Jump to content

Chrisguyw

Members
  • Content Count

    110
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Everything posted by Chrisguyw

  1. Hi Shane,.........a few answers. 1/ I wish I had a "vent" machine, but, the vents were done by hand,...and if I did not like the guy who it is going to , I would not have done them......a pain !! I traced the vents on to the bare shell with a sharpie/ruler, and then used a series of small drill bits to drill a series of holes which were then joined with a scalpel, and cleaned with files and sandpaper,.......did I mention, that they were a pain ???,......worth it though 2/ The Helmet is one of the "Interlagos" Miniatures that I have previously mentioned..........they do a ton of different drivers, and in person they look really good, and make any car !! The Macro I use does point out a few flaws, but, to the naked eye they are very very good...........may be a bit pricey for some. 3/ This car will be run in a club NSR F1 series, so , a custom chassis is a no go..........I will be using a "hard" NSR chassis plate with a few bits added, and as the tracks are all wood, the honking great FK180, will be replaced with an equally potent (and 10gm+ lighter) FC-130. Cheers Chris Walker
  2. Hello all,....I have been asked to do a "Rosberg" edition of the McLaren MP4/2C that he ran in practice for the 1986 Portuguese GP.......this was the only appearance of this car in the Marlboro "Light" colours. As it is for his club NSR F1 series, I have obviously used one of the NSR white kits. I did want it to look a touch closer to the actual car, so a few simple body mods have been made.......the sidepods have had the holes for the top mounted intakes filled, the side vents have been closed in, vents cut into the top rear of the sidepods, and the wing has been lowered approx. 1/8th. The rear wing has to be painted/decaled, some more suitable wing mirrors need to be made, detail bits to be sorted, and , the whole thing clearcoated. Still lots to be done.................. I thought that the interior was more or less done,........until I look at the close up Macro lens shots ..............right glove, hole in left shoulder, and a bit of helmet clean up need to be done,.....but, without the evil Macro lens highlighting these mistakes, it actually looks quite nice . I did add some gauges to the dash, but, they can not be seen from this angle. I will post updates when done ......both the body, and the chassis build. Cheers Chris Walker
  3. Precisely !!!,..........this complete assembly (motor/axle, gears/wheels )can rotate torsionally, as a complete unit,.... as a motor pod can do in its chassis plate......this torsional rotation of the whole assembly allows the outside tyre to load and compress progressively, improving grip and handling. You do not want any movement in the triangle formed by the motor shaft (pinion), and the rear axle/axle uprights. Cheers Chris Walker
  4. He certainly is Den, but,...it is considerably less stiff than the Scaleauto RT3 "red" pods.........far less critical on plastic, but, very noticeable on wood. Cheers Chris Walker
  5. Pod movement and torsional flex in the chassis plate are the elements that provide "suspension",......there should be absolutely no movement of the axle in relationship to the motor shaft/pinion. Many motor pods (Slot-it included) are quite flimsy, and do allow some independent "twist" of the axle uprights...........Slot-it themselves introduced a "wire" brace for the rear of their inline motor pods, and while the intent was good, the design, and effectiviness,...not so much!! Chris Walker
  6. A couple of answers to a couple of questions............ 1/ The paint colour on the M6 is Tamiya TS 58 "Light Pearl Blue".........shot right out of the can. 2/ The triangle formed by pinion (motor shaft), and the rear axle bushings should be as stiff as possible, in any motor configuration (inline,sidewinder.anglewinder)..........flex in this area causes, axle binding, gear mesh issues, and, axle hop,........none of which are highly recommended for quick lap times nor longevity. The stiffness in this area becomes more important with,...stronger motors, grippier tyres, fast/flowing tracks (anything that generates more load/twisting force on the rear of the car. 3/ While improving the rigidity of the rear end "triangle" is absolutely worthwhile, it is far less critical on plastic tracks, where the relative lack of grip, and the bumpy nature of the track (the rear tyres are likely off the track as much as on, when running on plastic), lessens its effectiveness. 4/ The Scaleauto RT3 "RED" motor pods are the stiffest pods currently on the market, and need no modifications 5/ Keith, I do not always disagree with you Cheers Chris Walker
  7. Hi Rosco, The axle brace is actually the "U" shaped brace across the rear of the pod, and ,as mentioned in my prior post, it ties the axle uprights together, eliminating independent flexing of the uprights/bushings. which for a variety of reasons, is not all that good. Motor bracket bracing was seen starting in the mid 60's with most of the top pro racers using,..gussets, brass sheet.wire etc. to stop flexing of the motor bracket, and anything one can do to improve the stiffness of the current crop of flimsy plastic motor pods is a very good idea. More than a dozen years ago Sloting Plus came out with an axle tube that had bushings installed in the tube, and they worked wonders, I bought a bunch, and use them in any motor pod I can. A couple of shots of the brace made for the TSlot motor pod...........a piece of .055 wire bent to fit snuggly into the chassis, and secured with Locktite 380. A SlotingPlus axle tube installed into an NSR pod.......it works wonders And a Eurosport chassis...soldered spring steel, with a wire brace tying both axle uprights together. And a recent build of a very early 70's style chassis with an axle tube.............independent flexing of the rear uprights, has always been a bad thing Cheers Chris Walker
  8. It stops the rear uprights flexing independently,........this can ....1/ cause the axle to bind, 2/ cause mesh issues, and 3/ result in chatter.........none of which are all that good for helping with lap times Cheers Chris Walker
  9. Hi Folks, This car has been built for an upcoming CanAm proxy (1966-1974), and looks to have entries from a few countries While I do prefer to enter scratchbuilt chassied cars, time constraints this year (my golf club has just opened)....I have decided to take the quick and easy route and put together , a Thunderslot chassis, under a Thunderslot M6. I built two variations, with one going to a fellow club member........still undecided on which one to run for myself as they both are very very close in consistency and lap times. Cheers Chris Walker The first is an anglewinder pod, with an NSR 22K, MRSlotcar gearing, silicone damped pod, and a rear axle brace, running on NSR Ultras. The second is a Sidewinder pod (although the T.Slot pods are a 2 degree angle !!, so sidewinder is a bit of a misnomer )..........with a Piranha 21K motor, and essentially the same bits as the other. As I don't like running duplicate liveries, I have done a fantasy livery, which I think looks period correct.
  10. Keep on tuning Mark !!!,....I can tell you that whatever issues may exist with the R8, you can certainly eliminate issues with the pod. Cheers Chris Walker
  11. Anything you can do to make the triangle formed by the pinion, and the rear bushings as stiff as possible (torsionally, and longitudinally) will pay huge dividends........it will........eliminate independent flexing of the rear uprights which will cause axle binding, and chatter,..it will eliminate "axle tramping" which is seen as hop under hard acceleration (this is also seen when a chassis is too soft longitudinally), and it will improve the consistency of gear mesh, which will help with both performance and longevity. Braces, axle tubes, securing the motor etc. all help, and if you are looking for something quick and easy, you might try one of the ScaleAuto RT3 "Red" motor pods............these are the stiffest, best braced, motor pods on the market (to date) bar none..........if you are not using one, try one,... you will notice a significant difference. Cheers Chris Walker
  12. Hi Mark, Replacing/modifying the "self aligning" bushes in any pod is a good idea for a couple of reasons........1/ self aligning also means "self unaligning" , and , 2/ in order for the bush to move /align in its carrier, there must be some room for the bush to move, so some "slop" is present...(as you have found out/described above). While this will not really be felt on plastic tracks (inherently rough/bumpy), it is much more apparent on wood tracks, and is magnified as you up the motor power/grip. There are a couple of options............ 1/ Glue in the spherical bushings.........You can use a dremel disc (if you have steady hands) to slightlly open the slots between the "fingers" that hold the bushes.......install the bushes/axle, and using a toothpick etc., put a few drops of CA into the slots. Notes..... You should always install a motor into the pod before installing/gluing any bushings, as the motor can distort the bushing uprights. Use the new(er) sintered bronze spherical bushes from Slo-it, instead of the older solid brass/bronze ones. On any pod with spherical bushes (whether glued or not).....take a few thou. off of the outside face of the "fingers",..enough to expose the outer face of the bush. This will ensure that your wheels/spurs/spacers, run on a smooth flat surface....this will improve precision, and, reduce friction. Below is a typical pod with spherical bushes just popped in.............you can see that the face of the bush is recessed (and clearly not even), which will result in wheels/gears etc. rubbing on the plastic fingers of the pod. I have used a file/dremel disc etc. to remove a few thou. off of the plastic fingers, leaving the edge of the bush exposed........much less friction, and more precision when setting lateral axle movement. The slightly raised portion of the bush also makes a very handy "fence" should you wish to glue the bushings in place. 2/ Replacing the spherical bushings You can certainly use ballraces in place of the spherical bushes, but, it is my experience, that quality does cost a bit, and cheap ballraces are far worse than a good quality oilite. Cheap ballraces, have poor quality components, and invariably have far less precision than oilites,.....they also do not hold oil, like a sintered bushing, so do require some constant care/maintenance/oiling, so, far from ideal for long proxy type events. (This applies to the cheap ballraced motors you can buy...if they are cheap, they are cheap for a reason !!) So if you want to invest a few dollars ($10/15 per ballrace) go right ahead, if not, you will be much better off with a pr. of quality single flanged oilites for $2/3 a pr. Cheers Chris Walker
  13. Hi , As Mark has correctly indicated, there is really not much difference in the performance/quality of the truers outlined (Tire Razor/Prof. MTR./RSM).........they will all do a good job. To be honest the technique and process of truing tires (tyres) is more important than the machine used..................and that is the subject of another thread, once you have truer in hand !! So, as I am a proponent of "Support your local Bricks and mortar slot car retailer", I would find out what is available locally and put your money down. Again, I must reiterate..........please ensure you have a power supply that is adjustable down to 3 (ish) volts, and has a minimum of 5 amps. Cheers Chris Walker
  14. Hello, I would be happy to give you my thoughts,........but it does vary , depending on your intended usage. Do you folks race/run mainly with stock plastic wheels/axle assemblies, or, do you mainly race with grub screw type wheels ??? If you predominantly use stock wheel/axle assemblies (plastic wheels), any of the above machines mentioned by Mark, would be my choice, and any of these will provide more precision than the Proses. This style of machine is designed to hold the complete axle assembly without any need to remove the rear wheels from the axle (certainly a bonus with plastic wheels), and for this reason alone, any of the machines mentioned by Mark would be wise choice. It should be mentioned that the "Forks" that hold the axle bushings on these type of truers can be out of alignment vertically from the base sanding plate.......this should be checked/adjusted. If you race/run predominantly with "removable" grub screw type aluminum wheels, it is hard to beat the "Hudy" type tyre machines, ....tyre machines which rotate the tyre against a counter rotating sanding drum, providing a cleaner more accurate cut. Additionally, there are no "hand held" or free floating bits involved in the truing process when using the Hudy type machines so precision/consistency is further improved. The one issue that does arise with the Hudy (depending on your need/definition of perfection), is the diameter of its axle......it is not so much a Hudy issue, as a wheel manufacturer issue, as various wheel manufacturers (Slot-it/NSR/Staffs/CB Design etc.) do produce wheels with slightly (very slightly) different bore diameters....(why can't we standardize ??). These slight differences result in a tiny bit of "Slop" when some wheels are used. All tyre truers use electric motors that draw considerable amperage, so regardless of you final choice, you should use a variable voltage power supply (it should be able to go down to 3 volts), with a minimum of 5 amps. So,.......in a perfect world, I would suggest one of each type , but, to be honest, if you are racing solely in a club atmosphere, and your club has a variety of classes using both plastic and aluminum wheels, it is hard not to give the nod to the "Tyre razor" type machine, based on both versatility and ease of use. Cheers Chris Walker
  15. As you have indicated they work "OK" ,......and if that is what is used by all in your local club, everyone will be in the same boat,...so no one will be the wiser. Additionally, if you run on plastic track with its inherent bumps and lumps the degree of precision offered by the Proses will be adequate.................a more precise truer will return a more accurate wheel/tyre assembly, which will be considerably more noticeable on smoother wood tracks/higher powered cars. Cheers Chris Walker
  16. Good idea,.............but, you may want to use something more than a 2 amp power supply. Cheers Chris Walker
  17. I used the MPC Lotus 56 kit (pictured in the prior post) to build a copy of Graham's Indy car. This was built many moons ago and sits on a brass/wire chassis, Cheers Chris Walker
  18. Hi Rosco, To date, all the "Future" clearcoating I have done over Molotow chrome has been done with a brush. I do apply the Chrome fairly thinly, and generally wait a week. I also apply a couple very very thin coats of Future".......zero issues so far. I got my method from the static modeller sites, where several folks suggest this method, and, all seem to claim great results While the multinationals (SC Johnson included), do like to keep formulations consistent globally, as Phil has correctly stated, there certainly can be small regional differences,.....which may affect the results when used over Molotow. Cheers Chris Walker
  19. Hi Rosco,..............you will really like the results of airbrushed Molotow chrome !!!..................do not rush to get the Pledge/Future floor polish topcoat on........a couple of days is the bare minimum,..if you can wait 4/5 days ,...all the better. Cheers Chris Walker
  20. Looks good Shayne...............have you seen the Interlagos Miniatures drivers Helmets???,.......they make the car. Available from Electric Dreams, ..Interlagos has 30/40 different helmets available.
  21. Hi Rosco,.......a bit confused here,........you say you will be overcoating the Molotow Chrome with lacquer , then you say it can't be overcoated, or it will lose its chrome finish ?? It can be overcoated with no chrome deterioration,..but, only when coated with an acrylic clear.............Future/Pledge acrylic floor covering is the coating of choice........I have done this several times with no issues. cheers Chris Walker
  22. Hi Kevan, these gears are likely quite hard to find these days,.......they were made by Ranch Design, and are 64P. They also did a few 64P pinions.........sadly, they have been gone for quite a few years now. Not bad quality, but, they did benefit from some lapping compound. I am sure you just made a typo/brain fade, but that Spur is actually a Crown.... Cheers Chris Walker
  23. Hi Rosco, I have to agree with Kevan on this one,..........while I have no objection with the Tasman width rules,....48mm width is far from scale on the T53. Track widths (tire center to tire center) for the 1960 T53 were 47" front, and 48.5" rear...this converts to approx .37 mm front, and 38mm rear (in 1/32 scale). Assuming you are using 6 to 7mm wide tires the overall width would be approx. 43mm front, and 44mm rear. Not suggesting you change it, as your rules do permit 48mm, and, this will no doubt aid handling, but, it certainly is noticeably wider than scale. Cheers Chris Walker PS,..........good job so far, and, good luck in the "Tasman".
  24. Chrisguyw

    Motor brackets

    Hi Den, when I said drilling holes, I meant on the bulkhead of the pod, not, the motor.......my mistake, I should have been more clear.........and I do not recommend drilling/tapping the sealed motors commonly used in 1/32 "plastic" racing, as during the process, small metal bits/filings can get caught in the can and bugger things up. And you are correct, the 26D is a Champion can with Arcos' (freshly zapped) and shims !!.......it has also had the motor shaft replaced with a drill blank shaft, is has been rewound/dynamically balanced, a larger diameter comm installed and trued, and reworked brush hood and barrels to accept 36D sized "goldust" motor brushes.....heat sinks and piano wire brush springs finish it up ..............goes well Cheers Chris Walker
  25. Chrisguyw

    Motor brackets

    You are correct Den,..if motors screws are used (on the can end and on the rear bulkhead of the pod).....adapters are absolutely not required. If the particular pod does not have screw holes, they can easily be drilled, or the motor can be glued in with ShoeGoo/E6000 etc, with zero fear of failure, regardless if you are situating the motor in a can end or endbell drive configuration. Thousands of motors have been attached to motor brackets with screws only over the last 50+ years,......and many many racers currently employ this method. Cheers Chris Walker All of the following pics. are of cars that went through rather long proxies (10+ rounds) with absolutely no issues. An FC-130 secured via motor screws only,...in a "longcan" pod And another....... A FC-130 in a "longcan" anglewinder pod........motor screws,....no adapter A heavily reworked (very fast/lots of torque) 26D motor in a Vintage Champion chassis......motor screws only, and, on the endbell end An FC-130,.........this one just glued in with E6000/ShoeGoo stuff. If you have an overwhelming desire to purchase/use a motor adapter, be my guest, but, they are totally unnecessary !!
×
×
  • Create New...