Here's the initial layout that Homer and I came up with for my place. Minimal tweaking to be done and we still need to figure out how many levels it will be when it's physically laid down. But here ya go, comments and criticisms appreciated!

Also, can someone tell me where the "hide track section labels" setting is?!?! It's killing me!

I likes it!

Not sure about the huge viaduct down the backchute though. They can be a gorgeous centerpiece of landscape styling and a royal bastage for marshalling in the heat of battle. I'm picturing some poor marshall fumbling to fish a car out of the dark like a racoon trying to dig a crawdad from under a rock, let alone get it back in the groove with geeked up competitors throwing pizza and insults about yer eye to hand coordination or yer momma. Any big pile up under the lid would be bad juju.

Some folks might knock some points off for a lack of technical squiggles and scribbles, but I'd argue it looks like a very fast track.

I'd have to agree with Bill's comment, especially if you plan to hold races on your track.

I'm also from the camp that likes an overpass in a layout. It helps equalize lap lengths and makes for a more challenging course to drive. While your layout folds back on itself, it doesn't have a true overpass.

I also recommend you run on your layout awhile before you permanently attach it to your table. I built a track that seemed perfect on paper until I drove it!

Oh-my..

I agree with Bill.. it's an interesting layout. I think I'm with the majority of people that does not like multi-level track for hi-speed racing, for all of the reasons Bill mentioned. But, to be honest.. I've never raced on one in a club environment.

Looks like a very.. very fast track! Only one 9"/6" corner! Thanks for sharing and keep us posted on it's progress!

-Robbie

Will take it all under advisement and relay to Homer as well, tho he may cry :(

First priority is for me and the 8 year old, THEN other folks. But I understand what you all are saying. It's the first draft and we've got a month and more to tweak.

I was also looking at adding esses in that straight just under the very top (it would be the 2nd most top straight). When it comes out from under the pseudo-overpass then into esses.

Anyway, keep it coming!

The layout looks to be a very fast layout.

I prefer a layout that use a lot of different curve combinations that increase in radius and decrease in radius. It is also good to incorporate straightaways of different lengths in the layout. This adds a lot of variety to the racing experience and you will find that as you learn the circuit, you will find different areas of the track where you can lower your lap times.

Racing the cars in both directions is another way to change things up. In most cases, the track will drive totally different in the opposite direction.

Best regards,
Brian

I likes it!

Not sure about the huge viaduct down the backchute though. They can be a gorgeous centerpiece of landscape styling and a royal bastage for marshalling in the heat of battle. I'm picturing some poor marshall fumbling to fish a car out of the dark like a racoon trying to dig a crawdad from under a rock, let alone get it back in the groove with geeked up competitors throwing pizza and insults about yer eye to hand coordination or yer momma. Any big pile up under the lid would be bad juju.

Some folks might knock some points off for a lack of technical squiggles and scribbles, but I'd argue it looks like a very fast track.

Btw, what do you mean by viaduct down the backchute? Totally not seeing what you're talking about.

Btw, what do you mean by viaduct down the backchute? Totally not seeing what you're talking about.

Bill is referring to the two-level backstretch you have at the top of your layout.

JStu -- If you are using Tracker 2000, the setting you are looking for is Options -> Show Track Codes.

I'm going to go with the group on the variety of track radii; just about every turn you have is 15/18". Have more of a variety of turn radii, and mix up turn radii in a corner. Build increasing- and decreasing-radius turns.

I *am* going to go against the group on the double-level backstretch. While I have not seen that approach used with an HO track, it is very common in commercial 1/24 scale tracks, which are known as 'hillclimbs' (http://www.oldweirdherald.com/photos/gallery/dixon/dix0002). I am building the tables for an HO hillclimb of my own...

http://photos.hobbytalk.com/data/511/Hillclimb_1.jpg

(The direction of travel is UP the donut)

Take the cautions mentioned by others into consideration. You need to have enough room between levels to allow reasonably fast marshalling. On the other hand, even though it might be an awkward reach, the awkwardness affects everyone the same; my recommendations to the drivers: don't come off!

Again, hillclimbs are very common in 1/24 scale racing; they are efficient tracks in the amount of floor space they use when compared to the amount of track they have. Do they work well in HO scale? I don't know, but I'll soon find out.

-- Bill

We started with the Hill Climb idea and added a bit more. Definitely want to keep the hill climb, since as you say, it's not been done much at all in HO but it's all over the place in larger scales.

That's my thought too tho, who's going to lose it on a long straight? If so, you need to leave and go grill the food for the real racers :)

Joking :)

Who knows what we end up with?

Edit: The main issue I see with using the standard Hill Climb into HO, is the banking. A 1/24 HC is all flexed and graceful. Using Tomy plastic track, a solid base of MDF or something is needed to bend the plastic, correct? I love your layout, but it was a bit too much to do for my first one I felt. Is that 3x12?

JStu --

My track is 4x16' and 69' long; pretty much the same size as yours. If my track was scaled up to 1/24 scale, it would be 187' long, which is a pretty good sized hillclimb.

Not all hillclimbs are banked; plenty are flat.

Flat hillclimbs often look banked because you are changing levels. There is an upward or downward grade to the track, but the track itself is not banked. It is the tilt of these inclines and declines that makes the track looked banked. According to John Ford in 'Slot Car Raceway Floor Plans', page 32: "...This C <"Klimber"> track <a hillclimb without a donut> was one of the least expensive tracks we ever built. Mostly because it was so easy to build with it's all flat turns. The "Klimber" versions gave the illusion of banking however, they were all built with the same flat pieces which were mass produced."

And I am building an HO hillclimb because I want to build a routed but flat 1/32 hillclimb, too. I figure the experience that I get building the HO track will translate well to the 1/32 scale track.

Hillclimb tracks are considered to be the hardest type of track to build because of the elevation changes and multiple levels. To paraphrase a famous president: I am doing this not because it is easy, but because it is hard.

You have the elevation changes, which will change the effective length of the ascending and descending pieces. You have transitions (incline to flat, flat to decline) to worry about so you don't get car launches. If you tip the track to the side for a better entrance to a turn, you have those issues to deal with, too.

Not trying to scare you off, but there are things that bear watching...

-- Bill

Aye, that's why I took up Homer's offer to help me build it. Like you, he wanted to build something not seen before. I don't want to speak for him, so I'll stop.

We may come back to it, not sure. Primarily i want something the boy can grow into and is still fun for me and my friends. Your layout looks like it would work well for us too.

I may have to pick your brain a bit as well as we tweak it.

looks great iI would try a few underpasses on it. should be a blast it will be a fast track. How many boxes will you need to get the material? looks like a bunch!

This layout, which I just threw together, captures the essence of a hillclimb track in the allotted space without imposing any overlapping layers. You could still elevate the rear part to make it feel like a hillclimb even though there is no overlap. In the larger scales where the elevations are proportionally larger the overlapped part affords you plenty of space for seeing and retrieving cars. It doesn't translate to HO quite so easily. I'll keep tweaking this basic design to introduce more driving challenges - if you'd like.

All four lanes of this layout are 63.67 ft.

wm_brant - if you want some good reference models for custom tracks - check these out:

1:32 scale Hillclimb: http://www.slotcarmarks.com/track_1.htm
HO: http://www.slotcarmarks.com/track_2.htm

Here's a couple more 65.17 ft hillclimb inspired layouts:

A couple more ...

65.71 ft and 63.87 ft.

I like the one on the right, in the post directly above this one. Tho they are all losing what makes a Hill Climb.. a Hill Climb. I very much want a double decker track in the back straight. It's unique in HO and I've been known to sacrifice to have something that's all mine, even when I can afford and obtain much more.

wm_brant, watch where that 45 deg shoots the car, hope they don't end up in the corner under the upper track. I SUCK at 45's and will own that corner of your track with broken car parts :)

And I am debating esses, I honestly don't like them. I can't justify having them on my track without really wanting them. Especially when this coming out of my allowance :(

Yeah, I know I am difficult :)

But I really appreciate the feedback, it helps me keep learning and shows me options I never even know I had. For instance, I like the ^ 90 degree bumps you added to that one.

OK, if you must have that double decker straight . . .

- an increasing radius turn leading into the bottom straight may lessen the deslots there. Likewise, a decreasing radius turn exiting the bottom straight may make sense. Having the lower level straight a bit shorter than the top layer straight is a good idea from a driver visibility standpoint, as included in your original design.

The British Slot Car Racing Association has an interesting page on track design. (http://www.bscra.fsnet.co.uk/track1.htm) Some of it applies specifically to routing a track, but much applies to all tracks. More food for thought as you're considering your layout.

I'll be looking forward to seeing the final design!

A hillclimb track is really designed to be shoved against a wall or in a corner, allowing you to have a sizable track where you would not otherwise be able to place one due to line of sight and marshaling concerns. On a large scale hillclimb the overlapping parts of the track are more than a foot apart and the drivers can see the cars and the marshals can reach the cars quite easily from one side. But the essential thing is that from where the drivers are standing they see the track as a compact tiered arrangement of track within easy viewing distance. The compactness of the view is helped by the track overlapping, and the amount of overlap is variable and a function of how much depth you can afford. Given more latitude in depth I would opt for less, even no, overlap but still maintain the tiered/stepped effect by raising the back part of the track. The other tactic when you have a lot of depth and height would be to have more than two levels. When evaluating these designs you need to be thinking in 3-D from where the drivers are standing, not top down birds eye view. Having the rear section raised several inches with the ascending ramp will definitely convey the feeling of a hillclimb track.

I think this is a case where you need to set up a test track or mock up (with cardboard strips perhaps) that has the essential feature you desire and see how it really works. Sometimes things that are a "novelty" on paper end up being a "circus freak show" in person. Keep in mind that it's all subjective. Whatever works for you is the way to go.

Excellent points, AfxToo. Thanks for taking the time to explain it!

I am sure things will drastically change when the actual track goes down, it always does. We're designing with that in mind, being flexible enough to make changes last minute.

Again, thanks!