You are not logged in. Please login or register.
The NASTE Forum → NASTE → NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing Rules & Current Thread
Zack, in that reference the "fastest lap" is the method used to break the tie for 5th place. Not necessarily the fastest lap of the race. I edited the post....
Bill, I was attempting a joke. Internet context is the worst. hahaha
Nice job Doc and Rico!
Zack
Well I guess that pretty much sums up my understanding of internet etiquette!
Our host Al
Mitch
Daniel aka Doc
mmmmmmmmm wonder what I was thinking. maybe if worked harder master Yoda would train me in the ways of the force....... or may I didnt get the punch line to joke that Mitch was laughing so hard to. I looks more like a Opossums starring into the head lights of a on coming car.... smack.....
Well no time like the present to start talking about the next year points race classes to be run and rule changes. 1st up the classes to be run. I for one would love to see ones he have not yet ran In a points race.those would be the following policar f1 Carrera DTM group c gt and open for the last
I gave this some thought myself. It might be easier if we replaced two of our current classes and kept two.
What do others think?
I'm up for that.sounds like we need to put it to a vote again.......then when it does not go the way I want I'm calling the FBI and launching a investigation for Russian collusion...
Speaking as one who can't readily locate his "race" cars but is in possession of a large volume of "cars", I vote for NO "new" car models/types!
Quoting myself; "I ain't buyin' NO new cars!"
Keeping two and two new ones would be nice. I have a pretty good amount invested in the last few months getting to the point where I have cars for most of what we have going.
I think Classic 2 might as well die haha.
The slot.it Group c cars are very fun and fast, plus seems everyone has one. GFX could be cool....
Zack
It might be easier if we replaced two of our current classes... What do others think?
I am thinking, "What are Al and Zack's two slowest cars?"
Let's pick those classes!
You guys pick them, I can probably come up with something.
You mean you guys don't want to run the highly competitive Classic Ford GT 2 class?!? Im appalled! lol
Are we talking Slot.it DTM? Because I can get behind that!
I am fine with classic 1 as well.
Zack
I think Classic 2 might as well die haha.
I think it just needs an adjustment. In my opinion classic cars shouldn't have pods. I feel like both Div 1 and Div 2 should run podless. And not with cars that have had their pods tightened. This is a chance to step back to the older type of slot cars. Closer in concept to the 50 and older class.
If the Ford GT is your choice there are still ones to choose from, most notably Fly and Scalextric.
I would add the following to both classes:
Classic 1: No pods, no scratch-builds.
Classic 2: No pods.
Allowing brass/scratch chassis in Classics 2 would be about the same as allowing the Slot.It cars without having to fight the pod battle. And yes I know a Policar Ferrari is coming. I'm not that thrilled with a two-car class either. Perhaps we need to consider adding a podded classics class.
So ideally, once the FGT gets outlawed and the next, easy-to-tune-and-go-fast car rises to dominance, will that one get outlawed too?
We picked the 18k motor because it was readily available and cheap. If they go too fast, let's pick a different motor. Maybe make both Classics categories use the 14k?
I can see Fly and Scaley running well enough in Classics I (through '67), but completely irrelevant in Classics II ('68 through '75) if pods are continued to be allowed.
I don't remember specifically why we allowed pods but there was presumably a majority interest.
Let's look back at the original intent of the Classic Sports Car Class and the path that got us to here. I established the Classic Sports Car Class for the small sports cars from the '50s and '60s that would have raced in SCCA type races. Cars like the Ninco Classic cars were the class models. Originally there was no cut off date or year of manufacture, it seemed simple enough to me to interpret what qualified as a classic sports car. Silly me, mistake one! It didn't take long for the racers to start modifying the cars for better handling and more speed, and eventually realizing the Slot.it Ford GT fit the definition of "Classic Sports Car". This was a game changer. Add to that the availability of aftermarket chassis with motor pods, and some really well built "scratchbuilt" cars and it was time to reign in the class a little. So I established two divisions of the class. Division I retained the 7mm wide rear tires and non-podded chassis with no articulation allowed. Division II was established to allow the Slot.it Ford GT40, articulated scratchbuilt chassis, and the aftermarket chassis that were hitting the marketplace. The rear tire width was bumped up to 8mm on division II cars to further enhance the improvements of an articulating chassis. The third revision was to adopt a spec motor for each division, 14k in division I to bring the car's speed down, and 18k to allow the division II cars to be the faster of the classic sports car. This is where we are today.
I think one thing that would improve both divisions is for each to be defined by specific years and the cars raced within those time periods. We have discussed it and I think the cut off for Division I cars should be 1964 to allow the inclusion of the Ferrari 250 GTO. In addition I think there needs to be a maximum body width spec for Division I. I like the idea of Corvettes being eligible in Div.I but I think the extra width of the Grand Sport Corvettes might give them an advantage over the narrower cars. I feel the Grand Sports should be in Div.II with wider cars being allowed. I would set Div.II for the years 1965 through 1975 and change the rear tire spec to 10mm. Let the Division II cars rip, but reign in the Division I cars.
My thoughts...............
I know many of you must be sick of me talking about "the old club in SoCal", but we solved the "classic" car issue by requiring cars to be "box stock," i.e., just as they came from the factory, with just weight and typical tuning (trued tires, etc.) being the only mods. Sure, the cars were slower than they could have been with the "right" modifications (pods, aftermarket tires, etc.), but then again, they were also "class competitive." That means that they were as closely compatible as they could be. Slow, yes. Squirrely, yes. But also very closely matched, which led to some very tight racing.
Perhaps such rules might be introduced here?
(P.S.—also cheaper than modifying your cars up the kazoo...)
I'm liking what Bill said about the Classic I and II classes limit classic I to smaller narrow non podded cars and let the Classic II roll !! I would also be for keeping CanAm and LeMans classes in for 2020 Point Series and voting for two more.
Maybe three more classes
Maybe three more classes
...In addition I think there needs to be a maximum body width spec for Division I. I like the idea of Corvettes being eligible in Div.I but I think the extra width of the Grand Sport Corvettes might give them an advantage over the narrower cars....
How about a max track width instead? Technically, track is centerline of tread to centerline of tread, but in the slot car realm, it usually gets translated into outer sidewall to outer sidewall. That should equilibrate any width advantage and allow the era cars to run together appropriately.
I don't have a car in front of me but someone who did could probably make a suggestion for us to try.
equilibrate? Did you make that up?
Chris, max track width sounds like a good solution (sidewall to sidewall).
equilibrate? Did you make that up?
I wish. Not creative enough though...
I am newer to the club, so I don't feel as fit to provide good arguments in these discussions because the classes were obviously made for a reason. I do know any time of racing it is very hard to fix classing by excluding certain models if they truly fit the intent, since eventually the next fastest car will just be what everyone has.
Nearly everything mentioned so far exludes cars I have purchased in the last 6 months to race these specific classes, Frustrating of course, but I understand. Maybe its best to not race them for a year and just let other people develop some cars?
Lemans, although I only raced it a couple times, seemed like really good lower paced racing with the fastest cars being hardly under 7 seconds. Finishes were close.
Can am, I feel will be much like classic 2 going forward. Since I have developed the Slot.it cars to be at Thunderslot pace, and those cars are specifically excluded.
I always gravitate toward the best racing, so my keepers from this year going into next season would still have to be GT3, and Lemans. Even though I am not a fan of the GT3 they provided some very good races.
Zack
I am newer to the club...
Fairly irrelevant. You just have experience with bigger scales and certainly bring a truckload of enthusiasm to the smaller ones.
...I do know any type of racing it is very hard to fix classing by excluding certain models if they truly fit the intent, since eventually the next fastest car will just be what everyone has....
This is precisely my concern as well. Right now it's the Ford GT in the crosshairs. It's no secret I'm somewhat of a fan. I want to be able to race them. If we exclude them, shall we also exclude Camaros from Trans Am? McLarens (or whatever the "hot" car in GT3 really is) from GT3? Slot.It McLarens from Can-Am?
What I like about our club specifically is we share with each other. Got a car you can't figure out? Someone will help. Got a set up that works? It gets shared. Any class could become a single marque/model category if really pushed. At one point, Classics I was the Ninco Corvette class. Remember? If a current top runner is cut from a class, there will be a new top runner. To quote someone (I think), "the king/queen is dead, long live the king/queen!"
Can am, I feel will be much like classic 2 going forward. Since I have developed the Slot.it cars to be at Thunderslot pace, and those cars are specifically excluded.
Agreed, and it would be a shame to have this happen. Don't pull the rug out from under someone just because they were able to tune a car.
I do agree with Stan and think there is something to be said about the minimal modification classes. Keep things as close to box stock (like GT3's and BRM's) and things tend to run well. I think the mods in Le Mans are justified because the Flys start out as such turds anyway. I wouldn't mind adding some stock classes but also really enjoy the classes we already have.
Chris
How about a class of Ford GT's and similar models? At LeMans a Ford GT and a 356 Porsche were not expected to race in the same class. With the new Ferrari coming from Policar maybe there will be a suitable challenger.
I have nothing against the Ford GT. I have at least 4 of them, 2 Scaley, a Slot.it and an NSR. I just think that when you have a car that so dominates that it's about the only car then maybe some class adjustment/creation is needed.
The NASTE Forum → NASTE → NASTE Odd Thursday Night Racing Rules & Current Thread
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
