# Power Taps, or no power taps?



## Jerzferno (Aug 19, 2007)

I was getting concerned by all you guys talking about large layouts needing power taps. When you say large layouts, whats your definition? I have a 4 lane layout that has a 45 foot center line distance. I have absolutely no power problems what so ever. Right now Im just using stock Tomy/AFX wall packs. 1 pack for 2 lanes. I have just received the dual terminal tracks so Ill be converting to one pack per lane. Am I just lucky, or is my layout not large as to what you guys are referring to?


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

My track is 82.5 ft per lane with no additional power taps. All four lanes are powered smoothly all the way the around by a power supply with 1 Amp per lane. I kept reading all the posts about power taps and as I kept lengthening my track I was expecting problems. All's well. The racing's great.


----------



## Dyno Dom (May 26, 2007)

My Tomy track had an avg. running lap length of 77ft., originally with 3 power taps. Using the recomended 12 to 15 joints per tap, the track could have used 7 taps per lane. My new sectional track will be a smoothed out version of that layout & will have 4 power taps per lane. (less joints) The type of cars run for amp & voltage draw should also be considered.


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

Like anything else, the real answer is: it depends. I think Tomy track has an excellent electrical system. It may not be the smoothest or roomiest ride, but the electrical connection is about as stout as anything ever done in HO scale. 

A lot of us started out back in the Aurora Model Motoring track days, running cantankerous TJets and A/FX cars in humid basements with half wave rectified power supplies that hummed like something out of Dr Frankenstein's lab. Heck, some of the living room floor layouts suffered from severe power drop off halfway through the 25 foot (if we were lucky and using fishermen's measurements) of running length. When I built a permanent MM layout on a 4x8 table I needed 2 additional power taps and 4 transformers to keep the cars from abruptly slowing at various points. 

With my latest track, a 82 ft Tomy, I powered it up and ran it sans extra taps when I was evaluating layouts. I really didn't notice any drop offs with standard cars. I was mightily impressed. But I was determined to build a layout that could handle anything up to RO so I went ahead and dropped in 6 sets of power taps.Needless to say, power delivery has never been an issue. Is it over designed? Probably.

I think it comes down to what design approach you subscribe to. Do you build something and then adapt what you have built, based on actual circumstances and observed needs, or do you try to anticipate what you'll need ahead of time and design in the margins to handle all of the contingencies that you know about? With bridge building, or heart monitoring systems, the preferred approach is obvious. With a hobby like slot cars, either approach is fully reasonable. I always try to encourage hobbyists to try things for themselves and learn as they go. So, unlike some slot car sites of how-tos or proclamations to the contrary, my answer to your question is ... add as many jumpers as you need to. If your cars are slowing down halfway around the circuit - add a tap at the midway point. If the cars then start slowing down halfway between the taps, add some more. Your track will tell you what it needs.


----------



## slotnewbie69 (Dec 3, 2008)

as always,well said!i always benefit from your posts,whether i posed the question or not.neil


----------



## 1976Cordoba (Sep 20, 2000)

I've set up a 128' Tomy 4-lane road course with one terminal track and power pack per lane. Running box stock SG+ and 440X2s never noticed any power drop-offs.


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

My current track is a Mattel four laner with 65 pieces per lane; the number of joints is more critical (for determining power requirements) than the length. I built the track with two power points almost halfway around the track from each other.

While testing the layout, I only hooked up one of the power taps and did not notice any dropoff. Two taps seems to be enough on my circuit.

When I had my original Aurora L&J track, even in the last few years before I converted, I could see a visible dropoff in power the further you got from a terminal track. An Aurora L&J layout with 65 pieces may need as many as 4 power taps to run well.

As AFXToo said, see what works for you.

Joe


----------



## NTxSlotCars (May 27, 2008)

I have only one terminal track per lane on both of my Tomy tracks. I have absolutely no power issues. I have a friend who is using multiple taps on his Tomy track. He constantly has power problems. One straightaway will be slower than the others. The problem is not on just one lane either. He has a 65' layout. I told him I think multiple taps interrupts the flow of current, so he added another power tap(from 3 to 4). He still has the same problem. He uses batteries and a power supply.

One is just fine.
Rich


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

A little girl asked her mother why she cut the ends off the ham before baking it. Her mother said, "Because that's the way my mother did it." So when Grandma came over they asked her why she did it that way, and Grandma said, "Well, that's the way _my_ mother did it." So the next time they visited Great Grandma, they all asked "Why did you always cut the ends off the ham before baking it?" And Great Grandma replied "Because my pan wasn't big enough for a whole one."

I can see this thread's going to save me a some time on my next track.

-- D


----------



## Jerzferno (Aug 19, 2007)

Dslot, I think they have medication for your condition. If you cant offer anything intelligent, then dont bother wasting our time with your babble. 
Now on to the topic. I must have approximately 40 joints / lane. So by some I should have 3 to 4 taps. But since mine is working fine with 2 pack for 2 lanes, it should be just as good if not better (if thats possible) when I intall the dual power terminal tracks. Thanks to all who offered their own experiences and intelligent responses.


----------



## NTxSlotCars (May 27, 2008)

I think Dslot has a great point. Our next ham will be cooked without chopping the ends off.


----------



## Crimnick (May 28, 2006)

My 105' foot tomy has 5 taps...going to add two more...

Having had both methods of wired track....I wont build another without taps...

But then again...we race super stocks....and you can instantly tell a power drop when there is a bad track connection between two track sections...


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

Jerzferno said:


> Dslot, I think they have medication for your condition. If you cant offer anything intelligent, then dont bother wasting our time with your babble.


 Jerz,
I'm just going to assume you're cranky because you're up past your bedtime. Try rereading it in the morning.
Cheers,
D


----------



## slotnewbie69 (Dec 3, 2008)

when you guys are determining power loss to a particular lane.are you talking about the car being visibly slower,or as recorded by the lap timer?just askin cause we are doing ho at my bud's place and using the trakmate for the first time to try and up the ante a bit from our usual beer league races...


----------



## Scafremon (Dec 11, 2006)

Jerzferno said:


> Dslot, I think they have medication for your condition. If you cant offer anything intelligent, then dont bother wasting our time with your babble.
> Now on to the topic.


I'm hoping you do as Dslot so politely recommended, and re-read his post. If you do not understand the point he was making, ask, and someone here will (most likely) explain it to you.


----------



## rudykizuty (Aug 16, 2007)

Scafremon said:


> I'm hoping you do as Dslot so politely recommended, and re-read his post. If you do not understand the point he was making, ask, and someone here will (most likely) explain it to you.



AMEN TO THAT.


----------



## Jerzferno (Aug 19, 2007)

I understand the point he was.............trying to make. His last sentance sets the tone of his ingnorance.

Each forum has that............one. I guess hes it.


----------



## wheelszk (Jul 8, 2006)

I'm on my 2nd MaxTrax, again 4 X 14 road course. I use 2 power taps, not necessary, but why not. I never have any power issues, plain and simple. Do or don't  your choice
Bill


----------



## Scafremon (Dec 11, 2006)

Jerzferno said:


> I understand the point he was.............trying to make. His last sentance sets the tone of his ingnorance.
> 
> Each forum has that............one. I guess hes it.


I fear that you may have placed your foot so far into your mouth now that you will not be able to extract it. 

Dslot is a well respected member of this forum, and while you are not necessarily expected or required to know this, you might want to be a bit more careful in the future. I suggest you click on his name, read some prior posts of his, realize your mistake, and try and make up for your mis-understanding of his post, including his last sentence.

I can pretty much guarantee that you will not find any support from other members here for your attacks. 

If each forum 'has that....one', and if that is a bad thing, try not to become 'it'.


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

Hang in there, D...


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

_Whoa Nellie!_

As far as power taps go it's up based on the relationships between the the type of track, it's condition, overall length, what type of cars you run and their power requirements, ability of the power supply to provide current, guage of wiring....yada yada yada....check the archives. Scaf has a major thesis on the topic if you care to take the time to read his fine track build thread. 

It's just another one of those how high is up questions that we field on a regular basis.

_Some time ago_

I personally went vintage L&J and carefully read what more experienced people had to impart on this very board. I took that knowledge and with what I already knew applied it to my specific situation....and guess what.....no problemo! duh

I took what the cagey veterans of the time had to say to heart. This has allowed me to enjoy my simple track with all manner of cars and *no, zero , nadda* problems. I personally chose to use power taps at the recommended distances and upgrade my power supply. The dividends are paid longterm as I dont have to waste time mucking around with current flow problems and can spend my valuable hobby time building and running the lil' cars I love. 

Entertain the idea that you dont just slam a good running reliable track down with out some extra effort. We havent even discussed shimming joints and leveling rails. 

_Generalities_

If you expect to run high current demand cars then plan for taps. Nobody says you have to go all the way with it...just plan for it. 

Even if you think your just going to putter vintage queens on a sunday drive;
plan for taps anyway. Tastes and interests change. Be a boyscout and prepare yourself for contingencies.

_Jerz_

To paraphrase Marty Bauer, whacking Dslot upside the head_ is not a good way to win friends and influence people._ Dslot is a big boy fully capable of shredding anyone in a battle of wits or the finer points of board decorum; as well as being a helpful contributor to HT in general. Should you want to continue this or whacking other members please take it to PM or E-mail. Thats the house rule ....period.

Please remember one of the cornerstones of HT, *humor*, dont log on with out it. Dslot's comment is relavent to the topic and there is no doubt in my mind that it was proffered with humor and good intent as he recognizes the irony in these typically open ended questions that have no direct answer; but become rather complex based on all the individual parameters and lead us to the same eventual conclusion every time.

Please consider that the joke/jab is on the situation not on you as an individual.


----------



## ParkRNDL (Mar 20, 2002)

I have a 4x16 table using Atlas track. I had a 2-lane layout on it, somewhere over 60 feet of track, and I had something like 6 power taps. Two old MM buzzer transformers, one on each lane. I always had a weird problem where one lane was a little faster and ran a little better than the other, even when I switched power packs between lanes. I suspect that there was some resistance somewhere in my questionable wiring job.

Anyway, I recently tore it all up and replaced it with a 4-lane layout using the same Atlas track that's probably between 50 and 60 feet (bought more track and left less space for landscaping). I now have 4 of the aforementioned buzzers, one on each lane again... but since the track is still kinda under construction, I haven't added extra taps yet. Seems to work fine. Some points seem a little down on power when you first run the track after it's been sitting, but I don't know if extra taps would change that, and it's fine after a few laps. When it's all said and done, I plan to add a couple more taps, but probably not as many as I had before...

--rick


----------



## E-Force-1 (May 31, 2007)

> As far as power taps go it's up based on the relationships between the the type of track, it's condition, overall length, what type of cars you run and their power requirments, ability of the power supply to provide current, guage of wiring....


What Bill Hall said is correct.

If you are playing around with Tycos, JL, Magnatraction, X-tractions or any other low powered car, you can get away with one or two power taps. Most of you are probably factoring your testing on a two lane track and running a car by yourself.

Once you get into high powered cars, with polymer magnets and custom wind armatures, thats another story. These cars demand more and you must supply more. I have seen the amp meter jump to 5 amps on ceramic magnets cars when then hit the beginning of a straightaway on one of our 4 lane club tracks.

I own two four lane Tomy tracks and each one has six power taps. With good power, even tjets scream in the six and a half second range on a sixty foot lap length track.


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

I totally grokked the ham analogy. Totally in context and relevant. 

Hmmm. It did make me think about brown sugar, mustard, cloves, and pineapple rings. So I guess you know what's on this Sunday's dinner menu. 

Quit engaging in subliminal means to get me to eat more ham, Dslot, you evil persuader of pork product consumption.


----------



## rideinstile (Dec 26, 2007)

Boy I thought the Ham story was really funny!!! Oh well. Some people just don't get it I guess.


----------



## NTxSlotCars (May 27, 2008)

Maybe he meant if you can't get enough power to both ends of your table, chop off the ends?


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

Hahahahahahahahahaha! See Rich gets it cuz he's from Texas too!


----------



## Tycoarm (Jan 7, 2006)

104' give or take a few inches and five taps on my layout. 

Though you might not notice the drop visually this might make you double think the need for at least two taps. Disconnect the track at the end of the terminal and give it full throttle on the terminal and then at the last piece you disconnected before the terminal you should notice a difference in power from the car sound. that should tell you that extra taps are needed for a good flow of power thoughout the track


----------



## slotnewbie69 (Dec 3, 2008)

Tycoarm said:


> 104' give or take a few inches and five taps on my layout.
> 
> Though you might not notice the drop visually this might make you double think the need for at least two taps. Disconnect the track at the end of the terminal and give it full throttle on the terminal and then at the last piece you disconnected before the terminal you should notice a difference in power from the car sound. that should tell you that extra taps are needed for a good flow of power thoughout the track


so disconnect the terminal track,test,then reattach to following section and detach the preceding section and test?using the old "ear dyno"?i can see how this would give you a fair idea about whether the track is losing current at the end of the lap.thank you.i think that answered my question.:thumbsup:i would like to cook the whole ham,as it were...


----------



## Tycoarm (Jan 7, 2006)

slotnewbie69 said:


> so disconnect the terminal track,test,then reattach to following section and detach the preceding section and test?using the old "ear dyno"?i can see how this would give you a fair idea about whether the track is losing current at the end of the lap.thank you.i think that answered my question.:thumbsup:i would like to cook the whole ham,as it were...


Doing it that way as you get further away from the terminal you will have power drop due to the connections, no matter how clean and good they are. Just the last piece before the terminal should tell of power loss. 

For example let's say your layout consists of 51 pieces of track, If you were to lay 51 pieces of straight track down (a drag strip) and your terminal was the first piece, your car would run faster on that piece vs. the last piece at the end of the strip. 

Now put the terminal piece in the middle (the 26 piece) of the strip and you now should have better power at each end. Now keeping the terminal in the middle put a tap at each end and now the power would be even better throughout the strip.


----------



## Tazman6069 (Mar 20, 2005)

Could you use a meter on the rails to see if your getting enough current around the track?


----------



## Scafremon (Dec 11, 2006)

I'm starting to think that Power Taps are nothing more then an inside joke that the hobby veterans pull on the newbies that show up to the forum.

"Camp Hobby-Talk Snipe Hunt" if you will.

They see us walk in the forum door with a Super International under one arm, a childhood memory under the other, and a 4x8 piece of plywood on our backs. Shortly after the "Welcome to Hobby Talk" greeting, one of 'em drops the 'power tap' comment in passing, knowing we will hit the search button to learn more.

This usually leads to the 'how many do I need" thread, and then the veterans pounce. "Every 10 track joints", "Two on any substantial straight-away", "Divide your track into quadrants, then half those, half them once again, and put a tap at each resulting segment".

Off the newbie goes, accumulating enough copper wire to distribute power around a small condo. Terminal blocks, lugs, fuses, resistors, DPDT switches, "Do I need a reverse switch? - why not!", lights, cameras, action.

And at some point during the assembly, but prior to the actual implementation of all these electrical products, the newbie inevitably decides to simply plug in the wall wart to a terminal track and give the track a run.

It's now when he realizes.

There are no snipes.

He smiles, and often lets out an embarrased laugh.

"What's so funny?" the TM yells from the other room.

"Nothing hon", he replies, and with a smile on his face he makes the final connection to the 0-10A regulated power supply he purchased the prior day.

Enlightened, he comes back to the forum, and waits .....

"Every 24 inches if you have plans on running anything over box stock, and even if you're just running Tjets, no harm in setting up your track right from the git-go". 

He smiles again.


----------



## NTxSlotCars (May 27, 2008)

Well just let the whole dang cat out of the bag, why dont ya!!! Sfm just ended the thread.


----------



## wheelszk (Jul 8, 2006)

Tazman6069 said:


> Could you use a meter on the rails to see if your getting enough current around the track?


Yes you can.


----------



## T-Jet Racer (Nov 16, 2006)

1976Cordoba said:


> I've set up a 128' Tomy 4-lane road course with one terminal track and power pack per lane. Running box stock SG+ and 440X2s never noticed any power drop-offs.


Now here is were I have had trouble, I set up the Super International set in the long I belive the american layout and I did notice the cars always strated to pick up speed as they got closer to the terminal track. Maybe you guys are looking down the long end of the track but not seeing the close side?
Just a thought....


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

> Could you use a meter on the rails to see if your getting enough current around the track?


You'll need to 1) Measure the open circuit voltage at the point where power is applied to the rail and then 2) measure the voltage drop across a resistive load applied across the rails at some point and 3) then use Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL) to figure out how much voltage you are dropping due to bulk resistance of the rail and contact resistance of the rail connections. In this case it's very easy to figure out, the difference between the open circuit voltage and the voltage drop across the resistive load is what you are losing. You could use this same technique on a single piece of track to computer the drop due to the rail alone, which would tell you the voltage drop per unit distance of rail. Measuring the resistance alone with a $3.99 autoranging ohmmeter is unlikely to give meaningful results. If you have a lab quality, calibrated precision Wheatstone Bridge, a device used to measure 1000ths of ohms with 0.01% accuracy, then that's another story. That's why I recommend the voltage drop method. 

The big zinger here is the voltage drops due to contact resistance between track pieces. This varies immensely and is dependent of a lot of environmental factors, electrical, and mechanical properties of the connection. This is what absolutely killed us with the old MM track and this is the problem Tomy addresses with their funkadelic ziggy rail bends at the joints. 

Like I said earlier, you can listen to what your track tells you and make corrections only as needed (the ham case), or you can try to anticipate what may be a problem down the line and make the necessary accommodations up-front (the bridge builder case). It's up to you, and since this is only a hobby, either approach is fully justifiable and valid. It's up to you to decide how to run your hobby life, and by definition, a hobby is something where you have the option to call all of the shots.

This exact same topic was discussed in the track building section quite recently.


----------



## Scafremon (Dec 11, 2006)

NTxSlotCars said:


> Well just let the whole dang cat out of the bag, why dont ya!!! Sfm just ended the thread.


Like Thomas Edison’s Shaggy Dog – I just hope to survive the ensuing fallout.




AfxToo said:


> Like I said earlier, you can listen to what your track tells you and make corrections only as needed (the ham case), or you can try to anticipate what may be a problem down the line and make the necessary accommodations up-front (the bridge builder case).


The Ham Case is more of lemming situation, where you incorporate modifications without any true understanding as to why you are doing so. It’s similar to the Bridge Builder Case sans the calculations.


----------



## NTxSlotCars (May 27, 2008)

If running power taps improves the performance, I guess the absolute best thing to do would be to run taps to each track section. Now, do you run those taps in series or parallel? Would the same apply to continuous rail? What is the resistance of the material used for AFX rail versus Tyco rail? Does any of this really matter? Honestly, I think none of it does if you run a battery set up and put some real amperage through the rails. Since I switched from wall warts to batteries, I've never had a power problem with any stock chassis, or super neo chassis.

Rich
We're gonna pick up a ham this afternoon at the supermarket. :thumbsup:


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

Don't forget the brown sugar and the pineapple Rich!!


----------



## Dyno Dom (May 26, 2007)

Higher amperage is good, but dependent upon draw of car/motor requirements.


----------



## LeeRoy98 (Jul 8, 2005)

Scafremon said:


> I fear that you may have placed your foot so far into your mouth now that you will not be able to extract it.
> 
> Dslot is a well respected member of this forum, and while you are not necessarily expected or required to know this, you might want to be a bit more careful in the future. I suggest you click on his name, read some prior posts of his, realize your mistake, and try and make up for your mis-understanding of his post, including his last sentence.
> 
> ...


I agree with Dslot... but I fail to see how his "status" on this message board has any bearing on the content of the message. That should stand alone for each and every message.

Gary
AKA LeeRoy98
www.marioncountyraceway.com


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

> _*Gary says:*_ I agree with Dslot... but I fail to see how his "status" on this message board has any bearing on the content of the message. That should stand alone for each and every message.


 While I would agree with Gary on this particular point, I must say it was awfully reassuring for me to hear at the time (which may have been Scafremon's intent). I thank Scaf for it, as well as all the other members who came to my defense. 

I've sent Jerzinferno a PM explaining what I meant in simple direct terms and asking him to explain in similar terms what it was in the message that got him so angry. He hasn't answered yet; I hope he will. I really don't see any reason why he and I should remain at odds. His posts have stimulated a lot of good discussion and he is also a valued member of the forum.
-- D


----------



## 1976Cordoba (Sep 20, 2000)

Dslot said:


> . . . I thank Scaf for it, as well as all the other members who came to my defense . . . -- D


 
What? -- You don't wanna be 'that one guy' ? :tongue:

I agree; should be water under the bridge by now. :thumbsup:


----------



## Scafremon (Dec 11, 2006)

LeeRoy98 said:


> I fail to see how his "status" on this message board has any bearing on the content of the message. That should stand alone for each and every message.


I agree. A person's status does not make their posts any better then anyone elses. 

My impression after Jerz's post was that he thought he had found a 'troll' type of poster - someone who strays way off topic, and who's posts do not offer anything much to the matter being discussed (kind of like me ). By reading some of Dslot's prior posts, he might realize that he was wrong, and conclude he just didnt understand the ham story.

"Water under the bridge" - for sure. Like the Dude said "This will not stand, ya know, this aggression will not stand, man."


----------



## Dslot (Sep 2, 2007)

*Postscript*

Jerz replied to my PM. We got the misunderstandings straightened out. He and I are square now. 

The water is under the bridge and far down the river. We're back in the slot and talking about little cars again.
-- D


----------



## Dyno Dom (May 26, 2007)

All's well!  Sometimes best to sit back & relax before posting. 
A lot like measuring twice & cutting once! :thumbsup:


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

So now we're only cutting one end of the ham??? I'm so confused!!! :freak: LOLOL!!


----------



## NTxSlotCars (May 27, 2008)

NO, UJoe, we are running power taps to both ends of the ham.


----------



## bobhch (Apr 22, 2007)

*As long as my cars look good then I am happy...*

My track runs all downhill so, I don't need power taps right? LOL

Bob...I am so, not technical and have a two lane/two wall pack layout...zilla


----------



## wm_brant (Nov 21, 2004)

This is an old thread, and has veered somewhat off-topic, but I did have a link I wanted to add to this thread for future reference.

The BSCRA (British Slot Car Racing Association) has a good article on its website about power taps. The article is aimed at 1/32 and 1/24 scale tracks, but the basic principles discussed in the article apply to HO scale as well.

The article mentions 'braid' and 'copper tape'. Braid has lower resistance than copper tape, so it corresponds to 'continuous rail' in HO. Copper tape has more resistance than the braid, so it behaves more like the copper tape.

Here's the link: What does this mean on a real track?

It's a good article and well worth a careful read.

-- Bill


----------

