Scalextric T-Bird

[dw5555]

After watching Harry's video and looking at the pics, how can Scaley release a car that is way under scale? I'm assuming they designed this. While every new mold release is exciting this not something that should have been released in it's current form. It should have been caught way back in design. Harry you are way to generous in your comments. If more people like you who have access to prototypes and see something glaringly wrong you should speak up and just maybe if enough of you say someone, someone MIGHT take notice. :angry-soapbox:
Dave

[crossovercrazy]

Harry,

I noticed some calipers in your pictures with the new models. Did you measure what the wheelbase is on the new Camaro, and maybe even the track width? Also, I assume (and hope) that the wheels on the prototype are not intended for the final model; if not, did you hear what the wheels for the IROC Camaro would look like?

I saw the comment about the TBird being too small, but to my eyeballs its much more accurately proportioned than the Monte Carlo, to my perspective (with a more accurate rear quarter panel area above the wheel, unlike the "short track" cutout and thin sheet metal over the Monte). Regardless, did you check the wheelbase of the TBird and wheel track, and is it comparable to the Monte? That's the main thing anyway.

[HomeRacingWorld]

Well, first off...Dave K was well aware of the scale issue. BUT...try as he did, they simply went on with it.

So what can you do? If you have showed them...and proved to them...and they still give the green light?

When you are involved in the actual design it is one thing...when your are not? Not much you can do. Either take it or leave it.

Since it runs close to the Monte...I guess I will take it.

Dimensions for T-Bird

Length - 155.00
Width - 55.90
Height - 39.45
Wheelbase 86
Track Width 53.25

Same wheelbase as Monte, but narrower.

ON THE IROC CAMARO

The wheels are NOT the wheels for the models release. They were just snapped on there so Dave could have a "running" prototype to show.

Dimensions for IROC in MM:

Length - 153.55
Width - 60.25
Height - 34.75
Wheelbase - 85 MM

NOTE height and track width were useless to measure as the wheels and tires are NOT what the model is planned to be released with.


Of course it's all subject to change. When the T-Bird is released then we will go over it again.

Something to note...track width can vary. Sometimes the wheels are not pressed on exactly for each model. So give a little wiggle room on my measurements please.

[crossovercrazy]

Thank you so much, Comrade Harry, for that essential data.

I expected the 80s "downsized" Camaro to have a shorter wheelbase closer to 80 mm. I was interested to see if the chassis could be useful for scratchbuilt cars that were smaller intermediate cars and below.

I mentioned previously that a justification could be made for a large field of these cars for the ASA (American Speed Association) or ARTGO cars of their "golden era", when guys like Mark Martin, Rusty Wallace, Bob Senneker and Mike Eddy ran then as the stepping stone to NASCAR, but I got no comments from Dave Kennedy or anyone else on the board then, so no one else may see that as justification to pursue a potential series to replicate and thus buy more of these cars (even Scalextric-released "fantasy liveries" could be more faithful to the "look" of the ASA cars of that era (numbers near the rear wheel wheel, "jeweled" numbers, etc.), and even make more sense than the fantasy NASCAR liveries, and not so obviously deviant from the originals)

[slothead]

This commentary reminds me of when I posted about building a scale Indianapolis Speedway and running an Indy 500 race. It was said "why bother' when no Indy slot car replicas are available to race. I couldn't argue with that reality and Dave Kennedy offered that Indy stuff is totally off the radar of the slot car manufacturers and no one was interested in making or marketing it.

If the Indy 500 and Indy car series is invisible to slot car manufacturers and big box store buyers ARCA type stuff is even more obscure. Thus, I can see why at the design and manufacturing end no one cares if the Thunderbird isn't all that accurate. Same thing as with the Scalextric Trans Am Cougar with it's oddly high front end. Are there pictures of the Cougar with it's nose up in the air under acceleration - yes, but anyone who was actually around the car or series knows that's not it's normal stance. So I have to guess it was developed from a few photos and deemed 'good enough'. And, as Harry pointed out, what option do we have but to buy what is offered? There's no competition in this section of the market.

That said, we can rejoice because of what technology and 'little guys' are providing. Check out what proxieken has done and is working on. None of the 'big boys' were going to make a Cyclone, 70's Torino fastback, GTX, etc. But, 3D printing now makes it possible for the 'little guy' to offer things us niche folk want. Just like what RMS provided in resin, there will be ways to get what we want if we're willing to do a little finishing work, which will be needed anyway to get the liveries we want.

[crossovercrazy]

For folks scoring at home, I looked up some specs on Bill Elliot's TBird of the era, and although the street version wheelbase would only translate to 82.7 mm scale, they stretched it for NASCAR to 100 inches, or 87.3 mm (which i believe would to be roughly what the Monte Carlo used, being no less than the 108 inch street WB, or 85.6 mm scale). However, NASCAR used a stock overall TBird length, of 197.6 inches (156.8 mm scale), with the Monte being 202.4 inches, or 160.6 inches scale. The Scalextric Monte total length I measured was around 162 mm. Therefore, for both cars, their wheelbase and overall length is within what I would call a 2 mm "forgiveness zone". Therefore, I guess we should owe our Limey friends an apology, not for burning down our White House (although we did burn down their Canadian capitol first), but for judging with our eyes versus the real data. However the difference in track widths (56 mm or so for the Monte versus TBird), the squarish look and thin rear quarter panels of the Monte, and the long wheelbase of the Camaro, are "now for something completely different".

[goosenapper]

[HomeRacingWorld]

Well Mr. Crazy (Sir Debonair) the car released can be painted. And in IROC tradition, just race them? :whistle:

So make a field of them for your racers and please share the photos when you do. Also please share the scratch-built versions. We would all like to see that.

[waaytoomuchintothis]

I am amazed that I, of all people, am due to say this-

There have been dozens of cars of a class that are out of scale that we race against each other without regard to scale matching to other classes. The Fly and Scalextric Ford GT40s and concurrent Ferraris etc, have been in a class to themselves for years. We have had a ball for years with these. Monogram and Carrera 1960s NASCAR run together all the time.

What do we care if Scaley gets the scale wrong again? Are we going to run an early 1970s Ford or Chevy against a Ferrari 246 GT? I say let's run them and see if its fun. That's the bottom line, eh?

[noddaz]

Monte or TBird. TBird or Monte. Hmmm
Camaro. Yep, Camaro. :lol:

Scott

[Z-carfan]

[crossovercrazy]

Sorry if I offended anybody with my suggestions on the Camaro - I just wanted Scalextric to be as successful as possible with their product, which is much appreciated. That's why I defended their TBird and Monte Carlo and back it up by buying lots of them. Please forget I said anything.

[slothead]

I for one love reading what everyone posts, agree or not. Want to praise something in our hobby, or point out flaws as you see them? Go for it. Where else are you going to share thoughts about toy cars? This is our version of sports radio where a debate over little details can go on for hours if not days.

[HomeRacingWorld]

Oh great and powerful Crazy of Crosses...

You could not offend if you tried.

I will offer this for you to think about:

Perhaps the days of hoping the chassis could fit other models is behind us. In fact, I say it is.

Because 3D is well upon us along with talented creators in this hobby.

The amount of 3D chassis offered today is impressive. Of course you need gear to complete them, but most folks building a custom slot car for competition are already accepting that extra cost. Low cost alternatives are found on the bay and other for sale areas, but having full rolling chassis for under 15$ is not going to be offered today.

If cost is that crucial, then you have plenty of classes to race without building. So the folks you have in your group who are on tighter budgets have options. Buy a Trans-Am, Monte or T-Bird, or the new IROC and let them race. That is about as low cost as it can get these days.

It might be that certain 3D artists already have the data for the Camaro and T-Bird. Might be a chassis will become available that the competitive-minded enthusiasts can just bolt on the gear and bolt in the chassis.

So if I had regular racers down here for weekly fun, there is plenty for us to be happy about :)

[Ky.Slot Racer]