|
Post by mel62 on Dec 21, 2012 11:47:54 GMT -5
Just received a new shell, or at least a test cast for one which is the BRM 261. This car lasted from 1964 through to 1967 before it finally made way for the 3 litre cars. This is the Graham Hill car with two nostril-ettes and comes complete with an Immense miniatures Graham Hill head. If you want a Jackie Stewart one tell us and we'll keep the head. I've taken the shot with the old MRRC shell in the background which has very square sides to get that 13UO type motor in. You can get a proper Scaley Motorbike motor under this one. Must start building again soon. Need BWA wheels for this one! Cheers Mel PS maybe this should be posted in the next range of years as well.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Huber on Dec 22, 2012 7:29:45 GMT -5
Hello Mel, I always shudder when I see one of those MRRC BRM bodies with the ugly fins on the nose. What were they thinking? Actually I know what they were thinking.. trying to extend the product life of a mid sixties 1.5L car. Arrrrgh. Please post specs of your new shell.. length, width, height, etc. The rivet counters are curious. Well, I am, anyway! Merry Christmas.
|
|
|
Post by mel62 on Dec 22, 2012 13:23:22 GMT -5
Mark,
I've just put all my stuff away for Christmas, so when thats ended I'll post some details.
Cheers
Mel
|
|
|
Post by Phil Kalbfell on Dec 22, 2012 15:43:45 GMT -5
Mark the MRRC body is very good, apart from the fond. I used it as the base for both my BRM castings. High exhaust was easy just removing the fins and some detail work. The low exhaust version required a little more work with some filling and reshaping. Both versions have been used as Proxy entries.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Huber on Dec 22, 2012 16:44:39 GMT -5
Phil, Yes, I have a number of those MRRC bodies, and completed one car using that shell with a Beardog chassis. The sides of the MRRC shell are too flat and the nose is too tapered, but I think it's one of the better efforts from that era. A a point of comparison, here's a picture I took of the MRRC BRM, a Dave Jones 1964 P261 (uncompleted at the time), and the Dave Jones 1963 P578. The Dave Jones P261 is much slimmer than the MRRC in every respect (except for the overly tapered nose on the MRRC car). I didn't intend to hijack your post Mel.. I'm looking forward to seeting the stats on the Prewing BRM next week.
|
|
|
Post by mel62 on Dec 26, 2012 5:14:40 GMT -5
Mark,
I'm late etc as per white rabbit, but here are the essential dimensions for the P261 with MC plans ref. Many photos including originals from the day have been used for this shell.
Cheers
Mel
|
|
|
Post by Mark Huber on Dec 26, 2012 17:04:15 GMT -5
Mel,
Er.. yes. I am familiar with the 1:1 specs. I was more curious about the specs of your car... I'm quite certain the wheelbase is spot on at 72mm.. give or take a fraction of a millimeter of course! What's the overall length, height (at the cockpit), and maximum width of your shell?
Cheers,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2012 6:42:18 GMT -5
Mark, I use the best drawing available, as in the one that makes me feel comfortable, then I check the published leading dimensions by reading them from as many sources as I can find and then it's largely an eyeball job, using as many PERIOD photos as I can find in my various volumes of Motor Sport magazine, their DVD of the 60s, my various books and whatever I can find on the net. I rarely use modern restored car pics as they are often so horribly inaccurate that they are worthless and in my opinion should never be allowed FIA papers.
I do what I can with the reference I can find, but for what I can get for a pattern I'm afraid you don't get personal visits to restorers like Hall and Hall for measurement, despite their geographical closeness to where I sit.
I wonder why you are questioning this model, but have not obviously done so with others.
Martin
|
|
|
Post by f143 on Mar 22, 2013 4:18:31 GMT -5
Hi Mark Reading this thread again, I wondered what the dimensions of the Dave Jones 261 are. Would you mind posting them? I would like to compare them with the model cars magazines Walkden Fishers specs. Thanks Nigel
|
|
|
Post by Mark Huber on Mar 22, 2013 10:22:31 GMT -5
Nigel,
I'll get out the calipers this evening when I get home from work and post the measurements.
If I'm thinking of the same drawings, (and I could be wrong), I always thought that the Walkden Fisher representation was a bit odd... perhaps he had the wheelbase and tracks right, but the car just didn't look like any P261 I'd seen in photos.. I have Doug Nye's volumes, and I don't think Fisher's representation even looks like the original P261 chassis 2612.
But that's just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Huber on Mar 22, 2013 20:54:23 GMT -5
Nigel,
Dave Jones P261
Length: 113mm Width 22.1mm Wheelbase 70.5mm Depth from sill below windscreen 13.6mm
By way of Comparison
MRRC BRM P261
Length: 115.3mm Width 23.8mm Wheelbase 75mm Depth from sill below windscreen 15.5mm
|
|
|
Post by f143 on Mar 23, 2013 5:24:24 GMT -5
Hi Mark, thanks for that. The dimensions are not that different, Dave's car has a shorter than the stated 91 inch wheelbase, at 70.5 as opposed to 72mm. Dave's car is longer at 113mm to 108, the width about the same at 22. The depth near the cockpit is slimmer, giving a better looking car than the WF drawing as it has something of a fat belly and a dimension of about a mm more 13.6, against 14.7. I think it is this curved line under the car that makes it look not quite right. I wondered also what measurement of the width of the nose and rear end of the car? The WF drawing is 14 at the nose and 17 at the gearbox end. I suppose it is easy to be critical of the fellow all these years later, but at the time it was possibly the only access to that sort of information and for that we have to be grateful, and some of the tech specs are very good. Regards Nigel
|
|
|
Post by Mark Huber on Mar 23, 2013 6:51:03 GMT -5
Nigel,
The width at the tip of the nose is 16.4mm
The width at the gear box is a slim 13.6mm. tapering from about 16.9mm at the rear axle line.
Distance from tip of nose to front axle line... 26.9mm
|
|
|
Post by f143 on Mar 23, 2013 22:56:00 GMT -5
Well those last 2 dimensions seem to be the biggest differences, probably giving the two bodies their individual look. I like the thin look of Dave's shell, but I wonder which of the dimensions are nearer the actual car Thanks Mark Regards Nigel
|
|
|
Post by Mark Huber on Apr 6, 2013 13:39:48 GMT -5
I should have dusted off the resin shavings before I took this picture, but there will be more photos as this build progresses. The shell is sitting on a chassis that is about 1mm too short in the wheelbase, it won't be the chassis that goes with this particular car. Somewhere down the road I'll add a very cool Immense Miniatures Graham Hill head to the torso.
|
|