This pic was posted by TJet Racer in the other AW thread but I needed to brighten it up a bit to satisfy my own curiosity.





http://photos.hobbytalk.com/data/500/superIII.jpg

Behind the left front tire I can see an alternate axle mounting hole, so that is re-assuring (unless that has been deleted in the final production version).

Also visible is a little better wheel detail and the overall look of the chassis.

Doba,
Good pic. I only hope it's not dust. :devil:

Anyone know if they're chroming those wheels? :thumbsup: rr

Interesting. The metal bushing retainer in the picture doesn't even look like it's installed correctly. It looks to be behind the front bearing instead of on top of it.

I've never experienced a problem with a retainer on a P-car, even with the stock straight configuration. Most racers put a little gull wing bend in the retainer as added insurance. The newer versions of the Storm chassis has tiny bump stops on the bottom to keep the bottom of the retainer from moving back. At least this style metal retainer has no possibility of shorting the track rails if the car flips upside down without a body mounted.

The one thing that pops out about the SIII chassis is that it appears to be setup to mount open wheel bodies if the body clip is removed.

In any case, in a few days all of the mysteries of the SIII will be revealed.

.

Here is a brightened and labelled picture of the proto that AW sent me 12-18 months ago (now lost :( ) that shows the 4 wheels bases as lifted from my metal chassis design.

http://www.bglawns.com/Super_III%20mock%20up%20(14).jpg

If you stare at the lightened photo 'Doba put up, you can see the same four axle holes. I can see the rear and the front for sure. So, I am assuming the second from rear holes are there also. Very encouraging if this is the case. Love the wheels AW has, as a long over due alternative to the crap choices out there.

So we need pictures of the final chassis. Frustrating that a couple of retailers have the chassis but have not posted pictures. Very unreasonable to expect us to wait a few days :)

Agreed!!! You'd think it would help sell the product a little faster??? hhmmmm????? Where's the marketing gurus? Are they all on vacation?

Jeff tells me the chassis is unchanged.

Eeeek.

The model as pictured would never run (see gear mesh). Also the motor magnet look to need a retaining system or epoxy maybe to not come up on one side or pop in a crash. I understand this may be a prototype photo and all problems are fixed on the release. Should be interesting.

Agreed!!! You'd think it would help sell the product a little faster??? hhmmmm????? Where's the marketing gurus? Are they all on vacation?


Or it looks like crap and maybe a few people will buy some before that gets out??

Such a pessmist, I know.

Hi All:

After looking at the better picture I did notice two important features of the chassis that I noticed

First, look at the small box section area that holds the brush barrel and pick-up springs. The width is only as large as the width of the springs. On other racers the width is larger and the springs move from side to side. This should help keep the springs " Flat " and not have the pick-up shoes lean from side to side. The closer walls should help with this.

Second, if you remove the guide pin and the front wheels, you have a clean shot to the front and rear bushings. What I mean is that if you take out the magnets and arm, replace the busings and retaining clip, you have a clean way to aline the bushings. If the shaft of the arm is a #52 drill bit, from the front end " drill " or clean a straight path through the bushings while in place. This will give a parrallel " hole" for the shaft to ride in.

Thanks

Voxxer

Montoya's pic brightness and contrast adjusted a little bit:

http://photos.hobbytalk.com/data/500/Super_III.jpg

Bob,that's to let the arm spool up to speed faster,then they turn on the neo mag to pull the arm backwards,thus engaging the crown gear,launches harder then a top fueler if the wheels don't disintergrate:p:p:woohoo::woohoo:

55127

55128

55129

55130This is a image of the production version of the chassis, with everything attached except for body clip (to hold on the car's body to chassis).

Looks OK.

If the clip with the 2 holes in (legacy of my magnet idea) has nothing underneath, why is it there? Can it be removed?

Bags of potential, just concerned the shoes are too thick and too angled, but thats something to play with.

Th wheelbases seem to have survived from my chassis, in which case please AW, use them!!!

I think the clip needs to be there. It looks like it helps hold the rear bushing and motor magnets in place.

Agreed it does that as well. I think there are two prongs that go down from the clip and do as you say. But the holes....

As for the wheelbases, I don't really care about the who and why as long as AW make use of them. Or people like Gary and Helen.

Any one ohm out the arm yet?

As for the wheelbases, I don't really care about the who and why as long as AW make use of them. Or people like Gary and Helen.

Thanks Deane.:thumbsup:

I hope the extended holes somewhat match up with the new AFX wheelbase. Then it would be nice for the casters like Helen and myself to give the public the choice of using either chassis. You know which chassis I will be leaning towards:woohoo:

The only thing I don't understand is with the beautiful wheels AW sports, the thought process behind knurling the front axle ends to hold on the front wheel hubs? LifeLike did this also on their last version of the "M"-chassis and the "T" chassis. Over 40 years of slotting and I don't remember having fitment issues with simple non-knueled front axle shafts. Maybe the AW people hired the LL designer to help with this new design....:freak: I hope Steve is watching this, and considers the simple design over this. I'm sure we are in for a different set of very nice wheel design on the new AFX chassis.

Cheers, Gar

Gary,

I agree that you should focus on the new AFX chassis, but that is a way off so keep your hand in and make something for this chassis too! Maybe a version of your Nisaan or 956?

Gary,

I agree that you should focus on the new AFX chassis, but that is a way off so keep your hand in and make something for this chassis too! Maybe a version of your Nisaan or 956?

Shouldn't be a problem for any of my stuff with the multiple wheelbases. The new AW stuff should be available at the Midwest Slot Car show I will attend in April. I will be picking up a few chassis to play with for the casting side. One positive thing I will say, is I like those wheels. Hope someone is selling chassis only. Those AW bodies are scary. Looks like Jeff has it on his schedule also.

I like the wheels too but those new style axles now thats scary :)

Roger Corrie

Kinda defeats having 4 different wheelbases to play with doesn't it? I mean why melt the wheels to the axle if you intend people to set it up differently?

As I said before I may pick one up, but having 4 wheelbases won't necessarily make me want to cast bodies for it. Its still pretty darn tall, and the rear is too square and tall to fit under bodies most people want. Unfortunately the carry over of the adjustable magnets is what made the rear so bulky..... That's why my money is on the AFX chassis for sure. As for the wheels - not a big fan - the 5 spoke wheels from BSRT are much nicer IMO. I am sure once people start prying them off for use, they'll be upset as no doubt they'll be ruined.

Just my 2 cents....

R. Picard
www.slotcarinnovations.com

OI got 2 of these as freebies today to test.Dogs out of the box,and also afx/mag chassis will NOT fit these bodies.Terribly slow on the dragstrip.
DRAGjet

OI got 2 of these as freebies today to test.Dogs out of the box,and also afx/mag chassis will NOT fit these bodies.Terribly slow on the dragstrip.
DRAGjet

Hey Chris -- can you post a pic of the issue with mounting the Magnatrac / Xtrac chassis? Which bodies did you end up with? Does this nix the Turbo / SRT / SG+ family of chassis also, as I would assume?

Thanks.

I got the 07,70 Mustangs,they came in the same wheelbase as AFX chassis,but the mount clips are too far forward to fit.havent checked any indy cars or anything,but the turbo and super G chassis fit afx bodies,so there ya go.
DRAGjet

The gear mesh is also not the greatest.
DRAGjet

I got the 07,70 Mustangs,they came in the same wheelbase as AFX chassis,but the mount clips are too far forward to fit.havent checked any indy cars or anything,but the turbo and super G chassis fit afx bodies,so there ya go.
DRAGjet

Wow -- I won't be buying a single one then.:mad:

No joke!I hate to be negative,but the whole chassis just seems like an afterthought.
JMHO.
DRAGjet
p.s.We had a STOCK t-jet that had Wiz brushes and matched magnets..BEAT the car on the dragstrip.proofs in the pudding Doba.Save your $.

This is disappointing, but honestly its not surprising.....at least to me. Its a shame that the "Super 3" moniker has to be associated with it - of course the first AFX super II was never quite what it was hyped to be either.... maybe in 30 years we'll all wish we had them ....

R. Picard
www.slotcarinnovations.com

Any one ohm out the arm yet?

6.1
DRAGjet

Chris, Dont apologize for any imagined negativity. Just the facts, straight up...We expect nothing less from you. Thanx for the early intel and observations.

here is a side shot of the mustang from the bay...
a bit bummed at the review of these so far, but I'm sure somebody here can figure out what needs to be tweaked or swapped out on the new chassis, J

Yeeeeuch.

Thanks for the info on the arm. Putting a 6.1 arm in this magnet set-up tells me Tom L's advisors were not that educated on matching speed to downforce. Learn from the LL t-chassis please. Having a SS legal arm in a car thats illegal because of magnets was not well thought out. If ceramics were used it would make sense. The choice made was wrong on many levels.

I'm not sure AW aimed this car at SS, or even know what it is.

Montoya--- I know one person that had input into this car. He raced Ufhora and HOPRA regularly. He's young and had a couple good Ideas but they were rejected. Experience is not necessarily tapped into at the manufacturing level. I do know the new Tomy car does have an experienced racer and creator working with Steve Russell. I expect it will be considerably better. The Aw car is not necessarily a lost cause if you want to put an aftermarket arm in.

I'm sure that the S3 will undergo lots of improvements in the hands of hard core guys like us but AW should have done some of that upfront.

More than anything I would love to have a body that uses that longest wheelbase as part of release one,

Looks like a toy car to me. >for kids. :hat:

So Chris what is the measurement from the rear axle hole to the longest axle hole? It would be nice to know how much longer it is. Is it as long as a TYCO pan chassis?

Roger Corrie

Yeah, what are the four wheelbases?

Ouch!

Hadnt seen a full on side view yet.

I find the styling very disproportionate. Given the chosen length to height ratio this model lacks the graceful stretch of the original.

Check the angle on that tunnel rammed dual quad setup! Better fix those sacked out motor mounts. At that angle I'd say the fan has already "slurrpied" the radiator or at a minimum the fan shroud has been tuna canned.

I really makes no sense, there is a lovely long maximum wheelbase and they did not use it.

I was hoping this 'stang would be nice.. funny how the tjet boss mustang seemed to be spot on in terms of scale. Even the tampos on the front of this grille look so inferior to the Tjet car that JL released. Its almost as though the pattern maker and manufacturing plant are completely different...Plus - is there a reason the rear track is so wide? (how wide is it anyway?)

In response to this being a "toy" - IMHO it is. The original JL cars were well received for the bodies mostly, and the chassis was a nice thing to have, as it allowed people easier access to these pancake chassis that otherwise would have to be sought out at shows or on epay.

Honestly, venturing into an inline was a move to put more sets out there that kids could enjoy. Any inline trying to be a serious performer without pro racer input is just a toy, or an attempt to secure more of the entry market.

On the other hand, anything associated with the Russell family has always had top input.

Once these are out there I imagine that Bud will create a "buddyclip" that will enable the body to be used on other chassis...... Just out of curiousity, how would thee mustang look sitting on top of an SG+ chassis without the body clip?

What happened to all these beautiful bodies? Although, the Mustang looks squat in that photo also. Look at the 'tang pic, and you can see the rear tires sticking out too. And, no COT Nascar, only the version they came out with.

We have to give AW the benefit of the doubt and assume they will use the longer wheelbases at some point.

Has anyone got a theory on why the pickup shoes are so thick (if they still are)? Come to think about it, what do we do about spare shoes axles etc? Are any available?

I was noticing the huge amount of travel in the pick ups when viewed in the unloaded position. Looks like a clutch pedal on a VW bug!

Noted that they are once again nose heavy out of the box. Check the wear pattern on the pic with the inverted view. They also appear to be kinda delicate and unprotected on the backside where they disappear up into the brush barrels. Probably a non factor... just caught my eye.

Trying to adjust these shoes takes a bit of effort,there as tough as nails to bend,but I got my sons car running good on his track.I wanted to ad 1 thing,all you inline guys have managed to tweak and tune every inline car out there with great success<maybe not Marchon??>I have no doubt when you guys are done..this chassis will be a racer,good luck guys and god speed.
DRAGjet

Does your son like it? In other words, does it stick good to the track?...comparable magnetic downforce to a ...?

I bought him a big tyco set with the adjustable speed controllers,if he runs the car at the mid setting for long,it heats up something fierce!The tycos and super g's dont get hot.So the downforce is very strong!He seems to love racing it though,he calls it his prize:)
DRAGjet