# AW Camaro and LL Camaro



## Jim Norton (Jun 29, 2007)

I was at Hobby Lobby today when I had my first impressions of the new Camaro in HO scale. I first happened upon the Life Like Camaro and thought that was something I should have! But I was very disappointed when I took it off the rack to look at it. Very ill proportioned body to say the least! My enthusiasm was quickly gone.

Then, out of the corner of my eye I spied an Auto World Camaro. I reached for it and was very pleased with how the new Camaro was captured in HO. I then compared the two Camaro side by side (as best as I could w/ packaging afixed) and the Life Like one looked comical. Needless to say, I bought the Auto World version.

I don't understand why manufacturers still make these "morphed" bodies? Aurora had it figured out in the early 1970s with AFX as these cars looked very much like the real thing.

Walthers/Life Like has the resources to really make a big splash in the HO world. I can't figure what they are thinking with the Camaro. If they applied this method with their railroad models (i.e. does not look real) customers would leave in droves!

Jim Norton
Huntsville, AL


----------



## hartracerman (Jan 9, 2005)

I agree


----------



## kiwidave (Jul 20, 2009)

I agree also! Did this to my one. In Lifelikes defense to do like their new Mustang body!


----------



## tjd241 (Jan 25, 2004)

Jim Norton said:


> Walthers/Life Like has the resources to really make a big splash in the HO world. I can't figure what they are thinking


Jim... I think it's a case of one of two possible situations. Either they really don't have the resources and can't grow this part of their business... or perhaps they do have the resources, but simply don't see the point of trying to grow what is likely a pretty small part of their business just to experience a small amount of growth with their bottom line profit that might go along with it. I don't think it can be anything else besides these 2 factors. You can apply the same line of thought to Tyco/Mattel. 

There have been so many threads and posts (here and elsewhere) about what people would really like to see, so it's not for lack of suggestions or talking out loud by the guys who really want to consume their stuff. Year after year its a yawner. *A* new body or two ... Repaints... Maybe a couple altered track configs get trotted out... Never anything that really hits it outta the park. ( IMHO )

Some will say we are lucky to still have them dipping a toe into the market... I'm not among those folks. I've been leaving them on the pegs for years like you did the other day. There are some guys who love the collecting aspect and that's where they do have a following... I'd say they are lucky to have those guys' attention still, but that alone doesn't keep the lights on for very long. Autoworld and/or Racemasters they are not. In the simplest of terms... I just think *if* there was a desire to do anything... they would do it.


----------



## ParkRNDL (Mar 20, 2002)

Guess I'm in the minority when I say I kinda like Lifelike's new Camaro. Yeah the proportions are weird, but no weirder than lots of tjets. I think it looks good in profile, even if it's stretched too wide. And it kinda matches their new Mustang that way. I agree that a lot of their NASCAR stuff is blobby and misshapen, but I liked the mustang and camaro enough to pick them up for myself even though I favor mostly pancake motor cars. And I do agree that if they want to stay in the market, they need to do a lot more than two new cars every now and then. 

Obviously my opinion only, just thrown out there as a different viewpoint...

--rick


----------



## fastlap (Nov 11, 2007)

I personally keep this very important thought in mind about how I perceive the manufacturers inability to produce realistic bodies. It all comes down to one simple answer. If the body looks like a knucklehead designed it, then it's a good bet the guy in charge of what hits the market is a knucklehead.:freak:

*"It takes the same effort, materials, and time to make a body right, as it does to make it wrong." * 

.


----------



## 1976Cordoba (Sep 20, 2000)

Camaro = 112" wheelbase
Mustang = 107" wheelbase
. . . both LL cars using the same chassis . . .

Someone was gonna end up a little wonky-looking.


----------



## LeeRoy98 (Jul 8, 2005)

ParkRNDL said:


> Guess I'm in the minority when I say I kinda like Lifelike's new Camaro. Yeah the proportions are weird, but no weirder than lots of tjets. I think it looks good in profile, even if it's stretched too wide. And it kinda matches their new Mustang that way. I agree that a lot of their NASCAR stuff is blobby and misshapen, but I liked the mustang and camaro enough to pick them up for myself even though I favor mostly pancake motor cars. And I do agree that if they want to stay in the market, they need to do a lot more than two new cars every now and then.
> 
> Obviously my opinion only, just thrown out there as a different viewpoint...
> 
> --rick


I like the LifeLike Camaro also. Ultimately as 'doba mentioned, there are some variances that are required due to the differences in cars and the limitations of the chassis.

Gary
AKA LeeRoy98
www.marioncountyraceway.com


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

I like the new Life-Like Camaro a lot. Yeah, it's a bit too short and a bit too wide, but it sits nice and low and is an excellent racing body. It's light years ahead of LL's last attempt at a Camaro. The AW version is also very well done, but taller and much less race ready out of the box. All HO slot cars have some proportion issues, even vintage TJets and A/FX bodies and the latest RaceMasters masterpieces. Some vintage bodies are not even models of a specific vehicle, but aggregations of more than one model or model year. 

The scale modeler has to fit the body around a working chassis geometry with a fixed wheelbase. The bulkier the chassis (TJets chassis are horribly large for modeling anything smaller than 1:64) or the more limiting the wheelbase options (LL has only one wheelbase option) the greater the opportunity for wonkiness. 

Here's some various Camaro renditions done in 1:64 scale over the years.

http://min.us/mvjphUY

The fact that it's a struggle to find any two HO cars that are modeled at the same scale is indicative of a major departure in modeling focus from model railroading. Comparing slot cars to model railroading is like comparing apples to avocados. Slot cars were designed with a major emphasis on the broader range of operational and functional characteristics. Some of these functional necessities have widened the range of acceptable aesthetics, especially in the HO scale. If you want more emphasis on aesthetics, modeling accuracy, and presentation appeal you have to go upscale or further skew what's considered HO scale.

There is no crying in baseball - and there is no perfection in HO slot cars.

Here's the lineup, first 3 are AW and second 3 are LL.

http://min.us/mvjtPUI


----------



## wheelszk (Jul 8, 2006)

I bought both the Camaro and the way hot looking Mustang, The Camaro is still in the wrapper. But that Mustang/////////////


----------



## NTxSlotCars (May 27, 2008)

I think the new LL Camaro is a vast improvement over the 90s LL Camaro.

New










90s :freak:










These pics are very flattering of the 90s car. You just cant get an idea of how high the roof is off the wheel base from this angle.


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

Now that HO scale trains have been mentioned, I thought this would be a good time to give you guys who have never compared an HO scale slot car to a true HO scale car a chance to see the difference. A couple guys in chat couldn't understand why I try to limit myself to T jets size wise. This picture should sum it up rather well. I've always bent the rules from way back in the day using matchboxes and hot wheels for my trains for scenery. True HO scale cars back in the 60's and 70's lacked any detail, and the die cast was cheap and plentiful. I used them for so long, I got used to the scale imbalance and the larger die cast became the norm for me. I stick to JL die cast now, since they run a little smaller than the HW/ MB cars, and they fit the era I'm modeling better. 

Tjets are the closest I can get without going with out slots. Faller has true HO vehicles that run off a battery and are steered by a wire embedded in the scenery (see wunderland videos to see them in action) but the cost is prohibitive. I try to steer clear of AFX type cars and larger, as they just look too big. Yes I am the odd ball here... :freak:


----------



## tjd241 (Jan 25, 2004)

*Thinking positive thoughts on day 1 of 2011...*

Well?... At least it seems they've turned a page since this story  ...










_AND_.... Despite the fact that they're not my cup'o tea, I don't in any way find fault with anyone who wants them (hey you like what you like, it's yer dough).... I think my general feeling is I don't think the new Camaro or Mustang are terrible... They're just so terribly ALONE. It's pretty clear that slot cars are so very much *not* Walther's emphasis. It's not very hard to look past them and discount the meager releases each year.


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

I agree Dave!! I'm not bashing other brands by any means!! Guys, please don't take what I said above as anything negative. My personal preference is purely due to my usage. I'm old skool, using slots as train scenery. I am not the racing type, and never have been. What you guys do with your slots is cool, but not something I can handle. I'm lucky to just keep the cars running, and making them go fast is beyond my capabilities! :lol:


----------



## WesJY (Mar 4, 2004)

NTxSlotCars said:


> I think the new LL Camaro is a vast improvement over the 90s LL Camaro.
> 
> New
> 
> ...


yeah but dont understand why LL didnt make challenger and charger???? 

Wes


----------



## Jim Norton (Jun 29, 2007)

That blue LL Camaro is a monster. Its like you are looking at early slot car attempts from the 1950s rather than the 1990s! Just can't imagine they thought this would sell!

Jim Norton
Huntsville, AL


----------

