My next track is now in progress.

[mattb]

We all have our preferences, since I'm not much of a driver or are my racer friends, I always like a track with some curves, but not something that looks like spaghetti thrown on the wall. I think a lot of guys make a mistake (my opinion) by trying to get too many feet of track in the area that have to work with. would probably be better (my opinion) to get a track that flows better and is maybe a bit easier to drive.

Here is the track I have been working on. It is 4 inch lane centers for 1/24. I tried to work out max speed by the long straight into a nice bank. Then uphill to the overpass. Cars can't take this at full speed and you go downhill to the flat curve at the other end. So while you have a nice speed section, you also better back out and drive the uphill, downhill and flat curve at the other end. Being a figure 8, no driver has a lane advantage by much. I also built it so that the downhill to the flat curve can be changed to an "L" extension if we want a longer, more varied track. I have room for about a 10 foot extension out that side. I'm hoping it is a fun track for our group and that is not too hard to drive. I just never think it is much fun when you have cars coming off every lap!

P1010007.JPG

[slothead]

That is a great looking track with interesting elevation changes. It should be a lot of fun to race on.

My 2 cents worth of commentary is to crank the voltage down till there's a nice compromise between top end speed and driveability. At lower voltages acceleration is more realistic but cars can still gather speed over distance. I was guilty of cramming a bit too many twisty bits into my road course to maximize the lap length on my 5' x 14' table and it was difficult to get around at full wall wart voltage (16v) but at 12.5v it's fast enough and fun to drive.

[mattb]

I agree that less voltage is probably a good solution. I know putting current 1/32 cars on a track and getting nothing but fishtailing and speed that is not manageable is not fun for me. Lower voltage may make all the difference.

While talking about drivability, I have a question for you guys. I see lots of builds here get 20k or fast motors and are geared 3:1 or higher.
This sure seems like really over powering such small tracks. We run heavy 1/24 cars and with Mark Thomas 15K motors geared 3:1 and we have nice handling drivable cars on a Blue King track (punchbowl). The cars also transfer well to our home tracks that are 30 foot or so in length.

We can run Jaws (17,500) or the $2 motors I get from China (21k) and geared 4:1 and get similiar speed with with better brakes and acceleration. Those setups are on a really big track or our home tracks which do have 25-30 foot straights.Just really seems like a 20k motor geared 3:1 on a track with straights no more than 12-14 foot long and lots of tight curves would overpower the track.

How about it, does that much rpm work out good on a smaller track? I like to learn what I can about all different setups, even if it's not what I run.

[Tycosaur]

[chappyman66]

Sorry to hear that the tape is lifting. I will say that I have had some terrible experiences with inexpensive paint. Paint chemistry does vary. Have you tried a solvent? Liquid sander is sometimes used to help the surface layer to bind....it almost seems like you have an oil problem leaching out of the paint which is why I suggested solvent. Maybe 91%, but I keep mineral spirits and xylol around not to mention acetone, just in case.

It's a great track, hopefully you will get it sorted soon!