SlotForum banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello,

I have been reading a lot of threads, have posted myself some test-layouts and tried to make the best of your feedback.

With this thread, I would like to show you the "final" version. It uses the maximum of space I have (3.7m x 1.6m / 145´x 63´(?)). Planing to landscape it, it has quite some free space left. I would love to have a bridge, because I think it adds to the interesting look of the track and makes it more fun to race. The cars will be magless, borders will be added around the track. I´m not quite shure if I´ll choose the original Scalex stuff or if I make them myself with some MDF-boards. Maybe a mixture.

I would like to know what you think about it. Is it fun? Is it driveable? Will I be able to see enough of the cars when they pass underneath the bridge?

The construction for the table is ready. Next step would be ordering the missing track-pieces to give it a few weeks of testrun before making it a permanent layout.

Thank you very much in advance! Kind regards!

Markus
 

Attachments

·
Greg Gaub
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
Well, it sure looks fast. There's very little as far as technical driving. All your turns are either wide or parabolic, so there won't be a whole lot of braking, at least not hard braking. Asuming that's what you were going for, it looks good. Note that your design, although it has a bridge, is NOT a figure of 8 design, and so there's no benefit to the bridge other than adding the interest of elevation change and "bridge" to the layout. It does, however, add to the problem of seeing cars that go underneath. You've got a lane changer right under part of it, which is very risky, if not a downright no-no, especially if your bridge is anything more than the bare necessary of holding up the track.

I would suggest considering a couple things. First, throw in a little technical requirement. Maybe bring that left hand turn (turn 1) straight up and into an R2 or even an R1 to force a hard(er) brake point. Follow that up with a couple esses so that drivers don't feel robbed of a high speed entry to another straight, but also to add more trigger use. I would also think about pulling back the elevated area so that it's just above the track below, then make the track below into the bottom of a double-decker or something like that, with lots of big openings to see the cars through as they speed under the elevated track.

While I usually recommend LESS R2 turns in a layout, this one has very few of them. You might need to use a few more, and even an R1 here and there to tighten things up. Note that R1, when following a series of tightening turns (R4-R3-R2) isn't a big deal, as cars are already slowing down, and it's not a hard or early brake as for an R1 right smack at the end of a straight.
 

·
Greg Gaub
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
It will let pacer cars go faster, but since driven cars can ALSO go faster, it's not like they'll be competition. The same problems with pacers hold for a layout like this as one with tight turns. Make the pacers better than the driven car, and it will be a challenge. This one will have EVERYTHING going faster.

Again, not a BAD thing. If you want a fast layout rather than a technical one, then by all means, go for it and enjoy it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Thank you both for your feedback. Pacer cars will be something that I might use quite often, because most of the time I will be racing alone. Because of that, I´m not using R1 curves because I´ve read here, that it might cause problems (deslotting).

To mee the track looked a bit "steril" too, but you found the right words to explain the reason why that happened. I´ve tried to build something more "demanding" for the drivers. If you do not mind, please let me know what you think about this one. I still kept the loooong curve on the left because I like the idea of "expanding" the long straight a little bit. It does have a lot of parallel tracks, it still looks a bit strange, but maybe I can solve that by landscaping it.

Thanks and have a good start in the new week.

Markus
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
985 Posts
I would say the same as Mr F. My opinion is that the current bridge is not much of a feature I suspsect. A suggestion, but only that, is to raise the back lane following the bridge and tuck the centre loop under/very close to the big LH curve to give a bit more "colour". Personally this track lacks some serious R1's. I love then and if you use mags in the Pacers you can get a reasonable speed out of them. HOWEVER its your track. Don't senic it permanently till you are sure you have it how you want it. Start with stuff you ca re-use like pits. You could ask Mr F about his semi permanant track. He has an old video somewhere which is still a good watch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,646 Posts
The thumbnail of your track on the first post was great. only thing i,d do different is to make the outer curve on the right hand side even bigger. you,ve got a very fast track than you can get into a rhythem on. R1 curves i hate. their great on a nadgery rally type circuit. but on your cicuit it would just break the rhythem up and you,d keep deslotting. john
 

·
Greg Gaub
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
R1s don't deslot a car, bad driving does. Some people can't/won't/hate slowing down as much as you need to for an R1 turn, but like I said, if you put them at the end or center of a parabolic turn, they're not that bad, either. As for rhythm, you can get that with any track, even ones where the car has to slow down for an R1 turn. ;-)

As for the new track, you've made a paperclip, which worsens the inside lane problem. Normally this doesn't matter for digital tracks, and an argument could be made that it still doesn't matter, but when the inside lane is SO MUCH shorter than the outside, it can be VERY hard to make a pass, even when you're better than the car you're trying to pass.

Aside from that, I think you're right about the parallel lines thing. If you can tweak in some longer sections of off angle track, I think it will look a lot better.

By the way, there was a great track for a similar size space by SlotCarDad. It might be a little longer, but can easily be shortened.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Oh my god, it´s just a game for (grown-up) kids! I´d never thought, that it could be that difficult to build a slotcar layout...

Just joking, the fun building and driving it should last a longt time, so each minute spend at that time of the project is absolutely worth it!

Okay, trying to keep in mind what you said, this is the result. Please give feedback for a last time.
If that layout isn´t absolute carp, I´m going to buy the missing track pieces, build it and drive it. Although I will wait before landscaping it since I have driven it for a few weeks. I used every radius that´s available, although it´s just one R1 curve on the bottom curve on the right. By the way, the outside-lane is 14.38m, the inside-lane measures 13.89m.

I just started painting the trackpieces I have in a "medium-grey", they look so much better than the black stuff.

Cheers!

Markus
 

Attachments

·
Greg Gaub
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
Go for it!
No matter what, don't let "analysis paralysis" set in. Get your table put together, get some track on it, in ANY configuration, and have fun!

You'll soon find out what you like and what you don't.
All of the "wisdom" of people on the forum doesn't matter if you enjoy (or not) something they don't (or do).
If you do get the track for that last layout, at least you can take comfort in the fact that you'll have a good variety of pieces to use as you try other ideas. The beauty of plastic is how easy it is to change things up on a whim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Wise words, Mr. Flippant!


I will post some pictures of the progress.

Thank you all again for your support!

Cheers!

Markus
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,057 Posts
QUOTE (MrFlippant @ 23 Jul 2012, 13:41) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>No matter what, don't let "analysis paralysis" set in. Get your table put together, get some track on it, in ANY configuration, and have fun!

Hmmm..... now where have I heard that before?

Sounds like sage advice!

Now back I go to watching everyone else develop terrific tracks that I wish I had!

Cheers!
 

·
Damien Straw
Joined
·
562 Posts
Hi Markus,

I'm pretty new here myself and new to slot cars on the whole. I designed a track in software and started buying bits and pieces of various curves to make corners as I had designed. I placed these corners into the stock track set-up I bought to test them out and to see what I liked. I found that some curve combinations were a pain to drive and so I changed them in the software. This is a great way to try it out before committing to a permanent track.
Just a note on the R1's, as MrF said, if you place them after ever decreasing curves (R4,3,2,) they cause no more accidents than any other corner. I have one at the end of my straight like that and it is my favorite corner by far.

Cheers,
Damo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
985 Posts
Once a year when you are bored you can write I LOVE R1's and watch an excelent range war between lovers and haters. Ther are a few boring folk that admit there thare are pros and cons. But generally they are discounted ;-). Try you track and see what you like. PS not sure how folk take to the new type with the side swipe r1's. larger inner radii but you cannot pass. I have used them and they are OK. My lot finally rememberd thay they could not pass and crashes became at no different a rate. I generally don't use the one I have too much as in close racing it cuts down places to pass as you have to be clear before and after. Bigger tracks would not have this issue.
 

·
Greg Gaub
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
I had a squeeze hairpin that I took out. There are enough places to crash, I don't need to add more with that kind of thing. Like you said, in close racing, being able to make a pass can take a lap or more. It also adds to the havoc of pace cars, for anyone who uses those.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top