28 replies to this topic

[terry]

Sad to see the podded section of this years DUPR degenerate in the way it has,still with all that has gone on one should not be too surprised.

With all that behind us,I'm thinking what lessons have been learnt from this series?

For me as a entrant I certainly saw some great cars,Mannimals Aston in the non podded class a standout,as was the F40 of espix,hopefully I will be able to put together a car for the 2010 series that will have some of the features of these cars.

From a hosts' point of view,I certainly have learnt some,getting together a group of guys who are willing to help out is essential,although I had some dramas with the podded class,hosting rounds of the proxy was a very enjoyable experience.

Finally,it would be remiss of me not to mention some of the more unfavourable aspects of this years race,

Petty bitching about minor issues and the inability of some to get on with the racing was a real pity,to see some entrants pulling their cars out over stupid pettiness was dumb,it took away from the event and frankly some of our overseas entrants must think we are a pack of cowboys.

I certainly hope next years event is much more enjoyable.

I expect the race director to be firm with the rules,communicate with track hosts to ensure cars are sent on straight after the round has been run,and to keep us all informed on progressive point scores.

I hope we all get behind next years series and support our race director.

Terry

Edited by terry, 09 December 2009 - 03:49 PM.

[rick1776]

If you have rules you need to enforce them ALL the time. As far as I can tell Ronan was the only one penalised for being too low which robbed him of second outright and would have pushed me down to third. He was not the only one sitting too low. Some cars clearly did not meet specs even in the early rounds that I was involved with. I clearly remember seeing several cars with wheels extending past the wheel arches. Otherwise dont have rules and make it a Libre class which is an option.

Some people blatently tried to cheat with traction magnets. Personally I would have excluded them.

To avoid petty bickering the race director should post the PMs for all to see. Im sure this would minimise the bickering.

my two cents worth.

[manimmal]

on a side note Brett's F40 and my Aston Martin had a run side by side at Ged's last night, and there wasn't much in it - both stupid fast.

[rick1776]

Hmmm interesting Manimmal. So much for the concept of podded vs non podded. Personally I think its hot air.

[kalbfellp]

Quote

If you have rules you need to enforce them ALL the time.

What more needs to be said.

Edited by kalbfellp, 10 December 2009 - 09:03 AM.

[rick1776]

Phil,

I think the problem is that different people have very different expectations about what proxy racing is about. Some are very laid back and happy to race anything that sort of looks like a slotcar and has four wheels. Its all abot the fun of participating. Some people build cars exactly to the rules and generally like to see how their engineering compares to others. Lots of ideas are gained from such participation. My hats off to Manimmal with his design. I have no hesitation in saying its something Im going to copy. And some people take it so seriously they need cheat to gain an advantage. So if you have 30 people entered youre likely to get 30 different ideas about how it needs to run.

I can see both sides of the problem. Im new to the hobby and Id like to enter. I build a car and later find out its not legal for reason X. Ive paid my money and now I cant run it. Id be pissed. The flip side is Ive built my car to the rules and a car that isnt legal wins the proxy. If I complain Im taking it too seriously. If you have more than one person entered in a proxy be prepared for some form of bickering.

[boss302]

One of the things for discussion I think is for the host having discretion to make minor repairs. I moved the location of the lead wire mounting on one of the Slot It cars to prevent it from fouling and jamming the front wheels. It was terrible to drive in the previous round and this "fix' made it driveable - and turned out reasonably competitive - did I do the wrong thing?. Another car was sliding all over the place. I gave the tyres a light sanding - it was marginally better in the end. Do you need to pass these things on to the organiser?

I would probably favour a control tyre - mainly from the perspective of tyre cleaning procedures. I think the water/detergent procedure which I followed favoured some cars and not others. If there isn't a control tyre I think the track owner should determine what they know works best for their surface.

And I agree that rules should be enforced - in club racing the other night a low rider managed to damage my lane tape as a result of a gear tearing it up.

Just my thoughts.

Edited by boss302, 10 December 2009 - 09:32 AM.

[SlotsNZ]

If you have a clear set of penalties described up front for any repairs to a car - other than crash damage, you resolve much of both sides of this coin.
- No one gets excluded, and
if you scrutineer properly upon receipt of cars for each round, the entrant can negotiate with the host for bringing the car into compliance.

There's a proxy taking place on a sheep-station somewhere near you in 2010 that has something along those lines.
It doesn't even matter whether the schedule of penalties is exactly balanced the way everyone thinks is "fair" so long as it is in the ballpark and known up front.

2.3.3 All costs incurred will be paid by the entrant.

SCHEDULE OF PENALTIES
Car below minimum clearance 10 points per non-compliant round
Other non-compliant mechanical issues 10 points per non-compliant round
Non-compliance other than mechanical 10 points per non-compliant round
Tyre change 25 points
Repair of mechanical failure deemed not to be caused primarily by accident damage 20 points
Remedying of other non-compliant matters 20 points
Repair where mechanical damage is likely caused by, or has a major contribution from accident damage 0 points
Body/interior repairs due to accident or marshalling damage 0 points
All other non-specified events requiring vehicle work
Penalty - if any - based upon a principle of reasonable fairness to all entrants, at sole discretion and decision of organiser.
Or, in the case of the repairs being to organiser’s entry, the matter will be deferred to Phil Kalbfell for decision.
If car requiring tyre change is able to have this effected prior to the race without difficulty, only the tyre change penalty shall apply, but at host’s discretion, if they cannot perform this repair, and if the car runs below minimum clearance, the penalties are cumulative.


Of course, Series Organiser may hold car hostage for eternity if any entrant is adjudged to be giving him grief........

[first corner crash]

Personally I have really enjoyed the podded section this year but then again no-one complained about my car (that i know of) Shame really as it means they weren't really worried by it.So no reason to get upset for me. I think one race organiser overseas has a strict policy of not answering PMs about any other entrants car other than the owner of the car sending the PM. If it can't be said in open forum it doesn't need to be said. Not a bad concept. Prroxy racing is about improving your building skills and for that it has achieved its purpose. My car slowed through the series and developed a bit of hop so its likely the cracked chassis or pod that developed early in the series got worse as it went on but thats half the fun. Seeing if it will hold together. In one round the body came off completely from what i read and i had mental images of racers furiously trying to get it back on. Would of been hilarious. I have always had really good LMP cars so next year will be all about picking the right motor/gear/tyre combo for the tracks as the car is already sorted. Loking forward to it.
Lessons learned.
1. Stick to the rules and have a really good tech inspection before the first round.
2. Lighten up. Don't get worried if someone has a faster car than you (it can happen) and legality is for the organisers to decide on not fellow competitors
3. Lighten up., If someone complains about your car take it as a badge of honour. (notice how no-one complains about the slow ones)
4. Speed it up. Personally i would like to see the series shortened !0 rounds just drags on too long. There is always a host or two where life gets in the way of xlotcars and the series loses momentum.

Theres a bit of light reading lol.
Cheers Trevor.

[kalbfellp]

Quote

Stick to the rules and have a really good tech inspection before the first round.

This is why it is important to get the cars a few weeks before the first round so any problems can be sorted out. I was lucky that most of the cars arriving here for the first round ( Podded) could easliy be fixed in the couple of days I had before the first round.
It would be good to have a dead line at least two weeks before the first round so any problems can be sorted BEFORE the first round.

[espsix]

Quote

3. Lighten up., If someone complains about your car take it as a badge of honour. (notice how no-one complains about the slow ones)

It wouldn't be so bad if they were man enough to do it out in the open, but that would never happen because then people would see them for what they really are!

[boss302]

OK – some positives.

I thought the split up between podded / non-podded worked pretty well. A logical way to separate a large number of entries.
The layout of the results was excellent.
I liked the web site created for the event.
It was a privilege driving other peoples’ cars. (Caused me to buy a Ninco Mosler - I was that impressed)
The detailed race reports were interesting to read. It is good to see the qualifying times ahead of the race – ie. an opportunity for discussion.
The teams idea was a good one – particularly with such a diverse field.
It wasn’t too hard finding drivers here – the proxy concept is pretty well supported.

[rick1776]

Well put boss302. Yep fully agree about the good feedback on the cars during qualifying. You can use that sort of feedback to build a better car.

[Bulsara]

Is there some way you could implement a penalty system for unsporting behaviour. The potential loss of points may shut up some of them!! You could also have a '3 strikes' system for this type of carry on. You would of course require a mutually respected and independent judge of fact.

I know this is pretty heavy for what is supposed to be an enjoyable hobby, but from what I have been reading a great time has not been had by all.

[haystack]

In an event that runs as long as this one did, you must stick to a K.I.S.S principle. As some organisers have just espoused, set the rules at the beginning

in a clear and unequivocal fashion, get the cars early, scrutineer and organise repairs/adjustments, race and report, and send them on their way.

Every variance from the agreed protocols, however well intended, is simply the thin edge of the wedge. All entrants have the ultimate choice at any time

to request that THEIR car be treated under the agreed rules and restrictions, and withdraw it if they are not in agreeance, or lose interest. Not rocket science.

[first corner crash]

Boss made a good point about focusing on some positives. The web site was the best i have seen for any proxy race anywhere in the world Aastes should be justifiably proud. Also the spreadsheet of results was outstanding and let you know exactly what was going on. I hope we can get the website template and keep it for all future events. breaking up such a large entry was a good idea regardless about what the criteria was. I think the top cars in both sections would of been about the same. (I will race my zonda against Ricks mosler soon and see if there is any car advantage one way or the other.)
Some ideas worth kicking around.
I am not sure if you should be able to throw out your worst round in such a long series??? Boss had one mechanical issue in one round that cost him any chance of a higher placing which seems a bit harsh but thats just an option
2. Standardised format of event.. Or at least a published guideline. Many hosts as is there perogative run the round in a format that they see fit. I would like to see it standardised so that the format doesn't change and everything is equal. ( I am not talking about voltage. Track owners know what works on their layout)
3. All entrants to include all information as part of their entry including weight, gear ratio, motor,wheels and tyres. No info no running. I can't see the point of learning from each other if some folk don't publish their data.

[The Stig]

I have read most of the threads about the 2009 DUPR and thought it was time to make a few comments. this was my first real entry in the DUPR and it has turned me off entering again.
IMO many of the cars simply did not comply with the rules. I know that Phil sorted out most of the problems with the podded car BEFORE the first race, except for Wet Coast Racers car that was returned and since gone missing, ( just like the thread about it!)
When the podded cars arrived in Hobart I was very keep to look at them and try and learn some things.
I was at Phils when he scrutineered them and I was surprised to see several cars that certainly did not comply with the rules. Several were too low and must have been all through the proxy series as it was the fronts that were too low. Also several cars had parts of the chassis cut away for extra clearance when the rules clearly stated " A minimal amount of plastic may be removed from the area between the wheels" This does not allow sections of the chassis to be removed for clearance. AS the rules also stated that IF its not listed it's not legal!
There has been a lot of referance to Manimals car being legal. Who ever raised the question with AAstes was reading this referance in the rules
The original chassis must be maintained. IMO Cutting parts off the body and gluing them onto the chassis was a great idea BUT was it with in the rules?
I really don't know!
All of these problems could have easily been sorted out before the first races of this event and most of the mud slinging that has gone on would have been avoided.

Edited by The Stig, 21 December 2009 - 12:10 AM.

[first corner crash]

The Stig, on Dec 21 2009, 12:37 AM, said:

I have read most of the threads about the 2009 DUPR and thought it was time to make a few comments. this was my first real entry in the DUPR and it has turned me off entering again.
IMO many of the cars simply did not comply with the rules. I know that Phil sorted out most of the problems with the podded car BEFORE the first race, except for Wet Coast Racers car that was returned and since gone missing, ( just like the thread about it!)
When the podded cars arrived in Hobart I was very keep to look at them and try and learn some things.
I was at Phils when he scrutineered them and I was surprised to see several cars that certainly did not comply with the rules. Several were too low and must have been all through the proxy series as it was the fronts that were too low. Also several cars had parts of the chassis cut away for extra clearance when the rules clearly stated " A minimal amount of plastic may be removed from the area between the wheels" This does not allow sections of the chassis to be removed for clearance. AS the rules also stated that IF its not listed it's not legal!
There has been a lot of referance to Manimals car being legal. Who ever raised the question with AAstes was reading this referance in the rules
The original chassis must be maintained. IMO Cutting parts off the body and gluing them onto the chassis was a great idea BUT was it with in the rules?
I really don't know!
All of these problems could have easily been sorted out before the first races of this event and most of the mud slinging that has gone on would have been avoided.

Depends on your point of view. For me Manimals car was perfect. He read the rules and applied them as written. No Issue. If someone wants to re write the rules for another event fair call but as it stands give the man some credit for building the best car possible under the allocated rules. For goodness sake the man chose a scalextric. He could of easily chosen a ninco with their 1/30 scale rear width. I was amazed at the lack of Ninco Supras entered for that reason alone. I just think there has been way to much drama over a toy car race. If someone has picked a better tyre compound good luck to them its a learning experience.

Edited by first corner crash, 21 December 2009 - 06:40 AM.

[first corner crash]

oops entered it twice

Edited by first corner crash, 21 December 2009 - 06:42 AM.

[rick1776]

IMO manimmals car was legal. I got no problem in saying that and I came runner up to manimmal. Too good id too good end of story. Minimal is a very subjective description. Is minimal 1 thou, 1mm, 2mm or 10mm?? If you want to tighten up the rule than have something like a piano wire go-no go gauge to define minimal removal of material much like you would use a piano wire for ground clearance go-no go.

So look at the rules which caused grief and rewrite those rules to take out the ambiguity.

You cant have rules based upon "If it doesnt say it you cant do it" otherwise you could literally exclude every car in the field. It didnt say you could remove 0.5mm off the leading and trailing edge of the Ninco pro guide but I did this as I thought the guide might be a little too big for the smaller tighter tracks, so was the car legal? I also painted my wheel inserts grey instead of leaving them gold so was it illegal? I had to run a washer under my guide otherwise it would not have met min height requirements, didnt say I could do this, so in making the car have a legal ride height was it illegal? I used loctite on my pinion, doesnt say you are allowed to use loctite so was it illegal? The list could go on forever.

So the organisers should have a reread of the rules which caused problems and rewrite them to take out the grey areas.