[RACING LINE]

Glad to see the test track back in the limelight.

 

[GregK]

Strange reading this thread again after Sean and I first discussed the idea. It had been done before, of course, and now doubt in another 10-12 years, it will be done again .......

 

[Gysse]

Perhaps this is the track to use with the coming Scalextric RMS, and some of the internet possibilities ?

 

[MrFlippant]

Wouldn't it be awesome if Scalextric were to make a set with this layout?

 

[UDoKuoio]

QUOTE (MrFlippant @ 5 Jan 2014, 23:56) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I might have been able to shave a tenth or two off if I had done.
Since I'm a NSR entuxiast, I cannot give up to beat you!
"Ford GT40 mk II.. I choose you!"

 

[MrFlippant]

Bring it on! If you better that lap, I'll just have to put down the track and try harder.

I've got an NSR GT or two that I can put ScaleAuto foam rubber tires on... those things grip like they're made of magnets.

I might have to use a TruSpeed controller and maybe even put down my laptop to get some good throttle curves going, but that's a sacrifice I'll just have to make.

 

[Douglas21]

foam rubber tires aye, I gotta try that

 

[turbofrenzy]

This afternoon was my first chance to set up the test track in the living room on the floor, madame was at work.

The results were as expected, but I'd hoped to get the fastest cars time down a bit lower.

These are the results I got today in red
Porsche 911/935 (standard) 4.6
Scalextric Rover SD1 Police car (wider rear axle, wheels and tyres) 5.6 4.3
Scalextric Ford Focus (standard) 5.4 4.0
Scalextric Audi Quattro 4wd (standard) 4.8 4.3
Scalextric Lamborghini Diablo (standard) 4.7 4.1
Scalextric Jag XJ220 (standard) 4.7 4.1
Team slot Lancia Stratos (standard) 4.1 not tested
Scalextric Mini Cooper digital (standard) 3.7 2.9
Scalextric Audi TT digital (standard) 3.6 3.1
Scalextric Jag XKRS (standard) 3.6 3.0
Scalextric Aston Martin DBR9 (standard) 3.5 2.9
Scalextric TVR speed 12 (bigger magnet) 3.5 3.3
Scalextric LMP Peugeot 908 (digital) 3.2 2.6
Scalextric Pro Performance Audi R8 (20000 rpm motor, lowest gearing) 3.1 2.6
Scalextric Mclaren/Hamilton (standard) 2.7 2.6 Just like the real thing he broke it again (I didn't mention that it broke last time)
Scalextric Pro Performance Lola Aston Martin (20000 rpm motor, lowest gearing) 2.7 2.5
Gslot Honda NSX Raybrig (standard) 2.5 (Aren't these meant to be rubbish?) 2.3
Scalextric Start LMP (pro performance 25000 rpm motor, lowest gearing, wheels and tyres, bigger magnet) 2.1 2.0

I had a lot of trouble with several cars jumping the timing sensors, namely the Porsche, Audi Quattro, Jag 220, Lambo and the Start LMP lap record holder, although I did manage to get some times for the Porsche this time.
The flat track benefits the weak magnet or non magnet cars the most

 

[GregK]

Have you installed the latest firmware on the APB ............. ??

 

[turbofrenzy]

QUOTE (GregK @ 10 Jan 2014, 21:56) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Have you installed the latest firmware on the APB ............. ??

No I haven't got a cable.

 

[MrFlippant]

If they were analog cars, it wouldn't matter, but definitely get the cable and update the firmware for added features and better reliability overall.

 

[GregK]

The lap-counting algorithm has been much improved between the the original version and the latest.

 

[Ade]

Hi
Should we let the times stand with 0.85 firmware.

 

[turbofrenzy]

QUOTE (MrFlippant @ 11 Jan 2014, 16:41) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>If they were analog cars, it wouldn't matter, but definitely get the cable and update the firmware for added features and better reliability overall.
QUOTE (GregK @ 11 Jan 2014, 16:52) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>The lap-counting algorithm has been much improved between the the original version and the latest.

They were a mixture of analogue and digital cars, but all run in analogue mode.
I will get a cable and do the upgrade in the future, but ir's not a priority at the moment.

QUOTE (Ade @ 11 Jan 2014, 17:59) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Hi
Should we let the times stand with 0.85 firmware.

Why not, I discounted all the 0.0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 times?

 

[Ade]

Hi

indicates it was meant to be taken seriously.

 

[MrFlippant]

it was?

 

[GregK]

Hi Ade ....... I'm onto some nice Laphroig at the moment ...... have a virtual glass on me ...

 

[waterlow]

I think that this is an excellent idea, but I have a question due to my table space I can just get the circuit on my board but there is a joist sticking through at the wrong end.

What would happen, if I flipped the track so that the loop is on the left and run in the reverse direction?

Mick

 

[GregK]

You know, no one has ever come up with that ......

I should say that as long as you use the same pieces of track it wouldn't matter which way round you lay the track ...after all, it's only a bit of fun ...

 

[MrFlippant]

I agree.
In your case, counter clockwise would be the primary direction, and clockwise would be "reverse" if you cared to post lap times of both.
What about just turning the whole thing 180 degrees, rather than making a mirror image? Would that work? Or, maybe that's what you were saying?
Either way, the same pieces in the same order should bear the same results, unless you were running NASCARs that have been set up specifically for left turn only racing.

In that case, running counter clockwise would yield markedly better times.