Fiat 806: research and scratchbuilds

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Roy, 

I think it is not my mail but my today phone call who allowed me to get this rdv.

My mail, sent about 15 days ago, had not given more result than yours...

I have booked my hotel.

I hope this travel to Torino will give results.

I will make photos of the Mef too, that I intend to build too, helped with Sam excellent thread.

 

[Hannes]

Dear Olivier , congratulations for your success ! Some days ago I was showing your letter to my sister and she said it would not surprise her , if Olivier would succeed , because it´s written so friendly .

Regarding our models , you are right ! Even if we have different approaches they become similar more and more .In the last days I was still working with my bodywork and frame.

The fairing now is flatter and I will shift the openings for the rear axis about 3 mm.

As I told Harvey  I decided to alter the frame´s rails at their rear ends so the bodywork will be paralllel with the frame. These are time-consuming works and it took some time till I understood  they must be done . Maybe you also will come to the conclusion that for instance  your frame needs to get elongated at it´s front . Pioneer´s work is trial and error very often !

Many greetings !  Hannes

Edited March 21, 2017 by Hannes

[Roy vd M.]

3 hours ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

I think it is not my mail but my today phone call who allowed me to get this rdv.

 

36 minutes ago, Hannes said:

Some days ago I was showing your letter to my sister and she said it would not surprise her , if Olivier would succeed , because it´s written so friendly .

 

It's not much different from what I did initially:

 

First I called, very friendly, then I sent an e-mail, very friendly, then some e-mails back and forth, very friendly, meanwhile two telephone calls, very friendly. That was the periode 14th of November 2016 until the 4th of January 2017. I think there were about six mails to, five mails from and three phone calls in total, each written with the utmost respect. See here, under 'Fiat Centro Storico'. 

 

Only one month later did I have this e-mail correspondence. If the tone is a bit dispirited, that would be because first they expected to get back to me half December, then half January, but they just didn't do so. And in my view even this e-mail correspondence wasn't unfriendly if you read carefully. 

 

So I really don't know the reason for the difference in treatment. The only thing I can now imagine is that in my first e-mail of November 2016 I mentioned the names Protar and Italeri, possibly setting off alarm bells for Centro Storico (I know that for sure) and legal department (I don't know that for sure) who were at the same time reviewing their copyright and archive admittance policies. I can imagine that, for example somewhere in January, they finalized those policies but they are still unsure about their contractual relationship with Protar / Italeri, keeping me out for that reason while allowing access to other. Whether this is the truth or not, for me this is a lesson learned: in similar situations (if they will occur) I will never again mention a kit maker's name when looking for access of a brand-owned archive. 

 

On the other hand, if also the admittance policy has not been reestablished yet, and Olivier would merely be lucky to not talk to my contact at Centro Storico (who is different guy) but someone 'fresh', then it would not be a good idea to confront them with my previous request before Olivier has visited the archive... for the simple reason to let sleeping dogs lie. First it's important to enter 'the treasure room' (I still have plenty of reason to believe there are more photos and other sources of info to be found... for example, Photo 28 can probably be found in a higher resolution, but I also think there is a photo of the interior) and discover what is there. 

[Hannes]

Dear Roy ,it´s not a matter of being friendly or not , it´s about mentality imho . Dutch ,British and German folks tend to be more earnest and dogged compared with our southern neighbors and friends . So let´s be happy about Olivier´s success  there´s no use crying over spit milk ! We all know , you did your best and you should be proud about it ! Hannes

Edited March 21, 2017 by Hannes

[Roy vd M.]

The problem is that I would have loved to dive into those archives, even better together with Olivier. But I have the (perhaps overly suspicious) idea that if Olivier and I met there, in front of the archive, and would enter the building, the first person we'd meet is Massimo (my contact at Centro Storico) and he'd say "wait a minute, what are you doing there" and both of us would be refused admittance. I know it is probably paranoid but you can probably imagine the idea. 

 

If it weren't for that, even out of pure curiosity would I have bought the plane ticket already; I can be very impulsive at times. 

[Hannes]

Dear Roy ,why don´t you disguise as Pascal (Olivier´s wife ) with a wig ! This way the problem could be solved !  Hannes

[Roy vd M.]

I must admit I hadn't thought of that before. Olivier, good idea?

[sharknose156]

Dear Olivier,

 

Excellent news! well done.  You'll be the first one (again) ! 

My turn is due first week of June.

 

Thanks for taking some pics of the Mef.  

i hope to have finished mine by then.

 

(ps take time to visit the second car museum)

 

cheers

 

 

[NickD]

Chaps,

 

Still following the progress and still trying to get the photos to tally. I think I am as close as I am likely to get so I will post soon - better before Olivier goes to Centro or I will have more things to compare. I look forward to Hannes' critique!

 

Olivier, great news. Hope it is as fruitful as it should be.

 

@Robin Lous - finally caught up enough to say hi.

 

ATB

 

Nick

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Roy, I understand your position.

I think it is better that I go first, so that we are sure there is no problem with Massimo. And, when I will be there, before leaving the place, I will explain you would like to have an appointment too, and I will try to get it for you. 

Anyway, I am not sure we will find many new things there, I think we must not be too optimistic, we should be disappointed.

But if you all have questions you want me to ask once there, you can all suggest them here...

I precise that, when I had Paolo at telephone, I explained him that the Italeri kit was wrong, and suggested him to go and see this thread, in which we had done a big research and scratchbuild work to be as close as possible from the truth of this car.

 

[Totally Mad Olivier]

1 hour ago, sharknose156 said:

take time to visit the second car museum

Sure I will, Sam!

And sure I will make many photos of the Mef, that I will send to any of you (especially you even if you will come in june) interested, as I did after Rev's visit.

[Totally Mad Olivier]

I have added all the rivets (I had done only a few ones up to now) on my "wooden" floor. The rivets were made with Rivet Tool (RP Toolz) 0,6 mm (the smallest size), cut in 0,05 mm alu foil. The black "spaces" between the "boards" have been traced again with a 0,1mm marker

 

Edited March 22, 2017 by Olivier de St Raph

[Hannes]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Hannes]

Because it will still take some days before I can show you my altered body , fairing and frame , I want to show you some pics of parts I made before entering the gangshow thread last year .

Of course I´m aware all these parts must get altered but maybe some details could peek your interest.

1) The steering wheel ´s ignition lever will be replaced by a different construction without bolt . The screen was made from scratch and it´s surrounding was made out of tiny U-shaped brass profiles.

2 ) The bottom plate must get new  constructed . Not only the oil tanks needs to get altered ,the seat´s base will vanish too.

I intend to shift the clutch oil tank behind the frame with no direct connection with the plate . The great main tank will get altered according Olivier and Robin , but I will shift the great fuel cap where the hand pump is situated and vice versa . I don´t believe that the floor was extened to the left side like in the kit´s solution. Why should there be unnecessary weight at these places ?

So I think about a solution where there are boards only where they make sense .My  boards were ,made out of beech verneer glued on a black support foil and soaked with wood oil .

3 )The rear axis with my scratchbuild leaf springs needs to get heavily altered too. Not only the distance between the wheels will get alterd by elongating the axis , the suspension of the leaf springs

lies too far away from the axis and will be replaced by a new construction. You can see the priciple on my not liked scetch 2 pages ago .

The leaf springs were made out of fire-bronce strips and will get replaced by new scratchbuilds maybe with a different material and thinner strips .

Many greetings !  Hannes

Edited March 22, 2017 by Hannes

[Totally Mad Olivier]

To cement the photoetched floor on the stand, I have chosen the solution of double sided tape. Of course, I could have used cyano but in such a situation, with a tall part with extensions, arms, etc., the d.s.t is better imho.

I have used the excellent dst provided in the Pocher 1/8 Aventador that I built 2 or 3 years ago (but available separately). It is very good, cements well and is very thin.

At the back of the A4 foil, I have drawn the limits (using my PE floor).

Then I cut it, and placed it on the plastic stand, on one adhesive side.

The photo 3 shows the removing of the 2nd blister, that will let the adhesive appear.

I just have to apply on this made to measure adhesive my PE floor, that will press perfectly everywhere, even in thin arms, very cleanly.

 

 

 

Edited March 22, 2017 by Olivier de St Raph

[sharknose156]

Dear Olivier a moddeler of your great numerous talents ... why use a photoetched floor wven it is so easy to cut some thin wood planks ? 

 

Am not being judgmental just suggesting between cutting each plank and painting it it may take less time than photo etched and you have real wood

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Dear Sam,

I understand very well your point of view.

So, why did I use the PE part provided in the Italeri kit and not wood?

1) because it is one of the best part of the kit! It was obviously missing on the Protar one (PE did not exist at that time if I am not wrong). The veinings of the wood are very well reproduced, at 1/12 scale. Some wood at 1/1 scale will not necessary give me such fine veinings.

2) I admit when I made this floor, I did not think to the "wood" solution. Don't forget that I was supposed to write an article (and probably I will, a super digest!!) in T2M, and I am supposed to suggest, when the kit offers the opportunity, solutions coming from the box.

3) I admit too that when I saw your floor on your thread (amazingly beautiful), I thought I could have used that solution, but I had ever painted my floor. I will choose probably a wood solution on my Mef, inspired by you.

4) That said, I don't dislike it like that, and I think it is a good exercise to try to get the "wood" looking with a different material than wood. I was inspired by J.M Villalba - you all know in which high respect I consider him - who gave an excellent wood aspect in some of his plastic model, as the Nieuport Ni 11, that will be one of my next build.

Edited March 22, 2017 by Olivier de St Raph

[Hannes]

Dear Olivier , for your information : Instead of a PE part there was a printed thick self-adhesive foil included the Protar kit . The sizes of the boards were exactly the same as  on the PE plate .

The printing had an ugly deep-brown color and there were thick black outlines . I don´t believe that the boards were so small in reality. If you look at the Mef´s boards for instance  you can see they are wider . It´s no proof , I know , but I´m sure the Protar designers did not know  more about that than we do .

Many greetings !  Hannes

Edited March 22, 2017 by Hannes

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Thank you Hannes for these interesting informations.

[Totally Mad Olivier]

I come-back to my leaf spring stands... The ones I used first (see p.89) were too large and too short. They were plastic ones (Evergreen 3,2 mm). I have removed them  and replaced by alu 2 mm tubes . Their lenght is now 6 mm (instead of 4,4 mm). Now, they "fall" well in front of the bottom of the leaf springs:

 

 

 

Edited March 22, 2017 by Olivier de St Raph

[Robin Lous]

Guys...do you think the whole floor was planked? I have doubts about that.

I don't think planking the left forward part of the floor makes much sense.

It's complicated to plank around the hole in the floor, in between the two tanks and around the forward tank... and I see no reason to do that...there.

Perhaps there wasn't even a floor there....at all.

 

What do you think?

 

Cheers,

 

Robin

Edited March 22, 2017 by Robin Lous

[sharknose156]

31 minutes ago, Robin Lous said:

.do you think the whole floor was planked?

 

Dear Robin,

 

Personally IMHO, i don't think it was planked with wood at all, just a metal floor.

 

It is so obvious they wanted to save weight... so why put wooden oak planks or some other sturdy wood !?

Unless they intended to put weight at the center to stiffen the chassis ? that could be possible.  

 

Also the Mef. had a lot of weight in front so it makes sense that 10 years earlier they would put heavy planks right at the center of the very long chassis.

 

also, i think Protar wanted to emulate the Mef. here as well.

 

In any case, personally i will not put a wooden floor on this super-modern and agressive aluminum-beautiful car, "superlegera", unless Centro Storico tells me otherwise.

 

[Robin Lous]

Good point!

 

I can see the use of a small wooden floor forward right.

From the front edge of the seat forward, because it will be easier to get out of the car with a wooden board there.

Bare aluminium there will be very slippery (oil, rainwater, dirt) and it will make climbing out kinda difficult.

More or less like a modern day car mat.

 

Cheers,

 

Robin

[Hannes]

Dear Robin , please read my remarks above ! If there were planks , only where necessary to  protect the driver from dirt and stones  coming from the openings of the bottom panel and where he could put his heels on. I agree with Sam, it´s possible there were no planks at all. We should look at other constructions of that time ( maybe Delage or Bugatti ) how they solved that issue .Our car was designed only for race tracks and the predecessors sometimes had to drive on dusty roads too ( see the painting 2 pages ago ) so maybe these cars had protecting planks on board .

Many greetings !  Hannes

[Hannes]

The openings of the bottom panel were designed imho to shovel cool air to the tank´s lower region , the louvres at the side of the car to cool the tank´s upper region. The louvres at the rear´s  end were made to let out the air.  In this connection a closed floor would make sense : To lead fresh air where it it is needed .Purpose : To cool down the temperature of the gasoline !  Hannes