Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Proposed BRM A/W Chassis for Porsche 962 ???

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Proposed BRM A/W Chassis for Porsche 962 ???

    So Mr Alan ...

    Any proposed delivery time frame for the aforementioned 962 A/W Chassis ?

    And how will this be offered ?

    As a separate pan chassis, ready for the transference of existing parts ?

    Will it accept the BRM interiors ? Or will it need a new BRM interior (the 917 interior is rather "compact") ...

    Or as a "kit" ,with a bunch of stuff we don't need /want ? (read $$$)

    I mean, the 962's come with different wheels/ inserts depending on livery, so a simple chassis pan would probably be the best way to package it .

    P.S. I'm still thinking a floating motor carrier ala the NSR GT chassis (on their R8 GT3 car) would be a step in the right direction, in improving handling, not raw speed ...

  • #2
    917's handle well here so no need to re-invent the wheel.

    The idea of the Group C and Classic range of BRM is simple, easy to set up and race cars. Affordable fun without added complications of pods etc.

    The McLaren series and Megane is a different direction and those cars do feature pods, and even a metal chassis on the McLaren.

    How will this be offered, well until I actually have the info from BRM I am only guessing, but I expect a chassis, with gears, as that is all you need.
    Interior fits in the TEST chassis I have, so should fit in the production version. Other than that I will wait until BRM can supply me with actual delivery dates, and spec.
    But no pods for Group C or Classic BRM and I see no reason to make these fun classes complicated.

    More soon, real soon now.
    Alan Smith
    SCI Owner.
    www.scaleracing.com
    www.slotcarillustrated.com
    www.facebook.com/scaleracingcenter
    www.132slotcar.us

    1-253-255-1807

    Comment


    • #3
      To BRM,

      I have to ask why produce an a/w chassis? The BRM Group C cars were a fine 'spec' class. There is no competing product forcing a chassis/performance upgrade. There is no BRM vrs whoever like there is with Slot.It vrs NSR. Now you introduce the 'haves' and 'have nots'.

      The only answer I can come up with is a need to force BRM racers to purchase an expensive upgrade ($ to be announced) for an already pricey car ($130 +). I guess that leaves me out of any 'national' event as I will not play the constant upgrade game... Remember 'Stock' class RC racing and flavor of the week motors, parts, and 'stock' cars...

      Sorry for sounding negative, I already have (7) BRM's, our club races a BRM spec race, and a/w cars will not be allowed to compete.

      JM2C

      CK

      Comment


      • #4
        I have to ask why produce an a/w chassis? The BRM Group C cars were a fine 'spec' class. There is no competing product forcing a chassis/performance upgrade. There is no BRM vrs whoever like there is with Slot.It vrs NSR. Now you introduce the 'haves' and 'have nots'.
        I'll throw in my input, for what it's worth. And I may be way off base here. But the BRM Group C cars that I've raced have been annoying beasts, too willing to deslot without warning, and demanding extremely careful setup just to race for endurance type events without issues cropping up (been quite some time - three years or more - since I last drove one, so I may be well out of touch by now).

        But you compare that to the 1/24 Scaleauto cars, also a 'spec' class type racer, and it's the difference between chalk and cheese - brie, maybe camembert, even ... those things are fun, and driveable.

        So while I take your point about an expensive upgrade (about $33 for a new BRM chassis), if the performance enhancement was commensurate (did I swallow a dictionary today?) it could well be a good step forward. After all, if the 'spec' class BRM dictates the original inline chassis setup, then that's what you'll still be racing.

        Comment


        • #5
          After all, if the 'spec' class BRM dictates the original inline chassis setup, then that's what you'll still be racing.
          I hope you're right and that the inline chassis will be the 'official' competition chassis.

          I'm sorry to here that you found the stock chassis a bit of a handfull. We race no-mag on a 110' foot wood track using the stock rubber & red motor. The BRM's behave like big Slot.It Group C's...

          As far a reliability, the stock pinions were so-so and these usually cause the crown gear to fail so we replaced those. We only run 'sprint' races, 2 min per heat. But we do run a lot of them since this class is well liked and they have held up well.

          We also run Scaleauto 1/24's, while faster with more total laps, I feel they are more demanding of tires, gears, and setup.

          JM2C

          CK
          Last edited by Carrera Kid; 11-17-2013, 07:48 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Wet Coast Racer View Post
            I'll throw in my input, for what it's worth. And I may be way off base here. But the BRM Group C cars that I've raced have been annoying beasts, too willing to deslot without warning, and demanding extremely careful setup just to race for endurance type events without issues cropping up (been quite some time - three years or more - since I last drove one, so I may be well out of touch by now).
            Then you tried a BRM that was not very well built Wet. These BRM Group C cars are as rock solid as they come.

            Ron

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Carrera Kid View Post

              I have to ask why produce an a/w chassis? The BRM Group C cars were a fine 'spec' class...

              CK

              Kid,

              I too have a handful of BRM's and am a BIG fan of the company, but my first reaction was also much like yours- this is effectively creating another class of Gp C without need.

              After spending time with their 917, and bearing witness to the benefits of the AW setup (simple gear lash setup, MUCH more robust gearing, spectacular handling), I must say that I am really looking forward to seeing this on the market. We have been running IROC-style around here lately (with a few of my personal cars) and I get nervous about someone losing (abusing) a gear while racing a car that's not theirs. Knowing how much stronger the AW setup is, I will happily retrofit the fleet if it gets me out of the gear lash setting business!

              It will be interesting to see how the two layouts compete against each other. I'll bet they will be reasonably close but I know the simplicity of the setup has me eagerly awaiting the AW.

              Yeah, it might be another cost to shell out, but maybe try it before dismissing it?



              Wet,

              It sounds like you got saddled with a dud. The analogy of a 1/24 Slot.It is very appropriate. They are a little slower as they are about 100g heavier, but just as fun and entertaining to drive. We have a great time with our fleet here and if you're ever in the neighborhood, you'd be welcome to give them a try.

              Chris

              Comment


              • #8
                BRM angle-winder chassis a progression, but in-line still legal.





                First the decision to release the Group C angle-winder chassis was taken after a lot of work explaining to Customers how to set up cars.

                Those who have had success with the In-line cars know it can be done, but after a lot ( 100's of hours ) of explaining about gear mesh, lash and zero axle float both BRM and I realized you can only tell your Customers for so long, and a solution was needed to make the Group C an easier class to set up for those struggling with gear mesh.

                After testing for the Porsche 917 started, with feedback to the development team that we needed to resolve gear problems, the angle-winder chassis was chosen. The other valuable feature is the adjustable front axle height to allow easy set up for different types of tracks.
                As soon as a prototype was created for the 917 we converted a 962 and started testing that car angle-winder as well. It makes for an easier car to set up, the only things needed are tires to suit your track system and a flat spot on the rear axle to prevent gear slippage.

                The Porsche 962C angle-winder chassis will be released as a kit chassis and gears, so you can easily change over the cars currently in the marketplace to this set up if you so wish. The in-line will still be legal in the BRM Challenge and in testing while we do see a slight advantage to the angle-winder car it was not released to make the cars faster, just easier to set up.

                With regard to the current Group C BRM Cars being poor handling, I do not feel that is the case, however you cannot compare a plastic chassis car with the Scaleauto metal chassis cars. A very different animal by design.

                The Porsche right now on my track at www.132slotcar.us is a challenging car to drive, we run the black motor so you have serious speed, and Scaleauto BRM sponge tires so lots of grip. This does make for a car you have to be very precise with to get the best out of, you cannot overdrive it or you will crash out, normally by lifting the inside wheels in a corner which causes the guide to leave the slot and your off.

                Setting up a BRM for your driving style is critical, or you will struggle especially on a high grip track, but once mastered they are a blast.

                You can also run with the softer Purple motor and many choose to run with lower grip tires, like BRM sponge, or even their rubber tires, this will create an easier car to drive as it will be loose, but lap times are not as exhilarating.

                When asked to compare a BRM to a Scaleauto I have often said the BRM is like using a Surgeon's scalpel you have to be precise to get the best out of the car. The Scaleauto is more like using an axe you can be brutal with your driving, overly aggressive and wild and still stay on, not as fast as being tidy but you still stay on.

                Also no the 132Slotcar Track we have the whoop de doo's on the front straight which will challenge any car set up too light at the front, or a driver that does not adjust for these features on the track. BRM cars are more likely to have problems here with a heavier body and lighter chassis than a Scaleauto with a light weight body, and heavy weight low down in the chassis.

                So to conclude BRM and Scaleracing felt after 6 years where we are still explaining gear mesh and set up to owners of the BRM Group C Cars it was time to see if a different solution would make a great line of cars even better, I believe it will.
                Last edited by Scaleracing; 11-17-2013, 11:32 AM.
                Alan Smith
                SCI Owner.
                www.scaleracing.com
                www.slotcarillustrated.com
                www.facebook.com/scaleracingcenter
                www.132slotcar.us

                1-253-255-1807

                Comment


                • #9
                  It sounds like you got saddled with a dud.
                  Then you tried a BRM that was not very well built Wet.

                  If I didn't know where and when Paul last raced a BRM I might agree with Chris and Ron. However being out on the West coast and the proximity to 132Slotcar I'll leave the rest up to you guys to figure out.

                  As Chris pointed out the anglewinder set is more durable, for those who have the finess to race the inline cars and care for them it does seem a waste. However race longer than 2 minute heats and get involved in someone else's wreck and your well set up car could be trashed in a heart beat.

                  The inline is not durable when compared to 1/32 scale inlines and that is how most new racers try to drive them.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    In regard to constant upgrading, this is the first major change in 6 years.

                    With regard to BRM bringing this out to make Racers spend more money, nothing could be further from the truth. As described above in the previous post it was done only due to the struggle with setting up in-line gears.

                    After six years of this discussion it was felt necessary to continue the growth of BRM racing to make the gear set up easier, and more robust.
                    With regard to pricing of the Chassis Kit, it will be as low priced as possible to allow Racers to upgrade this is not done to make people spend more money on their cars.

                    It is great to hear of clubs running BRM and happy with the stock set up we still have a reasonable amount of stock of the first cars at $119.99 so there is no danger of you not being able to get product.

                    I am also glad to hear your group is happy on the Stock Tires and with the Red Motor, this may be why you do not see so many gear or handling issues. We will continue to support the original BRM line, and have stock to do so for many years. We support all racing BRM, but had to listen to those who had struggled with gears.
                    Last edited by Scaleracing; 11-18-2013, 01:53 PM.
                    Alan Smith
                    SCI Owner.
                    www.scaleracing.com
                    www.slotcarillustrated.com
                    www.facebook.com/scaleracingcenter
                    www.132slotcar.us

                    1-253-255-1807

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Scaleracing View Post
                      First the decision to release the Group C angle-winder chassis was taken after a lot of work explaining to Customers how to set up cars.

                      Those who have had success with the In-line cars know it can be done, but after a lot ( 100's of hours ) of explaining about gear mesh, lash and zero axle float both BRM and I realized you can only tell your Customers for so long, and a solution was needed to make the Group C an easier class to set up for those struggling with gear mesh.

                      [snip]

                      So to conclude BRM and Scaleracing felt after 6 years where we are still explaining gear mesh and set up to owners of the BRM Group C Cars it was time to see if a different solution would make a great line of cars even better, I believe it will.
                      As someone who struggled with getting the whole gear set up thing deciphered, I will admit to going through a fair number of gears before becoming reasonably proficient at it. After reading Alan's first paragraph above, all I have left to say is "Thank you, BRM (and Alan)".

                      Chris

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        If I didn't know where and when Paul last raced a BRM I might agree with Chris and Ron. However being out on the West coast and the proximity to 132Slotcar I'll leave the rest up to you guys to figure out.
                        I didn't like 'em in Chicago, either.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          When wil the new chassis be released?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The BRM 962 has deserved a better chassis for some time now ...
                            I "re-entered" 1/24 scale racing, being somewhat "awe struck" as to just how pretty the cars could be made...

                            I returned to the "commercial" tracks, where as a kid, I ran warp speed thingies, that would lay down fast lap times, but looked nothing like a real car ...

                            Alan stuck a needle in my arm, and got me hooked on the new 1/24 scale offerings. First BRM... Then Scaleauto. The "homies" where I race however, are an entirely different ilk ... Having graduated thingies to a high "art form". Stuff with dental drill motors that rev so high, scratch built chassis so fast, they literally are a blur around 150 feet of track ...

                            Not my cup of tea, and to each his/her own. But I say all this to make it clear I expect something more like "scale speeds" (read slower ?) from a scale model . Not trans warp drive, like a wing car.

                            BUT ...Once one has driven a well set up Scaleauto, or H&R chassis ride ...One has to ask... Why is my 997 GT2 car able to wipe the track with my Bootyful, hot lookin 962 all conquering Group C killer ???

                            Well ... the 962 chassis lends itself to serious scrutiny. And it is obvious, that BRM has "learned" more about making a better running slot car, with each release. The 917 chassis, although too "simple" for my tastes (considering the PRICE it sells for ) ... Is a clear improvement ...

                            I have not run a BRM Megane chassis, but I gotta suspect, It may be the best of the bunch . I won't know though, unless they put it under a prototype I'm interested in ...

                            But a car as cool as the 962, as "pretty" as BRM can make them, deserves better running gear, better handling, and a much higher "fun to drive" quotient.

                            Hopefully, the proposed A/W chassis gets us there ...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              But a car as cool as the 962, as "pretty" as BRM can make them, deserves better running gear, better handling, and a much higher "fun to drive" quotient.

                              Hopefully, the proposed A/W chassis gets us there ...
                              Amen, brother.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X