# AW T-Jet Body Fit on AW T-Jet Chassis



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

Okay, I didn't think this would be a problem, but it is.

I bought a bunch of new T-Jet blue and red chassis from the Looney Tunes series which I want to use with new AW bodies I bought over the years. I figured they would fit without an issue....wrong.

The first body I tried was a 1971 Corvette (series 1). Not enough body clearance on the gear train.

Then I tried a 1970 Mustand 429 (S10). Not enough clearance for the front tires.

Then the Dodge 330 (S3). Again, not enough clearance for the gear train.

0 for 3 so far. So what is the story?

Thanks...Joe


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

I've seen the same things Joe described but it's not just the blue and red chassis. Many of the packaged cars show up and the front tires won't turn because of lack of clearance. It's a head-scratcher...


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

TK Solver said:


> I've seen the same things Joe described but it's not just the blue and red chassis. Many of the packaged cars show up and the front tires won't turn because of lack of clearance. It's a head-scratcher...


Amazing. On these it may be due to the wider front tires. But still a ridiculous situation.

After writing the OP, I quickly test fit these bodies on a release 1 JL (not AW) chassis and there does not seem to be an issue. The Corvette body fits and has clearance.

In taking a closer look at the blue chassis, it appears we again have a bad fit between gearplate and chassis. The rear of the gearplate on every one of the chassis is not sitting flat on the top of the chassis. The rear tabs of the gearplate, especially on the drivers side, are not seating themselves into the pockets on the chassis.

The reasons may be any of the following:

1. The tabs are too large or the pockets are too small
2. There is flashing at the rear of the chassis or on the underside of the gearplate
3. The gearplate and chassis are not molded correctly.
4. Every piece is warped the same way.

Hopefully it is either 1 or 2 because I can correct those. Anyone else see this bad mesh between gearplate and chassis? Is it on the black Ultra-G chassis as well?

And wow, there is a lot of slop in the axle holes and in the rear gear.

Thanks...Joe


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

Spent a little over an hour today trying to get a better gearplate/chassis fit on the first chassis. It seems there is significant flashing on the underside of the gearplate and I was able to file some of that away. I also tried to file away any rough edges on the gearplate tabs and chassis pockets. I have a better fit but it's not quite right.

Part of the issue may be the rear gear assembly. I pressed the shaft further through the driven gear so now it protruds slightly above the gear. This seems to have removed some of the wobble and helped the gearplate sit down a little better.

I have 14 of these chassis. Doing this to each one is going to _____ (fill in the blank).

Oh, by the way. It looks like the work done so far may allow enough clearance for the 71 Corvette body.

Joe


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

Looks like I have done enough to allow the Corvette to clear the gearplate. At this point, if I assemble the chassis without the magnets and brushes, the gearplate sits pretty straight. When I install the magnets (especially the rear magnet), the gearplate wants to sit tilted, driver side high. This of course tilts everything including the crown gear to cluster gear mesh. Still have much more to do, although at least the body now fits. 

I have a question. I read in another post the traction magnet can be removed by pushing it out from the inside of the chassis. I have tried putting as much pressure as I thought reasonable, but the magnet isn't budging.

Just how much pressure do you have to apply to get the traction magnet to pop out? Do you have to "hit" the magnet to get it out or just apply pressure?

Thanks...Joe


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

I usually use a paperclip. There should be a hole visible from the top view on the outside of the chassis. Usually just a push breaks the glue bond. If that don't work, use an awl. Just watch your fingers!!


----------



## Hittman101 (Oct 21, 2009)

Joe have you noticed on the older chassis the rear gear on the top plate is thinner then the newer top plate gears. So that is one reason why the newer chassis rub on the bodies. That's what I have found out. Hope this helps you out.. Johnny


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

Hittman101 said:


> Joe have you noticed on the older chassis the rear gear on the top plate is thinner then the newer top plate gears. So that is one reason why the newer chassis rub on the bodies. That's what I have found out. Hope this helps you out.. Johnny


Hi Johnny,
I have not noticed that, but will take a look and compare the rear top gear on the AW blue chassis to the one on the release 1 JL chassis. There are also probably subtle differences between the basic JL/AW T-Jet chassis and the Ultra-G chassis. I would assume the Ultra-G base chassis had to be a new mold and not just a modified base T-Jet mold.

Really a shame you can't use all AW bodies on AW chassis without clearance issues.

Thanks...Joe


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

slotcarman12078 said:


> I usually use a paperclip. There should be a hole visible from the top view on the outside of the chassis. Usually just a push breaks the glue bond. If that don't work, use an awl. Just watch your fingers!!


I have tried pushing the magnet out, but it isn't budging. I am using the end of a small square file and I am exerting enough pressure to cause the chassis to start bending.

I do notice there is a section of white over the magnet, shaped like a cresent moon. It isn't in the opening (which is smaller in diameter than the magnet), but just to the side. It is probably glue, but I can't be sure. I guess I can see it because the chassis is transparent.

The only way I can envision this magnet coming out is to place an awl (or other pointy tool) over the magnet and tap it with a hammer. Hopefully it does not split the chassis.

Thanks...Joe


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

how about soaking the chassis in acetone(finger nail polish remover)?
it is a known solvent for cyanoacrylate


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

alpink said:


> how about soaking the chassis in acetone(finger nail polish remover)?
> it is a known solvent for cyanoacrylate


I am a little leery of doing that, at least right now. I'll work on a couple more of these chassis and see if all the others are just as difficult. I tried lightly tapping the magnet out with a hammer - no good.

I also discovered another mold issue. Seems the inside of the chassis right above the traction magnet has a ridge. This ridge causes the rear motor magnet (on the traction magnet side) to sit a shade higher, possibly causing the gearplate "tilt" I see. Even after filing down all the flashing I can see, the rear of the gearplate still has a tendency to want to tilt, driver side high, when the magnets are in place. Without magnets, the gearplate sits flat.

I also see the traction magnet and rear motor magnet repel each other. Put in the rear magnet and you can see it get pushed away from the traction magnet. That can't be good over time. Doesn't forcing two magnets of the same polaity close to each other cause the magnets to lose strength?

At least I am able to mount the Corvette body. Gotta admit the chassis is fast and quiet. But there is a couple hours of work already into it.

Joe


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

I have been able to simply push out the traction magnets a dozen or so times with a toothpick.
there is something else going on if that traction magnet won't come out.
may be best to just leave it in and concentrate that task on a different chassis?


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

alpink said:


> I have been able to simply push out the traction magnets a dozen or so times with a toothpick.
> there is something else going on if that traction magnet won't come out.
> may be best to just leave it in and concentrate that task on a different chassis?


Hi Al,
Yeah, that seems to be the general agreement. I'm wondering whether anyone has done it with one of the translucent chassis. Maybe there is something about the chassis material which makes it harder to remove the magnet.

By the way. Just to add to my grief with these chassis, I moved the front axle to the short wheelbase position and found out the axle holes are not large enough for the axle. It will fit through the hole, but it won't turn. So now I have to open those holes a bit.

Great.

Joe


----------



## brownie374 (Nov 21, 2007)

Maybe the chassis molds are getting worn out?


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

Hmmm.. The red and blue translucents came on the Looney Tunes cars.. Were there any SWB cars in that release??


----------



## gonegonzo (Jan 18, 2006)

All of them I have removed have had to be tapped out with a small punch .

Gonzo


----------



## dlw (Aug 17, 1999)

Haven't used the translucent chassis yet, but have come across axle holes that were too tight. A gentle reaming using Afx rear axles or Aurora tjet axles (AW/JL axle's splines are too big and will over-ream) fixes that problem.


----------



## mrstumpy (Oct 5, 2013)

Knowing that I like AW T-jets, one of the guys in my club recommended I try the red and blue chassis because they were faster. This extra speed turns out to be the product of the crown gear, not the quality. While the AW black chassis has it's problems, I am coming to the conclusion that the red and blue ones are in real trouble.

The front axle holes are "drilled" too high and the pick up shoes have almost no travel in them, mashed too close to the track. The axle holes are 'tight" as well.

There seems to be more than normal distortion in crown gears and two out of three chassis I have came with casting flash in the teeth which kept them from turning freely. One chassis also has a bind between the crown gear and the chassis. Fixable problems, but they shouldn't have happened in the first place.

I have one chassis that came with the "cocked" magnet, but the others are okay. I had problems removing the traction magnet and finally resorted to milling part of the plastic away to allow prying them out with a small screwdriver.

I attempted to try the best chassis with O-ring front wheels and tires and sponge silicones on the back, as if it were a Super Stock/Fray car. No good. The front wheels will not touch the track and the rears barely touch.

All these problems have led me back to using the black chassis. Other than part out the two really bad ones I have no use for them, and limited use for the one decent one.

This is certainly NOT helping the poor reputation Auto World has for quality control, nor the Chinese manufacturer's ability to make anything more technical than that "buy two for $19.95" junk.

Yes, this is an unscientific test, and I have fixed AW cars before, but am I being too picky?

Stumpy in Ahia


----------



## Ralphthe3rd (Feb 24, 2011)

Hey Stumpy, you really SHOULD refer to the Standard AW T-Jet Chassis as GREY- Not Black  And FYI- the very 1st release of the Johnny Lightning version of this Thunderjet 500 Chassis, WAS BLACK !


----------



## Grampa Ho (Feb 25, 2009)

I have just used a dremel cutting wheel and cut out the whole magnet pot.
otherwise seemed to keep the chassis from getting low enough for me when I set them up to use so I just got rid of it all together


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

Hmm, front axle holes too high on the chassis? I think a set of aftermarket ski shoes will fix that. I am also in the "cut the whole traction magnet pocket off" crew. It not only makes the chassis too low, it also interferes with the ability to bring the back tires in to lower a body. I don't mess too much with AW chassis, but the high front axle holes does intrigue me. I wonder if truck rims on that chassis in the LWB position will work with standard shoes..


----------



## Bubba 123 (Sep 10, 2010)

Grampa Ho said:


> I have just used a dremel cutting wheel and cut out the whole magnet pot.
> otherwise seemed to keep the chassis from getting low enough for me when I set them up to use so I just got rid of it all together


I like the mag. on the g-chassis concept.. 4 use in my diecast 2 slor conversions.. it helps w/ traction & top heaviness.....

@ the risk of sacrilegious, I hope I can mag-track the new Dash chassis...
but NOT having tried 1 yet... I may NOT even HAVE2 (hoping).....

gotta get some dash's !!! :thumbsup:

Bubba 123 :wave:


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

*NOT on their radar*

Stumpy********

"I have fixed AW cars before, but am I being too picky?"

Yes.

Color not withstanding, the historically broad range of quality control issues seems to indicate that AW has never been overly concerned about what fray racers think. As their emphasis has always been about collecting and the marketing strategies to influence such, why should they?

The fact that the chassis are cheap to acquire, and therefore attractive to some, does not change the former.

Given that market target and price point, I'm not certain that you are allowed to complain about having to weed through a sea of mediocrity to find suitable candidates for a task other than what they were intended.

.... but I am certain that they dont care that you have to.


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

mrstumpy said:


> Knowing that I like AW T-jets, one of the guys in my club recommended I try the red and blue chassis because they were faster. This extra speed turns out to be the product of the crown gear, not the quality. While the AW black chassis has it's problems, I am coming to the conclusion that the red and blue ones are in real trouble.
> 
> The front axle holes are "drilled" too high and the pick up shoes have almost no travel in them, mashed too close to the track. The axle holes are 'tight" as well.
> 
> ...


Are you being too picky? Absolutely not. Good to know I am not alone in my observations about these chassis.

All the problems you mention I seem to be finding as well. I just tried mounting a Dodge 330 body onto the blue chassis. It seems I cleared away just enough flashing to allow the body to clear the top gears, although placing a small washer on the rear post to raise the back of the body a hair is probably a wise precaution. The body sits so high on the chassis that you can almost see the bottom of the gearplate clamp. I would say at least 40%-50% of the chassis sticks out below the body.

The front tires do not fit under the front wheel wells and this is no doubt due to the locations of the axle holes as you point out. This is a problem with the Mustand 429 body as well. I have not tried other bodies yet. But these bodies have no problem fitting on a JL series 1 chassis.

Now I discovered that the traction magnet sits so low it is hitting the rails with the stock tires. I ran the chassis and it "jerks" around the track as the magnet hits certain sections of rail. This will require me to file away the magnet pocket and remove the magnet if I want to use the chassis at all.

Right now I don't know what my best course of action should be. I have 14 of these chassis, seven of each. I have only messed around with two of the blue but I've got a couple hours of work into them and they are nowhere near being right - I'm not looking for not perfect (I understand the basic QC issues), just decent.

I bought the chassis because I figured they were something different, looked cool, and would not be more trouble than a regular chassis. I now believe they are made from different material which has a different shrikage rate than the gray/black chassis and may have come out of completely different molds.

Even for someone not expecting much from Auto World, these things are junk.

Joe


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

I got disgusted enough to send an e-mail to Auto World...

I would not normally write about your slot car products because I realize they are just toys. However, I recently purchased 14 red and blue chassis from the T-Jet Looney Tunes series and the quality of these chassis makes them absolute junk. I cannot express the depth of my disgust with having wasted my money on chassis which I will probably need to simply throw in the garbage.
I understand the limitations of the Auto World slot car line. It is not going to be a high quality product and I accept that. But up until now, at least the chassis were useable with some minor work. These red and blue chassis are so bad that no amount of reasonable work will allow them to be useable.
In the first place, there is something wrong with the molding. There are many AW bodies which will not fit on these chassis due to clearance issues either on the gearplate or in the wheel wells. That is unacceptable.
In addition, the axle holes are too small for the axles if you try to use the alternate wheelbase positions. 
There is significant flashing left on the chassis which interferes with the fit of chassis to gearplate, including causing the motor magnets to sit at an angle. Only a couple hours of tedious work trying to remove all the flashing allows the chassis to fit together in anything resembling a decent fashion.
The traction magnet sits so low that it hits the rails. Only by removing the magnet and magnet pocket could the chassis even have a chance of being useable.
These are just a few of the problems I have found. Others have found issues with flashing still left in the gears - problems I may see on some of the chassis I have not yet tried to use.
I have seen the range of poor componets throughout all the runs - warped armatureas, bent axles, axle holes too large, gears not press on straight, off center wheels, misalignment of gearplate to chassis, etc. But nothing as bad as these chassis, especially since they have these problems as well as those mentioned earlier.
After this experiance, I am done with Auto World. Not even a free chassis is worth the time, effort and aggravation necessary to get it into decent shape.
There is no reason for such sloppiness. Can it be that much harder to make a decent product?

Joe


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

I've said it before and I'll probably say it 100 more. It costs basically the same to make a decent product as it does to make a piece of crap. Both share basically the same tooling costs. Making an armature good or bad requires the same amount of materials and time. Making the tooling for the gears is the same. Granted, there are material cost differences, such as making pot metal axles rather than something more substantial. The major cost differences lie in either having some sort of QC on each stage of the production, or not having any. The differences add up to pennies on the dollar, but make the difference between a good solid useable product or a total dud. 

In this case, it's obvious that the red and blue translucent chassis were designed to sit on a collector's shelf and look pretty, not run decently (if at all) on a track. The difference between "collectible" and non useable at it's most defining.


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

Grandcheapskate said:


> I got disgusted enough to send an e-mail to Auto World...
> 
> I would not normally write about your slot car products because I realize they are just toys. However, I recently purchased 14 red and blue chassis from the T-Jet Looney Tunes series and the quality of these chassis makes them absolute junk. I cannot express the depth of my disgust with having wasted my money on chassis which I will probably need to simply throw in the garbage.
> I understand the limitations of the Auto World slot car line. It is not going to be a high quality product and I accept that. But up until now, at least the chassis were useable with some minor work. These red and blue chassis are so bad that no amount of reasonable work will allow them to be useable.
> ...


Joe, I'll gladly relieve you of any and all pancake chassis that don't live up to your expectations.
and
pay shipping too. 
LOL


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

I was able to remove the traction magnet by tapping it out with a small nail and a hammer.

I now notice that the rear brush hole inside the chassis has a mold ring around it on both chassis I have checked so far; this is something else that needs to be filed down. The front brush hole is clean - in fact, the front brush hole has a "negative" mold ring which is not a problem.

Joe


----------



## 22tall (Jul 28, 2002)

2/28/2014 Have you guys noticed that you are discussing negatives about AW and no one is labeling you heretics. These are the things AW needs to hear. You can't fix what you don't know about.

After the lumps I have taken this brings a tear to my eye.

Aw crap, it's the good eye. Now I can't see the TV.


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

private I


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

The Looney Toons release was the most disappointing one I can remember. Strange body choices, silly paint schemes and a variety of chassis issues were all contributors.


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

mrstumpy said:


> I attempted to try the best chassis with O-ring front wheels and tires and sponge silicones on the back, as if it were a Super Stock/Fray car. No good. The front wheels will not touch the track and the rears barely touch.


I was able to remove the raised mold circle around the rear brush hole on both blue chassis' I have been working on. Thought I had the chassis to a point where they might be useable....silly me.

There may be just two chassis molds, numbered 1 and 2 - at least that is all I saw when removing the traction magnet from all 14 chassis. I have been working on one of each (both blue). Just from these two, it appears the #1 chassis rides lower than the #2 since the magnet pocket on the #1 hits the rails while on the #2 it appears to barely be above the rail. 

Because it appears the axle holes may be higher than other chassis, the entire chassis gets lowered. This results in the head of the front screw hitting any raised section of track surface. The clearance is so small that the screw head will hit any imperfection in the track. You can't use larger front tires because even the existing tires don't fit under the wheel wells on many (most?) bodies. The #1 chassis is a little worse than the #2 in this instance.

Although, on the #2, it appears there is more mold flashing on the inside of the chassis above the traction magnet. So choose your poison.

I also had a bit of a problem getting the guide pin installed. On the underside of the pin there is a small nub. This nub fits into a hole in the chassis. The hole seems just a shade smaller than the nub. You can press it in, but it takes a bit of pressure.

Joe


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

These are sounding more and more like 4X4 chassis material. This doesn't help your situation, Joe. I'm just looking for a silver lining in your colored chassis cloud. Raised axle holes means that with truck wheels and tires, the odds of getting some sort of contact with the shoes to the rails are better. The next question is how is the mesh between the pinion gear and the crown? Since the back axle is higher, that has to throw off the mesh somewhat, though there is some fudge factor there.

As for the front screw, a 2-56 flat head may eliminate some of that problem, and you can countersink the screw in a tad by opening up the guide pin hole slightly.

By the way, this is the main reason why I pretty much stopped using AW chassis for my light up projects. I have to swap out the pinion gear and shaft, and the crown gear, modify the top plate and chassis base to get a good mesh, and swap out the axles... By the time it's all said and done, I've spent more on an AW chassis than I would spend on a lightly used Aurora real deal, especially when I have to get the parts from 3-4 different sources for the chassis and parts.


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

all very interesting.
when these were new, local raceway/hobby center had a case race of the Looney Tunes cars fresh from an unopened case.
$15.00 and first come first served for body types.
minor tuning was allowed ... meaning body off but not gear plate.
the Karmen Ghia I chose did have front wheel/tire clearance issues and I was allowed to add shims to front post to get clearance. I also had to do a minimum shave around the front wheel well and got clearance so I was allowed to race.
all the cars were fairly even.
I like to run such case race cars in reverse with a fresh 9 volt battery to break in the whole gear train since the chassis cannot be taken apart.
no one had any huge problems although everyone could tell they weren't as fast as previous releases.

again, I will take any and all of these chassis and even pay shipping.


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

The problem lies not so much in the speed you can get out of these chassis, it is just in the amount of work necessary when you look a little closely at the chassis or try to mount a different body. Speed can always be achieved out of a chassis by design and selection of components - hotter arm, stronger magnets, etc. How well the chassis is assembled and how it performs with parts comparitable to other chassis is the real test.

I am now trying to determine whether I should try to get these chassis running or strip them down for parts and use the dummy chassis for display cars. I've only done two so far, put a couple hours work into them and they are still not done. I am not a fan of the Ultra-G and was hoping that the removal of the magnet would be all that was necessary to make this a "regular" T-Jet. I only have three running JL cars, all from release 1, and no running AW cars. I think I'll stick with the old JL chassis despite their problems.

The first chassis I started with was the fastest T-Jet chassis I have ever seen. With the traction magnet in place, the car was like a rocket ship around the track. However, the traction magnet does hide other issues and it did take some filing of flashing to get the body mounted. Then when I used the second chassis with the traction magnet installed, that's when I saw the car "jerk" around the track because the magnet was on the rails.

So far I have had to do the following (if I remember everything) that I would not consider normal maintenance:

1. File away flashing at the rear of the chassis and under the gearplate.
2. Press fit the driven and cluster gears much tighter.
3. File away flashing inside the chassis and over the traction magnet.
4. File away a mold ring over the rear brush hole (this is present all the way back to my JL R1 cars and may not be a "problem").
5. Adjust the "V" bend of the brush spring on the front brush.
6. Open axle holes (still to be done).


Problems which remain:

1. Because chassis rides so low...
1A. Front screw hits track
1B. Magnet pocket and magnet hit rail
2. Bodies do not have clearance over the gearplate
3. Bodies do not have clearance for the front tires


Normal AW issues:

1. Hubs need to be pressed on better/equally
2. Rear axle holes too big


Joe


----------



## Hittman101 (Oct 21, 2009)

I only have two of these chassis and the blue one runs great, the red one seems to be dragging its rear around the track. Like the rear axles are to low in the chassis. I haven't tried to fix it, but one of these days I will look into it..


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

Hittman101 said:


> I only have two of these chassis and the blue one runs great, the red one seems to be dragging its rear around the track. Like the rear axles are to low in the chassis. I haven't tried to fix it, but one of these days I will look into it..


Can you check the mold number on the two chassis? It is located at the rear of the chassis next to the crown gear. I would be interested in knowing if the #1 chassis drags and the #2 chassis does not.

Followup: Hittman101 got back to me and confirmed it seems the #1 chassis seems to drag.

Thanks...Joe


----------

