# Layout design thoughts?



## Shadowracer (Sep 11, 2004)

Howdy all. I've been doing some messing around on Tracker trying to get an idea for a layout. 

Its a 4 lane Tomy AFX on a 4 x 12 table (don't have room for 16 long.)

I'm hoping my track can utilize the best of both worlds, so to speak, both for actual racing as well as modelling...so I'm not after that "cram as much track in as you can" look. I need a little green space for a mock pit road down the front, spot for a tech shack and a burger stand...that kind of thing.

Anyway, I have a few here. Not hung up on any of them, but am posting them as a discussion starter on the logistics of racetrack design. I actually sorta like the first one. (Also the outer corners will be 18/15 instead of 15/12. Program doesn't seem to support 18 inch turns.)

I don't see the track ever being used for hardcore magnet racing. More like Tjet/Magnatractions...maybe Lifelikes.

Anyway, any thoughts, opinions, advice or general experiences to share?


----------



## Harold Sage (Apr 6, 2008)

Hey Shadowracer that first layout is nice. a layout like that is probably what I'll use when my track shows up too.


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

I like the first one too.


----------



## Sundance (May 5, 2003)

I like the first one also. :thumbsup:


----------



## Rick Carter (Dec 2, 2008)

Here's my 1/2 a cent for the first one. Since its only 12', I would add a set of esses at the 1st and 2nd "decline" pictorial wise and another set where the straights are coming out of the little right hand bend/before the cars turn to go East just to break the speed up somewhat.

I see a few different things that I would implement on the other 
2 as well but since there were "leads" for the first design, I made my suggestions based upon that.


----------



## ParkRNDL (Mar 20, 2002)

Me three on the first one. I think the diagonal runs make it interesting for modeling stuff. 

--rick


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

*Overpasses?*

Just giving you something different to consider... 

Our group likes layouts with an overpass so that we can have a couple of long straights and not have to use too many tight-radius turns. The overpass also makes it so that all four lanes are the same length, which most people on this forum don't seem to care about but everyone I've ever raced with seems to prefer. Here's one of the 4`x12` layouts we run. The colored lines represent the center lines of the two tracks. This particular layout has no 6" radius turns. Lap lengths are 52`.


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

This may be too crammed for you but it does convert into an oval by swapping out a couple of sections...

The four outside turns are all 18/15.


----------



## basement racer (Jan 22, 2010)

I agree with TK.I used this layout with an overpass.We have a hard enough
time keeping the cars on this one.To many tight turns leads to alot of time
waiting for your car to be re sloted ( instead ) of racing & having a good time.
BR


----------



## Shadowracer (Sep 11, 2004)

Hey thanks for the thoughts guys. As I said, I'm not really hung up on any of those designs, although the aesthetics of the 1st one just seem pleasing. 

The one thing I was wondering about is I know some guys don't have a lot of love for 6 inch turns. Is it because there's types of cars that just don't like them...or is it more like that it just makes you work harder to keep them slotted? I remember on my old layout, the Tjets were a challenge around the 6es, but I always figured it was because I just had set-stock controllers and wasn't running a good Tjet controller. The Xtracs and other types of cars I ran didn't seem to have issue. (I did try a similar design with 9/12s on Tracker but I couldnt make it work for my liking.) 

The zig zag coming out of what would be turn 2 just came to me because the big Blue King I used to run 1:24 on had the same deal....big long straight, then a high bank full turn, then right into the "hairpins" It was quite challenging, and with the diagonals it just looks good.

Overpasses I have to pass on for a couple of reasons, but those layouts actually look pretty cool too.

And hey there AFXtoo! Long time no talk. Its funny, when I was hammering out my old layout I had tried some esses sort of like what you have there...I could be remembering wrong, but I thought you weren't a fan of the wiggle stretches.

Anyway, once again thanks for the replies. I do know that one lesson I learned last time around was to be patient, not to rush it, and get it right the first time. This is a project that will likely take me till Christmas to have completed, so I'm plotting out my cash outlays, talked it over with the "new" TM (do we still call them that?  ) and am going to use decent wood, get the timing and everything up front while we're building instead of doing it piecework.


----------



## AfxToo (Aug 29, 2003)

I think it's more along the lines of wiggles don't like me.  But if you are looking for a some technical challenges and mostly running low downforce or nonmag cars then they do add some interest and demand your attention. But you are right that I do love big carousel turns and long straights. 

Your first layout has some things I really like, especially the big S in the middle. If you are doing scenery that would be a natural place to introduce a bit of elevation change since hill climbs typically involve that back and forth pattern. I would highly encourage you to add elevation, a fairly small amount, whether or not you have an overpass. If you are doing a pit area along the front straight then consider using the S turns as a very gradual climb to the short straight coming out of the 1/8 turn. This would give you an opportunity for a wall or sloped grade behind your pit and paddock area which would really add a lot of dimension to your layout. Use the short straight on left to gradually bring the elevation back down to the flat along the front straight. 

Having some slight elevation along the back also improves the sight lines for drivers and makes it easier to reach cars from the front if you are alone. I'm thinking a maximum elevation in the range of 2"-2.5" with gradual climb and gradual descent with perhaps some higher scenery elevations behind the back of the S where there is no track and you don't have to worry about sight lines. 

When you get your table and track in I'd suggest using books and magazines to temporarily prop up the sections of the track like I mentioned to see if you like the effect. Magazines are good to use for prototyping because you can stack them to create a ramp. Again, use just enough elevation and gradual slopes to create some depth without asking too much from the track with overly aggressive transitions. I have a long straight along the back side of my layout and elevated it only 1" and it definitely adds depth and scenic interest. If I had to do it again I probably would have gone up another half inch because I've always liked tracks that have walls and fences and elevation changes open up opportunities for these scenic elements.


----------



## TK Solver (Mar 18, 2004)

*Re: "some guys don't have a lot of love for 6 inch turns"*

The 6" turns are challenging and add flexibility in creating layouts in tight spaces. The popular Super International set is loaded with 29 of them so either a lot of people like them or there are a lot of them going to waste.

My biggest concern is that I've seen less experienced racers have trouble with them and that seems to spoil their experience right from the start. 

My second concern isn't really much of one as everyone is free to create a layout they enjoy for whatever reasons. I consider slot car tracks to be "toys" as opposed to "scale models" but I know a lot of people use the word "realistic" when talking about some layouts. Realistically, 6" radius turns simulate racing through the aisles of a Walmart parking lot. (The Tomy hairpin track pieces simulate driving through the aisles INSIDE THE STORE but I'll stick to 6" turns here.) The center line (between the two slots) of a 6" radius turn track piece is at about a 4.5" radius. That equates to a 28' radius turn for an actual car, assuming our little cars are 1/76th scale. Assuming 1/64th scale, it's a 24' radius turn. A Corvette C6 reportedly has a minimum turning radius of about 20'. That's the tightest possible turn it could make creeping along in a showroom or parking lot with the steering wheel cranked. According to Wikipedia, the tightest turn at Istanbul Park has a radius of 49' through which the world's fastest road race cars get down to about 50 mph. Doing the math, a 9" radius track piece roughly simulates that kind of turning radius.

I've got nearly 100 6" radius turns and well over 50 of the 9" quarter turns in a box somewhere in the basement. I keep thinking that someday I'll come up with some silly use for them...


----------



## ParkRNDL (Mar 20, 2002)

TK Solver said:


> (snip)
> 
> My second concern isn't really much of one as everyone is free to create a layout they enjoy for whatever reasons. I consider slot car tracks to be "toys" as opposed to "scale models" but I know a lot of people use the word "realistic" when talking about some layouts. Realistically, 6" radius turns simulate racing through the aisles of a Walmart parking lot. (The Tomy hairpin track pieces simulate driving through the aisles INSIDE THE STORE but I'll stick to 6" turns here.) The center line (between the two slots) of a 6" radius turn track piece is at about a 4.5" radius. That equates to a 28' radius turn for an actual car, assuming our little cars are 1/76th scale. Assuming 1/64th scale, it's a 24' radius turn. A Corvette C6 reportedly has a minimum turning radius of about 20'. That's the tightest possible turn it could make creeping along in a showroom or parking lot with the steering wheel cranked. According to Wikipedia, the tightest turn at Istanbul Park has a radius of 49' through which the world's fastest road race cars get down to about 50 mph. Doing the math, a 9" radius track piece roughly simulates that kind of turning radius.
> 
> (snip)


See, now, this is why Hobby Talk is awesome. Thanks for that reality check. I never would have thought to do the research and math to figure that all out, but now that I know it, I'm even LESS likely to use 6" turns in a layout. I only have 2 in my current layout, which I stuck in just for variety because the "real world" has tight curves too. Apparently they don't need to be THAT tight...

--rick


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

light the tires...

the turning radius goes right down :thumbsup:


----------



## BewstdGT (Jan 4, 2005)

I kinda like the last track you posted, but only because it looks like the lanes are more even. The other ones favor the outside lane quite a bit more. To get lanes equal you almost have to make overpasses and if you aren't interested in doing that I'd say any of them are decent setups. I like the first and last the best personally. Don't shy away from the 6" turns because I think you can get tjets to work on them. Stock tjets may be a concern unless you've rework the chassis a little. I have a 4x10 table and when you do 4-lanes you don't have much choice for turns when you're making it all fit so I have 3 turns with 6" inside. Anything with magnets will do fine though, so long as there isn't an incline/decline on that 6" turn.


----------



## Shadowracer (Sep 11, 2004)

Yeah. I mean, you have to understand that if HO is your chosen scale, and you're using sectional track, there are some things you have to make peace with.

6 inch corners may not be realistic, but the truth is if you want a realistic layout you likely won't have room in your basement to contain it, unless maybe you're running a Saturday night bullring oval. So we make do with the variety we have available to us and hope we can create something challenging enough to be fun and interesting, but not so challenging that it frustrates. 

Personally I'm more bugged that all of our straights either go up/down, left/right or on a 45 degree. I'd love it if someone started doing 1/16th turns, but I don't really see that happening unless another mainstream slotcar fad happens. (in other words, don't hold your breath)

Anyway, design is stilll up in the air. I'm still trying to visualize what Rick Carter said in his post....and I don't have my track yet, but its coming. I just got news that my old track is coming back to me in the same box it went out in after a few years in someone else's hands...and that includes all the items that AFXtoo once sent out in a care package to this aspiring newbie. Gonna add a few new track pieces to it because I have a bigger table than I had then. 

It's gonna be fun. :hat:


----------



## Slott V (Feb 3, 2005)

6" turns are tricky but I wouldn't shy away from one or two. The issue with 6" turns is the inner lane is so tight it will make the back tires break traction more than any other turn. Since HO cars don't have slip differentials your inner tire will be spinning. This isn't as much of a factor with magnet cars since there is always downforce but give the car enough speed and they will fish tail or in some cases like on my track you will get some fun action with reverse curls and 360's.

This is one of the most challenging turns for the gutter lanes on my track, which is a very fast track with long straights. Being that it is right after a 12" sweeper, it takes a quick finger to 'blip' through it. There is another 6" on the inside of the opposing lanes.


----------



## oddrods (Feb 6, 2007)

I too happen to like the occasional 6"R turn here and there. I am also a fan of increasing/decreasing radii as I think it makes th track more interesting.


----------

