20 replies to this topic

[MG Brown]

I was looking at the Lancer Lotus 56 Indy body last night and was envisioning what it would take to make it as a late season (Riverside) Champ Car or F1 (56B) version.

Before doing all of the work involved, I was curious if there would be any interest in a body that conformed to IRRA specs (and of course was submitted and approved).

The late season Champ Car version had a duck-tail spoiler and front wings added to the more or less pure wedge run at Indy.



Fittipaldi in one iteration of the 56B F1 car.



Joe Leonard at Riverside in the late season spec 56.

[mjsh]

IRRA said the current body was an Indy car body and only F1 bodies were eligible.

[Greg VanPeenen]

I think what he is asking is if there was a version of of the Lotus 56B F-1 car would anybody be interested in using it. If it was made and approved I would give it a try for sure. The west coast guys are running the current version and it seems to do quite well.

Build it and they will come

Regards
GVP

[Ron Hershman]

The IRRA rules are very clear.... only F1 bodies are allowed that raced in 1969 or earlier.

The Lotus 56 was race at Indy in 1968.

The Lotus 56B was raced in F1 in 1971.

Therefore...... a Lotus 56B F1 body would not be IRRA approved.

[Mark Wampler]

The west coast guys are running the current version and it seems to do quite well.

Build it and they will come

Regards
GVP

They won't if the rules have anything to say about it. Better race West Coast then.

[GotToRace]

I like the Indy body and would love to have some of the F1 bodies. Please make it. It could be real cool looking. And it is a shame that IRRA doesn't allow Indy bodies of the time period.

[Paul Jurczyszyn]

I would also like one of these body's. Slot car racing should be fun and not run by some ones so set rules.

If you like it you build it.

I think a new class needs to be opened with 3 simple rules.

Restrict to one motor type. One gear and pinion size, over all length and width. These should be it, all this other crap is not what the sperit of slot racing. Build it yourself race it and have fun.
Paul

[TSR]

[MG Brown]

The Lotus 56B was raced in F1 in 1971.

I realized I had the dates wrong but was away from a computer. Darn shame.

[Bryan Warmack]

The Lotus 56 is a GREAT body!! The first thing the SCRRA did when it took over from D3 was to eliminate any ABSOLUTE cutoff year on body legality. We decided that "ABOUT 1970" or so would be OK and to just judge each body on individual merit and what the SCRRA were looking for.

Our thinking was why eliminate a perfectly good slot car body over the fact that it missed a time line cutoff by a few months. We just simply changed our time line.

The Truescale version easily mounts on wide or narrow F1 cars.

[GotToRace]

Now there's an idea. I like it, There are probably lots of neat bodies that fall just outside some arbitrary cutoff date. Also still don't see the negative bias against Indy car bodies, they're are open wheel after all.

[A. J. Hoyt]

I bought one of the Truescale bodies when I was at BPR this past August when Bryan Warmack pointed out it was made to the 1 5/8 chassis width (thinking that was the IRRA width, not D3). I painted it up in the no. 40 colors (like the TSR body shown in this thread) and it turned out pretty good looking. It looks fantastic going around the track!

I measured the body against the MPC model kit and it was as if that model was used to make the molds! That means it is one of the few bodies at 1 5/8 width to be actual 1/24 scale and not exaggerated in some aspect to fit over a 1 5/8 chassis!

Then, I found out it was never on the IRRA list! I was pretty disappointed, to say the least, but it is sure fun running it around the track! The car raced in 1968 (before the cut-off date) as an Indy car and then the same chassis was run after the cut-off date as an F1 car. It seems like a technicality that it is not allowed in Retro F1.

I have painted lots of bodies to look like period Indy cars and they are better looking (as model race cars) than half the field at most races I have attended! I think we are getting away from the "purity" of Retro when we allow bodies to be painted in unrealistic-looking colors and liveries that look more like gummy worms or gel shoes!

By the way, I think the black and white photo in MG's first post on this thread may have been taken at Continental Divide Raceway in CO (no longer exists) during the 1968 season. I met a fellow at work who did amatuer photography here and in Europe at that time and he attended that race and took lots of photos - this looks similar to what he showed me of that race. I was astonished that the wedge turbine car would ever have been raced on a road course.

If the picture above is actually from Riverside, then it appears it was raced on at least two road courses!

Keep it in the slot,

AJ

[TSR]

Indeed, two of the four Lotus 56 built raced at the Rocky Mountain 150 at the Continental Divide Raceway in 1968, with various fortunes. Art Pollard finished in 5th spot, 2 laps down, while Joe Leonard's car broke a half-shaft and was classified 8th in a race where attrition was massive. Only 9 cars were running at the end of the 25 starters. Pole position was by Ronnie Bucknum in the Weinberger Homes Eagle-Ford, but he broke and Foyt won in his Coyote-Ford from a 4th starting spot.
So yes, the picture was likely taken there, as the aero devices added to the car appear to be different from the ones used at Riverside later that year.

The Truscale body I have seen had a rounded nose, while the full-size car always had a plain, straight-edge nose. I do not know why that is. The best and most accurate body for the car was by Lancer and is likely the one that was used to establish the base pattern for the Truescale body.
The car I have shown above uses a duplicate of the Lancer body and its width is in scale. Since the car is a wedge not only in side view but in top view, its maximum width (if one ignores the front suspension fairings) is not in its center but at its extreme rear. That changes things a bit.

[A. J. Hoyt]

One last point about scale realism in Retro F1:

I have mentioned this in one thread before but I think "we" missed an opportunity to make Retro F1 distinctly different from Retro Can Am.

The fronts should be the same dimensions of the Stock Car fronts (dia .812, same width) and the rears should be 1.0 inch diameter with a maximum of .75 width. I know this will unsettle a few and I don't mean to "hi-jack" this thread but it would have made the F1 cars look much more realistic (the super wide rears really look wrong on my Lotus 56) as well as the width allowed in F1 (3.25 is way too wide!). I think the track width should have been 3.00.

This would have made Retro F1 a distinctly different challenge to make a car handle (like the Retro Stock Car is a distinctly different challenge) and to drive quickly.

The Retro Can Am cars hide their way-out-of-scale tires under the bodywork (as do the Stock Cars) but the F1's are right out there, in full view. Combine that with the out-of-scale wide bodies and they really don't look all that realistic anymore.

Just my opinion. Now, back to our regularly scheduled thread content.

Keep it in the slot,

AJ

[A. J. Hoyt]

Phillipe,

You are right! The body you painted has the squared-off nose, like the model kit, where the Truescale has a rounded version.

Your response about the Rocky Mountain 150 came so close on the heels of my post that you must have had that race committed to memory! Impressive!

Keep it in the slot,

AJ

[TSR]

AJ,
The reason why the Retro F1/Indy have the tires they have is because of the original concept suggested by Mike Steube in 2006: a nostalgia series mimicking the pro-racing cars of the 1967 Champion Arco racing series and 1968 Car Model series, simply using inexpensive modern motors.
In 1967-1968, the tires were like on this car below, that was the F1 national champion in the hands of John Cukras:



So if the retro regs are not retro enough, I don't know what is... because these tires regs were those of the two series.

Please also note that the chassis are 1-3/8" wide, not 1-5/8".

[W. J. Dougherty]

Here is another pic of the turbine with Joe Leonard driving.

 

[TSR]

I love the "56". It should have been 1-2-3 at Indy but luck and a bit of stupidity by Chapman ruined their day...

[Mike Wurn]

AJ,
The reason why the Retro F1/Indy have the tires they have is because of the original concept suggested by Mike Steube in 2006: a nostalgia series mimicking the pro-racing cars of the 1967 Champion Arco racing series and 1968 Car Model series, simply using inexpensive modern motors.
In 1967-1968, the tires were like on this car below, that was the F1 national champion in the hands of John Cukras:



So if the retro regs are not retro enough, I don't know what is... because these tires regs were those of the two series.

Please also note that the chassis are 1-3/8" wide, not 1-5/8".

Wow, that is a sweet looking slot car, I don't care how the tires look.

[W. J. Dougherty]

More 56b's

Attached Images

• 
• 
• 

[TSR]

Those pictures are of the 56B F1 car in its two versions (without, than with the larger fuel tankage), first driven by Fittipaldi then by Dave Walker in 1971, so it is not eligible for either IRRA or SCRRA body rules.
The only model that can be eligible is the original 1968 '56" as it ran at Indy, then in several other races during the 1968 USAC season.