# AutoWorld TJet Chassis



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## JordanZ870

Would changing over to brass gearing significantly change the pricing? Right now, I am guessing that the gears are made in-house. The brass gears would have to be out-sourced. Would different machinery be required for assembly?


----------



## micyou03

I have no problem with the plastic gears, but T-jet gear ratio would be great with these quick and fast mtotors.


----------



## dlw

> I have no problem with the plastic gears, but T-jet gear ratio would be great with these quick and fast mtotors.


That would make the car a tjet :tongue: .....but seriousely, Round2 may have a problem doing that because Model Motoring has the rights to the tjet chassis (I believe). 

Also the plastic gears make for a quieter chassis.....just have to be a little careful about binding and stripping the gears, which is thankfully not easy to do.


----------



## noddaz

*Huh?*



joez870 said:


> The brass gears would have to be out-sourced.


The Chinese out-sourcing something...
Now THAT would be funny...:lol: 

Scott


----------



## ParkRNDL

dlw said:


> .....but seriousely, Round2 may have a problem doing that because Model Motoring has the rights to the tjet chassis (I believe).


I'm not a copyright expert, but I'm pretty sure that since the original patent to the Aurora Tjet design expired, nobody owns it. I think that means it's fair game for anyone who wants to take a shot at producing it...

--rick


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## ParkRNDL

AfxToo said:


> So again I ask, who does the Tuffy based chassis appeal to? The chassis compromises on the appearance of the bodies that fit on it, the gearing makes set controllers virtually useless, and the seemingly "race inspired" wheels are throw aways for anyone who is really racing the thing. I've yet to hear anyone say that they prefer the Tuffy configuration over the TJet configuration. Ponder that question as you gaze at all those rediculously jacked up bodies in the Bowtie Brigade collection.


I agree with you on this. As much as I get a kick out of a few of the Tuffy-stance cars, when I bought my case of Bowties, the first thing I did to all the Impalas was mount them on stock Tjet chassis (or change the wheels to Tjet wheels) and lop off the screwposts. The '59s especially look waaaaaaaay cool at stock height...

Also, I've converted a few JL chassis to Tjet gearing, and I like the way they run. I wonder, though, if for some manufacturing-based reason, they're stuck with the plastic gears. Could they make that eensy weensy little Tjet 9 tooth pinion in plastic? I suppose they could use the same gear as the arm gear--isn't that 9 tooth?

--rick


----------



## Gear Head

i'm with you on that one rick. these cars are so much more drivable with that gear swap. in my book lowering the bodies is right up there on the priority list as well. honestly though anybody that builds anything that even smells like a tjet i would probably buy it. :thumbsup:


----------



## mking

*gearing question*

which gears need to be changed to make a JLTO a tjet? 

just the gear on the axle? or the gear on the axle and the gear under the plate the axle gear meshes with?


----------



## dlw

The gear on the axle and the gear under the gearplate. The TO's use a 14 tooth gear under the gearplate, and notice the axle gear has a little 'bushing' on both sides of the teeth.

Tjets use a 9 tooth gear under the plate, and the axle gear has all of its 'bushing' behind the teeth.


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## T-jetjim

If we are voting, I prefer brass with T-jet gearing. I do not have a 120 ohm controller, so I have to do a combination of de-tuning the JLTO chassis (ala Rick's previous thread) and babying the throttle. 
The plastic allows for no changes. I am not worried about noise. I have yet to wake the neighbors racing my brass geared t-jets around.
Jim


----------



## buzzinhornet

I doubt Tom will make brass gears... but we can hope.  

Maybe R2 could make the chassis with a plastic 12 thooth "hop-up" (down) gear. 

GP


----------



## wnovess99

*Its fine the way it is*

The gear ratio of the JL cars is just fine, a vast improvement over the Aurora T-Jet no matter what the wheel/tire set up is. The only time it hurts is when the stright away is over 12-15 feet long, past that the car isnt gaining any more speed. Some other parts of the JL car do need improvement and should be preformed on what sounds like will be a new generation.


----------



## co_zee

wnovess99 said:


> The gear ratio of the JL cars is just fine, a vast improvement over the Aurora T-Jet no matter what the wheel/tire set up is. The only time it hurts is when the stright away is over 12-15 feet long, past that the car isnt gaining any more speed. Some other parts of the JL car do need improvement and should be preformed on what sounds like will be a new generation.



AMEN!!! I have far more of the original Tuff Ones than I do T-Jets. As a racer, I find them far superior to the T-Jet. And I find the JL Tuffy to hold some serious racing potential. All they take are some dedication to get it out of 'em!



> I've yet to hear anyone say that they prefer the Tuffy configuration over the TJet configuration.


Where you've heard it know!! I prefer the Tuffy configuration over the T-Jet!!! Of course the substandard manufacturing of the JL verversion makes it a little less than desireable for racing but for the collector and "fun runner" they are quite the performance value!!

Race On!


----------



## sethndaddy

I would like to see the original tjet setup only for tire placement only. like Rick said earlier, the 59 Impalas look so cool setting down on the chassis.
as for racing, the Tuffy is by far, the best setup (just my opinion). the tire stance, the magnets, weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## co_zee

From a racers perspective and from reading many posts on this board from collectors, these cars out of the box are more suited for collecting. I don't beleive they are marketed as 1:1 replicas but moreso as replicas or newer versions of the original Tuff Ones hence the tires and stance. Unless I am missing something presented to us in the marketing, this is fairly clear. I took a liking to them because they were presented as regenerated Tuffy's. After a bit of tuning I found their performance to be close to that of the original Tuffys. If I were still collecting, having had over 1500 cars from the 60's and 70's with around 100 Tuffys, I would be very pleased with the JL's as coleectable pieces. Their stance closely replicates that of the original which they are marketed to do.




> Some people buy products and actually expect them to work right out of the package and without having to buy a new controller.


I remember many a brand new T-Jet when it came out of the box needed a fair amount of attention to get it to run well. Oil, pick-up shoe and hanger adjustments. Then came mods for handling. The first thing to go was the rear tires and rims. And even in the 60's and 70's, we knew that either another controller/resisitor was actually needed to drive/race the original Tuffys and T-Jets. Enthusiasts today need to be educated when they buy a car. The JL's are far superior in performance out of the box as compared to a T-Jet. Especially in HO, higher performance requires different resistors cut and dry. Perhaps your friend with the hobby shop should educate the buyers prior to their frustration. Happy customers mean repeat customers!


----------



## dlw

Bingo, Coz_ee. These cars, like their Aurora counterparts needs to be tuned to get peak performance out of them. Even the Afx cars needed a little tweaking to get them running smotth. This adds a little to the hobby of running/racing these.

I think JL (then) pretty much hit the nail on the head with these. And since Model Motoring was cranking out the much-maligned, yet smooth-running T+ chassis (after you replaced those horrible 50 ohm arms), JL may have felt it would be better to use the TO chassis instead of entering an extra level of competition with MM. Both brands sell quite well. 

And on top of that, the JL cars/parts are finding their way into the various racing groups across the country. Fray rules allow the magnets, and VHORS now allow the TO gear setup in the superstock tjet class. Other groups have races allowing JL/RC cars to race alongside Aurora TO's. Now I need to build a VHORS superstock race chassis for when I go to a race.


----------



## LDThomas

*T-Jet gearing...*

I know that Round 2/Auto World is looking into putting standard T-Jet gearing into some of their cars, or at least making the gearing kits available for them. The reason I know this is because, at their request, I sent samples of the 9 tooth/15 tooth gears for their evaluation. Their email response was that the gears were then sent to the manufacturer for further consideration.

Now, does that mean that standard T-Jet gearing will definitely be available? No, it does not. But Round 2/Auto World has at least heard us and is considering the possibility.


----------



## mking

AfxToo said:


> numerous performance inhibiting manufacturing defects like bent axles, warped chassis, distorted chassis electricals, off center mounted wheels and arms, and sloppy bearing surfaces just to point out a few. ?


I have tuned several cases of JLTOs over the last month. I have yet to find a bent axle. I actually like the JLTO axles, I have used them with great success in stock Tjets. The biggest problem I have found is the rear axles holes are almost always too large for the axles. 1/16 drill rod (much cheaper than a drill blank, $1.20 for 36 inches, although drill blanks are only about $5 for 36 inches) works great as a replacement, and i can cut it easily with a cut off wheel on a dremel. 

Once the rear axle is replaced and the pickup shoes are restricted, the next weak link is the driven gear and cluster gear.


----------



## ParkRNDL

hey, thanks for that drill rod/drill blank tip... do you find that the wheels stay on okay without the knurled "teeth" that the standard axles have?

--rick


----------



## mking

I have actually had a bit of trouble with the wheels. The fact that the axles are smooth instead of knurled is not the problem. I have split a few hubs pressing the hubs on the new axles. In fact, I found a number of the hubs already split on the stock axle. What I finally decided on doing was chucking the new 1/16 axle into a dremel, and enlarging the hole in the stock axle (essentially reaming the stock hole in the stock hub). Then I just super glue (black is Max's best) the hubs onto the axle. No more split hubs. I usually run each car I've set up this way several hundred laps, and so far haven't had a hub or crown gear come off the smooth axle. 

In fact, almost all fray cars use smooth axles. 

Here is where I get my drill rod. No minimum order, and shipping is usually about eight dollars. 

http://www.wthutch.com/hssblanks/


----------



## micyou03

I prefer JL Tuffones to both Aurora T-jet and Aurora Tuffones, and I grew up with the Auroras. I've raced JLTOs against Aurora Tuffones and T-jets in the same class and the Auroras were no match for the JLs.


----------



## ParkRNDL

LDThomas said:


> I know that Round 2/Auto World is looking into putting standard T-Jet gearing into some of their cars, or at least making the gearing kits available for them. The reason I know this is because, at their request, I sent samples of the 9 tooth/15 tooth gears for their evaluation. Their email response was that the gears were then sent to the manufacturer for further consideration.
> 
> Now, does that mean that standard T-Jet gearing will definitely be available? No, it does not. But Round 2/Auto World has at least heard us and is considering the possibility.


hey, I missed this post first time around... that is some GOOD NEWS, as far as I'm concerned... :thumbsup:

--rick


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## Pomfish

AfxToo said:


> Try to place yourself in the shoes of a hobby shop owner who is recommending a product purchase to a mom or dad who walks into a hobby shop. When the customer points to a pretty looking JL car you have to launch into a spiel about the "tuning" that's required just to make the thing run on sonny boys little track, oh and only after they also buy a new 90 ohm controller. That's the right thing to do and you have to sit back and endure the puzzled looks from the customer about why in the heck a customer should be expected to jump through those hoops in the first place with a brand new product. Even after reputable hobby shop owners do this they still get hit with returns that they end up eating. What does the hobby shop owner get out of this besides a reputation for selling junk? Is the manufacturer compensating the reseller for the extra expense of educating the customers?
> 
> Just to be clear, the person I'm referring to is a victim of the latter scenario. He goes out of his way to promote sales of the JL/RC2 products to collectors only. Despite this he gets plenty of returns. In case you don't remember, the "customer is always right" so if you find any solace in telling your customers "I told you so" then I hope you embrace that feeling as you're standing in the unemployment line after your shop goes bust.


All good points.
Here are some solutions;

Well, for starters your Friend the Hobby Store Owner could/should take those Returned cars and perform the necessary Tweaks on them, then set them in the Display case as "Race Tuned and Broke In" Slot Cars and Make some more Profit ($) for His time.
Customer wants a different body style? Switch the body.

He could also Make Up some Parma 90-125 ohm Controllers wired with Longer cords and put the Proper Connector on the end for the most Popular sets He sells.
I.E. Mattel/Tyco, Tomy, LL. 
Some of the 1/32 companies have begun doing this and they can't make enough of them to satisfy demand.

Most customers Want Upgrades, if they are informed of them and the Advantages to having them.

About now is when you will say "He doesn't have enough time to do it" 
There is always down time in retail stores other than Christmas season. He or one of the employees can find time.

It's all about turning Lemons into Lemonade. 
More work than selling a LL Magnet car? Yes. More profit potential with better Tires,Arms, Pickups? 
You bet, the Performance difference on a Tjet or Xtraction car after modifications is substantially more Evident than that of Most Magnet cars.

This kind of Service and Education is what seperates the True Hobby Shop from the Mass Merchandizers.

Thanks,
Keith


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## Pomfish

Afx,

Now you are comparing a $25,000 purchase to a $15 Toy car purchase. 
That doesn't seem fair does it?

I am Sure for $25,000 Tome Lowe will Gladly build you a Tjet with Gold Gears and No Slop anywear to be found 

Anyway, he could just Slap Magnets in the chassis and Pin it to the track and then we would never notice the oversize holes, etc. All those imperfections come to the surface when dealing with a Non-Magnet slot car.

Bottom line, I do hope the Quality improves, but I am not holding my breath.
At the end of the day, they are Toys made in China very cheaply. As the old saying goes "You can have Quality or Cheap Price, but only Chose One"

Thanks,
Keith


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## hefer

The fact is, these are still a 1960 design. And a hobby & a toy are different. If all the cars in NASCAR were identical, it would be...ZZZZZ! That's why they work on em the whole race. To make them better. That why I love the T-jet. You have work to make em better, like real racecars. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## co_zee

> That's why I'd like to start with a stock configuration with skinny tires and standard gearing.


I could possibly see your point if these cars were billed as T-Jet replicas but they are nor never were.They were billed as Tuff One replicas and are built in a stock configuration following their predecessors. Moreso than low slung bodies and DBL flanged wheels being a part of a stock T-Jet configuration.



> If you want to go racing, break out the Dremel.


Exactly, and that is how one gets a lighter, lower mounted body! And silver/nickle conducts better than copper. And brass gears rev slower and not nearly as high as plastic. I didn't hear anyone complain when Aurora changed gears to plastic. In fact, it quickly became a popular hipo mod on T-Jets to swap out the brass idler for a plastic one. 

From a former collectors view point, I think the JL's are more desireable as they are. As a racer, I find the JL's to be a great starting platform for various classes. I say leave them in the configuration in which they are and concentrate quality. It doesn't matter what they look like when we get them, if they run like junk, they're junk.

Sure sounds more like you are wanting more T-Jets. There are still plenty of NOS chassis to be had.


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## ParkRNDL

I'll probably buy more of these even if they stay exactly as is, but I'm pretty much in agreement with what AfxToo says. I'd prefer to buy them exactly the way Aurora did the original Tjets as regards the skinny tires and the gearing. I think the bodies should sit lower too... but I'm not so sure even Aurora's originals were low enough in some cases. Fir example, both of Aurora's Tbirds (the '62 and the '67) had issues with the STOCK NARROW tires hitting the body unless they sat high. Another example is Aurora's '67 Galaxie 500 XL, which had incorrect rounded wheelwells from the factory to clear the stock skinny wheels. I think the little bit of diddling with scale has been a good thing for JL's Impalas... they're wide enough to sit way down low over skinny Aurora wheels...

--rick


----------



## co_zee

My bad about the nickel. I knew that.

Personally, I feel with the success of the TO and The X-Tractions, the next sensible thing to do is to move on up the progressive line and do a G-Plus remake. This would probably do more to add depth to the collectable and racing markets than anything else. Body styles are really a weak point when it comes to racing. They are a vast amount of quality resins availible that fit the racing order quite well. Admittingly, there are subgrade resins out there that do leave a lot to be desired but in no way should reflect the quality of all resins. 

Also, with an already impressive line of "aftermarket" rims today, the collector/modleler has far more options than those pos T-Jet rims. Double flange rims do not appear as something realistic so would be a detraction from realism in the collectors box.

As for bodies themselves, I do believe this part of the major market is virtually in it's infantcy. There is still a very long list of bodystyles that can be produced that again, would be a major boost for the hobby. This is the reason that home casters are beginning to flourish, fulfilling a demand by collectors and racers alike. 

I think perhaps Mr. Lowe would best serve the hobby as a whole by looking beyond this board to the long list of others which are filled with not only with collectors but racers, and those who go well beyond a home 2 lane, and see what the demands on a larger scale are.

My opinions! :thumbsup:


----------



## Mike(^RacerX^)

co_zee said:


> Personally, I feel with the success of the TO and The X-Tractions, the next sensible thing to do is to move on up the progressive line and do a G-Plus remake. This would probably do more to add depth to the collectable and racing markets than anything else.


I hear you on that.Bring back the G Plus!!!!!!!!!

[/QUOTE]I think perhaps Mr. Lowe would best serve the hobby as a whole by looking beyond this board to the long list of others which are filled with not only with collectors but racers, and those who go well beyond a home 2 lane, and see what the demands on a larger scale are.

My opinions! :thumbsup:[/QUOTE]

A)He knows better then to bother

B)A lot of guys here on Hobby Talk,including myself,"go well beyond a home 2 lane" setup.  


Mike(ice9)


----------



## co_zee

> A)He knows better then to bother


 I spend the bulk of my time on boards more dedicated to HO racing so I do not see why it would be a bother. There are getting to be more and more groups and clubs which already have classes devoted to both types of JL cars. And usually classes which go beyond a simple box stock class which only allows the changing of the tires. Granted, many of the other boards center around inline magnet cars but when this is all the current manufacturers offer, well, 2+2=4. And many groups and clubs are beginning to look to alternative classeswhich are centered are rules and classes which are not part of the norm today. The lack of alternatives is a good part of the reason many are changing scales.


----------



## hefer

Make em sit like the stock car. If I want to jack it up for big rubber, I will. Some cars just look plain stupid like that...(see Bowties). Then you can market a kit to raise em up. Wide tires & wheels, different size spacers & screws that fit the posts, fake traction bars...I'd buy em. Also, WHEEL OPTIONS...the right wheels can make a car!


----------



## Mike(^RacerX^)

co_zee said:


> I spend the bulk of my time on boards more dedicated to HO racing so I do not see why it would be a bother. There are getting to be more and more groups and clubs which already have classes devoted to both types of JL cars. And usually classes which go beyond a simple box stock class which only allows the changing of the tires. Granted, many of the other boards center around inline magnet cars but when this is all the current manufacturers offer, well, 2+2=4. And many groups and clubs are beginning to look to alternative classeswhich are centered are rules and classes which are not part of the norm today. The lack of alternatives is a good part of the reason many are changing scales.


I spend a good part of my onlne time reading quite a few boards as well.Probably all of the same ones as you do.But after awhile,you get tired of sifting through all of the bashing and politics and all of that other nonsense.It gets tiresome after awhile.It's a turnoff.You have to check the other boards an awful lot of times to actually get anything useful it seems.

Pretty much here on HT,for as long as I've been here,it's strictly slot cars.I think Mr Lowe is well aware of that.

IMHO opinion,the politics and bashing is the reason why many are switching to other scales,or,doing as I do and just getting together with a bunch of local guys and having a blast.

Mike(ice9)


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## T-jetjim

I just hope that the cars come out with interchangeable parts, so I can use parts I already have. Thiks means it has to fall somewhat into line with the T-jet chaissis. Tuning and upgrading is fun and certainly a must for me, but shouldn't be required to race the cars. New body styles would certainly be appreciated. I didn't really care for remakes of Aurora cars. Sure they may be a little different, but there are so many car types, why repeat?
Since Tom is already producing cars in a kit form, he can bring back the hop - up kit and include the types of things that have been mentioned above.
Jim


----------



## Jimmy49098

*anybody seen this...lowrider?*

this is on kens classis slots page, they call it a low rider with chrome racing rims http://www.kensclassicslots.com/shop/showProd.asp?prod=24551 I dont know if the link will work, you may have to cut and paste, in description it says...Mint Auto World Thunderjet 500 HO scale slot car. This is the 1962 Low Rider Ford Thunderbird in silver. Car comes with chrome racing rims. Car is powered by a Auto World Thunderjet 500 Chassis. Car handles like a real race car, sliding in the turns. Car ships April 2006. Accepting pre-orders at this time......looks like skinny tires???? maybe, hopefully


----------



## ParkRNDL

Jimmy49098 said:


> this is on kens classis slots page, they call it a low rider with chrome racing rims http://www.kensclassicslots.com/shop/showProd.asp?prod=24551 I dont know if the link will work, you may have to cut and paste, in description it says...Mint Auto World Thunderjet 500 HO scale slot car. This is the 1962 Low Rider Ford Thunderbird in silver. Car comes with chrome racing rims. Car is powered by a Auto World Thunderjet 500 Chassis. Car handles like a real race car, sliding in the turns. Car ships April 2006. Accepting pre-orders at this time......looks like skinny tires???? maybe, hopefully


 WHAT the HECK is THAT?!? i LIKE it!!!

It's like Aurora's old T-bird, but the hardtop version! And that packaging is COOOOOOOOOL.... 

That's not on Round 2's future release lists or anything... Does TL have some stuff up his sleeve that he's not sharing right away?

I hope so... I like surprises... :hat:

--rick

edit: Check THIS out from the same site:

http://www.kensclassicslots.com/shop/showProd.asp?prod=24550

I think we knew that one was planned as an XT, but again, check out the packaging. Kinda looks like R2 packaging bears a similarity to JL diecast... not a bad thing at all...

Hey, does this warrant its own thread?


----------



## dlw

And did you see the tires on the T-Bird? Looks a lot like the old Speedline tires. And that '55 Chevy looks nice, too. Can't wait to run those around. If you do a little poking around on that site, you can see the pitkits, but the deluxe 'kits don't have the bodies or the parts on them.........just a pic of the cards. I hope the cars on the cards are going to be made....at least those color schemes.


----------



## okracer

man id like to see a superII chassis i have never owned one and would love to see how good it is


----------



## JordanZ870

I wonder why the owner of that store has identifies the 55 chev as a nomad?


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## buzzinhornet

Interesting. Thanks for the info AFXtoo as I haven't played with new chassis yet... 

GP


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## noddaz

Funny...
The two links that Jimmy & Rick posted now lead to blank pages...


----------



## AfxToo

-----


----------



## micyou03

------


----------



## Montoya1

Whats with all the dashes guys? Its like having Lenny posting in the thread!


----------



## noddaz

------


----------



## WesJY

Montoya1 said:


> Whats with all the dashes guys? Its like having Lenny posting in the thread!


I think we have a Slot Car Mafia here in Hobbytalk. You get the idea why there are dashes. They must have threatened them if they dont wise up or they lose their slot cars.   Jeez..

Wes


----------



## Manning

Hmmmmmmmm........

Well, to get this somewhat back on track..... I bought a AW '67 Vette over the weekend. Pretty happy with it. It runs better than the average JL car. The chassis isn't warped, the comm plate is flat, and the crown gear/drive pinion mesh isn't wobbly. It isn't as fast as my "sorted" JL cars, but its way faster than some. I think the wide fronts may make the car smoother somehow...... So, overall my vote is a big :thumbsup: 

And to mimic the other posts....

---------------------------- :wave:


----------



## 1976Cordoba

I bought the yellow Auto World vette and it is a good runner. They must have built the vettes on a Wednesday. 

------

'doba


----------



## micyou03

*Slightlt O/T*

I just got the black Daytona and the Red Daytona X-Tractions. I clearly like the RC2 version with the skinny independant front end. The AW version is faster, but it will jump off the trac going into the turns very easily. I would definately buy the skinny independent front ends for my AW cars if they sold them as replacements.


----------



## dlw

*AW Indie Fix For XT's*

Micyou, the front axles holes on the AW cars are bigger than the JL/RC's. But thanks to a little tip from SwamperGene, you can use those larger rims and a JLTO front axle and make an indie front. Just use a rear axle and ream one of the rims for the pinhead side of the axle (you can ream them by hand). The other rim will fit tight on the other end.


----------



## micyou03

Thanks. I remember reading that a while back.


----------

