.

.

Thread: Slot Car Racer Today

  1. #1621
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Richmond, CA
    Posts
    1,279
    Just finished up LMP #3, this one the X25 with .030" Cheetah pans, Cahoza ex-production set up with Camen balanced Pro Slot Super Wasp arm. Mounted a fresh new Red Fox Audi R10. Lots of paint on the bottom of the chassis from the new lane striping on the Fresno flat track...I'm thinking of adding 1-2 .005" spacers, but the car was really good last Saturday. Meanwhile in the computer room there's one pair of animals sleeping

    DSCN4456 by svtgeorge, on Flickr

    Also yesterday I cleaned up my Mack ES32 and mounted a freshened motor in it. Interested to see how Gawronski likes it tomorrow if he shows up for the eurosport test session. Oh yeah, then in the living room is the big beagle...

    DSCN4457 by svtgeorge, on Flickr

    So, I better get back to work, I have one more car to go, a new Bulldog 3 which is earmarked as the "Nats GT12". This one is for tuning with the USRA legal LMP bodies. I'll do more testing of those bodies tomorrow. Oh, one more, the small beagle is really knocked out...

    DSCN4458 by svtgeorge, on Flickr
    Journeyman Industrial Slotcar Worker, Teamsters Local 3299 AFL-CIO
    Now with "Improved Karma"

  2. #1622
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    NorthWesterner now in Philippines
    Posts
    9,531
    Looks like everyone (except SR) is sleeping off T-Day dinner.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Paul Kassens
    OWH Slot Car Talk "Mom"
    The Old Weird Herald
    email: paulk@oldweirdherald.com

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

  3. #1623
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    401
    SR,
    On the X25 with the C11 .030 pans are you using anything to control or limit the movement of the pans?
    The Race Place raceplaceinfo.com
    Bowskateer founding member #3
    Get a 3rd EYE Fetroller 2.1
    Balanced by Bill

  4. #1624
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Richmond, CA
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff714 View Post
    SR,
    On the X25 with the C11 .030 pans are you using anything to control or limit the movement of the pans?
    Jeff, funny you should ask that question as Hermanator and I were discussing how to limit chassis movement a few days ago. My own driving style prefers less movement in general. Being a production chassis, there should be no modifications to the chassis....to me this means no soldered on parts that create an X25 Frankenstein. Once you start adding or subtracting from a flexi chassis it leads to a slippery slope of modifications. I only bend the parts, use tape and/or lexan bulletproofing, and/or lead weight. I believe it's better to be creative with what you're given rather than being creative with additional modifications.

    I'm sure you've worked with the X25/C11 combination, Jeff, and you will recall that the first thing about it is the pans hang very low...that's because the X25 does not have those awful two bumps where the crossbar sits. That's perhaps the biggest improvement I can think of. I've found it takes at least .010" lexan bullet proofing to raise the crossbar to the proper level.

    Hopefully not to contradict what I said in the first paragraph, I think you can try different diameter crossbars, and more important, cut to different lengths. I prefer a crossbar that is so long, it almost eliminates movement...just leaves a little side movement, maybe .007" or so.

    Of course, to make the pans hang straight (if not addressed, they will droop down outwardly) you need to do some tedious bending of the small front forks. It has to bend up, and then the fork needs to be bent back down...it's an "S" shaped bend and really hard to do on the .030" pans....I use a vise to get a good grip. The .025" forks are very easy to adjust. When the fork is raised enough, then the pans are mechanically held flat.

    The other adjustment is being sure the little tongues that sit on top of the front winglets are flat...not pointing up or down at an angle relative to the flat winglet. I try to get all these pieces to slide nicely against eachother without any odd angles which will cause uneven movement. I want the pan to slide forward to rear nice and flat. I do not restrict this forward/rear movement at all, I think it is helpful. But I do make the crossbar longer to restrict the side to side movement in the rear, and I also try to restrict up and down movement as much as possible.

    For you, this may be completely wrong in terms of your driving style, but there may be some concepts in this you can use.
    Journeyman Industrial Slotcar Worker, Teamsters Local 3299 AFL-CIO
    Now with "Improved Karma"

  5. #1625
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Paonia, Colorado
    Posts
    1,452
    SR,

    I was looking at your bullet proofing. I used to use Roger S's smaller and lighter "ninjas" (they are actually t-shaped), but I switched to the parachute/spinnaker tape from Alpha. It's the best I've ever used. Very light, very strong. Also available at Mid-America. It has the huge advantage, that if you miss, you can put a second hole right next to the first without any obvious loss of strength.

    Greg

  6. #1626
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    401
    SR,

    Great feed back as always. Yes I have done some testing with the X25/C11 combo and to this point haven't come up with a combination that will best the standard center with the stock pans setup well. In today's GSI series the first and second place cars were both running (don't recall the third place car's setup) X25 with stock pans and had the field covered by over a 10th. That said it makes sense to me that the lighter pans could be quicker so I'll keeper tinkering.
    The Race Place raceplaceinfo.com
    Bowskateer founding member #3
    Get a 3rd EYE Fetroller 2.1
    Balanced by Bill

  7. #1627
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Roseville, CA
    Posts
    146
    SR, I appreciate the X25/c11 feedback.... it's always nice to hear what others are doing especially when they talk about chassis adjustments, etc. Looking forward to Fresno.
    Jay Herrod

  8. #1628
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Richmond, CA
    Posts
    1,279
    It was an interesting test day at Slot Car Raceway, Rohnert Park, Calif, Site of Many, Many Scale Nats past and future. Found out many things including Hermantor’s idea to return to 2009 eurosport technology, so here is a rather lengthy report...

    Why go back to the 2009 Mack eurosport? In early 2010 we were turning 2.9s pretty regularly on the yellow lane using Camen single mag small block set ups and Valiko 22t25 arms. Yeah, I know, maybe the track is slower with all the wear on the lane, battery condition, track wear, etc etc. But you’d think that over time we would be keeping up with the changes by newer technology.

    What’s the newer technology? Much of it is the Horky 2010 “Chicago” chassis. Motors? Voki 10 mag and 18 mag, Camen “Mystery Motors” and a little dabbling (unsuccessfully) with different armatures. You’d think we’d be running 2.9s, maybe 2.8s. Nope, on a good day we run 3.2s now….with the futuristic high dollar eurosport equipment. Lately, I’ve had trouble even getting 3.2s with the Horky and the Castricone chassis and the supposedly more advanced motors.

    What’s the older technology? Last week I pulled my 2009 Mack eurosport chassis out of its plastic bag, cleaned all the oil off it and installed a fresh pair of 2mm axle bearings in it. Built it up and mounted a fresh Red Fox Audi R10 short. For a motor, I had a Camen small block single mag, .410T X .330L that had never been a particularly good set up for whatever reason. I replaced the bearings in this set up and installed a Valiko 22t24.5. I think the bearing replacement was key.

    What happened on the track? The Mack blew away both the Horky and the Castricone. There was an immediate result getting down to the low 3.2s with tall tires. The only thing about this was when the car let go, it did so suddenly and without warning. This is what I remember from “the old days”….but, we were going awfully fast!!! The Horky was very drivable, very predictable and could be pushed extremely hard. For some reason, the lap times were not good….best was mid 3.3s. Seems like I could push and push and it won’t come off, but looked at the lap time and OMG why is it so slow? I tried changing motors too. But, what I should have done was take the motor out of the Mack and put it in the Horky. I will do that in a few weeks when we have the next Eurosport Club meeting on Dec 11th.

    For the GT12 testing, the new Dog 3 is very, very good. No weights and .047” rails with minimum steer. Motor was a bit soft. The test was to try all the USRA LMP bodies on this lightweight car. The results were a bit startling…..all the bodies were reasonably good. Herman agreed. We concluded that the list of USRA approved LMP bodies may make this into a multi-body class finally! Of course, if the Audi R10 is in the list, it becomes a one body list. I could see running any of these bodies except for maybe one or two. I really did not think the Parma MG Lola performed as well yesterday…this is the one with the two lumps on the hood. Best time I could get on yellow was 3.95 and it felt quite tippy. I think the only hope for this body is to lower it, maybe remount it with a 1-1/2” spoiler height. The entire top surface of this body seems really high, so it even appears to be a bit top heavy. I’ll give it another chance. The JK Products Audi R8C that I liked so much a few weeks ago on green was pretty average this week. It produced good time in the upper 3.8s. Remember that a good NORCAL GT12 with a HD Caddy, Start-a-fire, O/S Mercedes, etc will get consistent 3.6s. The two bodies I ended up favoring yesterday were the Red Fox Audi R18 which ran a ton of 3.80s, and the JK Products BMW which I cut a 3.75. The BMW looked very smooth, and we have read GearBear’s reports saying the same for this body on the Seattle Twister. The Audi R18 was not quite as smooth in the esses, but it looked really bolted to the track…I liked the way the car behaved, and it turned 3.80s and 3.81s over and over. The BMW was not quite as consistent.

    Hermanator and I concluded that we could probably race any of these bodies, and again, it won’t be a bad idea to bring them all to the Nats and make the choice on the day of the race.
    Journeyman Industrial Slotcar Worker, Teamsters Local 3299 AFL-CIO
    Now with "Improved Karma"

  9. #1629
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by Slotcar Racer View Post
    For the GT12 testing, the new Dog 3 is very, very good. No weights and .047” rails with minimum steer. Motor was a bit soft. The test was to try all the USRA LMP bodies on this lightweight car. The results were a bit startling…..all the bodies were reasonably good. Herman agreed. We concluded that the list of USRA approved LMP bodies may make this into a multi-body class finally! Of course, if the Audi R10 is in the list, it becomes a one body list. I could see running any of these bodies except for maybe one or two. I really did not think the Parma MG Lola performed as well yesterday…this is the one with the two lumps on the hood. Best time I could get on yellow was 3.95 and it felt quite tippy. I think the only hope for this body is to lower it, maybe remount it with a 1-1/2” spoiler height. The entire top surface of this body seems really high, so it even appears to be a bit top heavy. I’ll give it another chance. The JK Products Audi R8C that I liked so much a few weeks ago on green was pretty average this week. It produced good time in the upper 3.8s. Remember that a good NORCAL GT12 with a HD Caddy, Start-a-fire, O/S Mercedes, etc will get consistent 3.6s. The two bodies I ended up favoring yesterday were the Red Fox Audi R18 which ran a ton of 3.80s, and the JK Products BMW which I cut a 3.75. The BMW looked very smooth, and we have read GearBear’s reports saying the same for this body on the Seattle Twister. The Audi R18 was not quite as smooth in the esses, but it looked really bolted to the track…I liked the way the car behaved, and it turned 3.80s and 3.81s over and over. The BMW was not quite as consistent.

    Hermanator and I concluded that we could probably race any of these bodies, and again, it won’t be a bad idea to bring them all to the Nats and make the choice on the day of the race.
    Two important elements that I find people neglect when testing bodies: how many laps to get to a consistant quick time and recovery after a de-slot.

    The first is self explanatory: put on a body and how many laps to you get consistant with it. Then swap bodies and see how many laps to get consistant with it. If you have 3-4 bodies this is even more effective, just have someone call out your times and you will see one body will usually allow you to get to consistent times with fewer laps.

    The other test is to push like crazy until you de-slot. Now put the car back on and push really hard right away, as if in a race. One of the bodies will typically allow you to get back to quick lap times in the least laps.

    Lou and I spent a Saturday afternoon last winter testing similar "low downforce" bodies (B-Production bodies). We came to similar conclusions: the JK CLR Merc allowed the fastest de-slot recovery and OS 082 the fastest constancy. It was funny that neither offered the best, nor most consistant lap times. Note that this was a c-can in a X25, not GT-12.

    How long is the R18 body? It looks short in the photos.
    Last edited by pilmat; 11-29-2011 at 06:38 AM. Reason: It's a CLR not CLK....
    Phil Matthews

  10. #1630
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Richmond, CA
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by pilmat View Post
    Two important elements that I find people neglect when testing bodies: how many laps to get to a consistant quick time and recovery after a de-slot.

    The first is self explanatory: put on a body and how many laps to you get consistant with it. Then swap bodies and see how many laps to get consistant with it. If you have 3-4 bodies this is even more effective, just have someone call out your times and you will see one body will usually allow you to get to consistent times with fewer laps.

    The other test is to push like crazy until you de-slot. Now put the car back on and push really hard right away, as if in a race. One of the bodies will typically allow you to get back to quick lap times in the least laps.

    Lou and I spent a Saturday afternoon last winter testing similar "low downforce" bodies (B-Production bodies). We came to similar conclusions: the JK CLR Merc allowed the fastest de-slot recovery and OS 082 the fastest constancy. It was funny that neither offered the best, nor most consistant lap times. Note that this was a c-can in a X25, not GT-12.

    How long is the R18 body? It looks short in the photos.
    Phil, I'm really impressed with your feedback. You and Lou developed a really smart way to test bodies, I like that! About three weeks ago Paul Gawronski called out the laps and was a second brain in comparing the bodies on the green lane. This past Sunday, I did not have the second brain, but it is easy to see your lap times on our track, quick glance at the screen as the car heads down the main chute to the deadman.

    So, your first criteria: how many laps does it take to get consistent?

    The second one is very interesting: push to 100% until it deslots....then, how long does it take to get back to 100%

    Your second option is very interesting....it's like a "Stress Test". So, when under stress, I think that boils down to which body makes you feel more comfortable...which one induces the most confidence.

    It also makes me think about how to conduct a slotcar race. How do you react to deslotting, or a wreck? That's a whole different subject. But, ideally you brush it off, don't let it affect you, and just concentrate on your race going forward from the time the marshall gets the car back on the track. Like a batter who takes a big swing and misses the ball because it was a 97mph fast ball. Batters who dwell on that missed pitch get nowhere by dwelling on the past. Batters who look only look forward to the next pitch are the ones who are more successful.

    So, I'm not totally sure how useful option #2 is, plus isn't it kind of hard to replicate race conditions when you are perhaps the only car on the track doing the testing? This is why I would say your first criteria is about all that's available on a pure test session. Lap times and consistency.

    There's a third element that's important to me: how the car looks on the track, not sure you mentioned that one Phil. I take note of the degree of smoothness of the car particularly in our esses where the car changes direction in three 180* turns at fairly high speed. Example, the JK BMW looked really nice, not a lot of unnecessary jerky movement. On the other hand, the Red Fox Peugeot looked downright crazed. Herman tried the Peugeot on orange and thought it was a weird ride.

    Anyway, great stuff about testing Phil. Any more insights are much appreciated. Oh yeah, the R18 is on the shorter side. I will do some measurements when I go home after "work". I did post a photo of all the bodies relative to eachother in length. I think it's a few pages ago.
    Journeyman Industrial Slotcar Worker, Teamsters Local 3299 AFL-CIO
    Now with "Improved Karma"

  11. #1631
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Richmond, CA
    Posts
    1,279

    DSCN4428 by svtgeorge, on Flickr

    DSCN4446 by svtgeorge, on Flickr

    DSCN4443 by svtgeorge, on Flickr

    DSCN4440 by svtgeorge, on Flickr

    DSCN4437 by svtgeorge, on Flickr

    DSCN4434 by svtgeorge, on Flickr

    DSCN4431 by svtgeorge, on Flickr

    Might give you some idea of relative length....I still need to measure though!
    Journeyman Industrial Slotcar Worker, Teamsters Local 3299 AFL-CIO
    Now with "Improved Karma"

  12. #1632
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    305
    Thanks for the photos!

    I agree 100% with your visual test. I call it the "flow" of the car and use it to judge the fore-aft aero balance of the car. The one single body that stood out as having a weak flow was the JK CLR Merc. It has awesome front and good rear but no balance between the two (sounds funny...).

    The JK R8 is one of my favourite B-Prod bodies. with the heavier car I find it has the best flow. One observation about yours from the photos is that it is quite high. Lou cuts down the front another 1/8" and the rear is set to be level like yours (so basically 1/8" off the whole thing). I always find high bodies are tippy with poor flow. You have the rear wing at legal height?
    Phil Matthews

  13. #1633
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Richmond, CA
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by pilmat View Post
    Thanks for the photos!

    I agree 100% with your visual test. I call it the "flow" of the car and use it to judge the fore-aft aero balance of the car. The one single body that stood out as having a weak flow was the JK CLR Merc. It has awesome front and good rear but no balance between the two (sounds funny...).

    The JK R8 is one of my favourite B-Prod bodies. with the heavier car I find it has the best flow. One observation about yours from the photos is that it is quite high. Lou cuts down the front another 1/8" and the rear is set to be level like yours (so basically 1/8" off the whole thing). I always find high bodies are tippy with poor flow. You have the rear wing at legal height?
    Yeah, I liked the JK Audi 8 too, but this past Sunday it wasn't as good. Anyway, as I had posted earlier, these bodies were all cut to the USRA legal maximum spoiler height of 1-5/8". My intention is to do further hacking on them to lower the spoiler. That's a good way of putting the appearance of the car, the balance of front to rear. One thing about the JK BMW is it seems to meet that balance quite well. In general, we are finding the 1-5/8" spoiler height is too high...your comment "tippy with poor flow" matches my experience. We use high downforce GTP bodies on the GT12 in our monthly series, and ones like the HD Caddy, RF Starfighter are way too tippy at the 1-5/8" maximum....lowered to about 1.5" makes a huge improvement....just think, all it takes is 1/8"....small changes in slotcar dimensions make huge changes in handling.
    Journeyman Industrial Slotcar Worker, Teamsters Local 3299 AFL-CIO
    Now with "Improved Karma"

  14. #1634
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,201
    Phil
    Nice to see you posting again I heard you had a busy race season with your race team .Looking forward to racing again with you in the near future.
    I like my Body's to have some rake to them Front to back and George is right on about a little change in rear height can really change the way a body drives.
    I'm More of a feel guy If it feels good then that's what I use. B-pro the OS -082 just felt right when I tried it and haven't changed since Could be time that I get a Little more scientific with my program.
    Motors By Mic B
    Balance By PoppaPower
    A Clean Slot Car is a Happy Slot Car
    Garden State ISRA Club Home of the Anaconda
    Tires by the Hermanator
    www.TheISrausa.com

  15. #1635
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Richmond, CA
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Mic Byrd View Post
    Phil
    Nice to see you posting again I heard you had a busy race season with your race team .Looking forward to racing again with you in the near future.
    I like my Body's to have some rake to them Front to back and George is right on about a little change in rear height can really change the way a body drives.
    I'm More of a feel guy If it feels good then that's what I use. B-pro the OS -082 just felt right when I tried it and haven't changed since Could be time that I get a Little more scientific with my program.
    If I were to go by the "Mic Byrd School of Feel", then I would choose the Red Fox Audi R18...."The Ugly Duckling" as I call it....on Sunday, I just loved the way that car felt....I guess I like the visual of it too as the car looked really PLANTED on the track. Very, very consistent 3.80-3.81 over and over and over. More testing to come. I will be cutting down some of these bodies. Oh yeah, that Red Fox Cadillac, I am going to try to recut the front completely, eliminate the diaplane....that will totally change the profile of that bad boy.
    Journeyman Industrial Slotcar Worker, Teamsters Local 3299 AFL-CIO
    Now with "Improved Karma"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •