107 replies to this topic

[Jean-Michel Piot]

OK, as asked by Chris Clark, here are the two different Lotus types one could build with the "Lotus 40" Cox kit.

As mentioned by the Dokktor, the kit includes specific parts for the two different types. The instructions clearly indicate what exhaust or roll bar or decals have to go on either Type 30 or Type 40.

One additional thing before I let the pictures talk: I reproduced a genuine livery of Bob Challman's Type 30, a little bit posterior to the pictures taken by Cox when they decided to reproduce this car.

[GTPJoe]

Jean-Michel,

Two beautiful examples. Superb workmanship!

I can rememeber when these arrived at our local slot shop. My cousin and I each purchased one and at the time we both went for the modern aggressive Lotus 40.

Yet today I see the Lotus 30 as the more beautiful design and much more pleasing all around.

Thanks for sharing.

[don.siegel]

Same here Joe - I got one of these as a present, probably in 1966, and built the Lotus 40...
Looking at it now, I'd have to agree that the basic shape of the body looks closer to the 30 - and that the Russkit is the best example of a 40!

Still, it's hard to get a model like this looking as low as the actual car. A friend has a real Lotus 11, and none of the models comes close to duplicating that stance. I kind of suspect it's the same thing for any other Lotus or similar car.

Anyway, beautiful work Jean-Michel - now you just have to race them against each other to settle the question once and for all...

Don

[bosmeck]

Absolutely marvelous, Jean-Michel!

Great detail work.

Thanks for putting these amazing cars up for us Jean-Michel.

Looking forward to the 2E.

[Jean-Michel Piot]

As I've already made a first series of those cars, this time I had some ideas of the way to make the Cox model more accurate.

If you are a purist (like Don Siegel with whom we had some debates about my Cox transformations), don't look at those pictures!

- Hello Don, Ca va ? je vois que tu me lis ... Ta 2E avance elle-aussi.

First of all, I wanted to copy the Strombecker shape of the front wings, arround the front lights. Indeed the Cox model has too big and too low front lights.

I made a mould upon the 1/24 Lotus Strombecker front wings, cut the Cox model, put the moulds on with a seal made of modelers clay, and dropped some resin from underneath.







On the last picture, you see on the left the genuine shape of the front lights of the Cox model. Of course, on the right, you have the Strombecker.

You will notice that the car in the middle is also modified in the nose area, as the Type 40 nose is longer (with no rostrum, unlike Bob Challman's Type 30 (ex-Jim Clark at the 1964 LA Times Grand Prix, which is very special).

The whole is about downforce by the way (either the rostrum or the longer nose).

About Bob Challman's car again, my work was based on pictures taken by John Wilson.

Here is a little frame (because of copyright) but indeed, if you want to build a model and have the chance to find pictures taken by a photographer who sells his work, just like John, do not hesitate to order a print. You will get more details and be proud to show your model together with an original print.



As the front lights were covered, for this Type 30 (and not for the 40 of course) I filled the front wings with epoxy mastic (Milliput).



This picture also shows that the rear spoiler had been filed (this is the Type 30, remember), that the doors were lowered and flattend, among other body modifications.

It was time then for the primer:



More pictures to come.

[Jean-Michel Piot]

Looking at it now, I'd have to agree that the basic shape of the body looks closer to the 30 - and that the Russkit is the best example of a 40!

Don, the basic shape is closer to Bob Challman's 30 because of the specific apertures in the wings and because of the nose.

As for the best example of a 40 I know and as already cited here, for me the best is the one made by Karl-Heinz Hornberg (Fein Design). But, as already said, we are not talking of vintage models in this case.

[TSR]

Jean-Michel,

I have seen the Fein-Design resin kit and for my money and my personal knowledge of the car, believe that the vac-formed Russkit body is more accurate and much better representing the stance of the 1/1 car. My personal opinion of course.

I believe that if someone would simply make a resin copy of the Russkit model, he would have a much better base to begin with. In fact, I would actually use the Russkit body replica because the PETG is stronger than resin and looks a lot more like fiberglass in its thickness, as well as better representing the thin plexiglass of the windshield.

Another pretty good model (of the "30") is the Revell vac-formed body.

[Jean-Michel Piot]

Philippe,

As for the general shape, the Russkit may be better, I can only trust you as I know a little about your skill and as I do not have the Russkit (which shape is really pleasant indeed, I admit).

The Fein Design model has better detailing of course... its exhausts is so much far better than the curious spaghetti noodle of the Russkit.

[dc-65x]

Hi Philippe,

Which Russkit version do you like? The earlier narrow one as repoped by E.D. or the later wider version with the molded-in bundle of snakes exhaust (less chrome trumpets)?

Jean-Michel,

Your work is amazing. You are a true "Plastic Surgeon"!

[Jean-Michel Piot]

A little step further for the two cars, with a close-up on Bob Challman's head.

I had to sculpt the Wayfarer sun glasses, make him smile, modify the helmet, notably by creating a screen.

Apart from this, the integration of the longer nose for the 40 and of the shapes of the Strombecker front wings cannot be suspected.

[TSR]

Which Russkit version do you like? The earlier narrow one as repoped by E.D. or the later wider version with the molded-in bundle of snakes exhaust (less chrome trumpets)?

Rick,

I am only aware of one Russkit body. Is the other one you are thinking of the close copy made by Select?

Jean-Michel,

The Russkit chrome exhaust being a separate part, it matters little if not realistic as one can easily use a replica of the Monogram Lotus 38 system...

[Jean-Michel Piot]

After all this "plastic surgery" as Rick gently and cleverly suggested, the habitual detailing and finishing...

Oh yes, just one little thing: I had to recreate the screens, notably because the hole in the genuine Cox part is not at the right place.



Please note the correct place for the gear shift ... (not in the middle of the car)





More cars to come ... (I had to slow down a little the restoration of vintage slot cars for an excellent reason: my daughter is two months and a week old now... nice, but time-consuming).

Hope she will like the toys I'm building ...

[Joe Mig]

Incredible job!

What did you do to use the Lotus front wheels with the Ackerman steering ?

[Jean-Michel Piot]

Thanks, Joe.

The front wheels simply are the extra narrow Cox wheels. Those wheels can be modified.

I do the same thing with American mag extra narrow wheels for the Cheetah models with Ackerman steering:







The Cheetah steering was made more recently and you can see that I improved the process in order to have the correct nut. I may modify my Lotus with Ackerman steering in order to have a nut rather than a clip.

It is noticeable that and each and every type of 1/24 Cox wheels has also been made in an "extra narrow" version.

I will try the same thing with a Chaparall 2A, with a set of Chaparall extra narrow wheels.

[don.siegel]

JM,

Hope you don't mind if I open a slight parenthesis on this thread to show a pair ofLotus 30s and a pair of 40s.

First, since we're all saying so many nice things about the Russkit, here it is! Color not quite right, but this is the one I have, which I found built like this in its box. If I remember right, the intakes aren't correct for the car.



From the sublime to the ridiculous, here's the Fleischmann version; the body's actually not too bad, but they really sold this as a high-performance Thingie version...



And a couple more vac-formed versions, the series I Unique Lotus 30, with a Russkit 22 in their in-line chassis, and the series 2 Unique car, with the sidewinder aluminum chassis, but anodized black... The series 1 Unique cars came with clear bodies so I painted that one; the second is factory-painted - no, I wouldn't have chosen orange!





Don

[Jean-Michel Piot]

Hope you don't mind if I open a slight parenthesis on this thread to show a pair ofLotus 30s and a pair of 40s...

Of course not... Feel free! I'm really interested in Vintage slot cars, especially if they represent Lotus cars.

Is it another of your attempts to make me restore Russkit models?

[Joe Mig]

Thanks, Jean-Michel. That is kind of what I was planning on doing. It sure is nice to see it done first.

[don.siegel]

Is it another of your attempts to make me restore Russkit models ?

Nope, just a sort of preaching for my parish - which happens to be vac-formed slot cars, the Right Stuff! Hard bodies are okay in 1/32, but 1/24 is for real men, with soft bodies!

You gotta admit the Russkit is nice, non?

And thanks for the look at the steering gizmo, I'm planning to do that on my Lotus (which will be left stock, but I'm not really that much of a purist, just realistic and not very artistic).

Don

PS: Don't forget I still have your 16D motors... and where's my Cox 2E? Hmm, something tells me I won't be able to use blackmail on this one...

[Tex]

Really sweet lookin' cars, Jean-Michel!

[dc-65x]

Jean-Michel,

I hope you don't mind me showing this mystery Lotus 40 body to the Dokktor in yout thread. :

Rick,
I am only aware of one Russkit body. Is the other one you are thinking of, the close copy made by Select?

Philippe,

I have two of these Russkit (?) Lotus 40s on steroids. The narrow one is for sure a Russkit I took off the card. The wide one is :











The Russkit interior fits like a glove:



The Russkit velocity stacks and gas caps fit, too:



Here's the molded-in bundle of snakes exhaust:



Now for what made me think it was a Russkit body. I bought a pile of Russkit chrome pieces years ago and included were these pipes:



So what do you think, Philippe? Is it live or is it Memorex?

[TSR]

Rick,

I know this body very well and had several examples in my hands over the years, but I do not believe it to have been produced by Russkit unless it would have been a special version made by Von Klein for MESAC or pro-racing use. But I don't believe this to be the case because it simply is a bit too wide to fit correctly on a Russkit pan chassis, and all such bodies have always been factory pre-trimmed and pre-DRILLED for mounting on the Russkit frames, which is not the case for the ones I have seen.

Instead I believe that it is by Select or another specialist maker. No doubt however that the Russkit body has been used as a basic pattern... Any other suggestions?

I will ask Morrissey if remembers any such things but all the pictures I have of their team cars show the standard "narrow" body and remember that chassis width in R & C and Car Model races was limited to 3"... and that wider body looks built for 3-1/8". So for me the mystery remains until we find one in a box or in a bag with a tag...

If I remember right, the intakes aren't correct for the car.

Jean-Michel, no they are not correct but the ones shown by Rick in the post above this one are.

Regards,

PdL

[endbelldrive]

Is the wide body made of a thinner material?

[TSR]

Russkit made two thicknesses for their bodies. The "other" body is made of the same polystyrene butyrate as the "lightweight" version of the Russkit body, probably close to ten-thou.

[Jean-Michel Piot]

Jean-Michel, no they are not correct but the ones shown by Rick in the post above this one are.

OK, super, je le dirai à Don car c'est lui qui a fait la remarque, pas moi...

(OK, great, I'll tell it to Don, as he was the one who made this remark, not me... )

[Howmet TX]

I have that 'Russkit-on-steroids', too. It measures 78mm wide or thereabouts.

I repopped it with a little 'extra' and flattened side sills, and it makes a great D3 runner.