I like diegu's layout, very simple and practical. But as it's a test track I would use just one crossover so that you effectively have times over two laps.
David
David
Slot forum test track....
After finally getty my own track up and running and tuning some of my own cars GregK had a good suggestion about a way to compare models we don't own against the one we do...
The idea was simple we develop a "test track design" from commonly available parts that any of us could build on the "Rug" for a test session.. By only using times to 1/10 th of a second even the analogue lap counter timer can be used and removes the competitive element! hopefully
![]()
...
The idea is to see not who is the fastest racer but what are the fastest cars and by how much on a "standard" track then by timing cars with "Mods" we can see which ones worked best etc.... as long as we are all honest of course... which of course we would be!
All we would need is a "track design" to begin with to start to build up a table of the best cars... Any ideas, designs etc for the track appreciated.
So who is up for doing some testing of their cars.... if we can find a dozen or so people who would like to play could make for some intersting results...
I'm game... digital or analogue it doesn't matter all are welcome.
________________________________________________________________________________
_
________________________________________________________________________________
_
This has turned out to be a very successful (and long) thread. It's been requested that the final test track layout be
replicated here at the beginning where it's easy to find for reference. Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, hope this helps...
John
![Rectangle Slope Font Terrestrial plant Pattern]()
________________________________________________________________________________
_
________________________________________________________________________________
_
The idea was simple we develop a "test track design" from commonly available parts that any of us could build on the "Rug" for a test session.. By only using times to 1/10 th of a second even the analogue lap counter timer can be used and removes the competitive element! hopefully
The idea is to see not who is the fastest racer but what are the fastest cars and by how much on a "standard" track then by timing cars with "Mods" we can see which ones worked best etc.... as long as we are all honest of course... which of course we would be!
All we would need is a "track design" to begin with to start to build up a table of the best cars... Any ideas, designs etc for the track appreciated.
So who is up for doing some testing of their cars.... if we can find a dozen or so people who would like to play could make for some intersting results...
I'm game... digital or analogue it doesn't matter all are welcome.
________________________________________________________________________________
_
________________________________________________________________________________
_
This has turned out to be a very successful (and long) thread. It's been requested that the final test track layout be
replicated here at the beginning where it's easy to find for reference. Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, hope this helps...
John
________________________________________________________________________________
_
________________________________________________________________________________
_
Attachments
21 - 40 of 330 Posts
Apart from the Argos sets, I only have Ninco track and no crossovers. I think standard track pieces makes it easier for everyone to join in.
But once details are sorted i'm game.
Pioneer cars will kick arse on this big time. IMO
![]()
But once details are sorted i'm game.
Pioneer cars will kick arse on this big time. IMO
Twist on tracks already suggested... All R2's for what its worth...
![]()
2
I can't believe I missed this one.
![]()
So... the first thing that's popped into my head is that, since the whole point appears to be to post data about different cars so that people can know how it competes before they get one, or to compare different setups and such, or even compete, there MUST be at least some semblance of a common, known track. Not just the layout, but the type. Even those of us who only ever race on one type know that other types drive differently. The same layout in Scaley Classic and Sport will drive completely differently, not to mention Ninco or Carrera. Unless the track is the same type from result to result, then the results are meaningless, at least until the available results are complete enough to include multiple surfaces as well as cars.
I'd love to participate, or to find other people's results useful, but I would only be able to share results on Scaley Sport, and would only pay attention to results for Scaley Sport.
As far as layout design goes, I think it needs to be small and simple. Something that would come as a set and be likely to be easily made using spare track. It's only recently that I even have what I would call "spare" track, as pretty much every piece I owned was on my table layout. If it's a design that's common to sets, then someone who didn't already have spare track, or who ran on wood, but still wanted to participate, could pick up a set (like that cheap one recently acquired by many which then spawned this thread, I think).
I think you guys are on the right track. Keep going.
![]()
So... the first thing that's popped into my head is that, since the whole point appears to be to post data about different cars so that people can know how it competes before they get one, or to compare different setups and such, or even compete, there MUST be at least some semblance of a common, known track. Not just the layout, but the type. Even those of us who only ever race on one type know that other types drive differently. The same layout in Scaley Classic and Sport will drive completely differently, not to mention Ninco or Carrera. Unless the track is the same type from result to result, then the results are meaningless, at least until the available results are complete enough to include multiple surfaces as well as cars.
I'd love to participate, or to find other people's results useful, but I would only be able to share results on Scaley Sport, and would only pay attention to results for Scaley Sport.
As far as layout design goes, I think it needs to be small and simple. Something that would come as a set and be likely to be easily made using spare track. It's only recently that I even have what I would call "spare" track, as pretty much every piece I owned was on my table layout. If it's a design that's common to sets, then someone who didn't already have spare track, or who ran on wood, but still wanted to participate, could pick up a set (like that cheap one recently acquired by many which then spawned this thread, I think).
I think you guys are on the right track. Keep going.
2
Correct me if I am wrong, but the aim is to end up with a list of cars so one can see (in order of importance)...
a. Which cars can race against which in a fair fight (so I don't need to buy 4-6 of every type of car)
b. the best a car can go with normal tuning (so I know what to aim for when tuning my cars)
c. lap times to beat (so I have something to aim for again)
d. the best a car can go with extraordinary tuning (so I can be impressed by what you fellas can do)
How about this?
or this
come on, surely this is the one!!!
a. Which cars can race against which in a fair fight (so I don't need to buy 4-6 of every type of car)
b. the best a car can go with normal tuning (so I know what to aim for when tuning my cars)
c. lap times to beat (so I have something to aim for again)
d. the best a car can go with extraordinary tuning (so I can be impressed by what you fellas can do)
How about this?
or this
come on, surely this is the one!!!
I would go for our Distant kiwi friend option Nr 1.
Simple & everybody should be able to make one and its got it all
![]()
Simple & everybody should be able to make one and its got it all
It can be extended with 2 extra straights on all 4 sides at the corner sides left two straights in the middle and on the right side one before and after the wiggly bit.
Problem i see with second one is the need for a 1/4 track piece
![]()
Problem i see with second one is the need for a 1/4 track piece
3
What about this one
![]()
Only R2's and 2 45 Deg crossovers leaves only a few outside bends in the esses
![]()
Regards Michael
![]()
Only R2's and 2 45 Deg crossovers leaves only a few outside bends in the esses
Regards Michael
I would think it was too big. Too many straights and curves for a lot of people. Though I do like the way you have used the crossovers to keep the car on the inside lanes.
There, no 1/4 straight. I'm sure it will stretch and join up.
There, no 1/4 straight. I'm sure it will stretch and join up.
2
How about this one?
![]()
Or this one if You want to avoid the straight in the esses.
![]()
+ Fits on 4'x8'
+ Standard pieces.
+ Fairly long straight.
+ Room for Borders
Room for Scenery and a Pitlane for those who want to make it more permanent.
/Stefan
Or this one if You want to avoid the straight in the esses.
+ Fits on 4'x8'
+ Standard pieces.
+ Fairly long straight.
+ Room for Borders
Room for Scenery and a Pitlane for those who want to make it more permanent.
/Stefan
Twist on Stefan/trevor's tracks for simplicity but adding some "braking" and a longer straight... so the lap is at lest 3 seconds... this will give 1% differential on a 1/10th second timing... enough to catagorise cars into groups...
![]()
So with a few ideas now in the mix anybody like to comment on what we have?
anybody have a preference...
any ideas of what to put into a "poll" for collecting ideas..?
So with a few ideas now in the mix anybody like to comment on what we have?
anybody have a preference...
any ideas of what to put into a "poll" for collecting ideas..?
Nice proposal.
Long straight, EssEss and R1 included, no R3 as requested by some..
Works with Ninco also. Length of inner lane is 7.41m:
![]()
Imho two drawbacks:
- Width of 3.5m.
- R1 is taken on the inner lane.
However, I would vote for this one.
Regards,
Diegu
Long straight, EssEss and R1 included, no R3 as requested by some..
Works with Ninco also. Length of inner lane is 7.41m:
Imho two drawbacks:
- Width of 3.5m.
- R1 is taken on the inner lane.
However, I would vote for this one.
Regards,
Diegu
21 - 40 of 330 Posts
