314 replies to this topic

[Duffy]

... So, the big Lolas, Husseins, and Lotus 40s are nice and long and wide, and everybody's gonna run them. Just makes sense. Okay.

Sense is boring.

I mean, people, there're only so many slick cars you can do in this life. Even Alexander the Great wanted for more slot cars after having conquered the world. Or would've. We just need some inspiration in our lives that goes beyond The Hot Chassis. Be truthful, now, didn't modeling the cars come first? How many of you, when first confronted with this hobby, said: "Ooo, gee! Here's something I can WIN!!"

Okay, well, you five, you're the exceptions. - Seven. Nine. Okay, I get the point.

BUT, we three or four who love the oddballs, Like Jerry Grant's Lotus that Ron showed elsewhere, or Sherm Decker's SuperCooper below (Google that name, it's worth it), We want a place shamelessly to ogle old racers and, if we're crazy enough, build models of 'em just because we like seeing the cars run.

This is the place. Who's in?



Duffy

[slotbaker]

Yeah. Where can I get a vac form of Old Yeller 2?

[Duffy]

Ohhh, RIGHT, carve it! We'll go up against Eliminator!

Duf

[Mark Wampler]

The title of your thread lost causes makes me think of how flawed, but sincere attempt to integrate the past with the present. Trying to recreate nostalgia with 21^st century thinking is going to be skewed no matter what.



In the beginning with all the excitement of Jail Door racing, the temptation to organize authorities and write rules ran way ahead of looking at the bigger picture and how the use of present 1/24 scale standards are to integrate with mid 60's scratchbuilding practices.



Butyrate body materials are prohibited . PETG and Lexan will do just fine. What should have happened was a 2 ¾- or 2 7/8 " width rule should have been imposed which would easily correspond to exact reproductions of those old bodies. That didn't happen with the 3" wide allowance. That mistake by itself has caused a lot of major grief.



D3 CanAm and coupe classes allowed the 3.125 width, but also allowed original Russkit/Dynamic bodies to be reworked to accommodate a width that did not actually exist during that time period. It was acknowledged by Philippe that as late as '68, angle winder chassis were still under 3" wide. I'm ok with that, because body manufacturers can easily produce bodies that not only fit CanAm and Coupes but will easily transfer to the much larger market of flexis.

The Dokktor


Group: Root Admin
Posts: 18,459
Joined: 2-February 06
From: Kalifistan
Member No.: 3



Barn,
This is another little issue with bringing back "vintage" spirit today: all the authentic, 1966 and 1967 period chassis we have at the LASCM and built by famous pros are between 2-3/4" and 2-7/8" wide. Not a single 3" before the late 1968 angle-winders. Even the early angle-winder chassis at the museum are under 3".
So many replica molds have been "modified" to fit the current fairy tale of believing what never was, including slab sides, because some apparently cannot even figure out how to mount the period bodies.

[Howmet TX]

I unintentionally responded to this on another thread- my suggestion would be for a pre-64 class. That would really be a test of building ingenuity and driving skills, but you might end up seeing some sweet little babies on the track.

[Duffy]

Mark: The title of your thread lost causes makes me think of how flawed, but sincere attempt to integrate the past with the present. Trying to recreate nostalgia with 21^st century thinking is going to be skewed no matter what.

Well, I sort of meant the cars...but I hope there's a little bit in each of us that gets stirred by that spirit of the thing that John expressed more ably than I, that goes beyond just building for performance. That's clearly what JD is for, & maybe I'm carrying it to extremes. Just discussin' here.

(...And thanks to the Admins for compressing my subtitle! Needed it.)

Duffy

[Bob Emott]

I think I remember a Chaparal ! (the original Troutman and Barns Special) made by Ruskit in white styrene plastic back in the mid 60's as part of their early vac formed body series that pre-dated clear buterate bodys.... I have a Lotus 23 body in the series that one day I hope to use to replicate my first Pitman 703 powered slot car that I raced at Polks Hpbbiesat 314 5th avenue in NYC..... I remember I had one of the Chappy ! bodys but I never built anything with it as it was just to narrow to fit over a 703 motor based chassis.... PDL, do you have one in the museum???

[Joe Mig]

[quote name='Mark Wampler' date='May 20 2009, 08:25 PM' post='165758']

What should have happened was a 2 ¾- or 2 7/8 " width rule should have been imposed which would easily correspond to exact reproductions of those old bodies. That didn't happen with the 3" wide allowance. That mistake by itself has caused a lot of major grief.

So get rid of the grief and change the rules and make it 2 7/8 th ...
It is easy enough to change a chassis and it will stay in the sprit.
Sorry Duffy to get off your topic !!

[idare2bdul]

As Rocky puts it, the problem is when you get racy. When you start trying to develop car able to win it often ends up with one or two bodies having an advantage.

I've started building cars just to have and drive around the track. That was one of the fun parts of the slot car convention concept. Showing off your toys and exchanging drives with others. After racing for years it was fun to step back and just be that kid renting time for the sheer joy of driving a slot car around a track for fun.

[Keith Tanaka]

The JD class is meant for racing just like in '66. The difference being the intent of using "similar rules" as the Rod and Custom '66 series.
The D3 "inline" Can Am class was/is focused on scratchbuilding using "similar" materials and techniques as the pre-anglewinder days.
Anytime you have racers who were/are very competitive, they always have a motivation to beat the other guy and thus strive to go as quick as they can. The JD class created by Mike Steube limited performance similar to the '66 era. Mike's idea (a good one) is to build/race cars similar (not identical) to those raced in the '66 series. I believe this new class is already an overwhelming success even though we haven't had our official inaugural jail door race yet (May 30th).

Paul Sterrett and some others at BPR do have an interest in someday building/racing pre'66 cars. Paul wants to race Pittman 196B powered cars (F1's will be the initial class). Paul and some others (Bryan Warmack, Dennis Samson, Ryan Miller, etc.) have already built Pittman 196B pre'66 F1's so we do intend to race them someday (dont' know when).

Another idea which Paul and some others (myself included) have discussed many times is to someday (probably some years from now) have a racing track/format similar to MESAC. As our baby boomer racers age and slowly lose their reflexes and their ability to go faster, they hopefully will begin to see the fun and challenge of building/racing scale cars similar to those raced at MESAC. The slow movement towards scale racing (it's still racing!) will happen, it's only a matter of time.

Duffy, I do believe the day will come when you will be able to race whatever old "scale" car you want since the emphasis then will not be on speed, but scale (although it will still be racing!).

Keith

[TSR]

In the beginning with all the excitement of Jail Door racing, the temptation to organize authorities and write rules ran way ahead of looking at the bigger picture...

Dixit a fellow with not a clue.

[Mark Wampler]

Duffy, I do believe the day will come when you will be able to race whatever old "scale" car you want since the emphasis then will not be on speed, but scale (although it will still be racing!).

Keith

As a racer, I'm always trying to find a better mousetrap to go faster. Since the motor question has been basically settled with Falcons/TSR-D3, its all about setup and handling. I like a good looking car, but when it comes down to it, I want a faster car more than a good looking one. I notice stuff at the tech table and little fudging here and there. I think all racers to one degree or another have this thinking that there must be some hidden trick or two get you over the top.

Here's the reason that I like some of the odd ball races like the Crazy 8 race that Jeff Easterley and Jeff Bell put on. Everyone ran the same car on the same lane. The IROC race during the convention was a blast. It was about 100% driving skill.

So maybe you're right Keith. If the cars get slow enough and useless enough to try any "enhancements", there might be more contentment out there.

Duffy, my apologies too for getting your thread out of whack.

[Prof. Fate]

Hi

As I said, the flyers went through this same agonizing missteps in the 60s when they organized flying pre-WW2 designs. Felling like the lost prophet, I brought this up in the beginning a few years ago. I TOLD you this would happen.

Doesn't really affect me in that I have always kept originals running. And as Bomker points out, WE have been racing these things at conventions for a while.

One story, P did this, and might not fess up to it. 10 years ago, some of the guys around the country, including P, wondered why I disdained Cox Cars. My fault really. In the day, in the 60s, Cox cars wouldn't run well, and didn't get raced except in the Z main. I mentioned that of the 36drtr/kits the AMTs were the only rational period design, and the one I used to abuse money races for the kits.

After proving it at several convention races we called "The Cox Challenge" (the challenge was, any cox against my surviving AMTs). (Ironically, P found NOS bodies for my survivors FOR me!), P decided to do an AMT. Instead of just doing the car and beating me up with his driving, something he does...he had to IMPROVE the car.

Rebuilt chassis, front end and, best of all, a Champion 707!

He lost the race to me, first to the "deadman" and off! I opined that the chassis wasn't up to the power level involved. I am not sure he ever worked it out. What he didn't understand, period, not being there, was that the tracks put a 12buck limit on the cars. The roots of "Group 12"! The 707 was about 20 bucks in the day, unimaginable.

Because, as racers, we are afraid of looking bad!

I am not sure why the NOW part. The preamble to the Society Of Antique Modelers, the guys flying the pre WW2 model aircraft, says, in essence, "we are not trying to re-write history". And goes on in that vein. P was a world champion, Stube and Cukrus and ...you get the idea.

I have beat P in races but that doesn't make me the 71 champ, does it. Just means WE had fun racing as friends. Bomker, a couple years ago, was racing with a bunch of us on the old hill climb with 1/32 60s CLUB cars. Most of us in the race were old club champions with those cars, and Mike had never done that. The cars were good, fun, SLOW, and we had a blast.

That is what I do now. I make the trip to BP to run with friends. I KNOW Stube is the better driver. Now I just want to enjoy his company while racing.

But in the long run, I expect, if these retro catgories are going to survive, we need to take more of a clue from the airplane guys.

Fate

[Foamy]

blah, blah, blah fun blah, blah, blah, more fun.

Just stop that right now!

[Darkron9]

... So, the big Lolas, Husseins, and Lotus 40s are nice and long and wide, and everybody's gonna run them. Just makes sense. Okay...

BUT, we three or four who love the oddballs, Like Jerry Grant's Lotus that Ron showed elsewhere, or Sherm Decker's SuperCooper below (Google that name, it's worth it), We want a place shamelessly to ogle old racers and, if we're crazy enough, build models of 'em just because we like seeing the cars run.

This is the place. Who's in?



Duffy

Hi Duffy,

Speaking of which, in another thread I mentioned my 196B powered Lotus23B. Here it is. I painted it when I was 15 1/2 years old. Where did my eye and steady hands go?

[Duffy]

TO ALL THOSE APOLOGIZING FOR SIDETRACKING AND GETTING ALL VERBOSE & GARRULOUS: Sidetrack superbly, and get even more verbose & garrulous-er. All those things you get in trouble elsewhere for, this is prob'ly the place.

Listen, the JD "Event" (to continue Keith's allusion to the Re-Enactors) is just the coolest thing since, well, since I dropped out. And, yes, it's near impossible to resist "tweaking" a car for an edge--I was doing it the other night, mulling over whether I could solder my outriggers to NOT-all rails, creating a flexier body mount--but what I personally want to hold to, at least for now while I'm still young and excited, is those damn cool CARS. Racing's fine, winning's good, and while I'm on the way to do those, I'm lovin' the cars first. Building to the JD rule, but I'm slipping in a Lost Cause at every chance until I get it out of my system!

So I invite dreaming here, and whining about how the King Cobra's just too damn small but y'wants one anyway, & giggling about how Gurney sticks WAAY out of the Porsche--



--and there'll be plenty of room for SERIOUS everywhere, including here; but frivolous is all right, here, too.

No apologies.
Duffy

[Mike Steube]

That little U shaped hand rail for getting in and out of the car behind Gurney's is sano. Safety, safety is not getting in the car to start with.

[Duffy]

MikeS:That little U shaped hand rail for getting in and out of the car behind Gurney's is sano.

"That little U-shaped handrail..." best laugh I've had all week and I needed it, thank you.

Duf

[Duffy]

Because HowmetTX was talking about 'em, here's a little gem of a website:
http://www.lotus19.com/Index.htm
--with GOOD documentation of all 19 (only 19?) chasses, a pic or two but never enough, and this:

See, now, if y'got a butyrate body that's exploded, never fear, here's Documentation!

Funny how excited we get over these things. --Or, well, how I get...

Duffy

[Duffy]

MikeB:I've started building cars just to have and drive around the track. That was one of the fun parts of the slot car convention concept. Showing off your toys and exchanging drives with others. After racing for years it was fun to step back and just be that kid renting time for the sheer joy of driving a slot car around a track for fun.

In '64, I was just a kid and the Big Serious Guys took no notice of me, mostly didn't respond even to my questions. I dunno what my thought process was that went into this, but--I bought a toy Sherman tank, fairly realistic and about the right size to put guts under. Took a "sick day" from school and worked in all the running gear.

At opening time, I went to the track, bought time, pulled out the tank, hearing the derisive buzz grow as I did, resolutely ignoring it all; set the tank on the track carefully so as not to show the overlarge countersprung drop arm, and motored slowly around to the back straight where I punched it, and the tank WHEELIE'D the full length. The roar of laughter was maybe the most satisfying experience my little 14-yr-old soul had had to that point. & after, guys would talk to me at least a little.

Duffy

[TSR]

Another one that would be really nice:

[Phil Irvin]

HEY RON,

When ya find your eyes & steady hands......Let me know where cause I lost mine too .

OL'PHRT
PHIL I.

[Duffy]

In our house, my daughters used to refer to anything missing as "Gone to The Isle Of Mismatched Socks." But, where all the steady eyes and hands go...wow, now there's an image for an early morning.

I gotta say, the more I look at old car pics the more intriguing a "64 Class" seems.

Duf

[havlicek]

That Cox Brabham is an awfully cool car Philippe!

-john

[TSR]

Thanks John. I have never run it, because I am afraid of damaging it and it is signed by the great man himself...