Coupe bodies Next ?

[keith]

Good, that makes it easy then...i like easy.

[SlotBaker]

Hutch, it's not me writing the rules. I just try to help get them out there.
If we follow IRRA, then they are already done apart from our local variants.

As James says, just putting the GT bods on the Can-Am frames.
That's pretty much all the GT C Rules say.

Did anyone read them?

[hutch--]

Kingy,

I have a PDF that Fox sent me with the current set of specs for Aussia Retro and I do know my way around them reasonably well as I had to build cars that were within the class specs.

While I am happy to see them not being changed willy nilly and was pleased to hear that James will be running the next series at HSC with the same rules, I am also wary of being linked to American rules and their changes as this may not suit the tracks here, the stock that the track owners carry or the folks who want to race.

There is almost no chance of local retro racers ever racing in the US so there is no reason to be linked to their rules, ideology or available stock assumptions. Any future changes should be made to better suit the local conditions, the range of stock that the track owners can carry and the type of cars that the racers want to build.

There are a few anomalies in the existing rules that could do with being ditched at some stage in the future.

1: Centre hinge rules. I can bend you a legal technical equivalent in piano wire in about 30 seconds. That rule has no place being there.

2. Limit on hinge directions (IE: one direction only). Easily bypassed with 3 dimensional rattlers, miniature ball joints, duplicated with wire flex with no hinging at all etc .... Its a useless rule that complicates chassis building for less experienced builders.

3. Rear tyre diameter minimum. A new set of tyres is only about 10 thousandths of an inch larger than the limit, I would suggest .750 rear tyre limits that are enforced so that racers can get reasonable life out of their tyres.

Note that my suggestions are based on loosening the rules, not making them more complicated, enforce the minimums like tyres, ensure the bodies are legal and stay looking something like cars, sealed motors that cannot be opened, no exotic bits etc .... This is how you keep the racing fair and even.

Regards,

hutch at movsd dot com

[SlotBaker]

There is almost no chance of local retro racers ever racing in the US so there is no reason to be linked to their rules,...

Sorry Hutch, but you just don't get it.

[hutch--]

Kingy,

Probably not but elucidate a little so at least I know what the difference is.

Regards,

hutch at movsd dot com

[SlotBaker]

This is not trying to be condescending or patronising in any way. It's just my way of getting in the mood, and set the scene for why I'm into it. And maybe a few others as well.

A long time ago, when the smell of Methyl salicylate cleared your head at every slot car track, when brass was the slot car chassis builder's choice of materials, when hot singles, doubles and tripple winds melted endbells and acrid smell of burning delrin overwhelmed the wintergreen, when we raced 12 and 24 hour enduro's, was a time considered by some to be the golden age of slot cars.

It was a time when pimply faced teenagers could aspire to earning a living, albeit short term for most, from building and racing home made toy cars around a wooden track, buying our slot car magazines to see what was happening around Australia and in the USA, and reading the names of guys who were building and racing on the 'pro' scene when cars were more scale looking than they were in later years.

This was pre 1970, before the angle winder and air control changed things forever.

Some of those guys, who were building and racing (and famous through the magazines that we bought) got together late in 2005 and took up an idea developed by Paul Sterrett to revisit those golden years by essentially building brass frames of the day, but level out the horse power issues by utilising a modern motor that provides sufficient performance to get the frames working and generate enough track speed to provide the thrill of close competition and get the pulse up a notch.

D3 Retro Can-Am was born. Paul Sterrett developed a set of regs that embodied what was being built by most of the top guys at the time. Mike Steube was excited enough about the 'new' class, he built a stack of frames and loaned them to anyone interested in them to have a play. Eventually there was enough interest that a race was held in May 2006, and so it developed from there.

As the interest grew, and more people got involved more questions were asked of the rules, so other classes were developed to cater for the increasing interest.

There was a group of motor builders who felt left out, so the Retro-Pro was introduced which caters for the need for a bit more speed available to the motor tinkerers and is also angle winder. But no air control except for rear spoilers.

Retro Can-Am is the foundation class of D3 and IRRA Retro, and should be preserved as such.

The regs are written to allow enough latitude for builders to develop chassis in a wide range of styles, and also limit those ideas that were not in wide use or had been thought of pre 1970.

In the early days of D3, other groups wanted to participate, but wanted to make some minor changes to suit their local preferences and availability of equipment, but as;
"D3 is the exclusive intellectual property of its founder Paul Sterrett, who allows and encourages any and all racing clubs, associations and raceways worldwide to race under the D3 format. However the use of the D3 name by any such association also requires a respect of the racing rules established by the founders of D3 racing for the benefit of all enthusiasts. The "D3" name is protected by the trademark and copyright laws of the United States of America and its use is forbidden for any racing series not strictly enforcing the rules as expressed on the pages of the official D3 website." Quoted from D3 Website.

To facilitate others participating in Retro racing, IRRA was founded which allows groups (like us) to use their regs, and modify to suit. This is where our regs derived from.

Hutch, your original participation (60s & 70s) in slot cars is totally different to most, as you were earning a living from it, and as such were looking for better ways of doing things to win, in order to make money. I appreciate the way you approach things and question "why".
If we all adopt and accept these regs because they are currently workable and can provide uniform basis to build a competitive car, I believe the class will succeed. I also believe that the tie to the USA regs is a good thing. That's where it came from. We can still do our local variations as needed.

You talked about changing rules is a fast way to kill it off. I think continually questioning a set of regs, that do work, is more damaging.

Stoo made a comment about changing to Coupe/GT bodies for the next season, and I commented that it would effectively be another class, as identified by IRRA regs. and so it went on. Another class, not changing the regs.

I don't know if I've got my thoughts accross here or not, but to me it's the nostalgia of days of my youth with acid flux fumes, burnt finger tips, and racing cars that I have built, with good mates.

Maybe others can relate to this as well??

As far as tyres go, how about starting off with 0.850 dia?

[hutch--]

Kingy,

By 1969 you had the full range of chassis designs, inlines, reduction geared inlines(Dave Rittie), full sidewinders, dual pinion sidewinders(Geoff Howland at Glendale) and early anglewinders using Mura A cans and Cox gears. I don't remember any tooth belt or rubber band drives back then.

Differing from the US Australia had some very good rules back then, the VSCA had slightly tighter rules than NSW but the NSWMRRA B grade rules were similar and very flexible and allowed most designs and this avoided the straightjacket mentality that had already developed in the US. The notion that slot car racing in 1969 was brass inlines is short of the facts, anglewinders were common in both the US and Australia as well as inlines for some tracks and full sidewinders.

The young guys back then who are almost as old as I am now grew up racing rules that people like me and a few others fought for to keep open and creative. The committee meeting for the NSWMRRA were never a joy as they were subject to a number of competing forces, the older full scale guys who looked down their nose at anything else, the performance guys who looked at scale cars as plastic junk and a number of vested interests from interested parties who saw some advantage in stacking the rules in their favour.

Part of what I had to do with sponsorship was to continuously liase with the track owners around Sydney to encourage the up and coming young guys (gals too) so that they became competitive and helped the track owners in ordinary business terms. Over 30 years down the track the young guys back then can still build slot cars from scratch and generally drive them well.

The Aussia retro racing has very little in common with racing in 1969, you regularly ran 24# singles on 550 thou long armatures that you wound with class H wire lurked from the US space program, silver soldered the wire to the commutators and balanced them by hand after perfect layer winding the armature so it had almost no dynamic imbalance.. NSW B grade rules allowed .750 spoilers with folded side dams that ran down the sides.

The first full length side dam car I saw was Kim Axton in 1975 and the car was built under the identical NSWMRRA B grade rules.

There is little point on dwelling on some phony notion of nostalgia from the late 60s, Aussia Retro cars are very different to cars of that period and perform for very different reasons. Instead of assuming that the past is worth imitating, take from it what was useful and leave the rest back where it belongs.

I see the existing rules as adequate and commonly accepted but I would not support any form of following changes made in the US as we have different conditions, stock at tracks and people who are interested in racing. I would rather see any future changes made for local reasons than mindlessly following American rules.

Regards,

hutch at movsd dot com

[SlotBaker]

Hutch, OK fair enough. You have basically said the same thing a few times, so I figure we need to agree to disagree. We are on different planets on this one.

I guess the main difference between us is that you were slightly ahead of me taking a more professional approach, and I was just a kid having fun.

For me it's still fun.

[hutch--]

Kingy,

I doubt we disagree over much, while everyone has different mileage, most who come to retro racing do so to have fun, race against other like minded friends and enjoy themselves at reasonable cost. I can't see any insurmountable problems maintaining a set of rules for retro racing that achieves the desired end result.

Regards,

hutch at movsd dot com

[SlotBaker]

Yep, bring on the fun.

Stoo, what were you saying about Coupe bodies?