# AW gets no respect?



## mrstumpy (Oct 5, 2013)

I have a question that keeps getting me in trouble elsewhere: Why is it that Auto World get's no respect? Certainly AW is the "Rodney Dangerfield of HO slot car racing!" On some Yahoo Groups the mere mention of liking AW T-jets seems to be grounds for flaming!

Fortunately, I have a tattered old fire suit for reading posts and e-mails!:thumbsup:

The general excuse seems to be that quality control and/or manufacturing standards are lousy. That's true, but the cars are not beyond tuning or repair. 

I suspect that with the right tires and wheels a good AW T-jet would give a typical local club Aurora Super Stock car fits! After all, AW cars have the benefit of the many years of modifying the forty year old Aurora chassis into what the AW car is today.

But just thinking of such a thing is blasphemy on some sites! What's the story?

Stumpy in Ahia:wave:


----------



## pshoe64 (Jun 10, 2008)

No arguments from me on the subject. I'm a firm believer that any chassis out of the box requires something to make it that much better. Some more than others, but to me, building a car up is at least half the fun. I like the AW chassis, even the Super III. Even the original Aurora chassis needed tinkering. The huge aftermarket parts options from the 60's onward proves the cat could be skinned several ways. All part of the fun for me.:thumbsup:

-Paul


----------



## sethndaddy (Dec 4, 2004)

I think the biggest problem is the lack of new castings, and repeating paint schemes (or close to it). The last release had 5 red cars and one silver, and a set of chrome to match. The not yet released Dodge/Mopar set has a blue pickup with white stripes, done, a blue viper with white stripes, done. Just to much same old same old.

Depending on how deep you dig into the chassis, you'll find imperfections, but I think thats with every company, the last batch of tyco 440x2 chassis I got from mattel were horrible, one chassis was twisted to the point of no return, not to mention the acid wheels they use.

I still like AW alot, just don't have to buy all the cars all the time anymore. That could be a good thing.:thumbsup:


----------



## copperhead71 (Aug 2, 2007)

3 out every 10 aw cars I have bought have some type of problems(not really RTR) but then again I did open a vintage afx Ferrari to find the chassis was cracked! But it still ran just fine?that black gtx is from a very recent aw release!Aw machine pressing shoe hangers to hard or something?rear axle gears crumble under pressure often.looook..so..I choose to buy old afx for $2(bare chassis)and $7-$15 for working chassis from afx(some up to 27 years old)with no problems and rarely ever need anything but rear tires and oiling.Sad...but them aw tires and magnets,springs and brushes I can totally endorse!


----------



## copperhead71 (Aug 2, 2007)

Hangers on this car I bought 5 months ago bad on the rivet(left)pushed in too far,both points where brush springs sit?fixable but dang!I got satisfaction from parting two days after buying!:freak:


----------



## copperhead71 (Aug 2, 2007)

The further I look in my collection it goes on and on!!!!!!!!!! My I wheels charger is also afflicted That is my only complete aw car.(wuz):drunk:


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

mrstumpy said:


> The general excuse seems to be that quality control and/or manufacturing standards are lousy. That's true, but the cars are not beyond tuning or repair.
> 
> I suspect that with the right tires and wheels a good AW T-jet would give a typical local club Aurora Super Stock car fits! After all, AW cars have the benefit of the many years of modifying the forty year old Aurora chassis into what the AW car is today.


I believe you answered your own question.

There are those who look at Aurora through rose colored glasses and maybe forget all the tuning that went into those cars some 40 years ago. Time heals all wounds. You'll never win an argument there, even though no pancake car is ready to run right out of the box.

Can a JL/AW be made to run as well, or better, than an Aurora? Absolutely. But here's the big question - can a stock JL/AW be tuned without having to replace parts or modify the chassis (due to mold/assembly problems) right out of the box? The answer a lot of times is no. I have noticed that to some degree, every X-Traction seems to have a bad fit between the gearplate and chassis. This leads to the armature being "tilted" - the hole for the arm shaft in the gearplate does not line up with the hole for the arm shaft at the bottom of the chassis. The only way to fix that is to file the gearplate and chassis until they line up as close as possible. I have a car where I needed to remove the front tabs from the gearplate in order to get the car to work.

Meanwhile, almost every Aurora I have can be made to run well without changing any parts (except those that wear normally). In fact, I can go into my parts box and build a decent Aurora almost every time. The same cannot be said for a lot of JL/AW cars.

The fact remains that JL and AW had the benefit of 30-40 years of technological improvements and history. They had a design to copy. They had the specs or could easily get the measurements off the originals. Starting with the pullbacks, they made compatability with Aurora their target. Yet they missed.

Some pullbacks will not go on Aurora chassis. The wheelbase on the JL/AW chassis is not the same as Aurora, so swapping bodies may require some modification. Axles are bent and wheels are not pressed on straight. This is basic stuff they should have gotten right. Items such as needing to tweak the shoes and adjust brush tension is expected. Needing to disassemble, clean and oil the chassis is also expected. Needing to replace parts or fix mold issues is not acceptable.

Sure, we can quibble about the choice of bodies, and certainly can question the wisdom of a number of paint schemes. But I don't think they are the biggies. It is the quality control and the mismatch to original Aurora that keeps AW from getting all the accolades it could have recieved.

When the new Dash chassis is released, we will have a good benchmark on which to compare the AW chassis. If the Dash chassis does turn out to be an exact duplicate of Aurora as advertised, and if the quality of all the parts is superior to AW, and if it runs well with no parts replacement, then those failures on the part of AW will be even more pronounced.

It is human nature to find the fault with anything, and never mention the good. JL/AW has done some good work and certainly provides us with maybe the most prolific manufacturer at this time. For this they get credit and my thanks. They invested in a hobby that is small and does not seem to be growing; a risk few of us would have taken. It is just unfortunate that they did not spend a little more effort in getting the small things right.

Thanks...Joe


----------



## sethndaddy (Dec 4, 2004)

I'm sure Tom Lowe (owner of Autoworld) sent original cars to be copied, unfortunately, the material and quality control are not the same as years ago.

And if your not in a competitive race league, most of these cars run half decent out of the box. Some scream, I had a few that didn't move, most are ok.


----------



## videojimmy (Jan 12, 2006)

I've bought well over 200 cars from JL and AW, every single one of then ran out of the box.
The first t-jet release, with the black chassis, had some messaging issues but they were easily corrected. I'm not a racer, so as long as car is fast enough to fly off the track if not handled correctly, in fine with it. My only compliant is the limited body choices. Big fan of their ultra g chassis and the 4 gear. I don't think cars were designed for serious races, they were designed for collectors and Sunday drivers like me. I think their drag strips are awesome and the legends Funny car sets are great. 

Just my opinion.


----------



## grungerockjeepe (Jan 8, 2007)

Ive had probably 50 or more JL/AW chassis myself. The first release of the JL T-jets had their flaws, the first XTs were worse. The top tabs would never quite align with the chassis and the torque from the arm would rip the plate out of its position. I quickly culled the bodies I wanted and sold off the chassis. When the AW XT dropped, with a lot better quality frame, I was stoked! True, a few bent pickups and a few wobbly wheels but these can be fixed. I cant say Ive EVER come across an AW XT that I couldn't get to run at all. True, performance is all over the chart but some flat out scream. Im more of a collector/customizer myself so I don't obsess over every little imperfection. As long as my chassis run fast enough to be a challenge and don't destroy themselves in the process, Im pretty easy. AW has brought a HELL of a lot more to the table than all other brands combined since they've come on board, and they make something for pretty much everyone. HO may never hit the popularity levels of the '60s but if they keep doing what they do and enthusiasts keep introducing more people to the hobby, it will never disappear fully.


----------



## Hittman101 (Oct 21, 2009)

I'm just glad that there still slot cars being made and sold!! So I can get my nieces and nephews hooked..I'm not a racer but I really do enjoy the hobby. So when a nephew turns five I give them a track and whenever we go to visit I'm always running slots with them. I get evil looks when I talk about giving a set to a niece must be a girl thing.. But my daughter has tyco/mattel and AW cars and loves running them. I even have the kids at church running slots. I'm finding out kids don't care what brand of car it is as long has it fast and fun..


----------



## gonegonzo (Jan 18, 2006)

I have quite a few JL/AW cars . I bought these to race at home originally with my grandkids . Now , I belong to Outlaw Modifieds yahoo group where we bas our Modifieds on the AW chassis . 

I find that you either get a bad one ( one that needs ultra tuned to be fast ) or a good one ( one that only needs a gentle prodding ) . I think my biggest displeasure is the gear mesh is too sloppy . 

If you get a good one , it will spank and Aurora that has a lot of work put into it .

Gonzo


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

*Lest we forget*

From the other side of the looking glass, many chassis also included the special options list ...

bent rims that weebled-sometimes all four, with bent playdoh axles and gnarled splines that rubbed the tail plate, all shod with lumpy boot rubber tires that split and eventually turned to adobe as they disintegrated to dust, hypno-gears, canted or bound brushes, incorrect shoe hook geometry, linguini guide pins that fold while cornering, from rubbing tires all the way to monster truck ride heights, a super oval gear ratio for table top racing, later saddled with an off set neo magnet to fake handling stability and enhance the RTR experience.

The frustrating part was that they had both the original template and the knowledge of the ages on their side.

Based on the aforementioned list; how could they not improve! :tongue:


----------



## A/FX Nut (May 28, 2004)

I like Autoworld. Like someone said here they've invested time and money into a small hobby. There is alot to choose from. 

I have the fortune of being 20 miles from the AW Store and check in often to see what's available. A few items have been for sale only online and at the store. 

I recently purchased The Legends of The Quarter Mile Funny Cars. 2 of them have the rear axle hole out of center in the rear rim. I called the WARRANTIES/EXCHANGES/RETURNS phone number in the catalog. They are sending me two replacement chassis as we speak.

I'd like to see better quality control and that happens at the factory. Even if AW has to send someone to talk to the production manager at the factory in China. 

I do have a HOT ROD release 55 Chevy that runs great right out of the box. Couldn't be happier with it.

I'm thinking with some of us it's a love/hate relationship with Autoworld. We love the products, but hate the issues. That's the way it is with me anyway. 

Randy.


----------



## tjd241 (Jan 25, 2004)

*I gotta agree with Joe...*



Grandcheapskate said:


> ....I can go into my parts box and build a decent Aurora almost every time.


Matter of fact, I can't remember a time when I couldn't. I've rehabbed the crusted, busted, rusted and disgusted remnants of some kid's frustrated 40 year old forgotten hobby into some of the best running chassis I own. All with minimal effort and with minimal (if any) exchange of parts. Why would I wear any other color of glasses besides rose? Before my efforts and before any parts are replaced... I know what I'm going to end up with. 

That having been said, I disagree that JL/AW get no respect and I disagree that they don't deserve any respect. Most critiques are not disrespect. There have been big problems with quality and in the pancake category the repaints of the same bodies over and over is dissappointing to say the least. You can't fault a consumer for spending time and money wisely, or for becoming bored with a stale assortment. Equally important, you can't ignore accolades that JL/AW have earned. They are not without successes since they launched their line and they continue to produce slot cars to this day. This in and of itself might be their biggest success. To their credit they have improved and probably will continue to. 

I don't think Aurora produced chassis thinking decades would pass and they'd still be in service. That has just happened to become a reality. The 800LB gorilla in the room (to me) is and always has been the fact that a product designed and manufactured decades ago (as a hobby/toy item) wasn't immediately improved upon or at least produced with equal quality and with components of equal durability... when it was re-done. The product history is known and technology is far beyond what it was in the 60's. Seems like a no brainer to me. 

... and Mr. Stumpy, to probably your most important point... people flaming you for mentioning you buy/run/build/enjoy non-Aurora stuff??... That is more disrespectful to YOU than it is to JL/AW. They can fend for themselves and wouldn't be in the business if there wasn't any money being made. Buy/run/build whatever makes *you* happy and don't look back. There is no "right" answer. There are only opinions (mine included). Yours should always be centered around what you can afford and what you enjoy. *Period*. :thumbsup:


----------



## mrstumpy (Oct 5, 2013)

The replies to my question have been interesting and informative and without some of the bile that I got on some yahoo groups. I'm liking Hobby Talk better the longer I'm on it.

When I returned to HO T-jet racing four years ago, I started with Auto World cars because that was what the local hobby shops sold. Every one ran well, but a couple MUCH better than others. Taking what I had learned in the 60's with "vibrators" and early T-jets, each car was "tweeked" to run better. It appears quality is slowly being upgraded, but it still well below what it should be.

Within months I had been exposed to "real racing" in the Ohio. West Virginia, Pennsylvania Tri-State area. NONE of these clubs ran AW stuff, although there was some interest from a few members.

Time passed and a couple of us formed the Outlaw Modifieds group last winter which is based on stock AW T-jets with the chassis magnet out and the older type Modified Stock Car bodies (pre-fab body era). The idea is to run just for fun, not "serious" racing, and the AW cars perform well for this.

At a recent club race, we ran Super Stock, Stock, and Outlaw Modifieds. An AW based Outlaw Modified ran nearly on the Track Record for Aurora Super Stocks! That got me thinking that the aversion to AW T-jets is unfair. And that a "set up" AW car could race with Super Stocks. (Certainly I'm not the first person to think this! But I've heard or read nothing about the possibility.)

As far as the AW X-Traction, I find them manufactured with many more flaws than the T-jets for some reason. Gears are the most common problem. I have a few "Racing Rigs" that wouldn't pull their trailer because of this. I only have one "4-Gear" car, a Funny Car, and it runs fine.

As for using a fire suit to answer e-mail and posts on various groups, I have a problem of "thinking outside the box" and talking openly about it. So I'm used to flames!:thumbsup:

Stumpy in Ahia


----------



## DonSchenck (Nov 14, 2012)

I'm the weirdo here.

No seriously.

Having said (written, actually!) that -- I *enjoy* less-than-perfect cars out of the box. I LOVE the tweaking. I enjoy fixing a broken part ... trying to conjure up some creative solution -- or an excuse to buy yet another tool.

"Honey, I *NEED* a 3D printer!"

But then again ... I'm the weirdo. Now excuse me, I'm gonna go paint my toenails ...


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

*It could have been so much more....*

I love reading Daves (tjd 241) commentary cuz there's always a poignant nugget.

Ya love them, ya hate them, ya dont care, or your on the fence. The extremes or the vast area in between. One of the problems is human nature with it's tendency for groups to polarize any issue and pound the subject matter into 'lil horsey atoms. :beatdeadhorse:

We now live in a PC touchy feely culture where everyone gets a blue ribbon just for showing up. Heaven forbid that anyone would point out something as obvious as the car going down the track like a constipated duck; or something as subtle as the flames being layed inside out and inverted to the body line. In todays world, unless your spewing blind marketing rhetoric ANY critique or conjecture contrary to the party line is considered bashing. 

Acceptance of a factual critique should promote design or manufacturing improvements to the product; rather than an ego driven kneejerk defensive reaction. 

An adjusted, altered, or padded critique is merely another fluffy press release and does very little to actually improve the breed other than to provide a steady beat for marketing agendas. 

Indicative that the term "minor quality control issues" was merely a damage control mantra; a fair percentage of the first jillion were parted for bodies and usable bits; then chaff was raked into the trash. It was frequently conjectured at the time that there was neither quality or control. Of course this served to rally the loyalists and polarize the camps permanently just as it does today. Notably a drastic drop was reflected in perceived value at auction. The idea that truth lied somewhere in the middle was actually rather charitable at the time. 

NO ARGUMENT THAT AW HAS IMPROVED in rtr quality, customer service and followup. This doesnt change the fact that the "reputation" Stumpy has inquired about was earned fair and square. 


PS: Stumpy, for your perusal, the archives contain volumes on the matter that include AW's shake up of their distributor network, the collector vs racer runner question; as well as the mind numbing eviscerations of each release, and of course the infamously fateful "Take it or Leave it" post. None of it serves much purpose other than providing a historical back drop and an empty motive to sharpen your pitchfork and refresh the wadding on your torch.


----------



## wheelz63 (Mar 11, 2006)

I had a lot of problems years ago with some of the older chassis they made but autoworld has come along way, are they as good as tomy? No. But you are not paying the price like tomy cars are asking for. If you like to tinker around and make your car a wee bit faster on your own and like doing that kind of stuff then most of us are very happy with what we get from aw, and yes i agree we need different bodys for sure hopefully soon.

Richard
wheelz63


----------



## DonSchenck (Nov 14, 2012)

Well said, Bill Hall.


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

It's funny you should mention those threads stashed in the HT Library, Bill. I typed out my first reply to the initial post and didn't hit the post reply button. Instead I went to the same mentioned posts and started reading. It's really good reading, though time consuming!! It's easy enough to find them. Tom Lowe didn't post much after the first "critique" went sour. His HT handle is tlowe. Search it and find one of his posts, and then click his name and "see all posts". You won't have to dig too far. 

What amazed me most about this thread we're on now and the take it or leave it thread is twofold. Neither have required moderation (well, Hank closed down the take it or leave it thread after 11 pages on my counter (yours may vary depending on your posts per page count) and neither had to be edited for language. As I recall, the slot boards ran for years without a steady moderator, and the very few instances we did need one, one of the other mods or Hank himself would address the issue. We were a well behaved group, as I'm happy to see us that way now.

Sometimes the truth hurts, and if the shoe fits, it has to be worn. I agree with you that whitewashing a product for the sake of being PC it totally wrong. I know I'm going to have a dud LED pop up from time to time. I expect to be notified of the problem, and I have no problem fixing it for free. Even if it means a complete rework to get the job done. Now if half of my car's light fail, I would expect to be grilled for producing a poor product. If no one says anything for the sake of worrying about hurting my feelings, then I have no way of knowing the problem exists. 

This is where TL and I differ though. If there was an issue with the stuff I light up, I would not only fix what's messed up, but I would also do what I had to to make sure the problem doesn't reoccur. AW would rather mostly ignore the problem, or throw a magnet under the car to fix it. Some problems continue from release to release; some get better and then get worse again (think 4 Gear back gear rivets), and some improve (the new crown gear tamed the T Jet chassis down some). 

There may be a logical reason better parts take so long to be implemented. Take the axles as an example. Sure they're crappy, but they were cheap and there was probably 1/2 a million + ordered to take advantage of bulk pricing, and the minimal storage space needed. The same goes for idler gears, driven gears, pinion gears, pinion shafts, etc. Too expensive to toss, they keep getting used because so many of them were produced. I've said it before regarding T Jet chassis in particular... They were manufactured about 50 years ago with a heck of a lot more quality than they are now. You would think the new stuff would be made even better than the original, but instead we got today's version of "disposable toy cars".

This is the third time I typed up a reply to this post, and I think this one will do it. I will say thank you to everyone posting here!! I'm really happy we're working together to get things back to normal! :thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## sethndaddy (Dec 4, 2004)

I want Rose colored glasses:dude:


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

When the Dash chassis begins shipping, the reviews should compare it as is against both the old Aurora chassis and the AutoWorld chassis, with and without the traction magnet installed. I'd like to read a review which runs all three on a stock AFX wall wart with stock AFX controllers since that is what many kids may see on Christmas morning. Ideally, I'd like the reviewer to start with a sample of five of each chassis and report the range of performance for each, as shipped. Review them on all three of the AFX Tri-Power settings. Then the review should consider how each chassis responds to the popular Parma Econo aftermarket controller with higher ohms. In all cases, the review should report lap times.

My own experience with pancake chassis cars is that I rarely have seen one that didn't need some minor adjustment to the pickup shoes to improve performance. Having said that, it would be interesting to get performance data reported before ANY adjustments are made to simulate the "Christmas morning" experience. Of course, it would also be interesting to get report of performance after, say, a maximum of five minutes of adjustments/testing on a given chassis -- again to simulate Dad spending a little time with junior's new toy.

I'm pretty sure the expectation is that the Dash chassis will receive a glowing review and a comparison review with the AW chassis will show the Dash's superiority. I'm looking forward to reading it.


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

I nominate TK Solver to perform said tests.
seems like you have a great plan and the patience to see it through.
and I would certainly respect the report of results.
please consider.


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

I have 5 Dash chassis on preorder. I have 5 AW Tjet UltraG chassis still bagged from an order from Buds. I currently have no unmodified Aurora TJet chassis. I have access to a Tri-Power pack and stock controllers. I have Parma Econo 60's and 90's (and I believe a couple of 120's as well). I will write a review based on what I have access to.

I'm such a geek...


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

*Magic Eightball sez...*



alpink said:


> I nominate TK Solver to perform said tests.
> seems like you have a great plan and the patience to see it through.
> and I would certainly respect the report of results.
> please consider.


Al heres the early race results....

Dash first, genny Aurora second, AW DNS/DNF due to graffiti in the radiator :devil:


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

TK Solver said:


> When the Dash chassis begins shipping, the reviews should compare it as is against both the old Aurora chassis and the AutoWorld chassis, with and without the traction magnet installed. I'd like to read a review which runs all three on a stock AFX wall wart with stock AFX controllers since that is what many kids may see on Christmas morning. Ideally, I'd like the reviewer to start with a sample of five of each chassis and report the range of performance for each, as shipped. Review them on all three of the AFX Tri-Power settings. Then the review should consider how each chassis responds to the popular Parma Econo aftermarket controller with higher ohms. In all cases, the review should report lap times.
> 
> My own experience with pancake chassis cars is that I rarely have seen one that didn't need some minor adjustment to the pickup shoes to improve performance. Having said that, it would be interesting to get performance data reported before ANY adjustments are made to simulate the "Christmas morning" experience. Of course, it would also be interesting to get report of performance after, say, a maximum of five minutes of adjustments/testing on a given chassis -- again to simulate Dad spending a little time with junior's new toy.
> 
> I'm pretty sure the expectation is that the Dash chassis will receive a glowing review and a comparison review with the AW chassis will show the Dash's superiority. I'm looking forward to reading it.


This has been a great thread.

While I understand the desire to get a "Christmas Morning" test of the various chassis, my evaluation of each chassis would not be how they perform straight out of the box, but rather how they perform once basic tuning has been done. I would not put much weight behind the performance of an untreated chassis. But again, I see the point as it relates to newcomers.

Whether Aurora, Dash or AW/JL, I expect (and enjoy) performing minor work on a pancake chassis to get it running well - not race ready, but good enough to enjoy in the basement. "Race Ready" probably means the replacement/swapping of parts no matter which chassis you use.

Tweaking shoes, adjusting brush tension and a good clean and lube would be the basis for evaluation a chassis. If I need to go beyond that into modifying the chassis or replacing parts, then the chassis fails the basic QC test.

I do not dispute the fact that a JL or AW chassis can go faster than an Aurora. I have a few myself. But can it be done with only simple tuning or does it go beyond that? I have one JL XT that was really bad - misaligned gearplate and a badly warped comm which I thought was useless. When I ran it, it was sluggish, got very hot and the armature was hitting the bottom of the chassis near the rear magnet. In desperation, I cut off the locking tabs from the front of the gearplate which took all the pressure off the armature shaft. I also filed down the rear tabs to let them fit better. Now the car is very fast and runs cool. But this type of modification should not be needed and I can see from every other XT that the problem of the misaligned gearplate exists on every chassis I have - but I don't want to hack up any more chassis than necessary.

If it was just the occasional car, then you could chalk it up to chance. But if it's a pattern, you have a problem. The things which are wrong were/are very easy to correct. One has to ask - when the axles were found to be bent, was the rest of the lot tossed or were they used until the stock was depleted? Worse, were better ones made and thrown into the same bin as the bad ones, thereby having them scattered throughout various releases?

I am not bashing JL or AW. I just believe that the few issues they had could have and should have been corrected early. After the first release, all the problems should have been corrected. I think all reasonable people would have given them a pass on the first release and JL and AW would be looked at far more favorably by far more people.

Thanks...Joe


----------



## mrstumpy (Oct 5, 2013)

No argument here that quality control/manufacturing screw ups SHOULD have been dealt with as soon as possible. They HAVE gotten better, but by now ALL problems should have long since been cured.

Will the Dash chassis be of much higher quality? I should certainly hope so! The time and effort that has gone into that project to this point should assure it! And we have reaped the reward on many very good parts and bodies along the way!

I'm not in any way against using the old Aurora cars. I race them right now. But by the time you find a good chassis among the ever declining number of unwarped forty year old ones, swap out the wheels and tires, buy a body, and do the necessary cleaning, lubing, and tuning, you have expended a substantial amount of effort on a car.

You can expend just as much effort on an Auto World car and have a faster car. I guess my root question is; WHY is an inexpensive and easy to come by resource is being ignored and derided. Hence the title of this thread; AW get's no respect.

Stumpy in Ahia
Stumpy in Ahia


----------



## NTxSlotCars (May 27, 2008)

I think AW is doing a great job. The quality is the best you can expect out of a 12yr old kid in China these days.
I have never had good enough luck out of the original Aurora chassis to enjoy them any better than these AWs.
No car manufacturer has equal quality across the board. Not AW, AFX, Tyco, LL, Carrera, Ford, Chevy, VW... you get the point.
Everyone makes dogs and everyone makes good runners. The quality issues slowly improve,
the bodies are fantastic. More selection is always nice.

:thumbsup: AW


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

mrstumpy said:


> You can expend just as much effort on an Auto World car and have a faster car. I guess my root question is; WHY is an inexpensive and easy to come by resource is being ignored and derided. Hence the title of this thread; AW get's no respect.
> 
> Stumpy in Ahia


Stumpy,
It's not the effort that's the problem, it's the quality of the parts. If someone does not like to spend time tuning a chassis, then pancake chassis are not for them. So whether it is Aurora, Dash or JL/AW, you have to put in the effort to get a pancake chassis to run well.

The difference between a poorly tuned pancake and a well tuned pancake is far more noticeable than between a tuned and untuned inline car. An untuned pancake car may hardly run, while an untuned (out of the box) inline car will probably run pretty well.

Can an stock AW car run faster than a stock Aurora? Most definitely - because they were designed that way. The difference is this: were you able to get the AW car to run well with the stock parts and without modifying the chassis? If the answer is (almost) always YES, then AW has solved it's quality issues --- IF the extra magnet is not masking other problems.

Faster is not always the name of the game. Many do not like pancake cars because they are not as fast as inline cars. Well, they are not supposed to be faster. JL/AW cars are designed to be faster than Aurora with lower ohm armatures and stronger magnets. Being faster does not directly translate into being better.

So we are not comparing apples to apples. What we are comparing is the ability to use the stock parts to create a chassis which runs well within the design constraints of the chassis. How the various chassis compare on that basis is how we offer positive or negative feedback.

Joe


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

*They is what they are*

AW chose to "loosely" re-pop the inbred derivative TO rather than the original. As they altered specifications and materials, the end product differed greatly. Thus the jlto did not fit the already established template at the time. A comprehensive rule set wasnt possible without allowances or restrictions in one direction or another.

While we saw the magnet restrictions changed over time, the armature rating has remained fixed in "Fray" style racing and it's derivatives. Ohms still remain the controlling factor. The AW armature rating falls under the established norm of the T-jet and well above the hotter AFX winds. So it's not really any different than cu" displacement and class restrictions in 1:1 racing. 

While both are fruit from similar trees, they will forever be apples and oranges. Regardless of whether it was omission or commission the simple fact is that they were changeling critters; and as such, they fit nether end of the spectrum and would require a special class of their own. Whether or not, and where and how groups/consumers choose to include them; is a completely subjective matter based on factors beyond just cheap and fast, as Joe astutely pointed out.

The situation has nothing to do with respect or a lack of it. It's merely where the numbers fall within convention and what is permissible at the club level. Some do and some dont.


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

What Bill said!! There was probably a cost factor that made the TO chassis the best option. Once the decision was made to use cheap plastic gearing with the exception of the arm gear, they were forced to go the TO route, because a plastic pinion gear in the 9 tooth size would have never held up to the demands. With the gearing that way, the JL/ early AW chassis were way too fast, too twitchy even with a 90 Ohm controller. Throw a stock Tomy controller in the mix and you basically had an on / off switch type of operation. Around the first extra magnet release, AW changed the crown gear which did slow the chassis down some, but they are still too fast by comparison. Add in the other QC failures like offset, over sized axle holes, bent axles, crooked wheels, low traction rubber tires instead of silicones, and a few other odd problems and you'll have a car that performs poorly... Nothing like an Aurora T Jet.

I'm all for an unbiased test of all 3 chassis types too. I agree TK is a good candidate for the job if he's for it. I also think Bill H. is correct to a point about the results. The AW chassis has a chance of finishing, but it will no doubt be in the anchorman position. It's sad that AW decided to go the magnet route instead of actually fixing the problems their chassis had. Putting a band aid on a broken leg doesn't make it all better...


----------



## mrstumpy (Oct 5, 2013)

Okay, I get the picture here. In a way, it's pretty much the same as I have gotten when I've brought this up before on other sites, but without the nastiness. Aurora is the "gold standard" against which everything else is measured.

The Auto World T-jet is a "cheap pretender to the throne." It's manufacturing standards and quality control are taking far too long to get "up to standard." 

Next we have the Dash T-jet, which should be superior to both the tired Aurora chassis and the slipshod Auto World chassis. It's had years of effort to make sure it is the best of everything. 

This leads me to think that the Dash T-jet will bury both the Aurora and AW chassis for racing once and for all! I'd better order a few right now.:thumbsup:

Stumpy in Ahia


----------



## ajd350 (Sep 18, 2005)

As a collector and racer I agree with both points being made here. The collector is weary of the same old bodies and the racer can build 4 Aurora Fray TJets in the same time/effort window it takes to do a JL/AW that will still not equal it on the track. 

Yes, the apples and oranges argument is in force. However, we have to make our decisions somewhere. The JL/AW car has run the dance floor uncontested now for near 15 years and that has bred complacency. The only incentive to improve the car has been to reduce warranty return costs. 

Now that open door for a competitive product has swung open wide with the OEM Aurora NOS chassis finally running dry. Kudos to Dan for recognizing this and stepping into the market. The Dash chassis only needs to equal the Aurora to be a success. On the racing side, that will make it a hit. On the collector side, we already know what the bodies are like. 

If distribution and availabilty is good, along with reliabilty, AW will be forced to step it up or lose share of the market. 

In my mind, AW has earned whatever level of respect ( or non-respect ) it has. 

Time will tell. Let the comparisons begin.....


----------



## Ralphthe3rd (Feb 24, 2011)

Just to set history markers here, but didn't JL debut their Chassis around 2000 or 2001 ? ...at best their chassis history is only 13 years old.
Ya know whats funny, nobody has even mentioned the Model Motoring(II) Thunder Plus chassis ! I have a few of them with Good arms, and they run great, and I got one that needed a replacement arm, and I swapped in an Aurora Arm and run the bejezzus out of it, and she's a sweet runner too.
I got a thought about the soon(?)coming T-Dash Chassis. Umm, I wonder how many Chassis molds were ever cut, just One ? ie- Aurora had Dozens , which considering how many chassis they produced was necessary because of die wear and damage.


ajd350 said:


> .....................Yes, the apples and oranges argument is in force. However, we have to make our decisions somewhere. The *JL/AW car has run the dance floor uncontested now for near 15 years and that has bred complacency.* The only incentive to improve the car has been to reduce warranty return costs.
> 
> Now that open door for a competitive product has swung open wide with the OEM Aurora NOS chassis finally running dry. Kudos to Dan for recognizing this and stepping into the market. The Dash chassis only needs to equal the Aurora to be a success. On the racing side, that will make it a hit. On the collector side, we already know what the bodies are like.
> 
> ...


----------



## ajd350 (Sep 18, 2005)

Ralph, I think you're right on 2000. Even if we call it at 13 years, the point is that there has been more than enough time to have made these way better than they are. 

I agree with you on the Thunder Plus. The ones I've fiddled with with were very good and it's a shame that the arm issue shot them down. It could have been what we expect the Dash to be. I thought about them, but they are rare on the market these days and few are running them. Too bad....

With the number that Dash will need to run, far fewer molds should be needed. Unfortunately, I doubt that they will be run in the tens of millions like the Aurora was. It still amazes me that overall the original Auroras maintaned the tolerances as well as they did over the life of the run. Hopefully he has that aspect covered.


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

The only issues with the Thunderplus which I ever heard were:

(1) The 50 ohm armature which was mistakingly placed into the first chassis. However, MM did offer replacement 15 ohm arms at no cost.

(2) The wheelbase is just slightly off from the Aurora "standard".

I only have one running Thunderplus and it is as good as any Aurora. I know the Thunderplus was first used when the Corvette GS came out. I believe the Corvette GS was the last body MM made and they must have run out of Aurora chassis. Every other model (and I have them all) was first issued with a NOS Aurora. When or if any other models were later released with the Thunderplus is something I cannot answer. I also don't remember if the Thunderplus was sold seperately.

Because of their low production numbers, including them in any side by side test would not be relevant.

Joe


----------



## A/FX Nut (May 28, 2004)

I'm not sure Autoworld used the traction magnet to hide the issue of a "rough" riding chassis. Anyone who runs or races the Ultra-G will know right away if the axles are bent, has an uncentered axle hole in the rim, or the tire is out of round. You'll here it on the track, like a vibration sound.

Back a few years ago. There was a venue called the Lightningfest. It was a diecast show. But the slot cars were added. When Tom Lowe bought back the slot car line from RC2/ERTLE. The Lightningfest became the Autofest. These events were held in South Bend, Indiana.

At the 2007 or 2008 Autofest my friend Craig, (MTYODER) and I were there. Craig had built a portable drag strip out of corian countertop material. It was hooked to a laptop computer that ran the timing system and car batteries to power the track.

Craig had several modified JL/AW cars there running them down the track. Tom came in and looked over the dragstrip and cars that Craig had modified. One car in particular Tom picked up and noticed that Craig had glued a neo dot magnet to the underside of the chassis. Tom asked Craig, "Why?" Craig explained the modifications gave the car so much torque that it would lift the guide pin out of the slot and stall. About a year or so later the first Ultra-G Thunderjets were released. 

I know adding the traction magnet eases the rouh ride but doesn't fix it. I think Autoworld saw a niche with Craig and his modifcations and added another tweak for the tuner guy and an easy fix for the ride and stability issues. 

Randy.


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

*Rare Earth Dot Magnets*

yep, been installing Radio Shack Rare Earth dot magnets in my drag cars since the mid 80's.
of course I use wheelie bars/anti-lift devices too.
in one 4-gear sporting a Bob Lincoln (WIZZARD) hot rewind and Super II magnets I even drilled out the front of the chassis and installed those dot magnets just above pick up shoes in addition to the two imbedded in the rear of the chassis.
missle!
no wheelie bar/anti-lift device required. LOL
back to your regularly scheduled discussion.
I don't hate AW/JL cars, they have filled a gap, keeping the hobby alive until Dan could get the intestinal fortitude to re-create t-jet chassis.
I await with bated breath.
I have also heard that Tom Lowe added traction magnets to chassis to avoid being in violation of someones patent/rights. don't know veracity of such statement.
but if he did get idea from your buddy, that proves that he is paying attention and willing to make adjustments in his own way and time.
:wave:


----------



## ajd350 (Sep 18, 2005)

Good point on the gap filler aspect, Al. Whatever else they came up short on, the JL/AW line did helped bring pancake racing back from the brink of obscurity. Credit is due for that.


----------



## philo426 (Mar 4, 2009)

The new tool AW Mustang t Jet looks pretty good but the gears are not the best.


----------



## A/FX Nut (May 28, 2004)

alpink said:


> yep, been installing Radio Shack Rare Earth dot magnets in my drag cars since the mid 80's.
> of course I use wheelie bars/anti-lift devices too.
> in one 4-gear sporting a Bob Lincoln (WIZZARD) hot rewind and Super II magnets I even drilled out the front of the chassis and installed those dot magnets just above pick up shoes in addition to the two imbedded in the rear of the chassis.
> missle!
> ...


I heard the issue of patent/rights also Al. But like you I don't know how much truth there is to it.

Randy.


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

I don't know it for sure, but I think the latest version of the '70 mustang has a retooling of the hood from the smaller scoop to the larger. Either way, it's still one of my favorite T Jets because of it's better proportions. I wish they would retool the Cougar to a LWB body, as it's short in the doors like they Aurora version was. It's still on my list of wants and I have the bodies here to play with. Unfortunately, I fear it won't be looked at favorably, kinda like the Nurora Camaro Z-28 does. We're all used to the 67-69 Camaro and 65 Mustang being SWB, so when a better proportioned body comes along, it kinda looks funny.

I personally have no major problems with what AW has offered body-wise. I just wish they would make some new ones instead of rehashing the same old over and over. We don't need "gimmick" cars. We need new material. 


I'd even be happy with some improvements on old T Jet bodies. Fix the 70 Camaro's back spoiler (a problem since the beginning) and put a front bumper on it (both split bumper and full will make for 2 "new" cars without breaking the bank). They made the 64 GTO with a removable hood. How about a blower version or a hood scoop? Even a stock Lemans hood would be nice. There's other bodies with separate hoods that could be modified too. Adding rear spoilers to the Mopars is another idea. These are quick, simple modifications that will spice up future releases without a huge investment. I don't know if everyone will embrace them, but anything helps.

Now that the Dash chassis is complete, TL is going to feel the heat. Whether he makes some more improvements to the chassis or not is up to him. It would be in his best interest to do so, or get out of the T Jet chassis business and just sell bodies. Going back into the Pullback business might be an option. Aw heck, maybe just sell the plain unpainted bodies as kits as has been suggested for years.


----------



## 70ss (Aug 22, 2005)

I know I would like to see new body styles from AW also. 

But compairing to Aurora to AW. How many different bodies did Aurora have compaired to AW?

I would think it would be close. 

Aurora also had the luxary of producing during the heyday of slot cars and still only offered a finite amount of bodies. 

And were guilty of the same rehashing of bodies in different colors or decals.


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

an important note I want to recall.

tooling is the most expensive part of any body run. in order to justify/break even, then profit from the tooling costs, many, many bodies have to be made with the tooling.
therefor, we end up with many more bodies than we are ever really going to need and have a warehouse full of them which is adding to costs/overhead.
so decorating them differently and trying to sell them is our best alternative to raising costs to consumers.
I too, would like to see some different body styles, but I am not going to get into the dilemma that Dan(DASH) found himself in when factory closed with his tooling kept captive. for the reasonable price and various, well detailed, bodies that Dan sold I can only be grateful and thank Dan for his courage and entrepreneurship.


----------



## ajd350 (Sep 18, 2005)

Remember the TJet really only ran for seven years before the AFX pushed it aside. Each of those years Aurora expanded the body selection. JL/AW has been at it nearly twice as long (good), but the new styles have slowed to a trickle (bad). Re-deco can be a good way to extend interest, but you can only go to the well so many times before the interest turns to boredom. Still need to have a few new bodies here and there to keep the buyers happy. Somewhere in there is a good balance.


----------



## Bubba 123 (Sep 10, 2010)

ajd350 said:


> Remember the TJet really only ran for seven years before the AFX pushed it aside. Each of those years Aurora expanded the body selection. JL/AW has been at it nearly twice as long (good), but the new styles have slowed to a trickle (bad). Re-deco can be a good way to extend interest, but you can only go to the well so many times before the interest turns to boredom. Still need to have a few new bodies here and there to keep the buyers happy. Somewhere in there is a good balance.


even recasting bods from their earliest release, ice cream truck white...
and a lot of the others, rigs, yaddas..."NOS" 's:freak:

Bubba 123 :wave:


----------



## hefer (Sep 18, 1999)

Those JL AFX Mustangs were pretty sweet. How about some repaints of those?


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

There are a couple "issues" that I feel contribute to the reaction AW bodies recieve. 

1. Certain body deco choices are highly questionable and not appealing at all to the casual collector/buyer. The graffiti scheme was horrible. KISS, Looney Tunes, Rat Fink, etc. may appeal to some, but it's a very limitied audience.

2. The body choices. Without too much difficulty, I think you can pretty well determine which body styles are going to be big sellers and which will be duds. Aurora had their share and so does every other company. Trying to eliminate those before production would allow for the creation of better, more appealing body styles. Maybe a survey on their website?

3. Rather than having scheduled/organized releases, my suggestion would be to produce a given body in multiple NICE paint schemes whenever time/finances permit. With each pre-determined release, there are always some cars you may like and others that you don't - and not just the body style, but the deco.
There is a buildup to a new release and then if it does not excite the customer base, it is a huge letdown. 
So instead of saying "Here's release x and there are 5,000 of each car", wouldn't it be more sellable to say "We just released 5,000 Ford GTs - 500 each in 10 different paint schemes"? The mold is the same, so all that would change would be the deco. AW could produce more sellable cars out of the same mold at the same time, while probably pleasing more customers and generating multiple sales of the same body because the paint scheme is different. Isn't it better to have 10 choices rather than 1?

I collected all the JL cars and starting collecting AWs. Two things turned me off so that now I only buy what I like. (1) The early games played with the "chase" philosophy and multiple window tints and (2) some downright ugly deco choices starting with the graffiti release.

I would have bought a lot more of the body style I liked if they came in different, appealing paint schemes.

Joe


----------

