Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

I just discovered the rules listed under the "Rules" tab on the NASTE Home Page and the rules as listed here in the Forum did not match up. I just completed the update of the rules on the Home Page tab so all rules listed in both areas match.

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

After Inslot's Checkered Flag Raceway is set up and ready for racing here in Vancouver, I will be enforcing a rule requiring the body screws on 1/32 production cars to be secured into the chassis. This is easily done by placing a piece of electrical tape over the mounting screw holes on the bottom side of the chassis. We have all experienced someone losing a body screw on the track. They get into the guide slot where they are difficult to remove and can cause damage to cars. The other common scenario is for them to get picked up by a car's motor magnets which can also cause damage to the car. My question to the rest of the group is; is this a rule we should adopt as official under NASTE's General Rules?

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

sounds good to me. I do that to all my scalextic cars since they are the worst at loosing those dang things. never had a problem with any other make so far. but a rule is a rule.

The secondnidator

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Good with me, one less part to have to dodge.

"Big Smooth"

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

wb0s wrote:

After Inslot's Checkered Flag Raceway is set up and ready for racing here in Vancouver, I will be enforcing a rule requiring the body screws on 1/32 production cars to be secured into the chassis. This is easily done by placing a piece of electrical tape over the mounting screw holes on the bottom side of the chassis. We have all experienced someone losing a body screw on the track. They get into the guide slot where they are difficult to remove and can cause damage to cars. The other common scenario is for them to get picked up by a car's motor magnets which can also cause damage to the car. My question to the rest of the group is; is this a rule we should adopt as official under NASTE's General Rules?

I'm bringing this up one more time, and also in the Odd Thursday Night Racing forum topic, because I think this would be a good rule to adopt, and because I WILL be enforcing this rule when I have Inslot's Checkered Flag track up and running.

If there are no objections I will add this rule to the official rules listed here.

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

The official NASTE Odd Thursday Night racing rules are now listed in only one spot. The rules are now found only from the Race Rules link on the Home Page. I added a link at the beginning of this forum topic to also direct readers to the official list.

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

NEW RULE added to Official Rules under General Rules:

7. All screws that pass through the bottom of a car's chassis will have their heads taped over. This is to prevent them from falling out onto the track surface should they become loose. This includes the heads of body mounting screws, as well as chassis motor pod mounting screws, or any other screws accessible or visible from the underside of the chassis.

Electrical tape works very well for this application. I will see that there is tape on hand at Al's Rippin' Ridin' Raceway for those that do not have any. Same will be true for InSlot's Checkered Flag when it is up and running.

This rule will be enforced at future races on InSlot's Checkered Flag.

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Good place to hide illegal lead, under all that tape. LOL

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

How much tape does it take to cover a screw?

"Big Smooth"

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

kidvolt wrote:

How much tape does it take to cover a screw?

It would depend on the participants

Race cars are neither beautiful nor ugly. They become beautiful when they win.

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

........AND how big the screws are!

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

How much weight do you need Monte?

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

To be precise I need as little as possible but as much as necessary.

wink

"Big Smooth"

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Just use very thin self-stick lead painted black. :^)

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Thanks Al and Donna for another great evening of racing.

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

I have revised the rules for Classic Sports Car Divisions I and II per my notes from last night's meeting. Please review the revised rules and let me know if there are any errors. Thanks!  ======Bill

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

http://slotcarnews.blogspot.com/2007/02 … -list.html

The secondnidator

68 (edited by Mitch58 February 29, 2020 10:11 pm)

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

I posted something similar earlier on Naste's Facebook page then it occurred to me that not everybody does Facebook.

  Unfortunately there was confusion concerning last weeks PGE class, there was objection when all but one car entered was a "Can-Am" type of car. On close inspection of the rules as written these cars are legal for this class as they fall into the correct years and did participate in the listed races.
  That being said I don't think that a second Cam-Am class was intended, we already have one. That can be determined by the class sponsor at a later date. But racers being racers they tend to gravitate to the fastest type of car available in particular those racers where winning is everything. I think I fielded the only non Can-am car, a Ford P68 that ran very well finishing I think 7th behind you guessed it, 6 Can-Am cars 5 of which were built by the same guy.

It was expressed at the race that we created new classes so we could race some cars in more races. This is not correct. At the time we started expanding the classes it was because most of us had other cars at home that couldn't compete in the classes we were racing, and instead we found ourselves racing the same two or three cars week after week. Some of these new "stock" classes have become our favorites with some of the closest racing.

  On to next weeks race. GT-3 is pretty well laid out. the LMP class not so much. We keep referring to it as the LMP class, but it is actually the LMP era class and as written covers full fendered sports cars that raced from 1994 thru to the present. So if you haven't found an LMP car that you like you don't need one. Many other cars are eligible. Pictured below are some of them. All of these are capable of running below 6 seconds on my track except the 350Z (18K motor).
Two of these the Opel and Marcos are eligible for both GFX and LMP era classes as their years overlap.

For the new racers/builders/tuners I would recommend the Revoslot Marcos as out of the box it will run with my fastest cars with no tuning other than a light tire sanding. It could be a short cut to the front of the pack.

Post's attachments

87852313_10219727099382564_6002557009109450752_o (1).jpg 427 kb, 1 downloads since 2020-02-29 

You don't have the permssions to download the attachments of this post.

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

As I recall, the reason we split up the GT class into the era-specific classes is a consensus of people wanted to see cars that ran together in 1:1 running together in 1:32.  I'm not sure what I think about Can Am running as PGE.  It is aligned with the intent of the GT class re-org, but doesn't seem to be in the spirit of it.

I wrote those rules up strictly based on breaking down the wide open GT class into buckets based on club feedback.  I am equally as happy to amend them to exclude Can Am from the PGE class- again, based on group feedback and consensus.

I would like to keep the rules as simple as possible though and I believe the less regulation we have, the better off the racing will be.

Chris

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Easy fix if needed. only full fender roofed cars....  that would take car of any can am cars..

The secondnidator

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Yeah, thought about that.  Might be a decent compromise for the situation.  I don't intend to require roofs for the other two divisions as I want a space for the Audi TDi's and similar cars to run.

72 (edited by docdoom March 1, 2020 6:51 pm)

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Think the only issues was with pge class. Im good with what ever we run. my 917 is getting a little dusty sitting in the old slot car box ... just needs some 10mm out back...

The secondnidator

73 (edited by Wanabgts March 1, 2020 4:28 pm)

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Keep can am. The racing is great, they are NOT the dominate cars anyway. I see no reason why a well sorted gt40, nsr 917, or a host of other cars couldnt win it in its current form. And crossover is cars is favorable in my opinion...

We had a great race with those cars. I won in a tie with a non can am entry.

Zack

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Because I keep going back to read them, here are the rules currently:

"Class 15 - Sportscar Era Class - Pre-Ground Effect (PGE)
Pre-Ground Effect (PGE) Era - Full-fendered sportscars from 1968 through 1980 which ran in FIA, IMSA, or SCCA sanctioned events. Any motors (22k limit), tires, driveline configuration, or chassis material may be used. Bodies must be injection molded or resin cast and not vacuum molded. Thunderslot brand RTR cars are NOT eligible for this class, but their driveline components (wheels, axles, gears, tires) and guide assembly may be used for tuning"

From our rules page: http://www.naste.org/racerules.cfm

I don't really have a strong opinion on this.  We split the eras up based on club feedback, not anything I personally wanted.  I am happy to support group consensus again, but the intent was to have era compatible cars on track with each other.  It seems like that is happening, despite the same cars having a class in which to play by themselves.

CK

75 (edited by ckouba March 3, 2020 10:55 pm)

Re: NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing

Upon further reflection, I would like to stay true to the original intent of the era-based buckets and say that a fleet of Can Am cars competing together in PGE is consistent with those objectives.  I don't see a need to alter the rules as they were originally drafted.

The only change I might consider is bringing the 1968 start date back to 1965.  That year (1968) was originally selected because that's where the Classics class used to cut off, but that has now moved to 1964.  It might add an interesting car or two into the mix- the Cobra, GT350 Mustang, earlier Corvette, 250 GTO, 250 LM, 365, 330, etc... so I will still propose it here.  Any thoughts?  Any objections?

Chris