# Lowered Dino Tjet



## mowyang (Mar 24, 2008)

Not sure that this car really belongs in this forum, but hope you guys will like it anyway. The body is a stock Aurora Dino Ferrari, but the chassis has been modified to let it sit lower. 
































The chassis mod was initially done to make a car that would look better, but I decided to make it run better too. For a car with such a narrow width, it runs great. Enjoy! 

Mark Owyang


----------



## 1scalevolvo (Feb 5, 2004)

:thumbsup::thumbsup:



:dude:


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

Mark! Caught this nifty piece of craftsmanship on HOW many moons ago. Although I went a different route, the rear drop axle chassis; your slammo Dino inspired me long ago to build "cricket scrapers"...lots of them. 

Welcome aboard! HT is a great place with something for everybody. BYW, your forum choice was correct.

All the guys are gonna go "Arrrrgh!" but here's a couple of my early dumps inspired by your Dino.


----------



## Dragula (Jun 27, 2003)

I really enjoy peoples work and appreciate the effort put into it,kinda a blast from the past like a modified old pan car!
DRAGjet


----------



## Hilltop Raceway (Feb 12, 2006)

"Never met a slotcar I didn't like", nice lowdown Mow!!! ...RM


----------



## ScottD961 (Jan 31, 2008)

Mow and Bill your cars are really nice great job to both of you


----------



## tjd241 (Jan 25, 2004)

*Great car !!!*

Nice Mark... Looks much better than stock. Got anymore low-down stuff? Its always great to see originals tweaked for better looks and at the same time benefit performance-wise from lowering. Purists and hard core collectors may growl when they see stuff like this, but how could ya not love a "face" like yer little Dino?... I know I do. nd


----------



## Hilltop Raceway (Feb 12, 2006)

*Ground Huggers!!!*

Bill, I guess those were before my time, I missed em. Lookin much better lowered, hugging the ground. I'd like to test drive that red Ford GT!!! Thanks for re-posting...RM


----------



## mowyang (Mar 24, 2008)

*Another low one*

Thanks for the nice welcome! 
Here's another car that I'm fond of, a lowered MEV Jaguar D-Type. The chassis is similar to the one on the Dino. I don't have a good picture of the body on an unmodified chassis, but it looks as high as a Chevy Suburban! Lower is better.


----------



## ScottD961 (Jan 31, 2008)

good job looks nice


----------



## vaBcHRog (Feb 19, 2003)

Mark how bout a picture of your modified chassis next to and unmodified chassis and a short description of what you did to it.

I really like how the MEV JAG looks and want to see If I can duplicate what you did.

Thanks

Roger Corrie

Roger Corrie


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

Hey Roger!

The detailed play by play should still be in the HOWL archive. It's a great tute and a good read. Mark's technique is really sumpthin' 

"Slammed Dino" in the far left column if I 'member correctly.

Nice Jag Mark. I always believed that if the chassis skirt is plain as day and any portion of the hong kong sticker is visable...then it aint low enough!


----------



## ebi (Jan 24, 2007)

Hello Mark,


thanks for sharing again!
Maybe you can explain it a bit more detailled here
how to modify the chassis...
Like you've done in H0-USA nearly 10 years ago!!! 


Kind regards, Ebi


----------



## mowyang (Mar 24, 2008)

Ebi and Bill are right, this mod has been around awhile, but I have yet to hear from anyone else who has actually built one. I'll keep on mentioning it every 10 years or so until I can find someone to race against! Roger, you're my next best hope. :thumbsup: Your vintage nascar bodies would look great on this chassis.

The concept behind my mod is simple, but it does take a good amount of work to build one. You need to grind out the chassis cavity so the magnets and the arm can sit lower. Then you grind and sand the bottom of the gearplate so it is about half its normal thickness. Trimming the gearplate and chassis in a number of spots allow the gearplate to snuggle down so the top of the gearplate is nearly flush with the top of the chassis. 

On the D-jag chassis, I also modified the gearplate clamp and used a screw to secure the idler gear, an idea that didn't really allow the body to be mounted any lower. However, sanding the gears to nearly half their normal height did help make the jag's driver smile. 

- Mark


----------



## bobhch (Apr 22, 2007)

*thanks for the pics....*

Mark,

Kool beans man...I love the chassis comparison pics you just posted up...shows all your hard work to let that body work right on the chassis. 

Not a 4 X 4 anymore...Sweet! 

Bob...zilla


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

*Skinning the cat*

So Mark, did ya find a better way to do the motor pit area? I noted that the chassis side cut outs are absent... where ya used cut access holes at magnet pockets for file access.

I go another route as shown below. I move the axles up and shorten the cluster set making it a floater. This drops the entire mass of the chassis.

Of course this drops the visible portion of the chassis skirt well below the body/rocker line. I pick up the slack with post shaving, internal body scooping, and beveling the driven gear teeth.

Obviously using the drop axle requires taller wheels and tires. To adjust the front I either use the truck hole, relocate the front axle location, or fudge the front tire profiles. Really not practical for lowering a stock setup, but I dont do many of those.

All good fun!


----------



## mowyang (Mar 24, 2008)

I see you were paying attention, Bill!  On the jag, I knew part of the chassis would still be visible below the body and I didn't want any holes to show. I found some tiny burrs for the dremel that allowed me to grind in the the magnet pockets without the need for the file access holes.

I chose not to use the AFX approach of raising the axle holes on my cars because I wanted to be able to use tjet-sized small wheels and tires. I can see it works great, though. And it's gotta be a more efficient use of time than the hours I spent on my chassis!

Yes, it's all good!


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

You bet Mark! I usually follow any chassis perversions very closely.

I've got the drop mod down to 1-2 hrs depending on what the front set up requires. At one point I had considered a combination of the two methods but quickly realized that raising the axle centers and dropping the gear plate would set the crown mesh above the driven gear...duh...LMAO! Still, it would not preclude using your plate and gear thinning trick in combination with the drop chassis.

I'm more of a slicer-slasher kind of guy than a patient, meticulous grinder sort... like you. One look at your design told me I'd be "eatin' ice cream with a tooth pick" and would surely lose my mind! I generally adhere to the "Dirty Harry" rule: "A man's got to know his limitations!"

That said, it doesnt stop me from taking a calculated slice or splice along the way. Here's a few shots of more "chassis madness"...as the membership groans, "Oh not again!" Sorry guys. 

I was on a "live dually" trip for a while.


----------



## vaBcHRog (Feb 19, 2003)

mowyang said:


> I'll keep on mentioning it every 10 years or so until I can find someone to race against! Roger, you're my next best hope. :thumbsup: Your vintage nascar bodies would look great on this chassis.
> 
> - Mark


Mark how much did the chassis drop when yo dropped the magnets and motor? It looks like you can grind about .025 out of the chassis. I'm going to buid one myself for the fun of it. You should have sent the Dino in the race in the 12 Hours of GreenRun 


Roger Corrie


----------



## afxgns (Jul 6, 2006)

Welcome Mark,
Keep posting this stuff, and we'll keep reading it.
I have been wanting to do the upside-down chassis bit for a while now, I may need to get to that.

Tim Leppert


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

Somebody send this thread to Auto World and Tomy.


----------



## 41-willys (Jan 7, 2000)

Bill, I really like the dually Woody!!!!


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

I'd love to see a major (or even a minor) manufacturer put out a Low-Profile T-jet chassis based on Mark's design, keeping much the same ground-clearance and tire size as the original, and allowing the use of standard Aurora & AW bodies (maybe with just shortening the posts).

Auto World would be the logical maker for the T-Jet LoPro, since they already have the chassis tooling which could be easily modified to produce the new design. A line of new bodies for cars like the D-Jag, which look hopelessly high on the standard chassis, could breathe new life into the pancake slot market.

Failing that, if a smaller manufacturer would just bring out the pre-modified chassis block and gearplate, we could probably scrounge the armatures and thin the gears and brushes ourselves.

If anybody has an "in" with the industry folks, send them a suggestion.
-- D


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

It might be possible to _combine_ Mark's and Bill's concepts in a commercial-production Low Profile chassis-block by providing the thinned chassis with an extra set of axle-holes and some sort of adapter to adjust the pinion height.

So you could set it up for the Lo-Pro Mark version with the full ground-clearance for tracks with the Aurora-style bumps and bridges, or for an even lower version that improves handling on flatter tracks at the expense of clearance.

Doesn't sound too hard (but I know that's not always an accurate predictor in engineering).
-- D


----------



## roadrner (Jul 21, 1999)

Bodies were great and then you drop the shot of the chassis. 

Lots of time spent there. Thanks and welcome! :thumbsup::thumbsup: rr


----------



## mowyang (Mar 24, 2008)

Thanks guys! 

Roger, I've not measured the amount I take out of the chassis, but .025 looks about right. I take it down to where the armature and magnet cavity is flush with where the rivets come through the chassis. The limiting factor is the circular pocket/nub where the pickup springs rest (on the opposite side of where you're doing your grinding). As you grind on the inside of the chassis, when you start to see the shadow of that pickup spring pocket appear, you've gone about as far as you dare go.

Tim - Build one, and we'll do some laps together in Ferndale next year. I turned some fun laps with the Dino on the Red table!

Bill, one thing I love about the tjet is that it's so darned mechanical. All them brass gears turning -- very retro cool. And your duallies take it to the next level!

Cheers,
Mark

PS: Roger, you mean my Dino would have been legal? I'll have to pay more attention!


----------



## bobhch (Apr 22, 2007)

*Las...Zillas...Speedway tour bus!!!!!!*



41-willys said:


> Bill, I really like the dually Woody!!!!


Me too...  It runs as smooth as a babys butt! Testimonial here that not only do Bills builds look good but, they are a dream to drive also. 

When life seems to suck...You just gotta forget about it all, zip around some laps on the track and then go eat some Pizza and Ice Cream. It works for me and any car works but, sometimes you gotta pull out something that just realy makes you smile now -n- then.  Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah so relaxing!! Thanks Mr. Bill

Bob...zilla


----------



## vaBcHRog (Feb 19, 2003)

mowyang said:


> Thanks guys!
> 
> PS: Roger, you mean my Dino would have been legal? I'll have to pay more attention!


Yep whenever I run the Daytona Class and Now the Sebring Class anything goes except no traction magnets and turning the TJET into a MT/XT motor magnets have to be ceramic and no rear guide pin. Its open tp can motors too as long as you can turn the car upside down and it falls off the track 

Roger Corrie


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

You know, with the advent of 3-D Printing, somebody could create a duplicate of the T-jet chassis and top-plate molding that already incorporate Mark's changes. 

The buyer would still have to pull the electrics off the bottom of an existing chassis and rivet them into the printed chassis, but all the finicky machining would be already done.

Anybody out there really good with 3-D CAD? 

-- D


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

That would solve the chassis mods, but the arm would still have to be addressed. Mark did some serious voodoo on it, along with sanding the magnets.


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

slotcarman12078 said:


> That would solve the chassis mods, but the arm would still have to be addressed. Mark did some serious voodoo on it, along with sanding the magnets.


He modded the armature only on his final Hobbytalk build, the Lotus 11. His Dino, described in this thread, and his Batmobile chassis didn't require armature or magnet mods. The Batmobile did need some serious chassis surgery, but Bill Hall's method of simply drilling the axle holes higher and grinding out a relief for the crown might have accomplished nearly the same thing. They weren't _quite_ as flat as the Lotus chassis, but were significantly flatter than a stock T-jet. Personally, I'd be happy with just the relatively simple Dino build which keeps the original ground clearance.

-- D


----------



## mowyang (Mar 24, 2008)

I was just about to make the same comments, D. Only the Lotus required modifying the armature.

The Dino can be thought of as Version 1. The gearplate was thinned and the bottom of the motor box was thinned. It's actually possible to build a Verison .5 by just thinning the gearplate and reinstalling it on a stock chassis.

The Batmobile was Verison 2. The bottom of the motor box was removed entirely, and replaced by a thinned one from a donor chassis. The gearplate was then lowered even further.

The Lotus was Verison 3. Take the Batmobile chassis, modify the arm, then lower the gearplate even further by sanding the magnets to match the height of the lower profile arm.

D is also correct that raising the axle holes as Bill has done would have a similar effect on the overall chassis height on the Batmobile. But when drilling new axle holes above the existing axle holes, the new hole center needs to be about 3/32" above the existing center, so a larger diameter tire is required to provide track clearance below the chassis. I wanted to be able to use smaller tires.

If one was engineering this for 3D printing, axle holes could be relocated by a lesser amount, preserving ground clearance when small tires are used.

I actually have fielded questions from someone intending to make a 3D printed tjet which incorporates some of the ideas from my chassis. Apparently, plans for an AutoCAD tjet are already available on the market for purchase and could be used as a basis for printing a stock tjet or for modifying into something resembling one of mine. Adding to what D said, if you're good at 3D CAD, lots of the hard work has already been done if you buy those AutoCAD plans.

Thanks, everyone, for the nice comments on the chassis.


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

*The Crux of the Biscuit*

Well, you got your Swiss watches, and ya got your Timex's. 

One of Mark's original guide lines is that he wants to run stocker sized wheels and tires. His quote is in the way back. It's what draws a big red line between the two methods.

It's always shamefully fun to be mentioned with Mark. The model murdering drop axle is a Magilla Gorilla street rod hack by comparison. Once the axles are up, the tire/wheel diameter follow automatically. So, I'm limited to slacking around near 1/64 to pull a lowered build together. 

Mark "SLAMS" MEV sports cars, while working at or above 1:72. Compressing the entire T-jet design step by pain staking step is remarkable. Rather than a Slimline, Mark does a "Thin-line.


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

Bill Hall said:


> ... Rather than a Slimline, Mark does a "Thin-line.


I guess calling it a Flat-Line would not be so good from the marketing standpoint. 

-- D


----------

