DARKspawn wrote:The sleek & simplistic shape is really faithful to the animated series. How does the canopy actually open? I think my only critisism would be to replace the grey grills with chrome - but I guess there was no chrome effect in the cartoon though
Nice work.
The canopy slides along 2 technic bars that are hinged at both ends. This allows it to be raised just over a plate in height. When the canopy is raised, it then slides along the rails forward 3 studs. A series of tiles and slopes guides the canopy and prevents it from being raised too high or tilting backwards into the cockpit.
Its a bit hard to explain, and unfortunately, due to the predominantly black colour-scheme, it is VERY difficult to photograph.
Tanotrooper wrote:looks good with no studs, but I think it needs more new smooth parts to really make the cockpit smooth.
Unfortunately, the wedge plates I used near the canopy don't come in a tile form. Neither do the 4x4 modified tiles. Both pieces were necessary in order to ensure the canopy worked and to create the vents near the rear fenders of the car. To remove those studs would compromise the overall look of the car, more than the studs themselves do.
Still, thank you very much for the suggestion. I do agree that the car may have looked better without any studs. Unfortunately I don't see a way of doing this right now.
Maedhros wrote:Yes, yes! The best animated series ever (and best depiction of Batman by far!).
I really like the MOC as well, just as sleek as the car should be. It would have been interesting to see some of the special weapons and details too though
Indeed. I'm a huge fan of the Batman Animated Series. Probably one of the reasons I attempted this project in the first place (its something of a side project that I was working on along with my current castle).
I would have loved to add a few weapons or gadgets, but I was more focused on visual accuracy at this point. Devices like the claw in the front-end would have resulted in some aesthetic problems. Given the choice, I decided on looks over function. Still, I think there is some room for improvement. Thanks for the suggestions
.
Later.
