but is a bit longer than scale from memory.

All things being equal I think that the MRRC is far and away the nicest model and they can be made to run well after a lot of swearing. NSR drives the best of course but at some considerable cost as a model.
 

Attachments

·
Jim Moyes
Joined
·
5,106 Posts
It's a MkIV with a hunchback. The top of the rear arch is more in line with the bottom of the side window on the real car. Nearer the top of the window on Scaley's (poor) attempt. And the gentle slope from the back of the door up to the top is very nearly matched by the slope back down to the rear end on the real car. Not so on the slot car.

Saw them at Gaugemaster on Sunday and could have had one for less than £29. Didn't bother! Doubly glad now that I know it has the FF motor in it.
 

·
Electric model car driver
Joined
·
1,575 Posts
I'd post something but the moderators would probably delete it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
746 Posts
Gentlemen, these are slot cars...not model cars! Model cars don't have to incorporate guides, motors, or anything else that helps them move. If you want a model car, buy one then try to put it on some chassis if you want to race it. All the criticism of these cars for how tall the window is, or how accurate the wheel arch is, or how many rivets actually held the windscreen in...become model builders, or hand build your own, don't tear down the small fantasy I have of owning and racing a Ford Mk. IV because it's not a real Mk. IV.......the nose isn't exactly the right shape! These are NOT models...these are race cars that some engineer has modified to either make more money for the company that sells them, or to go faster for the people who buy them.
 

·
Lee
Joined
·
608 Posts
You have hit the nail on the head there Doug. Although I like to see a nice car when its on the track and moving a yellow turd would look the same at speed.

Lee
 

·
Jim Moyes
Joined
·
5,106 Posts
Gentlemen, these are slot cars...not model cars! Model cars don't have to incorporate guides, motors, or anything else that helps them move.
By that logic, there are no slot cars that are also good models. That is plainly not the case.

And it has been said umpteen times before, it would cost the manufacturers no more to make a good model than a bad one.

The original sentiment of the thread was that Scalextric have been doing really well in that regard of late, but this is a step backwards. To those of us who care about these things, anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
746 Posts
By that logic, there are no slot cars that are also good models. That is plainly not the case.
By your logic nobody would ever do anything else but build an exact duplicate of the existing car. Well, some Cretan extended the nose of the Mk. IV so the guide could be put into a position that would improve the handling of A SLOT CAR...not to mention the guy that had to modify the interior so the darned motor could fit...and when that didn't work he raised the roof line just a bit to accommodate the motor...blah, blah, blah. These are toy cars meant to go fast...small market, little money. If it costs the same money to build an accurate mold that will win zero races, or an exaggerated mold that will blow the competition away, which way do you think the money guy will vote? They make the most realistic product they can, and try to go as fast as they can...a compromise. Could NSR build a car that would dominate the industry, but not look like a real car...undoubtedly! They have tried to split hairs for people who count rivets, and for people who want to go fast...a BUSINESS compromise. There is so little profit in this hobby that arguing over whether the window is the right height seems silly. Buy Racer...the expensive ones...are they accurate enough? Or buy LeMans Minatures...are they accurate enough?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
So the crucial flaw with Scalextric's representation of the MKIV is that it looks wrong (to rivet counters) and drives wrong (to racers).

I lean towards the racing side of things when it comes to prioritising what I look for in a slot car, because if I want a really pretty model car I get one of those 1/18th things that sits on the desk... but fair enough there's branches to the hobby. I'd be cheesed off if I bought a car and it looked wrong and didn't go fast enough to become an indeterminate blob where looks don't matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
If im buying a model car, be it a static one or a slot car, its important to me that it represents the car its based on, simple as that, if it doesnt look right then i might as well buy something that does look right. And overall that GT just doesnt look right, i think the biggest problem with it is there are so many bits on it that are slightly wrong that it just makes the whole car look odd. It has lost the sleek flowing lines of the original. Its not the sort of car id buy, but if it was i wouldnt buy it. Its like when i wanted to get a pair of american cars, there are other makes that just look better, so thats what I bought. There are plenty of scaley cars that look ace, but when they get it wrong it sticks out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
This is why I buy only the Fantasy livery of the NSR Ford Mk IV( Martini/Rothman),

My Scalextic Gulf Ford Gt40 is spot on and I can't see this car in my stable unless it's a Fantasy livery also!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Scale issues aside, the slim can motor kills it for me. I'm not a fan. I can see that some models just don't have enough room for a decent C can motor, but that's not the case here, just poor design.
 
1 - 20 of 52 Posts
Top