|
|
1998 is turning into a banner year for those of us
who appreciate really beautiful scale model 1/32 slot cars. We've
seen the introduction of some outstanding cars this year. The Ninco
Jaguar XK120, the Scalextric Jordan F-1, and the Fly Joest Porsche
come immediately to mind. Clearly, the market is responding to the
enthusiast's desire for slot cars that are authentic-looking scale
models, and every new release seems to take the euroscale slot car
industry another step away from the toy-car mentality that prevailed
for so many years and toward a serious commitment to true model car
racing.
Performance standards are rising, too, not just in terms of raw speed
and lap times, but also in drivability and the elusive but vital
overall fun quotient. Manufacturers are making serious efforts to
develop cars that combine ever higher levels of visual appeal with
ever increasing performance.
The two newest entries into the arena, Fly's neo-vintage Ferrari 512S
and Ninco's Ferrari F310B Formula One car, are examples of this
trend. And, though they are very dissimilar cars, they have some
surprising and fascinating things in common.
Both offer exceptional value per dollar (or pound, lire, peseta,
mark, franc, yen, or beaver pelt (can't forget you fellows waaay up
in the Great White North, eh?)) At U.S. (MSRP) retail prices of
around 40 bucks for the Ninco and about $45 for the Fly, customers
are getting cars that would have cost $100 only a year or two ago.
Both take their respective categories within the euroscale genre in
new directions, and to new levels.
And, most intriguingly, both take interesting approaches to an
attempt at combining strong-magnet cornering performance with
realistic driving characteristics. Testing the cars, provided as
always by Fantasy World Toy and Hobby of Tacoma, Washington, on the Fantasy World 4-lane
Scalextric layout provided a surprisingly revealing comparison. One
car pulls it off astoundingly well, the other less so. More about
that later.
These two cars have also caused us to review our testing procedure,
particularly in the area of controllers. We had always tested with
stock Scalextric set controllers, even though we are well aware that
they are less than ideal for many cars, especially Fly's. We stuck
with the Scalextrics for several reasons. First, they provide
uniformity. There is not a euroscale car on the market that can't be
driven reasonably well with a Scalextric controller, so we can use
them with every car we test. Testing with only one controller
simplifies the procedure and helps us meet deadlines. Second, the
Scalextrics are as basic as controllers get; so whatever a car will
do with a Scalextric, it will do at least as well with a Parma, a
Ruddock, or what have you. Third, the majority of newcomers to the
euroscale hobby are arriving by means of purchasing a Scalextric set.
Scalextric's controllers are what they drive their cars with, at
least at first. We believe the Scalextric controllers have served us
well.
Now, however, we are considering a change. Soon, Scalextric sets will
be joined in the market by new sets and controllers from Ninco, SCX,
and Carrera. Scalextric will also be introducing a new controller.
The choices are expanding rapidly. Thus, we are looking at the idea
of testing some cars with more than one controller, perhaps with its
manufacturer's standard unit and one or more after-market types. The
goal is to give the reader an idea of which brand and / or ohm rating
each car responds best to.
We tried it in a small way in our tests of Fly's and Ninco's new
Ferraris. It actually wasn't planned, but came about simply because
an alternate controller was on hand and we got curious. The results
proved interesting to us. If you find them interesting, too, let us
know. We'd like your thoughts on the matter.
And now, on to the fun stuff...
|
|
Fly's newest release comes packaged in the
standard clear case with black plastic base. The very dark blue,
almost black glossy paper insert that forms a backdrop for the car
says "Fly Classic" in gold. The car's name and the notation "2nd
Monza 70" are stamped in gold on the front side of the base. The car
is fastened down with the usual screw-in plastic retainer. Fly's
packaging has become almost Spartan by the latest industry standards,
but its clean simplicity serves well to showcase the car. And this is
a car that draws the eye without any help from the package.
When we tested Fly's Joest Porsche, we commended Fly on its progress
in resolving the flaws in fit and finish that had dogged its earlier
efforts. The 512S takes that very welcome progress even further. The
overall finish and general appearance of the car are the best we've
seen yet. There are still some imperfections, but they are even
smaller ones than those on the Joest.
Body
Our test car, stock number 98-C1, comes in
a rich shade of red with tampo stamped markings. These include the
number 3 in a white roundel on the nose, doors, and left rear fender,
Ferrari prancing horse insignia on the front fenders and nose, and
Firestone, Shell, Carello, Magneti Marelli, and Koni decals in
various locations. The lower body sides are painted to simulate
aluminum. The overall finish of the body is beautifully smooth and
glossy, and stamping and painting are excellent except for one quite
noticeable goof. Where the number roundels cross the door lines, the
white paint seeped partway into the lines. We would cover the problem
by simply flowing black acrylic paint or ink into all the panel
lines, but serious collectors who bet future fortunes on the
out-of-the-box perfection of their cars will want to check this
carefully before buying.
The Ferrari 512S offers a wealth of opportunities for fine detail and
Fly makes the most of them. The chrome-plated headlight lenses rest
in black pockets under clear covers. One flaw that continues
uncorrected from the Joest is the loose fit of the headlight covers.
The fit and clarity of the windshield / side window part, however,
are excellent. Two chrome fuel filler caps flank the windshield,
which carries a delicate black wiper assembly and a chrome rear-view
mirror. The mirror, at the very top of the car, feels quite sturdy
and stayed firmly attached through several testing crashes including
a flip onto the floor, but may be vulnerable over the long haul.
Perhaps Fly and other manufacturers might consider molding small,
exposed detail parts in something resilient like vinyl.
A complete driver figure with open-face helmet and full safety
harness sits in the full-depth cockpit tub. He grips a full steering
wheel and views a set of black-on-white gauges stamped onto the dash.
Curiously, there is a gauge, probably a tachometer, mounted
prominently above the dash without a stamped face. Could some
humorist at Fly be suggesting that Italian race drivers of that era
never looked at the tach?
Behind the open cockpit, the 512S's signature airbox, molded in
white, rides on an extension of the cockpit tub, giving a satisfying
impression of depth to the engine area. Extensions of the
black-molded cockpit assembly provide radiator detail inside the rear
fender openings. As is customary with Fly, every body opening on the
full-size car is open on the model and filled with the appropriate
details.
Fly has done a good job of capturing the 512S's complex rear spoiler
and body openings. This provides a frame for what is probably the
car's most arresting visual feature, an incredibly intricate molding
that incorporates exhaust, gearbox, oil cooler, body strut, and rear
chassis detail. Finished in a steel-like metallic gray, this part
gives a life-like look of depth and realism. With some detail
painting, including a wash of black paint, it would be even more of a
visual feast. Two taillights with clear red lenses complete the rear
of the car.
Chassis and Mechanicals
The chassis is simplicity itself,
consisting of Fly's versatile rear pod assembly, first seen in the
Porsche GT1, mated to a black-molded flat plate with just a few
molded-in stiffening ribs, body mounting lugs, and locations for the
guide and the usual front stub axles and independently rotating
wheels. Two tiny tabs at he extreme rear provide location for that
beautiful rear detail part. The well-known Fly annoyance of excessive
slop in the front stub axles is still there but even with the front
wheels pushed up into the fenders as far as they would go there was
no tire rubbing. Nothing remarkable in the design, just simple
efficiency.
What is remarkable is that Fly, knowingly or not, has produced a
universal chassis for many of the CanAm and sports-prototype bodies
of the late 60's and 70's. A trip to our stash of bodies revealed
that this chassis, with minimal trimming, is a perfect or
near-perfect fit for an astounding array of McLarens, Porsches,
Lolas, and other big-time race cars. What's more, it is easily
shortened or lengthened to fit many more with just a razor saw, sheet
styrene, and plastic cement .
Also, the attractive gold-painted Campagnolo "star" pattern wheels, a
Ferrari trademark, are ideal upgrades for any 1/32 scale Ferrari P3,
P4, 312P or PB, 512BB or Daytona and many Formula One cars. The
treaded tires, with flawless Firestone logos and white rings stamped
on the sidewalls, not only look great on the 512S but are also just
right for many other cars of the period. They give good grip, too,
and could easily be sanded down into slicks. One thing to watch out
for with these tires is the ease with which the sidewall stamping is
damaged by routine wear and tear. Just a few trips sideways into the
wall left gaps in those pretty white rings. If you want to preserve
your 512S's collector value and enjoy driving it, too, buy an extra
set of tires and stash them away to be installed just before you sell
the car.
The chassis, pod assembly, wheels and tires all are or soon will be
available as spare parts. Fly's parts bin, along with Ninco's, is
becoming a treasure chest for the build-your-own crowd, and all we
can say is, more, more!
On the track
We took Fly's 512S to the Fantasy World
track not knowing quite what to expect. The car breaks new ground for
Fly as well as for neo-vintage euroscale cars in general. Would it be
another stuck-down rocket ship in different clothing or would Fly aim
for a different set of driving characteristics more in keeping with
vintage car convention? We've now driven the car extensively and, to
tell the truth, we're still not sure what they had in mind.
Our first indication that this car was going to be quite different
from the Fly norm came when we noticed that the car has considerably
more ground clearance than past Fly cars and that the magnet, though
powerful as ever, rides farther from the track surface. The OWH
magnet test confirmed that magnetism plays a much smaller than usual
part in the 512S's handling package. The car began rolling down our
Scalextric track section at 75 degrees of incline. This is quite
respectable, but the Ferrari is the first Fly car we have tested this
way that has not made it all the way over and hung upside down.
We actually drove two 512S's. Partway through our customary break-in
procedure the rear mounting point for the pod assembly broke,
allowing the rear of the chassis to drop down to the track. We had
not crashed the car at that point and can't say what may have caused
the failure. We did notice that the thinness of the chassis did not
give the mounting screw as much plastic to bite into as we would like
to see. In the few days since our test session we have already heard
of this happening to another car. If this happens to your 512S the
cure is simple. Just drill the mounting hole all the way through the
chassis and use a 2-56 cap screw and nut to secure the pod.
The good people of Fantasy World very graciously gave us another car
and we started over. This time, break-in was uneventful and the car
ran smoothly and quietly after only a short time. We moved right into
our timed runs.
It was clear even during break-in that this car did not drive like
other Fly cars. As we expected, it did not have anywhere near the
grip we're used to. Worse still, the car had the classic magnet-car
vice of sudden breakaway at the limit, made worse by the reduced
magnetic attraction. All this showed in the lap times, our best being
6.833 seconds. This is still faster than any non-Fly box-stock car we
had tested up to that time, but it was almost a full second off the
best Fly lap time we have seen, a 5.925 set by a GT1 Porsche.
Now, this is more than fast enough for a neo-vintage car, but the
real problem was that the car was hard to drive consistently,
especially through the twisty back side of the course. The 512S
seemed unable to corner fast enough to keep the magnet from bogging
it down without going too fast to stay in the slot. The best times we
could do consistently were around 7.1 to 7.2 seconds. After five runs
like this we decided to deviate from our normal test procedure. We
had a 45-ohm Parma controller along, so we hooked it up in place of
our normal stock Scalextric controller, which is rated at about 70
ohms. This did make a difference, giving the car a more comfortable
feel and letting us keep it on the track more easily. Though it
didn't improve the fastest lap times at all it did allow us to turn
6.9 second laps more or less consistently. The car still felt like it
wanted fewer ohms, perhaps 30 to 35, but time pressures prevented us
from trying it.
The 512S comes across as a car that can't decide whether it wants to
be a stuck-down magnet car or a milder vintage car. Fly may have been
trying to achieve a handling compromise to satisfy both magnet car
devotees and those who like to hang the tail out. The result,
however, is a car with the usual magnet car virtues greatly reduced
and all the magnet car vices still there in full measure. Purchasers
of the car may be happier if they either remove the magnet or modify
the chassis to get the magnet down closer to the track rails.
All that said, Fly still deserves a lot of credit for this car. It is
beautiful to look at and its chassis, wheels, and tires are
much-needed products with great potential for scratch builders and
kit-bashers. Fly's fit and finish get better with each new release,
and we have no doubt that every 512S they make will be snapped up.
While this car falls short of the mark in some respects it sets new
standards in others.
Perhaps the truly exciting thing about this car is the mouth-watering
possibilities it suggests. Both a long-tail version of the car and a
512M would be easy and logical follow-ons, as would a 612 CanAm. We
could eventually see Fly and others produce all the cars we lusted
after and never got because the great slot racing boom of the 60's
collapsed at just the wrong time. Stay with us, friends, we suspect
the best is yet to come. There will be two more versions of the 512S,
a NART version, another with two decal sheets, and who knows what
after that?
|
|
Most racing fans I know either love the looks of
today's Formula One cars or hate them. There are few in between. I
tend toward the latter camp. It seems to me that F-1s stopped looking
like race cars around 1990 or so. The currently fashionable high
noses haven't helped. To me, they make the cars look like they are
constantly on the brink of flight. Give me a Champ Car, with the
point of the nose down next to the pavement where it belongs. The F-1
cars, for all their performance, simply look funny.
Not only that, I've never thought formula cars of any kind made very
good slot cars. There just isn't enough body to put a proper chassis
under and they don't handle like sports cars. Furthermore, until
recently, few of the euroscale F-1 cars had risen above the toy level
in appearance.
The new Ninco Ferrari F310B changes all that. I may decide F-1 slot
cars aren't so bad after all if all the euroscale manufacturers start
turning out cars like this. And if Ninco produces more cars like this
they will have
to.
Now, don't get me wrong, I still think F-1 cars are weird looking,
but Ninco has done a wonderful job of capturing every bit of that
weirdness in model form. The new car, which comes as Michael
Schumacher's Number 5 or Eddie Irvine's Number 6, is, quite simply,
the first mass-produced contemporary euroscale F-1 car that really
looks like a properly detailed scale model instead of a toy.
That by itself would be enough to satisfy legions of hobbyists, but
Ninco didn't stop there. They gave their new car performance that
puts it into territory previously occupied only by Fly
cars...well into
it.
|
Packaging and presentation. After those raves we have to air one
gripe. Whose idea was it to package the new F-1 car in a
plastic case taking up almost twice the volume of the old
cases? To be sure, the case catches the eye with its tilted
base that sets the car at a rakish angle and its prominently
displayed Ninco logos. But... somebody at Ninco should
remember that distributors and dealers have to store and
display their products in expensive and limited commercial
space and costly display cases. The slot car department at
Fantasy World Toy and Hobby, which provides the cars and test track for all
our OWH product reviews, is crammed to capacity with cars,
sets, parts, track, and accessories from seven manufacturers
as it is. If all of them double the size of their packages,
FW and other dealers will have a real problem, not to
mention importers who pay international shipping rates based
as much on volume as on weight. This phenomenon we call box
inflation may be hard for the average slot car racer to take
seriously, but it really does put an expensive burden on
distributors and dealers and ultimately it will raise the
prices we pay for our slot cars. So far, packaging in the
euroscale slot car business has been commendably compact. We
hope it stays that way. |
|
|
|
|
Bob Ward
email: bobward@oldweirdherald.com
