- This topic has 25 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
-
Q1. Since it appears the carbon-fibre chassis parts Are allowed – what does this spec actually mean? “No ScaleAuto chassis tuning parts are allowed” Specifically What Parts are not allowed?
Q2. Is there a NorthAmerican source for the MK rear tires? Most sources seem to be Australian mate. Are we sure there are no Paul Gage XPG series urethane tires that will fit?
Q3. So using wire clips or glue instead of the default, industry standard method of Soldering lead wires may give someone an unfair advantage? ROTFL -
MJK Engineering – Australia
http://www.armchairracer.com.au/workshop/tyres/mjk-4118-2-x-tyres-to-suit-1-24-scaleauto-porsche-911-gt3
#MJK-4118 – 2x Rear tyres for 1:24 ScaleAuto Porsche 911 GT3 $6.75/pair/USD
Supplied on Special Order Request only
*******
Mounted Outside Diameter: (A) – 27.5mm
Mounted Width (B) – 13.0mm
Rim Diameter (inside) (C) – 21.5mm
RIB/NIB/NUB Width (F) – 5.0mm
Wheel Maximum/Outside Rim Diameter (E) – 23.5mm
Wheel Visible Rim Diameter (D) – 13.0mmAttachments:
-
In response to Q1, if it didn’t come on the chassis out of the box, it’s not allowed. The carbon fiber and full metal chassis have a set of parts that are standard. Those are what’s allowed.
In response to Q2, Mark, I tested all tires that were available to us included the Paul Gage tires. They didn’t perform as well as the MJK thus they were removed from contention.
All tires appear to be in Austrailia so allow for 2 weeks shipping. Tires can also be sourced from this eBay seller: https://www.ebay.com/itm/ScaleAuto-1-24-Sports-GT-Race-tyres-MJK-4118/392035360419?hash=item5b4720dea3:g:5fIAAOSwL2NakLto
I have already purchased 5 pair from him and all but 2 pair have arrived as of the writing of this post. I’ve also got tires coming from Armchair and got an email yesterday that MJK is making the tires this week and Armchair will be shipping to me next week. I had ordered 5 pair and 4 pair are already spoken and paid for.
As the series manager, I’ve tried to make the series as even as possible and getting the resources necessary for racers prior to the race.
-
Cool – did not see any notes on tests of PG tires -5 minutes ago Randy informed me you did a controlled test recently with him and John.
RE the tuning parts – I just wanted to confirm that the carbon fibre parts were allowed since I am not aware of any “chassis tuning parts” that are available.
Thanks for the EBAY listing! Sounds fun 🙂 -
-
Mark and All,
Just to clarify the rules – you are not allowed to use any chassis modification parts. All chassis must run in there stock configuration. If you are running a full steel SC-8000 chassis you are not allowed to add or modify it by using any carbon fiber parts. If you are running the newer SC-8003 chassis you must run in it the stock configuration with no modifications to the chassis.
Marty
-
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aMP1sO1ErE
Mark,
Why is it important to ask what the advantage of adding illegal carbon fiber parts are to a SC-8000 chassis? What can be gained from the time someone would take to answer this question? If its illegal then there is no reason to even ask the question. Period.
The SC-8300 chassis is 11 grams lighter and that is not always a positive thing, Only time running them will let us know. As this point I don’t think either chassis has an advantage. I think its more up to set up than the chassis model.
-
-
Marty, there should never be a problem with any club member wanting to understand the factual logic behind any spec or rule. My question is a rational and reasonable attempt to understand what appears to my ignorant eyes as unobvious, (please read Q2 before you pop).
Two months ago there were claims of better performance with the 8003 – ‘the new chassis far out performed the old one’ …’ the adjustable front axle helps keep the rear tires flat’ … [post 11993, March 12].
Q1: Is the 8003 orders-of-magnitude different (e.g. aluminum chassis {with carbon parts}, lightweight axle supports with CNC motor support) than the 8000, so that upgrading a 8000 with only the 8003CF Kit would make a Frankenstein that is still Not fully equal to the OEM 8003?
You obviously have done the research and have significantly more knowledge than the rest of us on these chassis, so I am simply trying to help *all of us to be enlightened.
Q2: ** Is your intent to keep both chassis at OEM-spec so that our race results are an experiment to determine what configuration is best (e.g. for future races at Tom’s new track?) -
Mark,
I have no issue with someone asking a question about car set up or for clarification of the rules but when they are so clearly stated I have trouble taking the time to answer a question that is irrelevant. You asked about adding carbon fiber parts and the rules clearly state:
GENERAL RULES – MODIFICATIONS
- All Scaleauto cars must run with the stock chassis they come with.
- No Scaleauto chassis tuning parts are allowed.
I don’t know how there can be any ambiguity in what was stated. These rules were created to keep cost in check and to make tech inspection of the cars easier. There is no need to ask a question about something that has already been clearly addressed in the rules.
I don’t have any superior knowledge of how the SC-8000 will compare to the SC-8003. I have run the SC-8000 cars for many hours but have less than 10 minutes on the SC-8300. I don’t know how it will work. No one yet knows what chassis will be the quickest. As I have stated before, I believe it will come down more to set up than to the chassis selected.
If I have not already answered your Q2 – yes, the rules are written to keep both chassis stock. This has nothing to do with Tom’s track and has everything to do with cost and ability to quickly tech the cars. These cars are expensive enough without purchasing numerous axle mounts, motor mounts, bearings, axles, H plates and more to find out what works and what does not.
- All Scaleauto cars must run with the stock chassis they come with.
- No Scaleauto chassis tuning parts are allowed.
-
Mark,
In my testing, the difference between the 2 chassis were negligible. In other words, there was no difference between the 2 chassis which is why both chassis are allowed. If there was a difference in performance, I would have selected 1 chassis over the other based on availability. This is the job of the series manager for a new series and I have done that.
What are you trying to accomplish here? What are you trying to learn?
-
-
This was posted in the 1/24 scale cars section of the forum. Please refer to http://austinslotcarclub.com/forums/topic/new-scaleauto-sc-8003-chassis/
-
Hints for whitekit builders: http://austinslotcarclub.com/forums/topic/scaleauto-124-white-kit-building-tips/
-
TIRE ISSUES
One of my new MJK-4118 tires ripped 1/32in upon mounting. I gambled and proceeded to truing; no more rips occurred but an internal rip and molding faults appeared after the sheen of the urethane was removed by the truing; I proceeded to practice.After appx 20 laps a new 1/16in rip appeared, while the original rip remained the same size, but the tire remained mounted. Since I did not want the tire to fly off and my car to damage someone else’s car I stopped.
I will update this forum if any issues occur after mounting a replacement (the other tire appears to not have any issues) – e.g. other rips or molding defects in the new tire. -
Marty, Shawn and All, in reply and reference to 12293, 12292, 12290, 12281, 12279, 12225-Q1
SG_Q1 12293: “What are you trying to accomplish here?”
1) I am simply trying to encourage an open approach for senior members who posses knowledge and experience that some others may not have, to share that knowledge without reservation. This *should be the spirit of the club – to foster open and non-threatening exchange of information among club members.
2) Further, by example we should support and *train New Series Managers to be prepared to clearly explain the factual, technical rational that resulted in the decision to make the stipulations of the spec.
Naturally I am not expecting the research to the stated in the rules themselves, but if questions are raised, answers should be provided openly (on the forum) in a friendly manner. Further, if the series has started and no questions were raised prior to the start, the SM can re-iterate that people had X weeks to ask questions.
Replies with no details, justified by the rationale of “It is illegal… it’s the rules… I am wasting my time answering your questions” sounds like a parent saying “because I said so”, rather than a knowledgeable member helping other members.SG_Q2: “What are you trying to learn?”
1. First, I was Not asking how to add the illegal parts to the SC8000 chassis and second I was Not Challenging the rule.
2. My intent was fairly simple – 12279 was intended to understand why a racer could not spend $75 making their SC8000 chassis equal to a $150-180 car with the SC8003; which was introduced to the club in [post 11993, March 12] with statements such as ‘the new chassis (SC8003) far out performed the old one’ …’the adjustable front axle helps keep the rear tires flat’. As I said in 12290 “I am simply trying to help All of us to be enlightened”.
3. Since I have two SC8000 cars I was wondering (as I assume other members did) (a) should I invest another $150-180 in a SC8003 car to be *Equal with others who bought SC8003 cars, and (b) since cost is stated as a concern, what is the clear technical reason why a racer is not allowed to simply spend $75-80 on an upgrade kit, rather then buying an SC8003 car just to be on equal footing.FINALLY
1. I have NO MORE QUESTIONS – I finally got them answered, including my own research that the chassis are so Significantly different that trying to upgrade the steel chassis to match the aluminum chassis and all the other component changes may result in a frankenstein that takes forever to tune – and may never be as good as either the OEM SC8000 or SC8003.
2. More importantly – Shawn – I THANK YOU for your reveal in 12293 that after testing both chassis, you saw no significant advantage in either chassis, (not previously stated in this thread).
3. I am sticking with my SC8000s.
4. All – I would Never have raised any questions if everything was obvious. Re-stating rules and re-iterating that they are unambiguous does Not answer the fundamental question of “what is the Reason behind the rules”. More effort was spent questioning my motives and telling me I should not ask any questions than actually answering the questions – so that Future Series Managers can Learn how they should research cars, parts and make decisions (and answer questions :O ) -
THANKS to Marty for the ad-hoc ScaleAuto tuning-tricks session he held last Sat June 9 regarding the “float plate” and improving front axle bearing smoothness! Gathered round with rapt attention were Randy, John, Dave, Steve and Mark.
ALSO – thanks in advance to Alex for crafting a CNC template for scrutineering the a) F&R tracks and b) tire-outside diameters (plus thx to Marty for leaving his MRRC clearance plate setup-block at the track).** ScaleAuto-#1 is June 23 so we have two short weeks to tune and practice; bring your cars this Sat after the final Thunderslot race! p.s. we will also have the ARK opened up for Rally practice, (also on 6/30 as planned, and on 6/23 if there is enough interest).
-
-
As per Marty’s email, carefully thin the insert (using light sandpaper strokes from the axle side), being careful not to eat into the rotor. Also you can carefully sand by hand *spots (3 sides) of the insert’s Rim until it slides in with a tight fit. And sometimes you just gotta use a little drop of ShoeGoo on either the axle side or the rim.// sorry Marty I lost your email or I would have posted it verbatim – please enjoy your trip to Cleveland. There are some great bars in the “docks” area; you can find some real down to earth rock-an-roll in Cleveland!
-
-
-
By my calculations, halfway through the Scale Auto Series, after figuring a mandatory drop of one race, the standings are as follows:
1st Steve 39 points
2nd Marty 38 points
———-Shawn 38 points
———-Russell 38 points
5th Randy 37 points
6th David 35 points
7th John 31 points
8th Mark 29 points
It doesn’t get much closer than that!
-
WOW! That it amazing. It’s amazing to see how different racers have excelled in different races. No one is dominating the series and the smallest mistake or set up error can cost dearly. It will be interesting to see if the final three races are as gentlemanly as the first three. Things could get tense when battling in the turns with some you are tied in points with. Let’s hope the clerk of the course will not have to become involved.
-
I thought the marshaling was good last week. I was surprised to knock David off in the esses when I thought I would let him pass on the bridge.
i would suggest that cars off of the track for repairs be put back on the track at one of the two end corners by a marshal when the approach is clear of oncoming cars. I was blinded a few times by cars coming back to race on the esses.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.