Hello all,

I did not notice that the Can Am option on the ballet specified 1970-1973.  My preference is to allow cars representing the entire series.  I think it would be interesting to see how Thunderslot Lolas and McLarens would fare against the later wide tire cars, such as an NSR Porsche 917-10.  I don’t know how much members counted on only 70-73 cars when they voted for Can Am.

Russell

I agree with you Russell on the time frame.  Our good ThunderSlot McLarens would not qualify even though they look right.

What are the thoughts on running this series at 12 volts?  We already run the Thunderslot series at 12 volts so I don’t see us running this at anything less than 12.  Thoughts?

In 2019 we ran the slot.it McLaren M8’s at 12 volts also.

Concern has been expressed about the speed of the Thunderslot cars.  The Thunderslots are the fastest cars that we have run with fast laps in the 3.5 sec. range and may easily prevail in this Can-Am series. The first suggestion was to only allow cars from the 1970 to 1974 seasons.  This will not work because some Lola T70 cars were still running during this period.  It would seem that the only thing to do is not to allow Thunderslot cars in this Can-Am series.  The Thunderslot cars do have a clear edge in lap times.  The Slot.it McLarens are also quick, but not as quick at the Tslots.  Marty has provided a spreadsheet comparing this year’s Thunderslot series to 2019’s Slot.it McLaren series.

Keep in mind to discount my results in this year’s Thunderslot races as my car was illegal.  Also keep in mind that track conditions change and any cars and series may be faster or slower on any given day.

As the Thunderslots do seem to have a clear advantage, it does seem reasonable to exclude them from this year’s Can-Am.  The last time we ran Can-Am was 2014 and best times were in the 3.8 second range, running at 11 volts, so it is reasonable to expect them to be  faster now.

I would appreciate everyone’s input on this option of excluding the Thunderslot cars.

Thanks

Russell

I must say the Thunderslot cars are faster that I race at 12 volts than my McLaren that we also tried at 12 volts.  I hopefully continue to improve at car prep and driving, but I have been resigned to using a Thunderslot Lola already in my garage or a new Thunderslot McLaren M6/8B.  I have not made a purchase.  I was measuring the Thunderslort Lolas to see if I could put the Slot.it McLaren on the chassis.  If we exclude the Thunderslots I will work on my McLaren or maybe buy a Chaparral for added flavor to the race.  I also like the Porsche 917/10-30.  Let’s exclude the Thunderslots.  Or allow Thunderslot Lolas with a large weight penalty.  I hate to not see them as CanAm cars.

It would be good to have the Thunderslots run but they are so much faster.  I don’t know what amount of weight you would have to add to them to keep them in check with the Slot.it’s or others. but here is what the weights look like.

Carrera CanAm slot cars – 88 grams to 92 grams

Thunderslot cars – 63 grams

Slot.it McLaren – 63 grams

I will go along with the ban on Thunderslots and rely on the Slot.It and NSR cars with rules that are “open” for mods including 3D chassis, ball bearings and pretty high rpm motors in any orientation.  In other words, like the real 1:1 cars could be ever increasing performance.  Just mounting a Carrera, Scalextric, Slot.it or NSR body on a Thunderslot chassis might be going too far, but maybe;).  NO 1:28 scale cars.

Two Things – I wanted to confirm that the club has decided to ban Thunderslot cars from the upcoming CanAm series.

Will we be sticking strictly to the list of CanAm cars that Brian put together?  If so, I don’t see any Porsche 908/3’s on the list.  That could rule out this great NSR car from the series.  Can you confirm if this is the case or if the 908/3 will be allowed.  I know that Tony Dean raced a 908/2 but the 908/3 never ran in CanAm that I can find.  Let me know as I am looking at preparing this car for the series.

Let me add – if we are not going to be allowed to use Thunderslots I think we should be allowed to use the 908/3’s from NSR.  This will give members a pre-built option for a car to run.  Without this many will choose to run the Slot.it McLaren and it might be boring to have a field of Slot.it McLarens and one Chaparral.

Yes, Thunderslots will not be allowed in the Can-Am series.  As to the Porsche 908/3, the 908/3 is very similar to the 908/2.  I don’t know if it matches up exactly, but I think it could pass as a 908/2 with alternate/fantasy livery.  I better option might be an NSR Porsche 917-10K .   I don’t have one of those but I believe the body is wider.

I should have the rules up soon.  I was waiting on feedback on the Thunderslots before pulling the trigger.

Russell

Tony Dean won 1970 Atlanta in a 908-2 which is longer and sleeker than the 908-3 we raced on rally track.  I have a 908-2 that is a FLY car from some ones collection that  bought.  It has a little front downforce fender piece broken, but is ok.  Really does not look like  908-3.  (The two drivers are now crossing the Alps in a French Mustang on the Monte Carlo Rally.)

Race cars evolved from race to race.  The pictures of Porsche 908-2 I first looked at were earlier cars, which did look like the 908-3.  They had slab body sides and the fender tops on the “shoulders” were flat, without the dip between the fenders of the later cars, as in the #36 car.  I don’t know which versions campaigned in which Can-Am races, but my inclination is to be inclusive rather than exclusive, so I say they can run.

Russell

The original 908 was very much like the Fly car Randy shows above.  The more flat version was the evolution of the 908/2 nicknamed Flunder (flat fish) by the Porsche mechanics as it resembled the flat side of a flounder fish.  This version did not run in any of the CanAm races but did run in the 1969 6 hours at Watkins Glen.

It might be interesting to open up the entries to the cars that also ran in the Watkins Glen 6 hour race.  This would include these 908/2 flunders (Fly with 3D chassis), Porsche 917K’s (NSR, Fly with 3D chassis), Ferrari 512 (Fly with 3D chassis and soon to be Slot.it), Ford GT40 (Slot.it, NSR, and Fly), Ferrari 312pb (Slot.it, Policar), and Matra MS670 (Slot.it).

Thoughts?

Can you confirm that the 908/3 will be allowed?  I am looking at using one of my Targa Florio NSR 908/3 cars if they will be allowed.  Very excited about the series.

Marty

Penske Ferrari 512 coupe, (Brian’s) Otto Zipper Alfa 33/3, etc.  I can buy a NSR 917/10. Is the Carrera 917/30 legal scale?  Is my 917 Lemans legal from our old series?

I apologize for vacillating on the issue of the 908/3.  I thought that, at first glance, the 908/3 and the 908/2 had similar shapes, but I hadn’t seen the difference in sizes.  The 908/3 was a shorter wheelbase, much lighter car, just as you would want for the twisties in the Targa Florio.  In addition to the performance advantage it might have, the fact is, it did not race in the Can Am.  As an alternative, I think that the NSR 917/10K should be a good performer.

As to opening up the list to include endurance cars that ran that weekend, I have always said that the main criteria is that the car ran in the Can Am, at some point.  Those endurance cars and coupes that did run in the Can Am on Sunday are eligible.  However, if they ran in the endurance race but not the Can Am, they would not be eligible.

The rules are posted.

Thanks,

Russell

Not to cause more confusion but it looks like I have to retract my earlier post about the Porsche 908/3 not racing in a CanAm race.  The fact is, it actually did race in the 1972 Watkins Glen CanAm race.  It qualified 20th and finished in 12th place with Reinhold Joest running the #42, Porsche 908/3 #008.  The car did stick around and run the Watkins Glen 6 Hour race the following day and started 8th and finished in 5th place.

This car is the same one that NSR makes.

If approved, this is the car I will be running in the CanAm series.

Happy to have discovered the car actually did run in CanAm.

Marty

Thanks for doing a deeper dive on Can Am entrants.  I had thought that when you asked about expanding the Can Am field to include 908/3s that actual Can AM entrants of the908/3 had not been documented.  When I was searching, I was looking mainly at races in 1969 and 1970 as that was when I thought the 908/3 could have run.  Clearly, the car shown did run Watkins Glen in 1972 and would be eligible to race in our Can Am.  The car, as liveried, would be preferred, as that was the way it ran, but other 908/3s (with “fantasy” liveries) would be eligible as well.

Again, sorry for going back and forth on the 980/3, but it can run.

Russell

Russell – Thanks for the approval to run the 908/3.  As Reinhold Joest says “Joest Do It”.

Marty

The problems with my McLaren

In getting a car ready for the clubs upcoming CanAm series I looked to my tried and true Slot.it McLaren M8D’s that I ran in the clubs Slot.it McLaren CanAm series back in 2019.  During that series I had one car that was running quick with best laps in the 3.7 range.  I had another McLaren I was using as a mule to try set up changes looking for any possible improvement.  I used this car as a starting point for the updated CanAm series rules.

This CanAm series would run rules similar to the 1:1 CanAm series with almost unlimited rules.  This means racers would be able to use any tire, wheel, guide, weight or most anything else in order to get the car to run as fast as possible.

In working on my test McLaren M8D I discovered a few issues that would make this car a little more difficult to modify than I had anticipated.  Here is a list of the issues and what I was able to do to work through them.

Interior

Issue – The interior weight is 2.8 grams and although it’s not much it is still located high in the body and can upset the handling of the car.

The first thing I had planned on doing was to replace the plastic interior with a lightweight Lexan version. I thought it would be easy to find a Slot.it Lexan replacement interior but was unable to find one or one that looked like it would work.  Unfortunately, I was unable to find a suitable replacement and had to run the stock interior.

Front Wheels and Chassis Height

Issue – The stock 15” front wheels with narrow 8mm front tires work fine but the chassis height set-up is not ideal.

The 15” wheels fit inside the wheel wells of the body with no problem but I was unable to get the wheel height adjusted to get the correct chassis height without the tires contacting the body in the wheel wells.  To allow me to get the chassis lower and not have the wheels to fit inside the wheel wells without rubbing I used Slot.it 14” front wheels.  Unfortunately, I was unable to get the 14” wheels low enough to touch the track even the front axle in its lowest position.  The axle was rubbing on the lower grub screw holders.  To fix this I ground down the two front axle grub screw holders on the chassis.  This allowed the axle to go lower and get the smaller front wheels to contact the track and give them enough clearance within the wheel wells.

Now that I have the wheels, chassis and body working together I needed to grind down the McLaren wheel inserts to fit inside the smaller 14” wheels.  Once done it was time to paint them and get them installed.

Rear Wheels

Issue – The small lip on the bodies rear wheel wells limits the rear track to around 59.5mm

Since this series is for the most part unlimited, I had plans to use a wider wheel and/or tire combination on the McLaren for better traction.  I tried multiple options including NSR wheels and tires and various Slot.it wheels and tires but none would allow me to get a good fit within the 59.5mm width limitation.  These limitations also limited me from using a lighter magnesium Slot.it wheel or a superlight drilled NSR wheel.  In this case I had to stick with the stock super short hub aluminum wheel and a Slot.it F30 tire in the 10mm width and 20mm diameter.  So much for lighter or wider rear wheels.

Axles

Issue – No issue, just wanted to run a lighter axle and reduce the rotating weight.

I replaced the solid 48mm axles with 54mm hollow axles that were cut down to the 48mm width.

Guide Wire Clearance

Issue – The guide screw and motor wires on the top of the guide make contact with the body and impede the free movement of the guide.

The front of the car is so low the motor wires coming out of guide make contact with the front of the McLaren body.  I looked at grinding down the front of the guide to give additional space between the guide and the body.  By griding down the front of the guide there was not enough room for the brass eyelets.  In light of this, I used a grub screw to hold the motor wire to the guide.  The final thing I did was to use the thinner and more flexible NSR motor wires.  All three of these changes together gave the space for the guide to move freely.

Motor Wire Clearance

Issue – The top of the motor and the motor wires come in contact with the interior and the body.

With the interior out of the car I was able to see that the top of the motor and the motor wires were contacting the body of the car.  Unfortunately, there are no other motor configuration options for this model so it has to run with a short can motor in the sidewinder configuration.

Changing the motor pod from a 0.5mm offset to a 1mm offset helped the issue but the clearance is still very tight.  The other change made was to resolder the motor wires under or level with the motor wire tabs using a lighter and thinner NSR motor wire.  This thin and highly flexible motor wire also helped to free up the guide a little more.  I also used some hot glue to hold the motor wires in place so they would make as little contact with the body and the interior as possible.

Conclusion

At the end of the day, I wasn’t fully satisfied with the changes I was able to make to the McLaren M8D.  My goal was to make a more competitive car and get one that would run quicker than my other McLaren that ran fast laps of 3.7 seconds.  I have not had the car on the track yet so let’s see how it goes.  Update to follow.

Are we excluded from running Thunderslot parts?  The most drastic would be a NSR body on a Thunderslot chassis and running gear.  But could a Thunderslot motor be used in an NSR chassis?

In the 1971 Watkins Glen Can Am, the Penske Ferrari 512 car #6 ran the Can Am the next day.  DNF with motor trouble.  I take it we could run that car, but I am sticking with regular Can Am.  I also have a new never raced Ford GT40 in a livery that probably did not run Can Am.  Would that be eligible?

Yes, either the GT40 or the Ferrari 512 would be eligible.  We allow fantasy liveries so the existing liveries would be OK.  I always like to encourage accurate liveries, though.

Russell

I found the Ford GT40 that raced in Can Am.  1966 Mosport Eppie Weitzes GT40 MK2 #94 white with blue racing stripes like Shelby cars.  Not the livery I have, and I agree we should stick to Can Am liveries if available