19 replies to this topic

[JimF]

I had been wanting to build a fresh stock car for some races coming up in the next few months and while pondering that......some new parts showed up from Rick @ R-Geo. This was my first look at these so they are new to me at least.

 

This is a pretty easy build so not a full step by step. Just some details on this particular one but also some generalities re: stock cars.

 

This shows the very basic chassis plate along with the newish guide tongue. This chassis plate (one of two) is .050 and is very flat. But, the center cutout is just a little narrow and boy, this is one heavy chunk. So.......I chose the other one which is .040 and the center cutout had a better width to it. This new guide tongue is .042 hard steel, has well designed stops, and has a long tailpiece to cut off where you want it. I really like this piece and it is a good step up from the now discontinued S-7 item that I have been using a lot.

 

 

Here it is part way along. This shows the rail layout, pans cut off, hinge tubes and some reinforcement along the front ears.

• Bracket is a .050 angled face from R-Geo. This is becoming one of my favorite brackets.
• Main rails are 3X .062/side. One wire, two brass. Not soldered full length.
• I often build stock cars with 1X .078 rails but this plate already had some rail cuts so I used what was there.
• Although I have built a lot of them otherwise, it seems to me that these cars need to be fairly stiff.

 

 

All done up.......78 gr. as seen here. Just about right.

• 1/2 rails of .062 bracing the bracket face.
• Hinge rods are .055 in 3/32" tubes.
• Front up/down stops are .047 wire in 3/32" square.
• Crosspiece is .062 held in place w/retainers but not soldered.

 

 

 

Front end details.................

• Bracing on front ears is .055 wire.
• Better look at up/down stops.
• Earring back for lead wire management.

 

 

Rear end details.........

• Half rails off of the bracket face.
• 3/32" sq. tubes for the crosspice with retainers in place.
• I'm going to try to use body clips but if I can't fit the ones I have, I'll add some pin tubes.

 

 

Just a different angle shot of the rear end.

 

[slotcarone]

Beautiful chassis and work Jim!!  I always like to brace the axle uprights for support in a wall shot! Even that .050 thick bracket will bend with the right hit.

Attached Images

• 

[Eddie Fleming]

Jim

 You said it was an angled face bracket. is that like the CL brackets where the motor shaft and the axle line up?

[JimF]

Jim

 You said it was an angled face bracket. is that like the CL brackets where the motor shaft and the axle line up?x

 

Yes it is. Unlike older non hypoid brackets, the angled face units allow for the rear legs of the bracket to be flat on the block. Here's a better pic of that.

 

[JimF]

Thanks Mike.........I sometimes do that myself but I don't use axle tubes much and on this one I just dumbed out and forgot it.

[MSwiss]

 

Yes it is. Unlike older non hypoid brackets, the angled face units allow for the rear legs of the bracket to be flat on the block. Here's a better pic of that.

 

1-Shark1 004.JPG

Jim,

When you say older, do you mean brackets before mine?

[JimF]

Jim,

When you say older, do you mean brackets before mine?

 

Absolutely.........................

[MSwiss]

You threw me a bit when you said older.

 

Mine is almost 6 years old.

 

http://slotblog.net/...-versa-bracket/

 

That's pretty old. LOL

 

PS-Great job on the chassis, as usual.

 

It looks like it will work terrific.

[JimF]

I didn't know it was that old but I knew yours was the first of that ilk. I was thinking of the original JKs or Rehcos or BWAs and suchlike that we were using much earlier than that.

[MattD]

Beautiful soldering. I don't know how you do it!

[boxerdog]

Beautiful soldering. I don't know how you do it!

I think he has a hidden room full of aliens. 

[Rick]

 

Yes it is. Unlike older non hypoid brackets, the angled face units allow for the rear legs of the bracket to be flat on the block. Here's a better pic of that.

 

1-Shark1 004.JPG

Yes Jim, the angle is very critical! My bracket is designed so that the RH does fall beneath the chassis plane. Noose is a stickler about that.....

[MSwiss]

And apparently so does mine.LOl

This is my most popular model, the one Bud Bartos uses on his latest style chassis, with older style JK nose piece, that Willy Custer has been dominating with in Can-Am.

Attached Images

• 

[Rick]

Good to see you fixed that issue...........

[MSwiss]

It's never been changed.

Once you screw in your jig motor,depending on which type you use, you can tweak the sides up or down a tiny bit, accordingly.

IOW, before you solder your main rails to the bracket, you can get maximum low CG with either an FK or a Proslot.

If you are going to use both, it should be set for the FK.

I hardly mind someone using a build article as an unpaid ad, but at least don't portray something as unique, when it clearly isn't.

I think that's what E. Flemings post #3 (unsolicited by me) was getting at.

[gc4895]

I like the fact that the guide lead (please, lets refrain from defining how this measurement is accomplished to maintain comity) is set by the builder.  As noted by Jim, the steel guide tongue offers a lot of flexibility in terms of build options.  That also asks for a nice straight jig to keep things aligned. 

[Greg VanPeenen]

It's never been changed.

Once you screw in your jig motor,depending on which type you use, you can tweak the sides up or down a tiny bit, accordingly.

IOW, before you solder your main rails to the bracket, you can get maximum low CG with either an FK or a Proslot.

If you are going to use both, it should be set for the FK.

I hardly mind someone using a build article as an unpaid ad, but at least don't portray something as unique, when it clearly isn't.

I think that's what E. Flemings post #3 (unsolicited by me) was getting at.

 

 

 

The first Angled motor brackets that I know of were made by hand by me well before Mikes.

[MSwiss]

Greg,
I think you should be quoting Jim's post #9.

None of my rhetoric claims I invented it.

I just had the first ones available to all.

I'm pretty sure guys were trimming down JK straight ones before I came out with mine in 2010.

As far as angled face, around here, Sano Dave ran ones as per, IIRC, the Mike Steube chassis article, in 2007, at the original Sano (albeit without the sides flush with the bottom of the chassis).

[JimF]

Here's the first testing/tuning update and it's a very simple one. As Mike S. suggested, he thought this would work terrific....and he was really right.

 

First pic is the speedway configuration. No add on weights started out @ 129 gr.

• Tested on the swoopy King at Eddies slot car world in Vallejo Ca. Timing was not available.
• Started with our customary Mini Brute motor @ 9-28 w/JK 8703 PP.
• Could be very agressive on turn entry. Best stock car I've had in the donut on this track.
• Within 20 laps, I decided I'd race it just like it is.
• For grins, tested with a Retro Hawk..........same result except I felt like it was better with an 8t instead of a 9t.

 

This is flat track configuration. Tested on the Motherlode 12 turn technical flat track.

• No frame of reference for Stockers on this track but a good F-1 will go 6.4 > 6.6
• Started with no weights and Mini Brute @ 8-29. 8703 PP.
• Very good just as it was. Again, especially in the donut. initial times ran 7.0 > 7.1
• A little grabby in the esses so I went to JK 8703 narrowed. Times dropped to 6.8 > 6.9
• Added small squares of lead as shown to equal 136 gr.
• Started with lead just forward of crossbar. Not much change.
• Moved weights to rear of pans.Improved times to 6.7s with a best of 6.67.
• We don't run Stockers on this type of track but if we did...only other thing I might do is test a 7t pinion.

 

Given how well this worked right outta da box. I don't know if the .050 plate is necessary. It could be lightened of course like by windowing the pans etc. I do think the .050 would make an exceptional hardbody starter.

[Rick]

Here's the first testing/tuning update and it's a very simple one. As Mike S. suggested, he thought this would work terrific....and he was really right.

 

First pic is the speedway configuration. No add on weights started out @ 129 gr.

• Tested on the swoopy King at Eddies slot car world in Vallejo Ca. Timing was not available.
• Started with our customary Mini Brute motor @ 9-28 w/JK 8703 PP.
• Could be very agressive on turn entry. Best stock car I've had in the donut on this track.
• Within 20 laps, I decided I'd race it just like it is.
• For grins, tested with a Retro Hawk..........same result except I felt like it was better with an 8t instead of a 9t.

DSC02509.JPG

 

This is flat track configuration. Tested on the Motherlode 12 turn technical flat track.

• No frame of reference for Stockers on this track but a good F-1 will go 6.4 > 6.6
• Started with no weights and Mini Brute @ 8-29. 8703 PP.
• Very good just as it was. Again, especially in the donut. initial times ran 7.0 > 7.1
• A little grabby in the esses so I went to JK 8703 narrowed. Times dropped to 6.8 > 6.9
• Added small squares of lead as shown to equal 136 gr.
• Started with lead just forward of crossbar. Not much change.
• Moved weights to rear of pans.Improved times to 6.7s with a best of 6.67.
• We don't run Stockers on this type of track but if we did...only other thing I might do is test a 7t pinion.

DSC02508.JPG

 

Given how well this worked right outta da box. I don't know if the .050 plate is necessary. It could be lightened of course like by windowing the pans etc. I do think the .050 would make an exceptional hardbody starter.

Jim,

 

That was the only .050 piece I had on hand. I was tinkering with an idea for stock cars and this was one of the trys. The others I cut were from .040 for others to tinker with. Yours came out very nice and appears it will be a good racer too...........