Hobbyist Forums banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I see that there has only been one run of these cars, does anyone know if there are more planned?

Also I would like to know if they take standard X-Traction bodies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
641 Posts
Most slot car enthusiasts know the Auto World Super III was a mistake,
and Auto World has probably figured that out by now.

No spare parts and no other bodies fit on the chassis.

__________________

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,677 Posts
I hear they're planning another release and the body mounts are supposed to be adjusted so that theyre compatible with the XTs.

With some tuning, the SIII's run pretty well. But for the life of me I have no idea why AW didnt just copy the G+ or supermagnatraction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
I hear they're planning another release and the body mounts are supposed to be adjusted so that theyre compatible with the XTs.

With some tuning, the SIII's run pretty well. But for the life of me I have no idea why AW didnt just copy the G+ or supermagnatraction.
I think they were trying to make a low buck competition car but low buck turned into crappy product. With the right tuning (securing the brush barrel screws with glue) they can run ok, but they are hardly a threat to competiton. Still the best cars I have are Supermagnetractions and Blazin Brakes/Speedshifters with a single gear G-Plus rear axle. They just fly past everything else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,677 Posts
I think they were trying to make a low buck competition car but low buck turned into crappy product. With the right tuning (securing the brush barrel screws with glue) they can run ok, but they are hardly a threat to competiton. Still the best cars I have are Supermagnetractions and Blazin Brakes/Speedshifters with a single gear G-Plus rear axle. They just fly past everything else.
Crazy! Thats exactly what I do to the supermag variants. 'Cept for the front stub axles, the Supermagnatraction and all of its derivatives is IMHO one of Aurora's best ever chassis.

The SIII isnt so much 'crappy' as it is poorly executed. The adjustable traction mags, 4 place wheelbase and adjustable brush barrels are all fairly advanced features, and SHOULD make for a very tweakable and versatile item. But you have to have the basics down, and AW shouldve just repopped a proven inline before trying to develop all these high end features. All the widgets and upgrades mean nothing if you dont have a reliable fast platform to build upon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,512 Posts
Yeah, AW should have done a can motor based inline along the lines of a Tomy Turbo or Tyco HP7. At the end of the day, the Turbo and HP7 are about as plug-and-play as you can get for newbies who have a passion for speed.

I think AW tried to emulate the Wizzard P car without having someone with the technical expertise and experience to deliver on the promise that the Super III design implies. They could have sourced a cost reduced chassis from Wizzard, BSRT, or Slottech and come up with a body mount that adapted to one of those chassis designs. The value in the deal for AW would have been the AW hardbody.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,011 Posts
Seems to me it could be salvaged if AW were to produce some replacement parts and perhaps even go into their own hop-up parts production. Clean things up on a second run. The car is certainly cheap enough and with some tweaks could be a fun car. But with no available spare parts... why bother.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top