# AFX Shoe Shape - Which is Best?



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

Hi Guys,
I see three styles of pickup shoes on Aurora AFX cars. There's the ski shoe (no step), the short step and the long step. I find the ski shoe gives me more problems than the other two, either by losing contact through the turns or (more annoyingly) getting jammed against the rail; in other words, slipping off the top of the rail and wedging against the side.

Do you find one style of shoe better than the others? Also, what kind of bend do you put on the ski shoe to make it work better?

Thanks...Joe


----------



## copperhead71 (Aug 2, 2007)

Short step in shoe!For old type afx.


----------



## slotcarman12078 (Oct 3, 2008)

The stepped shoes ended my AFX/Xtraction problems immediately!! I have been retrofitting all my left over X tracks with JL T jet shoes and they run 100% better.


----------



## SCJ (Jul 15, 1999)

Short step for sure....properly "tweaked" it provides more then enough electrical contact for the Stock AFX & Mag chassis. BTW, It's also the AFX shoe we sell the most of.

You can even take worn out short step shoes and with a set of needle nose pliers make AFX Super Mag, Speedshifter and Balz'n Breaks shoes.

:thumbsup:

-------------------------
www.SlotCarJohnnies.com


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

IMHO, the answer lies in the chosen ride height of the chassis. Like John said, the step shoe is the ticket; but I will add the "in stock form" disclaimer. However; as slot-tards, we always wander away from the intended design limits and start farting around for more speed, handling or both.

As the ride height drops it reaches a point where the step of the shoe interferes with proper shoe travel, thus leaving the front wheels unloaded, or worse yet in outer space. High centered in a way, if you will. When this point is reached, the spring is at or near coil bind and the chassis, shoe and spring become as one. The chassis front will load or unload with variations in rail height, or even bog and speed up. At it's very worst the lower button on the guide flag can come into play as well. It'll make the same skkkkkkkkkk sound as an over sprung chassis instead of the nice shhhhhhhhhhh sound. Like motor boat, your plowing the rail instead of skimming along on plane. 

Ski shoes are a great option when you approach the ragged edge of shoe travel; but the initial contact patch should be checked. On a very low chassis, if you have a burn pattern 2/3 of the overall shoe length, your dragging a bit too much material. There are tweener cars...so tweener setups are required as well. Sometimes you have to put a little roll into the forward area of a ski shoe. (What would be the contact patch on a step shoe) to alleviate the extended contact patch and associated drag. Kind of an invisible half step, you just dont kink it. 

A 'tweener step shoe trick is to remove the bottom sill of the hanger window using a small file. This allows full vertical travel that might not ordinarily be available unless you ACTUALLY check! Ya might not even need the ski!

Regardless of which AFX shoe is used, the number one thing to check is the leading edge of the burn. 99.9999999999% of them need the sharp bend at the hanger window rolled up. Ever so gently....it doesnt take much.

So to answer the question, I do not believe there is any best or worst. Only that there is a "Correct" or "Incorrect" shoe for a given set up and that the perfect set up requires the correct choice AND then some tuning and observation to get the most out of it.

It should also be noted that by design (meaning a shortened overall operating travel range of the pick up system) ALL pancake AFX cars are extremely sensitive to junk track, AKA: stepped rail joints, poked up rails heights, warped track surface, hilly slot troughs, and worn slot widths. By further limiting the upper limits of travel it will only aggrevate problems that have nothing to do with the actual shoe or setup....yet the set-up is always blamed because reacts in concert with the underlying and often undiagnosed problem.

Maybe we'll get lucky and Swamper will have some bitchen' pix to help visualize the geometry involved.


----------



## dlw (Aug 17, 1999)

What I did was put a step on the flat shoes that came with my early edition JL cars.


----------



## SwamperGene (Dec 1, 2003)

Bill's got it nailed in that subtle geometry lesson. :thumbsup:

There are too many factors involved not only on every individual car but the conditions in which it's being used at any particular time. Theoretically and in practice, a non-stepped shoe when adjusted correctly to the chassis and track will outperform a stepped shoe because it offers a much larger contact strip. The problem is that it does not offer a "flexible" setup because once they are optimally bent to a particular track/tire ride height, if you change that ride height you need to _move_ the bend, not adjust it. If you simply adust the bend, the back half of the shoe angle changes and you will lose your spring setup, it only takes a small amount to induce drastic performance-robbing changes. 

Stepped shoes alleviate this by providing a happy medium, geometrically speaking. The bend at the top of the step creates a hinge point that allows you to pivot the contact portion of the shoe without drastically changing the angle of the shoe to the chassis, at least across minimal changes such as rail height.

So really, all three shoes have their place mostly depending on ride height. On a stock chassis on average-height rails, the long step will do fine, even better than the other two when you have a good patch going. The short step or ski, both of which are usually nose-heavy out of the package, will work but will need spring tension adjustment (an increase in tension) because as you flatten the front of the shoe to the rail the back of the shoe moves downward resulting in less spring tension. If you go lower in tire size (or higher in rail height), the small step becomes a better choice as it's natural angle is closer to the rail. The long step becomes a problem because the length of the step cause the shoe to move upward _alot_ which will compress the spring more than it should be. This is often confused with the step hitting the chassis (an issue in itself) and causing the car to deslot when in fact the spring is so tight that the shoe has no room to move.

Joe the actual problems you describe with the ski shoes is very common and usually the result of a soft bend creating a belly in the middle of the shoe. The bend on a ski needs to be sharp and square for to prevent those problems.


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

Thanks guys.

Bill and Gene,
Those are a couple of detailed write-ups. I think most of what you guys wrote has penetrated my rock hard head, but not all.

Let's first eliminate some variables in my case. I am running the AFX cars (both AFX and MT) on standard Tyco/Mattel track. I have replaced the original front tires with O rings which are just slightly larger than the originals. I don't know what size tire I'm using in the rear, but a quick measurement seems to show about .437. Basically stock all around.

If I understand correctly, a stock stepped shoe will hang lower than a stock ski shoe if you were to pick the car up and hold it off the track. Therefore, when you put it on the track, a stepped shoe will compress the spring more than a ski shoe on a given rail height. This is why depending on rail height, you could have a step shoe compress the spring so much that you completely bind (fully compress) the spring. This makes the chassis, shoe and spring act like one solid piece instead of three sperate components.

So far so good?

So, for me using a stock setup with a fairly high ride height, the long step shoe is probably best. So what to do with all the ski shoes I have (including the JL XTs)?

If I read Gene's picture correctly, the place to bend a ski shoe is about 2/3 of the way back, about 1/3 away from the shoe hook. You don't want to put a sharp bend, but rather curve it at that point. Is that right?

Also, Bill used the term "roll the front of the shoe". I think I know what that means, but could you clarify?

Thanks...Joe


----------



## SwamperGene (Dec 1, 2003)

Grandcheapskate said:


> If I read Gene's picture correctly, the place to bend a ski shoe is about 2/3 of the way back, about 1/3 away from the shoe hook. You don't want to put a sharp bend, but rather curve it at that point. Is that right?


Actually Joe as I tried to point out the location of the bend depends entirely on ride and rail height, with a ski shoe there is no magic spot that will work equally across all setups. The shoe in that picture was on a very low setup on rails that were .011-.013, it was an R1 XT that could very easily hang with and often beat an x2 in the long straights. On a higher than stock setup, you'd lose a lot of good spring tension. On a high car the bend should be further forward and will be more pronounced (more of an angle), as you go lower it can be moved back and "softer" (less of an angle). Regardless of where though, you do want a sharp, square bend, not a soft or "curved" one.

I'll try to do some visual aides later.


----------



## Bill Hall (Jan 6, 2007)

I use the word roll for lack of a better term Joe. Actually it's a very subtle almost invisible bend that accomplishes two things for me.

1. It provides the slightest clearance for the shoes leading edge on sectional rail joints where the sharp fold would ordinarily snag. This really helps with the clickety clacks because the roll helps ease the transition across rail joints or irregularities instead of whacking the joint with blunt force trauma. 

2. Buy rolling the this forward edge up it also allows you to control the exact beginning of your contact patch/burn. My preference is to leave the front portion of any pickup shoe out of the way as well as keeping the heel of the patch from dragging. I divide the contact patch into "sevenths". Just by eye mind you. The first seventh and the last seventh are clearance with the five middle sevenths being the actual contact patch.

I treat each one is a case in it self.


----------



## SwamperGene (Dec 1, 2003)

Here ya go, Joe. This pic shows the shoe geometry and the changes that occur with different bend locations. The dotted red line represents the bottom of the chassis. Notice that as you move the bend further back on the length of the shoe, the back of the shoe moves away from the chassis. By pic three you'd have almost no spring pressure. If you lower the car as in pic 4, you can get away with bending further back because the shoe is naturally closer to the chassis. In fact in pic 4 you'd _need_ to move the bend further back to avoid over-compressing the spring.


----------



## Grandcheapskate (Jan 5, 2006)

Hey Bill...thanks for clarifying the "roll" comment.

Gene,
A picture IS worth a thousand words. Now I see what to do with the ski shoes. If you attend Aberdeen this weekend, please stop by my table and say hello.

Thanks...Joe


----------



## jeremy1082 (Apr 27, 2004)

To date, the best AFX shoe I have used is the New Old Stock silver stepped non-magnatraction shoe. They work on Magnatraction and the new Auto World chassis too. 
They allow more electricity to flow to the motor and you really do notice a difference.
It's like swapping a tired, old 2 barrel carburetor for a nice, new 4 barrel.


----------

