This short video will explain the concept of angular velocity using a 33 RPM record as an example, and why the radius of the circle your dots travel in is important. It will either give you an AHA!! moment, or confuse you hopelessly.
Remember please...RPM is NOT the same thing as SPEED, and the two are not interchangeable concepts. A precise understanding of the meaning of the words here is imperative to grasp what's happening. FORGET the thought that both dots are on the same record for a minute, because I think that's what is throwing you off. Assume you have one record, a 33 1/3 RPM record, with a dot on its edge. At 33 1/3 RPM, the dot will travel 33 1/3 times around the record player spindle in one minute. Now take a smaller record, like a 45, and put a dot on its rim. Spin it at the same 33 1/3 RPM. The dot on the smaller record will STILL travel 33 1/3 times around in one minute, but because the circumference of the circle the dot on the small record travels is smaller than the circle the dot on the big record has to travel, the dot on the small record will travel LESS DISTANCE over the same time...meaning it will travel through space at a SLOWER SPEED, even though it's at exactly the same RPM. Now glue the little record to the big record with the dots in a line. See??
Sorry you got bit by some of that potmetal steel that's becoming pretty much standard now that we rely on "offshore" companies to make everything. The machined transition from the major diameter of the shaft to the worm threads is probably too sharp too, and it may just be under-designed, period. I hope they'll make it right for ya.
Remember the relationship between the radius of a circle and its circumference? The inner dot travels a circle defined by its distance from the center, which is the radius (R) of the circle it travels. The outer dot also travels in a circle defined by its distance from the center, which is greater than the distance to the inner dot from the center. Because the radius of the outer circle is larger, the circumference (C) of the outer circle is larger, as determined by the formula any 6th grader should have been required to learn and understand.
Because the circumference of the outer circle is larger, the outer dot has farther DISTANCE to travel than the inner dot, which is traveling on a smaller circle. BOTH dots travel the same number of DEGREES OF ANGLE in the same time, but because the circumference of the outer dot's circle is greater than the circumference of the inner dot's circle, more DISTANCE is required to be traveled by the outer dot to cover the same number of DEGREES. That's all there is. No smoke, no mirrors, no magic, no logic disconnect.
I recall this one, explained in some specific detail and concerning angular displacement versus time, distance and speed. Simple math, really, if you understand the terms and concepts. The dot on the outer rim is moving at a far greater speed than the dot close to the spindle in order to maintain the same angular displacement over a specified time, necessarily constant all along the line between the dots. The one farther from the center has to travel a greater distance because the circumference of the circle it traverses is greater than that of the inner dot. Hence the outer dot has to travel at a greater speed to cover the greater distance in the time available to do so. As stated above, RPM and speed are two discrete concepts, and are not interchangeable...even though the record player may be marked as "speeds" of 33 1/3, 45, etc., RPM IS NOT THE SAME THING AS SPEED. Speed is the measure of distance traveled over a specified time. Like miles-per-hour. RPM is a way of stating angular displacement over a specified time. One RPM...revolutions-per-minute... is 360 degrees of angular displacement in one minute (a circle is 360 degrees, so one full revolution is also 360 degrees).
Got a resin Chevron B-16 in 1/24. Interesting model, very thin resin reinforced inside with fiberglass cloth. A few symmetry and parallel issues, and it seems big for the scale...the real cars are quite small...but a great starting point for one of my all-time favorite racing cars (probably in part because it's the first one I ever worked on).
Much as the styling of the Juke initially made me want to puke, I'm beginning to feel kinda sorry for the poor things. I'm thinking the intent was to design a car that was as non-carlike as humanly possible, and so to appeal to the legions of people who see and dislike the whole idea of cars as macho symbolism, but who need transportation. The people I know who own them would seem to back up my psychobabble theory. Anyway, they look like frogs. How can you hate a cute little frog?
The Aztek on the other hand...yuck. But neither of them can hold a candle to the all-time champion of automotive ugly...
Well, speaking of horses, why do we need several different words to connote "horseness" and adjectives to further define specific kinds of horseness? The term "build" can be looked at as simply differentiating between a "model" that one buys, like a die-cast, or even a 3D rendering (oh, how I hate the current version "render") and a model that one builds or has built. I rest my case. Gots to work on my taxes, and render unto Caesar...
First 911 I drove was a '72 S, slightly lowered. After spending a fair proportion of my youth in hot-rod Bugs, Corvairs and the 356 series, it was like dying and going to heaven. THIS was the car I'd been waiting for all my life. Fast forward to the 930 Turbo. Same thing all over again. Then a wide-body Turbo Speedster conversion. Holy cow. All I'd come to love, brutal power, and wind-in the-face. I recently had the good fortune to drive a Singer reincarnation of the venerable old 911. For me, it's simply the perfect car. Now, if I could only afford one.