475 replies to this topic

[Jairus]

These cars should run very low or sub 4 seconds at BPR.....

That's the thought Bob. I am building a test car this winter and asked Bryan Warmack to test it.

Bill, I like that historical info, thank you.

[MantaRay]

anyone have the magazine articles regarding the Cali/Choti Thingies

[Jairus]

Ray, No articles... not sure I have ever seen one! But I do have this ad...

[One27ray]

Hi Guys!

Yes JW, I have seen this add before and printed out a copy some time ago
I'm sure He had more bodies than are shown in the add?
i-ray

[MantaRay]

Thanks Jairus............I thought I remember some pics of the real Deals.............Come on Dokk...........We know you are busy...........more cowbell You've got the prescription

[Gator Bob]

Jairus, Your Dynamic entry is based on the #15 ??? The #6 looks pretty cool too!


hahaha ... Negative Lift not Positive Downforce .....

[Jairus]

Bob,
Yup, #15 is my current entry and I have two new #15's coming to me for the next proxy. I like the shape so much that I wanted to stay with it.
Tried to order the middle one because it very closely matched #6, but Ray said that mold is gone.

The pic above was something Ray Fellows posted a while back. The one on the left looks closer to #15 than the car I am running. (exhaust pipes missing)

Here is a real one out in the wild.....

But note the pipes are in place... yet missing from the drawing on the ad. Probably just the artist being lazy.


At any rate, nothing on the tube after "Big Bang Theory" ended... so I pulled out the soldering iron and put this together.
Not the motor I am going with. Actually am building a Mura "C" motor with a 20/24 wind. Just waiting on the yellow dot magnets.


I only have this Choti body right now so it is being used to check clearances. But I like #15 best.


The wheels are something I am not sure about. And something I believe we won't worry too much about regarding the 1970 cut off I guess. About '71 - '72 rims lost both shoulders and became just a tube with a hub. So I figure if everyone uses a wheel with at least one shoulder on the outside...

Anyone have a name and a date for this one?

[Matt Sheldon]

I am in on this one, but I will need some help getting educated on the motors and what is correct, available, etc.

My son may want a piece of the action as well.

Jairus maybe a breakdown of your test build along the way too????

[Jairus]

Matt, that's exactly what I am hoping to do here regarding the building and testing of the car above. Contacting a friend at Buena Park tomorrow for testing of the piece later this month.

As for what is available. eBay is the best source. I see a few "A" can Mura's each week that close at very affordable prices. Of course they are in trashed cars and will need some clean up. All the motors I am spec'ng are no longer available over the counter. Closest thing you can find to NEW will be Electric Dreams mint in package "Green can" 2-hole "C" motor can and end bell. But then you need to source the arm, magnets, brushes and springs to make it work.

Likewise Mura "B"s and "C"s can be found on eBay residing in old and dirty chassis. (most economical way to get one) Since the Mura "C" can motor came out in 1970 we are going to allow all iterations of the 2-hole motor.

My 2-hole Mura is an actual 1970 survivor since it does not have the axle cutout on the side and was originally fitted with a cut down Mura "B" endbell.

Going to build it with two arms and see which runs best. The one with the red stacks was wound by John Havlicek (20/24), same as what is in the little "B" motor hooked to the bracket.
Sounds GREAT! The arm with the green goop all over the windings is a vintage "bubblegum" arm, also a #24 wind but I am only guessing how many winds and thus the testing.

Motors allowed are pretty much anything from Certus, Dyna-Rewind, Mubuchi, Mura and Champion as long as they are pre-1970!
About the best wind you can choose for these lightweight speed demons is some version of a #24 with the best Ceramic magnets (white, blue, yellow dot) you can put in.
However, we have not solidified the rules yet. I am always open to ideas and suggestions.

[idare2bdul]

Elephant Ears were introduced while I was racing in the mid 70's. The more rectanglar heat sinks predated them.
I'd like a clarification for what armature rules are going to be.
I'd like to also know what is planned for gluing the track.

[Keith Tanaka]

Just happened to see this topic and remembered an article about thingie racing in NorCal back in the day.
I didn't race thingies back then, it was popular in the Bay Area before anglewinders appeared.



Here's the article:








Keith

[Gator Bob]

Wonderful,.... Thanks Keith.

If this proxy comes to fruition please join in the fun.

[Martin]

Hi guy's, Jairus
Before the rules get locked in, can we question the proposed 3 1/4" rule? I checked my original Thingie bodies and cars and they are 3" not 3 1/4"
I would like to see these cars represent technology of the day, which I think is the point.
So my question is what year did 3 1/4" become standardized ? Are the original Choti bodies 3 ". Does any one have an original Thingie that is 3.1/4"?
I'm looking at this as a purist and I think it would be fun to build cars to the same rules or understanding of the day. I also think the long look of the Thingie is its parportions , length to width etc.
Martin,

[havlicek]

Dang...that article Keith posted still gets my blood pumping!

-john

[endbelldrive]

The wheels are something I am not sure about. And something I believe we won't worry too much about regarding the 1970 cut off I guess. About '71 - '72 rims lost both shoulders and became just a tube with a hub. So I figure if everyone uses a wheel with at least one shoulder on the outside...

Anyone have a name and a date for this one?

Hi J,
At fitst glance they look like 1968 Associated hubs. I had a few sets that came with blue sponge back in the day.

[Jairus]

Thank you Bob! Good to put a name with a face now.

Before the rules get locked in, can we question the proposed 3 1/4" rule? I checked my original Thingie bodies and cars and they are 3" not 3 1/4"
I would like to see these cars represent technology of the day, which I think is the point.
So my question is what year did 3 1/4" become standardized ? Are the original Choti bodies 3 ". Does any one have an original Thingie that is 3.1/4"?
I'm looking at this as a purist and I think it would be fun to build cars to the same rules or understanding of the day. I also think the long look of the Thingie is its parportions , length to width etc.

I guess if there were plenty of "3 Choti bodies available the width rule would hardly be needed. But as far as I know only one exists and that is available throughElectric Dreams. Only other bodies available are produced by private individuals and those bodies happen to be produced in 3.25" wide. If we all want to go with the one E.D. body... I suggest a vote. Majority rules is fine with me... however that restricts us to one body type. And 3 entrants so far have expressed a desire to mold their own!

I am open to opinions.

[havlicek]

The less "rulez" the better (which in itself is key to the whole thingie...er...thing)...the more bodies "at least in the spirit" of the period the better, especially considering modern lane-spacing. After all, everyone can then choose to use a 3.25" body or not, the 3.25" rule wouldn't give any specific advantage for anyone. I'm game whatever happens anyway

-john

[Howie Ursaner]

In the spirit of the old daze...no rear tire width or diameter restrictions. I guess there should be a gear and chassis clearance rules or no track owner will let you run.

BTW....I'm building a tiny wheeled "What If?" Russkit Marcos Mantis "slammed" as low as I can get it (a la Floyd Manley articles in Model Car Science). Howie Ursaner said that he built an inline something like that back in the day...just to see how fast it would go!

True enough.I think that the LA museum has that chassis. It is mabuchi 16d my rewind,inline rod with i think 4 rails per side. I has about 20 thou rear clearance with tiny worn out tires and the front was lower.Of course it had a crazy slammed body. I called it a thingie. It was fast.

[Gator Bob]

IMO, John is right. Tree'n a quarta.

Cheater, that is three and one quarter (31/4 or 3.25).

[Bill from NH]

BITD(thanks Tex)3.0" width was the standard width, including Chotis. Anything that's 3.25" wide has been made to fit a flexi chassis. What has to be determined here is whether vintage cars will be raced or will they be something else with some vintage parts being used.

[Gator Bob]

The wheels are something I am not sure about. And something I believe we won't worry too much about regarding the 1970 cut off I guess. About '71 - '72 rims lost both shoulders and became just a tube with a hub. So I figure if everyone uses a wheel with at least one shoulder on the outside...

Anyone have a name and a date for this one?

Looks close, close up ... Are these those ?

[Jairus]

Looks very close Bob!

[Gator Bob]

Lane spacing was less too. If we could run on the track shown above 3" would/should be the rule.
The way I look at it is It really is the same vintage logic as Retro is today but these will be More Pure. So these would be built in the spirit of vintage "retro" thingies.

We are inspired by the past history of our hobby but we can't turn back the hands of time.

I don't think we would even want to run on a track surface like the (moon) as one shown in the magazine. That would be something to recreate.....vintage tracks.

[Martin]

Hi guy's, Jairus
Before the rules get locked in, can we question the proposed 3 1/4" rule? I checked my original Thingie bodies and cars and they are 3" not 3 1/4"
I would like to see these cars represent technology of the day, which I think is the point.
So my question is what year did 3 1/4" become standardized ? Are the original Choti bodies 3 ". Does any one have an original Thingie that is 3.1/4"?
I'm looking at this as a purist and I think it would be fun to build cars to the same rules or understanding of the day. I also think the long look of the Thingie is its parportions , length to width etc.
Martin,

I did a little research and I mean a little and found along with the ED Choti ( which is the quintessential Thingie body in my opinion) I found 5 more 3'' wide Thingie bodies at True Scale. I know these 2 suppliers quality is very very good and well worthy of the time it takes to do a nice build.
I believe that if you make the rule 3", even more bodies will come and it will be much easier to back pour originals which is what the 3 1/4" repos are made from in the first place.
If you do go with 3 1/4" bodies which were made to fit on flex's you will have a what amounts to a Inline wing car. That leads me to another question will wing car bodies be legal? They look like Thingies and with the 3 1/4 rule you will lots of wing car bodies to choose from.
I hope you can tell from my comments that I think Thingies were 3" back in day and they should stay 3'' wide with inline motors and pin wheels. Re capture that Thingie movement with as much accuracy as we know collectively and you will have something really special and cool. Please correct me if my thinking is flawed please let me know.
Martin.

[Jairus]

Martin, This proxy race that we are discussing is not the be all to end all. (unless you believe all the hype about 2012) We have run a proxy race nearly every year for the Thingie enthusiast since what.... 2006? Each race director has picked the parameters and we build with-in that envelope. The wider the envelope the more participation.

This year and last year the rule was 3.25. That has been the standard for a long time.

NOW, I understand what you are saying and am not rejecting it out of hand. I happen to LOVE building replicas of vintage builds and my jig has a permenant setting for 3".
Frankly, I am right now in the middle of directing the current Proxy, of which 26 cars are being prepared for shipment to the 7th race of a 10 race series that won't most-likely end until March. Takes a lot of time and effort and money to put one of these on. Personally I have invested $600 bucks of my own money in the Dynamic Challenge. Not to mention the entrants who paid a princely sum to take part and allow someone they never met to drive their car.

If you would like to take the reins the next time around... feel free. I have not said that I desire the part a second time as the stress is... considerable. But, for me it is outweighed by the shear fun of finding out the score after each race and seeing the machine I so carefully crafted scooting around an unfamiliar track surface with someone who I never met telling me (or not telling me) what fun it was to drive my car.

Oh, and by the way, the theme this next race... if we do it. Is "BALLS OUT"! At least that is what I had in mind when I suggested it. In other words AERO!!!! The bodies at True Scale are beautiful to say the least, but they are not AREO! They have no "Negative Lift" as the Choti ad says.
My suggestion to you is to go back to the beginning of this thread and read the premies of the proposed race and then let me know if you still want to debate the additional .25" added to the width thus denying the many contestants who say they are IN, that they only have the option of running ONE body just because it's of vintage width.

It's all about the Choti and it's all about going fast this time! Damn the width, full speed ahead!
(Easy enough to limit the width at the next race.)