# New AW's



## Oscarw (Jan 24, 2007)

I noticed some nice pictures on Motor City Toyz website of some new AW's. Two each Dodge, Ford, and Chevy stock cars. Two 70 Mustangs and four 05 Mustangs...Cool
https://securewsch01.websitecomplete.com/motorcitytoyz/shop/showDept.asp?dept=84


----------



## coach61 (Sep 6, 2004)

oh my....eyes.......pain....those new stangs are.......not what I expected....


Dave


----------



## martybauer31 (Jan 27, 2004)

WOW, those are REALLY unfortunate looking..... yeesh.


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

*Mommy, mommy it burns!*

Oh YEAH baby! Those look great! :thumbsup: 

I went in with an open mind, but forgot to close my eyes. Would one of you guys please lead me to the emergency eyewash station before I turn to stone. :freak:

I looked right at a Medusa-stang without my mirrored sunglasses  

I'm probably dun fer aint I?


----------



## WesJY (Mar 4, 2004)

shheeessshhhhh.....

those nascars remind me of those ugly jelly bean dodge intrepid lifelike cars!!! those ford taurus must be the worst looking cars!! and mustangs looks like made by artin??

Wes


----------



## JordanZ870 (Nov 25, 2004)

I saw LL stockers too...with lil deelys around the front windscreen. Truthfully though....aren't the shape of those cars just what the modern 1:1 stockers really look like? (still don't like them)

I like the mustangs with the airhorns poking out of the hood, though. 
With a propper wheel slice to get the rubber under the fenders where it belongs, and maybe dropped down on a TJet chassis, I imagine it to be a very pretty piece. 

With any luck, I will be able to get a body from Buds or something to do just that.


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

They look OK other than some of the paint schemes with the overly large fake headlights. No licensed paint schemes apparently. The Mustangs don't bother me. I'm more concerned about how they are going to run, or should I say survive, with neo traction magnets. I do hope they did some serious R&D testing because at the price they are listed for ($24.95) they are up against some serious competition. AutoWorld is going to have to step up to the plate with a well stocked supply of service parts to keep these things running in the field. I really hope that Tyco and Wizzard service parts like brushes, brush springs, set screws, bushings, gears, arms, axles, etc., are fully compatible with the SIII chassis. 

Can't wait to get one on the track and see what it's got.


----------



## micyou03 (Apr 8, 2003)

When are we supposed to be seeing the Vettes?


----------



## LeeRoy98 (Jul 8, 2005)

I will reserve judgement until I can see the actual car... but I don't have high hopes. All the possible disappointment will disappear if it is a quality chassis.
I do wonder why they chose to model the Taurus and not the Fusion...

Gary
AKA LeeRoy98
www.marioncountyraceway.com


----------



## tjd241 (Jan 25, 2004)

*oh my!...*

 ... All of these are _NOT_ my cup I'm afraid. I can see many being purchased for the chassis alone. In other words "the parts" and not the sum of the parts. nd


----------



## noddaz (Aug 6, 1999)

*Ummm... I will have to wait*

I will have to wait to see these in person....

But part of me can't wait to see how they run....... :lol: 

Scott


----------



## Jim Norton (Jun 29, 2007)

*Trailing the field?*

With the introduction of the highly detailed AFX GT-40s by Racemasters you have to wonder what the Auto World designers are thinking.

Jim Norton
Huntsville, Alabama


----------



## dlw (Aug 17, 1999)

Hopefully AW will offer some of the Mustangs on XT chassis.


----------



## fastlap (Nov 11, 2007)

Jim Norton said:


> With the introduction of the highly detailed AFX GT-40s by Racemasters you have to wonder what the Auto World designers are thinking.
> 
> Jim Norton
> Huntsville, Alabama


Exactly!!!! We all saw the fantastic new models they were showing at the IHobby fair, then they come out with the toy Cr#p like this. Kind of makes you wonder where their heads are at. :freak:


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

I'm surprised by the price, considering they're just generic paint schemes. With SG+ and SRT chassis readily available for $12 or less, this chassis better handle well or this idea will struggle. The bodies look ok to me, compared with LifeLikes.


----------



## RacerDave (Mar 28, 2006)

I'm not crazy about the bodies. I am looking forward to trying out the new chassis though. Dave.


----------



## Xence (Oct 2, 2007)

Please tell me this is some sort of bad joke. Those look horrible. I thought we were supposed to be progressing concerning these little cars not regressing.

I'm with RacerDave though in that I'd really like to try those chassis out. I've never used neo-magnets so that should be a hoot to try.


----------



## win43 (Aug 28, 2006)

Can you say FUGLY!!!!!! I'm glad I only race tjets. These almost make LifeLike look good. Did Tom buyout the racing division from Walthers????? 

I'm with Bill, my eyes hurt, head is aching, think I'll go lie down amd maybe i'll awaken from this nightmare.


----------



## SwamperGene (Dec 1, 2003)

win43 said:


> These almost make LifeLike look good. Did Tom buyout the racing division from Walthers?????


LOL I was thinkin' by the looks of these things maybe he's trying to get _them _to buy the AW line.


----------



## grungerockjeepe (Jan 8, 2007)

I dunno, Ill be on that teal '70 and the blue '05 for sure. The proportions are a bit chunky but they clearly wanted to squeeze them onto the swb chassis setting for handling. Im diggin the raked dragster look of those '70s with the fat slicks. Just gotta retrofit some proper wheels (5 spoke mags) to complete the look and its on.


----------



## micyou03 (Apr 8, 2003)

I could have wanted the 70' Mustangs if they didn't have those intakes sticking out of the hood. I would have made T/As of them. That's all I'm going to say.


----------



## twolff (May 11, 2007)

OMG! I think the factory mistakenly used body proportions for the Tomy BitChar-G R/C cars.


----------



## T-Jet Racer (Nov 16, 2006)

the 05 stang looks like it hit a wall!


----------



## Dragula (Jun 27, 2003)

They just dont look right at all,thats all im saying.
DRAGjet


----------



## Crimnick (May 28, 2006)

Well....I'm happy for the new stuff...wanna see that chassis.. :thumbsup:


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

> I've never used neo-magnets so that should be a hoot to try.


The Tomy SRTs use neo traction magnets.

I've heard but cannot confirm that the SIIIs have poly motor magnets. That would make them so wicked fast it doesn't matter whether you like the bodies or not, because they won't last very long.


----------



## bobhch (Apr 22, 2007)

Only like the 2 Vintage Mustangs and they don't really grab me enough to cause a jump up and run out the front door to go and get them action.

Will just wait for the next time.....and see what they come up with.

Bob...zilla


----------



## slotrod (May 21, 2007)

Well looks like Auto World dropped the ball on these new cars. If you are going to do Nascar do it right!!!!!!. Well I can wait to get the chassis as retailers dump them for low prices just to get them off the shelf. I can tell you now that they won't sell. If you want them to sell do retro nascar stockers not the Like-like wannabe's. Oh well.


----------



## 1976Cordoba (Sep 20, 2000)

I think painting over the headlights and adding some racing decals to the '08 Mustangs might help. Bud's will probably be selling bods so I'll get some then -- not really interested in another inline supercar chassis.


----------



## sethndaddy (Dec 4, 2004)

Holy Moly......I hope the tjet release of ANYTHING is better (and how could it not be)

well, the red/black Autoworld car is ok and one of the Mustangs is "buyable".


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

I just looked at the prototype I got last year. That had 4 wheelbases, one at about 1.8''. Why oh why did that not use that.


----------



## SplitPoster (May 16, 2006)

Hmmm, lots of bodies sans chassis to be showing up on fleabay soon? 

Looks like some of those may have started life as a casting from LL, or maybe a zipzap.


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

I'm concerned about the aspect ratio of those pictures. I'd like to see more pictures from a different site. It's possible that the pics were resized to fit a given space.


----------



## micyou03 (Apr 8, 2003)

TK Solver said:


> I'm concerned about the aspect ratio of those pictures. I'd like to see more pictures from a different site. It's possible that the pics were resized to fit a given space.


I hope so.


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

Unfortunately, aspect ratio could not explain why the rear wheels extend so far out from the fenders. Maybe the goal is for these to be racers and not eye candy. Consider how ugly fray cars look and those enthusiasts don't seem to mind.


----------



## micyou03 (Apr 8, 2003)

I don't mind the wheels sticking out.


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

*


TK Solver said:



I'm concerned about the aspect ratio of those pictures. I'd like to see more pictures from a different site. It's possible that the pics were resized to fit a given space.

Click to expand...

*Judging by the proximity of the shoes to the front end of the bodies, the shortest wheelbase IS being used  
If the wheelbases that were taken from my chassis onto the prototype have also made it onto the final design we are looking at a wheelbase of 1.49'' when it could have been 1.7''

As for the sticky-out wheels Yuk. never understood why any body gets done that way.....


----------



## noddaz (Aug 6, 1999)

*It may be...*



TK Solver said:


> Unfortunately, aspect ratio could not explain why the rear wheels extend so far out from the fenders. Maybe the goal is for these to be racers and not eye candy. Consider how ugly fray cars look and those enthusiasts don't seem to mind.


Might be just a twisted picture...
remember this?


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

.

Those B/W pictures still suggest the shortest wheelbase was used for the Mustangs.


----------



## sped (Nov 20, 2004)

I think all of the pics are correctly scaled. I think the true diff can be explained by paint, and chrome wheels. Up till now, we have only seen grey bodies on black wheeled chassis. The paint and chrome really emphasis their faults. All in all I never thought the modern mustangs ever looked good even in prototype format. The 70's boss stang looks probably the best for production body of this year. The LL one was too squat. I'll wait for the standard hood version and see what can be done with it.

SPED


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

Richard,

I don't know about you but I think AW had their window to release these and missed it. Most of the collectors I speak to, aware that collecting all the JL/AW lines is expensive, were waiting to see how hot the SIII release 1 was. The bodies don't look killer, the Nascars look outated and don't give unique (real) liveries. It could mean a lot rides of how good the chassis is.

Deane


----------



## sped (Nov 20, 2004)

I'm not expecting much from the chassis at all. I have a hunch it will be a major blunder for AW - I think for the dollar they may be OK.....It may help sell some sets and get kids into the hobby, but I think the SIII will be too fast for them. AW would be best to focus on the pancake motored designs and really focus on quality and evolutionary improvements IMO.


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

> the Nascars look outated and don't give unique (real) liveries


Yeah, I was expecting licensed paint schemes, especially when they are MSRP'd at around the same price as Life-Like's NASCAR models. 

It's just a matter of time before someone does the '08 NASCARs and we all have little pieces of wings and splitters littering our trackscapes.

Still anxious to see how they run...


----------



## motorcitytoyz (Oct 11, 2002)

*AW Super III Slot Cars are on the water from China...*

Hey, I know from reading all the messages here on this thread that most of you here do not think much of the new chassis and bodies. 

I too am a little puzzled by this release but I am waiting to give my opinions until I have received them and put them on my track for a few laps. I have already expressed my concerns with AW about the pricing but I have been assured that the performance will be worth the price...

As for the bodies, I was hoping for more realistic styling and more detail for the price but again, lets see them in hand before judging them too hard. It is the first run and maybe lack of sales will help AW see what you all really want from AW....High quality slot car chassis, more detailed bodies (no blowers, just better tampos and licensed nascar schemes) and higher quality wheels ( different styles per each car).

I will keep you all advised as to what happens and I have them on my site as singles (pre-order) and complete set.

Later


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

Do you have a chassis to hand you can post pictures of, here or on the website?


----------



## motorcitytoyz (Oct 11, 2002)

Amy from AW is shipping out a sample to me this week. I will photograph and list here and in my HobbyTalk Photo Album too.

Later


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

Thanks. Hopefully it will have moved on from the prototype.

It will be interesting to see if any AFX/Tomy/JL bodies will fit it.


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

AW site now has some Super III info and pictures.


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)




----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

Thanx Dean,

Anybody got a dead on side view of the '70?


----------



## tjd241 (Jan 25, 2004)

*Better Pics...*

..and yet I _still_ have no interest in this release:drunk:. Looking forward to maybe the next tjet release? Maybe something in there will be for me. :hat: nd


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

MotorCityToyz,

went to the website to place an order, but the shipping stopped me dead in my tracks. $35 to ship one car to the UK is way, way more than I would pay. Even the US shipping seemed high, which knocks out the option to get one sent to a friend in Cali and have him send it on to me for $7 or so.


----------



## lenny (Feb 29, 2000)

Montoya1 said:


> MotorCityToyz,
> 
> went to the website to place an order, but the shipping stopped me dead in my tracks. $35 to ship one car to the UK is way, way more than I would pay. Even the US shipping seemed high, which knocks out the option to get one sent to a friend in Cali and have him send it on to me for $7 or so.


Just a thought, not a slam, not a rant...

Isn't a communication like this better handled by sending an email to the vendor instead of calling him out publicly about his shipping policy?

Dan


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

Dan,

I thought about that, but it does seem that absurd shipping charges are becoming more and more common, and maybe some debate would turn the heat up a little more than one email. I doubt that MCT are to blame _pers se_ but automated shipping quotes will always be at risk of appearing to be a rip off. 

For example, I sometimes see sites where 8 of something is $40 shipping and one on it's own $30. Gotta doubt the vendor does this on purpose but the systems they use are not flexible enough to give shipping quotes that are realistic.

Just for comparison, what would you charge for one Dash car to the UK?

If anyone else thinks my post is out of order I will of course remove it.

Deane


----------



## lenny (Feb 29, 2000)

Montoya1 said:


> Just for comparison, what would you charge for one Dash car to the UK?


I don't ship out of the US. 

As for 'debate', my opinion of these types of 'debates' is that they often turn ugly, pitting one vendor against another. It's happened before. 

If you don't like the price or the shipping charge, don't buy from that vendor. It's that simple. You have other options. 

Does everything need to be an online 'debate'?


----------



## rodstrguy (Feb 14, 2002)

Dan, 

Well said...


----------



## motorcitytoyz (Oct 11, 2002)

Montoya1,

I was very surprised to see your message concerning our shipping fee but also very happy to answer your question too!
My shipping fees are directly from USPS for Priority Mail International - which use to be called - Air Mail. Due to the terroist actions around the world, the US government has increased the amount of packages that are scanned by customs and this is why postage has almost doubled in the last 18 months for shipments going to International addresses.
I do not control the fees that are charged by the USPS and for the last 7 years, I offered my customers FREE shipping on orders over $100.00. Due to the higher cost of shipping packages over seas, I stopped offering the free shipping.
I am sorry that you feel that the cost was too high, but I stand by my fees for shipping and if at any time, the shipping is lower that what was quoted, I have changed it on the order before charging that customers order and personally change the shipping fees to actual fees charge to me by USPS.
The system is not perfect...but I would rather be a few dollars over and refund you the money, than have to hold up your order waiting for more funds. I know you all work very hard for your money as I do, so I try to treat everyone as I would want to be treated.
Am I perfect...NO WAY...I am human, but I try very hard to do the best I can and if I make a mistake, I will fix it.

Last, I have received many packages from Germany, England, Hong Kong, etc...that were shipped via First Class Mail - in a brown envelope that get smashed before they arrive.
I have shipped over 600 packages to international addresses in the past year or so with not one complaint....I double box and bubble wrap. I also insure each package, out of my own pocket, so if there is a problem, we are covered. 
I am more than willing to ship to you in a small envelope as long as you are prepared to accept the condition of the cars when they finally get to you....I am always willing to try!
Thanks


----------



## Scafremon (Dec 11, 2006)

lenny said:


> Isn't a communication like this better handled by sending an email to the vendor instead of calling him out publicly about his shipping policy?


"Caling him out publicly"? 

You make it sound like the vendor's shipping policy should be a private matter, not to be discussed between customers. 



> Does everything need to be an online 'debate'?


If shipping charges should be taboo from public discussion, then surely a debate about online debates should be handled off-line. 

Seriously, there was nothing wrong about Montoya's comment regarding shipping costs, and I think this is validated by the reply from the vendor. If the comment had been been made privately, MCT's response would have most likely followed suit, and we would not have seen MCT's informative response - a response which confirms that MCT is the type of vendor that I will buy product from.

Hmmm... I'm starting to think Dean and Jeff planned this whole exchange.  (j/k)

Jeff - typing from the grassy knoll


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

> a response which confirms that MCT is the type of vendor that I will buy product from


Yes indeed. Total customer satisfaction and a true class act. Way to set the bar Jeff.


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

Class response Jeff, many thanks for responding.


----------



## sethndaddy (Dec 4, 2004)

I agree with Jeff, whenever you win something from oversea's it's shipped in a "paper bag" looking package, I don't think I ever received a box from an overseas shipper.


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

I always use boxes.


----------



## RacerDave (Mar 28, 2006)

I bought a car from a dealer in England. It came in a box. Only charged me five dollars shipping. Dealer name was ukAFX. Hey Deane, are you familiar with them? Dave.


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

Thats Barry from SCD, top guy. If you know the Panoz body, that was him. Shame they will stop trading this year.


----------



## sethndaddy (Dec 4, 2004)

I'm sorry, I did get stuff from Claus, and it was shipped very well in a box.


----------



## buzzinhornet (Jan 20, 2000)

I've received stuff from Umpfis' in the past and he used boxes. 

GP


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

Great deal from Bud's right now for AW Super III cars... 3 for $25 with free shipping on orders of $75 or more. I had 4 Super III cars and took this opportunity to buy 9 more. I've found that these cars are very consistent in their performance once you get the pick-up shoes and brush screws set. The rear axle/wheels make the car too wide to fit two of these cars side by side on Tomy track (a puzzling design blunder) but there are ways of dealing with that. An AWS3 will fit side by side with most other chassis. The downforce on these cars makes them good for kids to use. I've found that their lap times are a bit faster than the latest Mattel/Tyco 440X2 chassis on my 82 foot road course. The top end speed isn't as good but the downforce makes them easier to handle through the corners... good for kids. Give the kids the AWS3's and see if you can keep up with your stock Tyco or Tomy Turbo. The AWS3 will actually perform relatively better at higher voltages due to the downforce. At under $9 each with a decent looking body, I couldn't resist.


----------



## Montoya1 (May 14, 2004)

Have they changed the bodies then


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

Nope.. Same old bodies.. just a reduced price!! If I had the money I'd consider a grabbing a few...


----------



## resinmonger (Mar 5, 2008)

Montoya1 said:


> Have they changed the bodies then


Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, Deane.


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

You can dial the Super III in pretty good. The first thing I do after getting the shoes adjusted and brushes tuned and secured with a tiny drop of purple loctite or vibratite is to put a LL rear end on them. This lowers them down a bit too much for the neo magnets. To compensate for this I push the traction magnets up in their sockets a bit. When you find the sweet spot with the magnets, you can secure them in place from the top with a tiny bit of superglue gel. 

I like how the Super IIIs run when they are setup right. They run quite cool and are comparable to a Tomy SRT in performance. The motor magnets on the Super IIIs are great. The Mustang bodies are really nice looking. My only beef with them is the lack of service spares, notably the shoes and shoe springs. I can get spares for everything else from alternate sources, but not for the shoes. I may pick up a few more for spare parts or shelf queen 'em.


----------



## DesertSlot (May 8, 2009)

AfxToo said:


> You can dial the Super III in pretty good. The first thing I do after getting the shoes adjusted and brushes tuned and secured with a tiny drop of purple loctite or vibratite is to put a LL rear end on them. This lowers them down a bit too much for the neo magnets. To compensate for this I push the traction magnets up in their sockets a bit. When you find the sweet spot with the magnets, you can secure them in place from the top with a tiny bit of superglue gel.
> 
> I like how the Super IIIs run when they are setup right. They run quite cool and are comparable to a Tomy SRT in performance. The motor magnets on the Super IIIs are great. The Mustang bodies are really nice looking. My only beef with them is the lack of service spares, notably the shoes and shoe springs. I can get spares for everything else from alternate sources, but not for the shoes. I may pick up a few more for spare parts or shelf queen 'em.


Could you do a little write up on adjusting the shoes and brushes with maybe a picture or two? I got a couple of III's a few weeks back from Bud. Great guy. I think they need adjusting. They seem to get hot pretty fast. If I can learn how to get them right, I might be wanting to get some more.


----------



## blubyu (May 4, 2008)

AFXtoo have you tried Tyco ski shoes with the sides narrowed down (part over the brush barrel) worked okay for me.


----------

