SlotForum banner
41 - 60 of 330 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,036 Posts
Another one from me



Or just flipped it round as it would look to drive better this way round from left to right



Both still use the cross overs to stay on the inside lane

As how would it compare on ninco track or others as it is a different size ?

Michael
 

·
42 Yrs
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
Discussion Starter · #43 ·
Ok poll tomorrow... just have to figure if i can post pictures in a poll or if somebody wants to do an tracks all in one post labled a b c etc... a plea goes out especially those who have just got up hint hint hint... as i'm now off to bed
 

·
Trevor Gordon
Joined
·
1,465 Posts
Any last requests?

Option A
QUOTE (Koala2 @ 2 May 2010, 09:33) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Therefore an idea to run maximum inside lane without 90° crossing (I have one but, as stated not everyone has it).

Not finalised, only to show that with the (sport crossing R2 90°) you can also run more inside line on one of the lanes.

Option B
QUOTE (davekp @ 2 May 2010, 11:00) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Option C & D
QUOTE (SlotRacer2000 @ 5 May 2010, 02:05) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Or this one if You want to avoid the straight in the esses.


Option E
QUOTE (hankscorpio @ 5 May 2010, 05:15) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Option F
QUOTE (diegu @ 5 May 2010, 07:59) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Option G
QUOTE (Michael363672 @ 5 May 2010, 10:09) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Option H
QUOTE (distantkiwi @ 5 May 2010, 10:11) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Option I
Plain Oval of some sort. this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
636 Posts
Hi,

option F is just a copy of option E with Ninco track. I just wanted to show, that there is no problem in doing this layout with another track system.

Please remove option F from the poll.

Thanks,
Diegu
 

·
Greg Gaub
Joined
·
15,402 Posts
Wow... that E/F design is truly inspired. The simplicity of it while still containing important driving elements just hits all the right chords with me. For me, the others, as great as they all are, just don't compare. E/F is the hands down winner. It also looks like it's likely to be easily made with almost any starter set plus the hairpins track pack, yes? Even if not, then definitely minimal outlay for extra track, even if having to get track specifically for this usage.
I guess a poll makes sense, but I hope people see what I see in that track.
 

·
42 Yrs
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
Cheers trevor you are a star...

Option E/F gets my vote...

As greg says its a mid range figure 8 set plus the haipin kit... or with standard R1's as per diegu... will work out the difference in lane length between Ninco and scalextric because of the track size and then just apply a size "factor" to Ninco timings for the % increase because of the wider lanes...

so if we all chose from trevs post we can see what we are voting for... alll post comments... many thanks
 

·
One petunia in a field of onions
Joined
·
6,455 Posts
As Mr Flip said earlier though, the track surface variation between Ninco and Scaley sport is huge. Actually the difference between Scaley Classic and Scaley Sport is huge. I know you love testing and calculating Mr Scorpio.... Be interested to see the time variations between the same track layout Sport vs Classic.
 

·
42 Yrs
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
Your wish is my command...

i have a large box of classic with enough to build it.... well actually my brother stole it but he is only a few miles away and we can answer that question and decide on a "fudge factor" to align the two times... wahey!!!!! another scalextric mystery to knock off the list!

With diegu on board as long as somebody has a similar batch of cars for comparison on scaley we can also work out a "fudge factor" to ensure that the two align as well... it will also tell us what sort of speed imrovement we could get by switching brands... oh my god the list is endless...

Do we have any carrera boys willing to play? i'd love to be able to be all inclusive...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,143 Posts
Great idea indeed! Try and sell this "concept" to Scaley, too. The SlotForumTrack ..

But seriously, I recall making something similar to C/D and E when I tried to figure out a simple testing layout.
That should be easy to set up, easy to tuck away.

So these are very nice. By only adding a few pieces to a standard set, that's very easy and the hair-pin combo
is great for that. The wiggly bit is perhaps also needed to test the weight/balance of a car.

Jobb well done, hank & others! .... aaaaaaand .. my votes also goes to E/F ..

-- ron --
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,082 Posts
Good stuff stuff guys ...... now we need a standard driver as well ............ anyone fancy being the Stig??
 

·
42 Yrs
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
Discussion Starter · #58 ·
Wahey we are getting somewhere.... just have to rescue my box of track from my brothers house...

OH ONE BIG DECISION.... Straight into the hairpin (Clockwise) is a much tougher direction than Hairpin into the straight (Anticlockwise) we really need to decide on that before testing begins... straight into an R1 is always a nightmare...

Now if you are "IN" how about a list of cars you are willing to test...

and the timing.... I will be analogue 1/10 sec with digital and analogue... Any club racers do against the clock stuff got any format suggestions?.... I suggest fastest lap time from 10 laps. maximum of 3 sets of 10 laps per car... to get the best time.

JL-F! The brand difference is in the size of the curve radius anyway and the track surface.... please no more designs... E if you have the scaley track F if you have Ninco... I will work out a fudge factor shortly to even things up... Will PM Diegu for advice later.
 

·
Greg Gaub
Joined
·
15,402 Posts
Straight into a hairpin is just as much about when to brake as straight into an R2. You have to brake for both of them, and then you can't just gun it again right away. Personally, I would prefer it with the straight into the hairpin, but it would be easy to flip the layout and run it the other way. For that matter, if people wanted to, they could test their cars both ways. I don't know about real racing, but racing video games often give you the option to race a track in reverse.


In all cases, the skill of the driver will determine the best lap, but that's why the driver does multiple laps and takes the best time, not an average. That's also why it should be allowed for an improving driver to revisit and re-post new results for cars, even if no changes have been made to the car.

As has been pointed out, the idea is to figure out what kinds of cars are good racing matches for each other, but it can also be a bit of a challenge between racers. Same layout, same car, who gets the best lap, and why? Stronger magnet? Better controller? Better/cleaner surface and tires? Better tuning? Better driving? All these things factor in, but as long as people don't make up their times, then it's all in fun.

I'll be using a PB-Pro, so can report lap times to the 1/1000's (three decimal places) which I think is useful for such a small track. I'll be specifying digital or analog, since the chip reduces power a little.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
636 Posts
as already stated I'll also vote for E/F (in fact F as I go with Ninco).

I strongly suggest running counterclock-wise. Running into an R1 hairping from a 7-piece-straight isn't really fun.

I prefer negotiating through the EssEss, diving into the hairpin and then accelerating down the straight.

I think the skill of the driver won't make the difference on this simple track. Most will be able to learn this track very easily.

I think it will be the cars and their set-up. I'm very keen on knowing how good my cars are, compared to others.

As Mr. Flippant said, I think there will be in-depth-discussions about the best tuning and set-up of the cars...

Fine to have AAWSC here, so I'm not the only one doing it in Ninco
.

Cheers,

Diegu
 
41 - 60 of 330 Posts
Top