Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
John
The issue with the stock crowns is the wearing of the channel for the motor shaft, right? (too tight? too binding?) Or is there some issue with the mesh itself? If it is the wearing/friction, then cutting off the end of the motor shaft and adjusting everything tightly, without too much side axle play, would seem the simplest solution. Assuming that would be legal….. I have not had a chance to run my car at all, but that is probably the first thing I would try.
.
Erik
CSX 2299 is not a 427. 427s start with chassis number CSX 3XXX. Your car was the second Daytona Coupe completed. I have the Monogram Viking Blue #21 CSX 2299. While we encourage period liveries and allow fantasy liveries, there is no need to repaint your car. Besides, I think the 65 Guardsman Blue car looks better. My #21 has a 3D printed chassis and a thin, sheet aluminum interior, with thin-cast resin dash, console, driver, and spare tire/wheel. I have flat sheet plastic interiors in other TT cars, with dash top and driver head and shoulders that look fine and are easy to do. I would think that the front motor would be very difficult to make competitive.
CSX 2299, after an impressive list of drivers in period, was sold to Michael Shoen in 1969 for $5100. Mike Shoen wrote The Cobra-Ferrari Wars.
Looking forward to seeing your car. I plan on being at HQ on Saturday and bring my six TT cars to test.
Russell
Here are some Cobra photos I took at Road America in 2001. The #19 car is a 289 USRRC Cobra being driven by Dan Gerber, the driver of that very car in 1964. Notice the cutback doors. The #99 car is a 427 Cobra. The photos were taken with a 2.3 megapixel Canon camera.
Russell
Marc
The headlight specification is a holdover from a previous series and I believe that it is referring to the real race cars having required head and tail lights. As many racecar headlights in period were covered during daytime racing, sometimes with tape, sometimes with metal or plastic covers, or otherwise not visible, I do not think visible headlights should be required.
Randy
Tracing Cobra race car body modifications can be tricky as it was a constantly evolving process, with various fender flares and extensions being used. The ultimate 289 body (and my personal favorite Cobra shape) may well have been the five FIA 289 Cobras that were built. These cars had a wide rear body, requiring the doors to have a cutback rear edge. The front wheelwells had wide fender flare extensions and an oil cooler inlet was added below the regular 289 flat-bottom grill opening. The hood had a scoop for fresh air in and added side fender vents let hot air out. The FIA cars also had the “suitcase” bumps on the trunk lids to clear the mandated FIA luggage space.
The 1/24 Revell slot car is a pretty accurate FIA car, except for the lack of trunk bumps. The AMT Cobra behind is a 1/25 early car.
After the FIA cars, there were 11 USRRC Cobras built, using the FIA mods. Then the Kardashian FIA rear body was used as the buck for the 427 rear body, although there were variations here as well; the street, competition, and S/C cars had slight differences on the rear fenders, all very similar to the FIA 289 rear fenders, except that the doors were not cutback. In addition, 33 427s were built with narrower rear fenders, closer to the rear tires. After a run of the “narrow-hip” cars Shelby went back to the wider rear, because it looked better.
In 1/32 scale, the Revell hardtop is an early 289 and pretty close to the LeMans/Goodwood hardtop cars, as they were raced in period. The MRRC car behind is clearly a 427.
Russell
Marc
Although I could not find the Bizzarini entered in period, it has raced in later Goodwood Revivals, so it would be legal. The Bizzarrini is a pretty cool looking car.
Randy
It can be difficult noting the difference in 289 and 427 racing Cobras, especially in slot cars, particularly during this time period, as car bodies were modified to fit wider and wider tires. Originally, the 289 Cobras did not have factory fender flares, except for the FIA Cobras, which had a bulging rear end very similar to the 427 cars. In addition, 289s were modified with makeshift flares in period. The 289s had a smaller grille opening that was flat on the bottom. The 427s had vertical oval brake openings on either side of the larger oval grille The 427s had large side pipes mounted along the rocker panels; the 289s either did not have side pipes, or they were smaller and located below the rocker panel. In a quick look at your Cobra on Saturday, it looked correct. The 289s had both a short hardtop roof or a longer, fastback roof. It was very rare to see a 427 with a removable hardtop. I did find that MRRC has correct 289s with hardtops:
Here is a Carrera 289:
I found this car on eBay, advertised as an MRRC. I do not think it actually is an MRRC. It is a model of the same car as the Carrera, but it looks like the manufacturer used a 427 body with the 289 roof.
Considering the difficulty in identifying “correct” 289s, I would be willing not to look too closely at a 289/427 Cobra. My main concern is with the potential wider rear end of a 427 car. If one is entered, a maximum rear track width may be required.
Updated comments on Tourist Trophy series:
Cars:
Cobras–Most of the Cobras that ran were original 289 roadsters. These cars ran with the removable hardtops, both in period and Revivals. The Cobra Daytona Coupes ran in 1964. 3D printed chassis are available for these cars. A MRRC Cobra is listed in the rules, but this may be in error. The only MRRC Cobras that I am aware of are 427 Cobras, which are not eligible. If anyone knows of a MRRC 289 Cobra, please let me know.
Aston Martin–There are a number of eligible cars; all are resin and will likely be heavy. Most of these are set up to use an adjustable chassis, which is not particularly race competitive. Adapting a more competitive chassis would be advised. These would likely require effort to be competitive.
Corvettes–only C1 and C2 Corvettes are eligible; Grand Sports are not. I do not have a Ninco C1 and do not know what issues there may be. There are some 1:32 C1 and Stingray static kits available; unknown issues. Carrera Stingrays are also an unknown quantity.
Cheetah–As in previous posts, the Cheetahs are marginally eligible, unless it is discovered that the Carrera Cheetahs are larger than 1:32. The vintage Strombecker Cheetah would be eligible, but it is a pretty small car.
Porsche 904–The vintage Monogram is eligible, but it is a pretty narrow car.
Ferrari–There are a lot of eligible Ferrari cars eligible. The Racer Ferraris are too large and are not eligible. The only known plastic Ferraris are the Fly GTO and the Fly 250LM and the Monogram GTO 64. Both sidewinder and inline 3D chassis are available for the Fly GTO and only an inline is available for the Fly 250LM. The Slot.it GT40 chassis can also be modified to fit these cars as I showed in my How-To post: http://austinslotcarclub.com/fly-ferrari-gto-slot-it-converson-project/ Clearance is tight at the front of the 250LM and the GT 40 chassis takes a good bit of work to fit in this car. I have only seen inline 3D printed chassis for the Monogram. The other Ferraris are resin and will take more work to be competitive.
Jaguars–I built the Revell-Monogram Lightweight E-Type using a 3D printed chassis. The Lister-Jaguar is resin and would take work to be competitive.
Maserati–The Maseratis are resin and will take work
As I do not have all of the cars on the list, I cannot confirm that all of the cars have similar rear track width. If any of the cars have a clear advantage due to a wider rear end, it could be necessary to impose a maximum rear tire total width. If anyone has a Carrera car they would like to enter, please let me know the rear body width. And, if anyone has any question about a specific car, please let me know.
Good Luck!
Russell
I am not familiar with NSR cars. I did not run the NSR Mosler or NSR Porsche 917 series and have no memory of the Modern GT series. The Modern GT race reports said I ran three races in it but my car was not identified and I did not recognize any cars in the single race photo; maybe I ran a borrowed car. The primary problem with my Corvette in this series seems to be trued tires. The car chatters a lot with what appears to be out-of-round tires. The NSR wheels seemed to be a snug fit on my P & N truer and I had trued them until they were butter-smooth, but on the track they bounce. The initial problems seemed to be with gearing and weight placement. After experimenting with weight placement and ordering and trying more NSR gears, I was able to get the car to handle much better, but the tires bounce. I tried the wheels/tires on the Hudy truer at the track but the wheels are looser than they were with the P & N. Very frustrating. I am going to order another set of wheels and tires and give them another try.
I don’t have a lot of experience or parts for NSR. My Corvette came with the 25K motor. I tried it for the first time today with a 33-tooth spur; it was undrivable. Even with weight it was very twitchy, especially under braking at the ends of the long straights. I ordered 34- and 35-tooth gears today. I still plan on running with the 25K motor, hoping that the higher numerical gearing will be enough to calm it down. I am ordering a 36-tooth gear as well.
Russell
Erik
I plan on driving my own car and I believe Randy does as well. Presumably if someone else wants to enter the race but is yet reluctant to race at HQ, one of the members that does attend could race his car as a proxy driver. We should, therefore be able to run the race as a regular owner/driver series.
Russell
Upon further checking it looks like the Sideways rear wheels are 17 X 8 and the front wheels are 15 X 8. It is also confusing because the millimeter dimensions are close to the inch dimensions of the real world cars.
Marty
Upon further checking, I see that the wheels on the Sideways are larger than the 15 X 8 Slot.it wheels (PA-17) that I normally use. They may be more the size of the 16 X 8 (PA-43) Slot.it wheels. I do not have any of these wheels to check. I have always found the Slot.it wheel nomenclature confusing. In the old catalogs, wheels will be listed as 15,8 X 8,2 (commas, not periods); the part number is PA 17 and the description on the label of the parts package is 15 X 8 Wheels. Other wheels are listed as 16,5 X 8,2 and the part number is PA43. I don’t have any of these to see how the package is labeled. I have typically used the 15 X 8 PA17 in either aluminum or magnesium form for most of my cars. Our Group C rules allow for either the PA17 or PA43 size. Assuming lighter weight and smaller diameter for lower center of gravity favor the smaller size, I do not know if the PA43 larger size have any disadvantage (or any advantage).
Concerning the Sideways cars, is only the PA43 Slot.it size allowed? Since I have none, and considering the issue with the inserts, I will probably use the stock Sideways wheels.
Thanks
Russell
Marty
After removing the Sideways rear wheel inserts, I found that they do not fit the Slot.it wheels that I intended to run. Despite the rules, would it be allowable to use Slot.it inserts?
Mark
As I have said, the Cheetah is marginally eligible. I do not have a Carrera Cheetah and I do not know if it is roughly the same size as the other cars. If it is, and should therefore be of similar performance, in the interest of having a variety of entrants, I think it should be allowed. If someone has one, please let me know of rear body width. Also, if members think that it does not belong, please let me know. The #8 Alan Green Cheetah has the best provenance for eligibility, but we generally allow fantasy liveries. Period correct liveries are preferred.
Russell
