Fairways Racing Complex Forum

Guys,

I'm trying to think of ways to simplify some (if not all) of our class regulations to make it easier to set up cars and thus hopefully encourage new drivers. Here are some of my thoughts.

First of all, I can think of seven basic areas which must be considered for classifying slot cars:

1. Body - determines the era and the class within that era and generally has no serious impact on performance.
2. Motor RPM and torque- these determine straight line speed.
3. Gearing - used to fine-tune performance and can affect acceleration, top speed and braking.
4. Magnet location and strength - these affect cornering speed.
5. Tyres - affect cornering speed.
6. Car overall weight - affects acceleration, braking and cornering.
7. Drive train weight (gears, axles, wheels and tyres) - affects inertia (acceleration and braking).

Because different slot car manufacturers and even different cars from the same manufacturer often have different combinations of motors, gearing, magnet locations and strengths, tyres, overall weight and drive train weight, the only way to ensure similar performance is to (a) race classes of identically designed cars from the same manufacturer (basically IROC racing) or (b) create rules which require certain parameters for all of the above points, allowing cars from different manufacturers to compete equally.

Assuming we don't want to only be doing IROC racing, when making rules for each class we need to ensure that all cars can be checked for compliance in these seven areas. Items 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and even 7 can be checked quite easily. The real problem is item 4, checking magnet strength equality. In addition, even if each car had the identical magnet strength, lighter cars will always be quicker than heavier cars. This is where the USD rule that we've been using comes in. The beauty of the USD rule is that it takes both the magnet strength and the overall weight of the car into consideration. Given a fixed magnet strength, a lighter car will stick to the block when a heavier car falls away from it. This will necessitate that the lighter car have its magnet strength reduced or its weight increased, making the two cars closer in performance.

Here is an example set of "simple rules" for a hypothetical GT car class:

1. Body: Must be a GT body from 1976 onwards.
2. Motor: Up to 23,500 RPM.
3. Gearing: Free
4. Magnets: ??????????????
5. Tyres: Free
6. Weight: Free
7. Axles: Free
8. Wheels: Free

So guys, besides using the USD rule (or Magnet Marshal), how do we solve item 4 so that its fair for any brand or model of car that otherwise complies with the class rules?

Let's hear your suggestions below.

Hi all,
I think the rules that exist now are workable and do in fact achieve the desired objectives. My only suggestion (at least so far) would be to do away with the ground clearance limit in the applicable classes. This should not result in any performance improvements as the Upside Down Rule would still apply and the cars' magnetic downforce would be limited by it. Removal of the ground clearance limit would however, result in cars being somewhat simpler to set up.
Steve

Gordon it’s a very very tough (overall) situation you’ve got on your hands here. From setting up your track, tuning your slotcars, confirming drivers attendance, managing the 3 x 3 different class regs and all (the other details) for one night of 3 to 4 hours of racing. Plus still having to put away all things (afterwards) in order to get back with your regular life. Also not leaving out the fact of mentally trying to keep everyone happy and as the saying goes - you can’t please everyone.

The suggestion by Steve sounds feasible and yet still having to take into consideration racing the different 1/32 scale models from different slotcar manufacturers. Another huge racing project - you have always worked very hard towards.

Anyway - if you’re wondering where I’m going with this ... If I were you - I wouldn’t change the regular Thursday night racing to any other night because it’s something grown accustom to (very strongly) over the years.

That said ~ which may rock the boat (a bit) going forward and thinking it through. From my personal life situations plus the FRC experience I carry - the decision is for me to race at FRC on a Thursday night because you have put so many things in place to make it possible (for me) making arrangements.

Now remember these are just my thoughts in black and white and know you will value because it will help in making decisions.

Have to go now - getting back to my regular life

Luke

I differ from Steve`s suggestion, by doing away with the ground clearance.Your car magnetic to track distance and its location in your car are the greatest variable for speed and handling.Therefore if you want to slow cars down, you can reduce rpm and torque, increase weight, change magnet location and increase its ground clearance.This seems simple enough, some ground clearance can be increased to 2mm for eg in the slower classes. Like Pony and Historic.My suggestion is to do away with a variable USD rule and have a consistent measured rule of a ground clearance measure,that best suits the car times we are looking for.These are some of my thoughts for now. Since we are also racing Analog in south TSCC , USD cannot work with us, but ground clearance has been a much more user friendly option for us.Gordon ,you introduced this method of measurement and i noted how well it has worked,thanks.I would appreciate if we can explore this option at some time.

Ram, if we do away with the USD rule (not sure why you refer to it as "variable") and instead use a minimum ground clearance (the measurement can be discussed), what magnet are you proposing that we use? Remember, some cars may be Scalextric, others Slot.It, others Monogram, etc. We also have cars with Slot.It-compatible 3D chassis, etc.

Under such a regulation, whatever magnets I put in my cars I'll be sure to go through my substantial collection and find the strongest using the Magnet Marshal, something not everyone will have access to when setting up cars.

I'm just putting out some of the realities of the whole question of magnet racing if we are not going to be measuring downforce in some way.

Of course we can also ban magnets altogether in all classes and this problem would be put to rest.

If we're going to try to simplify the rules, as a trial we can temporarily suspend our Restricted GT class regs and try these in their place (the only change is shown in purple):

• Period: 1976 onwards.
• Body: Must be modeled after a two-door car which competes in GT racing and must comply with General item 2. Windows may be tinted so as not to reveal the cockpit - see Eligible Cars below.
• Chassis: Free.
• Minimum Ground Clearance: 1.0 mm / 0.040".
• Interior: Free but must comply with General item 3.
• Digital Chip: Free.
• Motor: 23,500 RPM or lower, based on manufacturer's specifications.
• Gearing: Free.
• Motor Pod (where applicable): Free.
• Magnets: Single magnet which may be positioned anywhere on the chassis.
• Wheels: Free.
• Axles: Free.
• Tyres: Free.
• Guide Flag: Free.

No USD rule.

Luke wrote:Gordon it’s a very very tough (overall) situation you’ve got on your hands here. From setting up your track, tuning your slotcars, confirming drivers attendance, managing the 3 x 3 different class regs and all (the other details) for one night of 3 to 4 hours of racing. Plus still having to put away all things (afterwards) in order to get back with your regular life. Also not leaving out the fact of mentally trying to keep everyone happy and as the saying goes - you can’t please everyone.

The suggestion by Steve sounds feasible and yet still having to take into consideration racing the different 1/32 scale models from different slotcar manufacturers. Another huge racing project - you have always worked very hard towards.

Anyway - if you’re wondering where I’m going with this ... If I were you - I wouldn’t change the regular Thursday night racing to any other night because it’s something grown accustom to (very strongly) over the years.

That said ~ which may rock the boat (a bit) going forward and thinking it through. From my personal life situations plus the FRC experience I carry - the decision is for me to race at FRC on a Thursday night because you have put so many things in place to make it possible (for me) making arrangements.

Now remember these are just my thoughts in black and white and know you will value because it will help in making decisions.

Have to go now - getting back to my regular life

Luke

Luke, thanks for recognizing my "labor of love". I do appreciate it.

On the topic at hand, I still want to see what can be done to simplify/improve things.

Had a couple chats with Ram over the last two days and thought I'd update everyone on this topic. First of all his comments in this post were directed at encouraging new FRC drivers and his suggestions are aimed at them and not us, the established regular racers. Based on this clarification and on our conversations, there will soon be an update which targets newcomers, particularly existing TSCC drivers. I just have to get some detail measurements before publishing.

Thanks , encouraging new drivers by having easier setups, should be one of the ways guys should come out. Please be encouraged.

Guys, please see the following post for what we're proposing to encourage new drivers:

https://www.frcforum.com/viewtop ... f=6&t=1316