QUOTE (truescale @ 1 Dec 2003, 03:25 PM)For a chassis to be considered a "Scale chassis" it should be:
1. One that is all metal.
2. One that has plenty of adjustments (by soldering or fasteners) for tuning and different bodies, etc.
3. It should also have the ability to fit different motor types.
4. One that uses the conventional guide and axle system.
A Scale body is one that:
1. Measures out to be similar to the 1:1 real car.
2. Made detailed or with the ability to be detailed properly.
3. A shell rather than a heavy think casting (resin)
4. Must have a ridged feel (vacuum formed) not too thin.
5. Must not vary much on any dimension so as to, make any part of the body clear tires, motor, or the guide.
QUOTE
I fully support the explicit sentiment of this post having abandonned slot cars in '64 when rainbow colored tires and comic book bodies appeared. That said, I have a few comments on the specific formula for implementation implied:
1. Metal chassis - certainly an option but not the only viable one. Engineering plastics and precision die casting (viz the camera business) offer possibilities that can extend the range of choices - albeit at a cost of investment.
2. Adjustment - fasteners, adhesives and high performance double faced tape (like that used for installing auto glass) can be used with non-metallic chassis.
3. Different motor types: Again, an option but there is also an arguement that can be made for a well made motor/drive assembly that fits the widely available FK cans
4. What is a "conventional" guide and axle system? Both pivoting and pin guides have a long history - there are advantages to each. I would prefer a stipulation that the guide must be under the body rather than projecting like the ramming bow of a trireme. Axles? I prefer 3/32" for both 1/32 and 1/24 cars but, as an example, Al Penrose, whose BWA wheels are among the best available, bores his 1/24 wheels to 1/8" and 3mm is also commonly used.
Bodies:
1. Measurements: agreed
2. Detailed: This is a tough call. Some details are obvious - exhaust pipes, drivers, windscreens and proper wheel inserts - others offer a sort of "Hobson's choice" does one make rear view mirrors beefy enough to survive the first crash or make them to scale with a correspondingly short half life? I think that this is very much an individual question
3. A shell rather than a heavy casting - what is the agenda here? Resing shells can be made or ground thin and there are some pretty tough casting resins around. If I want to risk my $80 Fisher C4R resin body in a race and accept the weight distribution penalty - I think that that is my choice - I may make up the points in concours or my own building enjoyment.
4. "Rigid feel" - The only point I see here is one of durability. After all, if one correctly models a real car, the body should be made from aluminum (sorry, forgot that this is a European board - aluminium) foil. First, let me stipulate that I know that vacuum formed bodies in durable plastic can be painted and detailed to produce superb models. That aside, it is obvious that, barring injection blow molding in a female mold, thinner plastic allows finer definition of detail in sheet formed bodies -i.e. vacuum forming.
5. Varying dimensions to clear motors, tires etc. Good point - the biggest problem I see is the need to accomodate readily available drive components under the low rear decks of modern mid-engined cars or in the narrow tails of old F 1 cars. ( more of a problem with 1/32 than 1/24) I would add to that a stipulation that the body contours not be distorted to accommodate molding systems - not a problem with the current crop of slab-sided cars but a real issue in, for example, modeling the extreme tumble home of a D-Jag or the proper contour of the tail of a Lancia Ferrari or a 250F.
One area I find curiously missing - wheels and tires: IMHO (or perhaps not so "H" for those who know me) nothing so strongly impacts the "impression of reality" as properly (or improperly) dimensioned wheels and tires. Although this is particulary critical for models of older cars, even modern cars, especially when seen from the rear, should look like they are running on the pavement, not smoothing it!
My E 0.017
EM
1. One that is all metal.
2. One that has plenty of adjustments (by soldering or fasteners) for tuning and different bodies, etc.
3. It should also have the ability to fit different motor types.
4. One that uses the conventional guide and axle system.
A Scale body is one that:
1. Measures out to be similar to the 1:1 real car.
2. Made detailed or with the ability to be detailed properly.
3. A shell rather than a heavy think casting (resin)
4. Must have a ridged feel (vacuum formed) not too thin.
5. Must not vary much on any dimension so as to, make any part of the body clear tires, motor, or the guide.
QUOTE
I fully support the explicit sentiment of this post having abandonned slot cars in '64 when rainbow colored tires and comic book bodies appeared. That said, I have a few comments on the specific formula for implementation implied:
1. Metal chassis - certainly an option but not the only viable one. Engineering plastics and precision die casting (viz the camera business) offer possibilities that can extend the range of choices - albeit at a cost of investment.
2. Adjustment - fasteners, adhesives and high performance double faced tape (like that used for installing auto glass) can be used with non-metallic chassis.
3. Different motor types: Again, an option but there is also an arguement that can be made for a well made motor/drive assembly that fits the widely available FK cans
4. What is a "conventional" guide and axle system? Both pivoting and pin guides have a long history - there are advantages to each. I would prefer a stipulation that the guide must be under the body rather than projecting like the ramming bow of a trireme. Axles? I prefer 3/32" for both 1/32 and 1/24 cars but, as an example, Al Penrose, whose BWA wheels are among the best available, bores his 1/24 wheels to 1/8" and 3mm is also commonly used.
Bodies:
1. Measurements: agreed
2. Detailed: This is a tough call. Some details are obvious - exhaust pipes, drivers, windscreens and proper wheel inserts - others offer a sort of "Hobson's choice" does one make rear view mirrors beefy enough to survive the first crash or make them to scale with a correspondingly short half life? I think that this is very much an individual question
3. A shell rather than a heavy casting - what is the agenda here? Resing shells can be made or ground thin and there are some pretty tough casting resins around. If I want to risk my $80 Fisher C4R resin body in a race and accept the weight distribution penalty - I think that that is my choice - I may make up the points in concours or my own building enjoyment.
4. "Rigid feel" - The only point I see here is one of durability. After all, if one correctly models a real car, the body should be made from aluminum (sorry, forgot that this is a European board - aluminium) foil. First, let me stipulate that I know that vacuum formed bodies in durable plastic can be painted and detailed to produce superb models. That aside, it is obvious that, barring injection blow molding in a female mold, thinner plastic allows finer definition of detail in sheet formed bodies -i.e. vacuum forming.
5. Varying dimensions to clear motors, tires etc. Good point - the biggest problem I see is the need to accomodate readily available drive components under the low rear decks of modern mid-engined cars or in the narrow tails of old F 1 cars. ( more of a problem with 1/32 than 1/24) I would add to that a stipulation that the body contours not be distorted to accommodate molding systems - not a problem with the current crop of slab-sided cars but a real issue in, for example, modeling the extreme tumble home of a D-Jag or the proper contour of the tail of a Lancia Ferrari or a 250F.
One area I find curiously missing - wheels and tires: IMHO (or perhaps not so "H" for those who know me) nothing so strongly impacts the "impression of reality" as properly (or improperly) dimensioned wheels and tires. Although this is particulary critical for models of older cars, even modern cars, especially when seen from the rear, should look like they are running on the pavement, not smoothing it!
My E 0.017
EM
