SCI Logo

Scalextric USA
Pioneer Slot Cars
SCIs  MarketPlace, the online slot car mall
Carrera Slot Cars
Fly Model Car
BRM Model Cars
NINCO
MRC
AFX
Slot.it
Slot Car Illustrated Forum
  #16  
Old 12-20-2011, 10:34 PM
bov's Avatar
bov bov is offline
Championship Contender
View bov's Photo Album
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 34ever1 View Post
Effective immediately GTU #7 (Haystack) , along with GTU #26 and GT #101 are being removed from the entry list.
I'm hoping there's a very good reason why.....

Chris? Ray? What's the story?

Cheers, Tony.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-21-2011, 05:09 AM
Robert Livingston's Avatar
Robert Livingston Robert Livingston is offline
World Champion
View Robert Livingston's Photo Album
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Haven CT area
Posts: 16,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoom Beedo View Post
Robert, I might be reading more into the existing rule than is intended, but don't rule II.B.1), bullets 1,2,6 & 7 restrict the placement of metal being attached to a GT/GTU plastic chassis as reinforcement? Since most additional weight is metal of some sort, I would consider that a limitation on the position of weight because it could be construed as reinforcement, but again, maybe I'm reading more into that rule than is intended.
Yes, the no-metal-braces rule. You could use smaller pieces of lead laid end to end, like tiles, to be legal. As long as the pieces of metal are discontinuous and don't transmit forces across the axle center line or the motor center line it should be legal. That's the way I understood it. Maybe that rule is ambiguous.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-21-2011, 06:34 AM
Phil Kalbfell Phil Kalbfell is offline
Championship Contender
View Phil Kalbfell's Photo Album
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Hobart Tasmania Australia
Posts: 2,667
Default

Quote:
Effective immediately GTU #7 (Haystack) , along with GTU #26 and GT #101 are being removed from the entry list.
Why? Is this because of the drivers position in the car, the weight under two of the cars being too low,or just the fast the drivers are in the wrong position?

What ever the reason the problem should have been noted as the time of the tech checks.

Why is this posted here anyhow as this is all about the FUTURE YEARS?

Last edited by Phil Kalbfell; 12-21-2011 at 06:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-21-2011, 07:43 AM
RacerX132 RacerX132 is offline
National Racer
View RacerX132's Photo Album
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga.
Posts: 295
Default

I'm in complete agreement with George. The current series is underway and should include ALL cars entered that passed the current rules for this year.

This is simply a discussion for getting opinions out in the open to help tweak the rules to better the series for future years to come.

Please don't let the discussion cause a "black eye" to the series by having folks back out of it! More importantly it's just bad for the hobby we all enjoy.

After all, we are just playing with toy cars.....

Jason
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-21-2011, 08:25 AM
ckouba's Avatar
ckouba ckouba is offline
Championship Contender
View ckouba's Photo Album
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,320
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 34ever1 View Post
Effective immediately GTU #7 (Haystack) , along with GTU #26 and GT #101 are being removed from the entry list.

I'll also chime in with a "Why?". What rule (as currently written) did they violate? If they don't pass tech, do they get a chance to resolve the issue prior to the start of the series and/or re-enter with a penalty of missing round(s)?

I read (kinda) the rules and did what I did- full stock plastic interior with chassis/body at normal height. Would I have done something differently if we were all building these in the same room and I got to see some of these works in progress? Maybe, but I have not the experience at entering proxies to build the competitive advantages which others have. That's my learning curve. Next year my entry will be different.

This seems to be getting way out of hand... Let's get on with the racing as long as we all meet the rules.

Chris
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-21-2011, 05:00 PM
MRollingthunder's Avatar
MRollingthunder MRollingthunder is offline
Championship Contender
View MRollingthunder's Photo Album
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,237
Default

As a newcomer here I don't want to step on any ones toes and wear out my welcome, but I will say the idea of building and racing a car that represents a series from my youth as accurately as possible is what drew me to the series.

I understand the racer mentality, bring raised in a family that raced Oswego Supermodifieds back when they were virtually unrestricted. But if we are trying to build cars that represent the cars as they were run back then, then you would see no low profile tires on cars (unless you were the UOP Shadow), and the stock body classes were just that...bodies pulled off the assembly line and lightly modified, with some series running small blister flares. If the intent is to honor the cars of an era then slamming, lowrider tires and wheels, drivers that would need a periscope, all seem to violate the spirit.

My car is based on an actual car that is a TransAm Capri that a friend of mine competes with in various series. However, although he wins more than his fair share of championships, he is frustrated because although he races his virtually "as raced" in 1971, that some of the series allow the vintage cars to be modified with modern components such as over sized engines as used in later years, disc brakes, much wider tires than would have been used in the time period, taller diameter wheels and much bigger flares than were on the cars when first raced. So his competitors take what he calls unfair advantage.

In essence the very same issues on his 1:1 racer that we're discussing in scale! In fact, his biggest complaint is with sanctioning bodies that allow the wide body Alfas and Datsuns to compete! Slot cars mirroring real life!

Maybe some or all the solutions others have put forward should apply...maximum track, minimum and maximum tire and wheel packages, driver and interior height and material...

Maybe the easiest solution is to simply track down a set of rules from the period and a set of factory and race spec dimensions for each car and scale each down to 1/32 scale?

I'm also a veteran scratch builder and racer dating back to the 1960's and 70's. I stopped racing when the tires became orange and the bodies no longer had any relation to the appearance of a real car. It, as someone mentioned earlier, drove me out of the sport as well,when speed became more important to realism.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.