Todd (tlbrace) runs with the IHSR. There are two of us who repeatedly host digital races, and we always invite the IHSR crowd. I generally get 1, 2, or 3 of the IHSR crew to show up. There are at least three others who would like to make it, but the timing has never been right. Has digital gained a lot of traction with the IHSR crowd? No. I don't expect it to. But Todd doesn't really have much reason to say 'efforts to get races going there never really get too far off the ground.', as he's never been to one, and has no idea how high they fly.
As you know, Greg, we have a small but growing group of D132 racers here in MD. Several SCI members. Sabata, keechracer, ponderwilu and others. At our last race (not held an an IHSR members house, and the owner only knows digital racers, so that's all he asked), we had 8 people. The last event here at my house, I believe it was also 8, with two being analog racers from the IHSR.
Some slot car racers- particularly those who've been at it for 40 years or more- seem to feel as if they are 'threatened' by digital. I'm not quite sure why that is, and it's sad, really, as they are two very different versions of the same thing. I believe those people must never have but one flavor of ice cream in their fridge.....
I'm one of the old timers, but don't feel threatened by digital. The actual racing of digital, not the technology, but the racing...ie passing only in designated sections where people can change lanes via remote control, has been around for 40+ years or more...Eldon did it 'back in the day.' didn't catch on then, either.
Again, my own reason for not going digital is that between the two slot racing approaches to racing, the lack of analog realism is preferrable to digital's lack of realism. They both are terribly unrealistic. Again, FOR ME (and that's the only person who matters when I'm determining how to spend my time and money) analog slot racing is more realistic in the way that matters to me than digital's realism. Again, both fall woefully short on the realism scale.
If the digital realism of 'drafting' and overttaking/passing is the goal, RC is the better option...even though the 'digital guru' dismisses that. That's fine.
To me the only advantage to digital that would appeal to me is the ability to race more than 2 cars in the space needed for a two lane setup. That is a significant advantage, a much larger advantage in my mind than any 'realism' argument. THAT is the feature/benefit the manufacturers should be hammering home over and over and over above any 'realism' argument.
Again, all of the above are my opinions only. I don't expect to change anyone's mind, no point in that.
But the original question was (paraphrased) why isn't digital catching on? To THAT question, understanding the resistance of the likely market: current analog racers, is more fruitful than trying to argue down analog racers' resistance. Sell it, don't argue it.
Manufacturer's aren't pushing realism over the fact that you can race more cars in a smaller space than analog. If anyone pushes that angle, it's the hobbyists. We do often point out the more cars in less space angle as well, but I would imagine you're seeing more of the former than the latter.
And I don't dismiss the fact that RC has better realism in racing line, overtaking/passing than digital slots with their "limited" lane change points. I understand that RC is more realistic (though less so in other ways) in that regard, given that there's no slots holding them in line. My point is, analog people are racing slots instead of RC for some reason, right? Surely you have some reasons? Well, digital slot racers usually have the SAME reasons for preferring slots over RC. It's not like we looked at RC, and digital slots, and said "oh, I think digital slots is more realistic than RC, I'll do that!". No, we like slots for the same reason everyone else does. It also happens that we prefer the tactical racing that comes with sharing a lane with other cars.
As for limited passing opportunities, well... show me a race where two very closely matched cars/drivers can just pull out and pass anywhere. Heck, even a group of racers/cars that isn't perfectly matched fall into the racing line and only pass in certain places on any given track. Fact is, passing opportunities are also quite limited in real racing. It's down to the person building the track to put lane changers in the most appropriate places for effective passing opportunities. Sometimes this can only be determined after a lot of racing with equally skilled drivers racing equally tuned cars. Sure, if I'm running circles around the other guys, I want to be able to change lanes whenever. It's also not long to the next LC where I can pull out and pass them, if they don't happen to take the same lane change as me. An LMP car can pass a GT car pretty much anywhere on the track. I don't like racing like that, though. I like the cars and drivers to be even, where making a successful pass requires really pushing my car and skill to get past the other driver. Does this exist in analog racing? Yeah. That's probably why I haven't stopped running analog with the local club. But between the two types, I prefer digital. Digital SLOT CARS. Would I enjoy RC? Probably for a little while, but only if I could find a racing club that wasn't yet another "spend to win" club. Too bad those don't exist.
That's cool. The top hit for "RC GT points series" showed a pretty reasonable set of rules that were clearly about evening the playing field and keeping costs down. I guess my only remaining complaint is entry (and maintenance) cost. Still much lower for slots. No, I have another... I can do it in my garage, though I guess a MiniZ course might be about the size of a generous slot track?
you need more room than your ssd track for a mini-z track... unforutunately, and then you need friends you know how to drive RC. And dont be fooled mini-z is not cheaper than a 10th scale scale. They can be just as expensive.
But I like being able to run whenever I want and not have to depend on people to show up =)
Mini-Z's are cheaper than 1/10th scale, unless you're comparing high end Mini-Z's against entry level 1/10 scale. I've done Mini-Z's, and they're fun, but they take up as much floor space as a 1/24 scale slot car track. They're not too expensive (but each car is about 4X a 1/32 scale car for one that race prepared), and the tracks are cheaper than slot car tracks. BUT... the timing & scoring systems are WAY more expensive. And all RC's have a WAY steeper learning curve than slots. A newbie can get a slot car around a track without crashing in a minute or so. A minute of practice on an RC car won't put a dent in the skill you'll need to make a decent lap. I like the realism of RC, but the learning curve is such that it's impossible to race against anyone who's not an RC racer, and those who are RC racers are typically WAY better than me. So there's no group of people I can race RC's against, and have a head-to-head race. I wouldn't even care if I couldn't keep up with the best. I'd just like to be able to find someone to battle with on a somewhat even level.
True, but even then a stock mini-z will set you back 200 dollar and then you need batteries before you can use it. A race ready mini-z is easy close to 400 w/out controller (another 300).
but you like you said, not everyone drives rc, and many get frustrated learning.
I'm one of the old timers, but don't feel threatened by digital. The actual racing of digital, not the technology, but the racing...ie passing only in designated sections where people can change lanes via remote control, has been around for 40+ years or more...Eldon did it 'back in the day.' didn't catch on then, either.
.
"Either" ??? are you saying its not catching on. It is and in a big way, 0-34% in 7 years. and another 22% wanting to, thats over 50% for the enthusiasts if Im to believe this poll. If that isnt "catching on", what is?
Quote:
Again, my own reason for not going digital is that between the two slot racing approaches to racing, the lack of analog realism is preferrable to digital's lack of realism. They both are terribly unrealistic. Again, FOR ME (and that's the only person who matters when I'm determining how to spend my time and money) analog slot racing is more realistic in the way that matters to me than digital's realism. Again, both fall woefully short on the realism scale.
Please explain. Where do you see in 1:1 four, six or eight cars running in perfectly spaced lanes?
Fact ius if the technology was available in the 50's and 60's they would have gone digital straight away, but it wasnt, but it is now. On my track with pitstops, fuel, penalties, multicar per lane, overtaking, a realistic track width, its probably more real by a factor of 4.
Quote:
If the digital realism of 'drafting' and overttaking/passing is the goal, RC is the better option...even though the 'digital guru' dismisses that. That's fine.
RC is a different animal. I cant race RC in my games room or garage. Whos the Guru by the way?
Quote:
To me the only advantage to digital that would appeal to me is the ability to race more than 2 cars in the space needed for a two lane setup. That is a significant advantage, a much larger advantage in my mind than any 'realism' argument. THAT is the feature/benefit the manufacturers should be hammering home over and over and over above any 'realism' argument.
Quote:
Again, all of the above are my opinions only. I don't expect to change anyone's mind, no point in that.
But the original question was (paraphrased) why isn't digital catching on? To THAT question, understanding the resistance of the likely market: current analog racers, is more fruitful than trying to argue down analog racers' resistance. Sell it, don't argue it
Dont let the title fool you, its catching on pretty fast. Look back in the threads here 5 years ago, so many people saying it would never catch on etc, how times have changed.
In the long run its all opinion, all argueable and all good, but please dont say its not catching on.
Rick
Last edited by injectorman; 07-05-2012 at 04:17 PM.
"Either" ??? are you saying its not catching on. It is and in a big way, 0-34% in 7 years. and another 22% wanting to, thats over 50% for the enthusiasts if Im to believe this poll. If that isnt "catching on", what is?
Please explain. Where do you see in 1:1 four, six or eight cars running in perfectly spaced lanes?
Fact ius if the technology was available in the 50's and 60's they would have gone digital straight away, but it wasnt, but it is now. On my track with pitstops, fuel, penalties, multicar per lane, overtaking, a realistic track width, its probably more real by a factor of 4.
RC is a different animal. I cant race RC in my games room or garage. Whos the Guru by the way?
Dont let the title fool you, its catching on pretty fast. Look back in the threads here 5 years ago, so many people saying it would never catch on etc, how times have changed.
In the long run its all opinion, all argueable and all good, but please dont say its not catching on.
Rick
Rick, I appreciate your effort to respond to my post point by point.
Why do I say it's not 'catching on?' A poll is a poll. The only poll in the market place that counts is at the cash register. Of course it's catching on 'some,' but it's not impressive. Look at the vendors: Prof. Motor, Hotslots132, Fantasy World, etc....most of their inventory and layouts of their websites are given over to analog. By a far, far margin. Why is that? Look at the (few) hobby shops that actually sell slot cars with regularity (not the ones that lay in a few sets around Xmas), again, most of the shelf space, by far, is for analog products.
Look in the new product releases on this board, new slot car manufacturers. For the most part, the overwhelming new products, from new manufacturers remain analog. Polls at one slot car site notwithstanding.
The few hobby shops that have tracks and sell track time...is it analog, or digital, for the most part?
You'll know digital is catching on when vendors switch their emphasis, in the form of shelf space, inventory, advertising, and floor space to it. You'll also know it when slot forums threads and posts start to tilt towards digital. Take a look at the post counts on this board...by a factor of what...10, 20, more do the analog posts outnumber the digital posts. Until then, again, a poll is just a poll.
About 4-5-8 cars going through a turn side by side...if you reread my post I said NEITHER approach is terribly realistic, and the parrallel parade around most analog tracks is its least realistic feature...but it DOES allow passing anywhere on the track (except for those routed tracks with their lane convergence features). In digital, you HAVE to wait until you get to the passing points on the track.
But as everyone has said, it IS a matter of preference. If you enjoy it, more power to you, and I hope the market expands so you have access to greater variety of cars, parts, accessories, and track options, and I hope the hobby grows so you can sustain a strong club racing, if that's what floats your boat.
As for the pitstops, fuel management, etc...all CAN be fun. But remember, the more complexity you add to a 'game,' the smaller the universe of people who will truly embrace it as a hobby. You'll get some folks who 'try it out,' but then decide that the cost and complexity is such that it's not something they will see as a hobby, and therefore invest in more heavily. This isn't exclusive to slots, but a phenomena of any hobby, really.
The original question was why it does not seem to be expanding. You say to not be mislead by the title of the thread. Why was the question asked? Is the OP frustrated by digital's lack product options in the marketplace? The lack of local hobbyists with which to race?
I think the biggest impediment to digital gaining much traction over analog is that it does not tap into a previously non-existent market where there is/was pent up demand. For the most part, the people who will buy digital are the ones who already are into analog, and to make the switch the analog hobbyists evaluate what it will take in cost and retirement of what often is a large collection of toys to make the switch and if the switch is worth the 'pain.' What will they gain vs. what will they give up. It's pushing through that pain point for the target market that is pushing back on the growth of the hobby.
So, digital enthusiasts, are you trying to talk your analog breathern into moving away from analog? Because THAT is the answer to digital catching on. It's the analog folks who need to switch in great numbers, not an untapped market of new slot car hobbyists, that will get digital to grow. Because the latter market doesn't exist in sustainable numbers. Most young people today are fully engaged in computer gaming. They are more mobile, with smaller homes and less space for such hobbies. GT5 offers very much a realistic racing experience. Sound. Steering wheel (that vibrates on que), accelerator peddle, brake peddle, nearly infinite choice of cars for no more investment than the original game. Infinite complexity combinations from just driving a race car with an automatic transmission to factoring damage, fuel, tire wear, weather, the whole enchilada.
The modeling side of the hobby is of course totally absent with video gaming, but it sure has a lot of other features that are very, very attractive. And a lot of younger car enthusiasts who want to live that enthusiasm vicariously through a hobby are more prone to move towards video gaming than to any kind of slot format, one would think.
About 4-5-8 cars going through a turn side by side...if you reread my post I said NEITHER approach is terribly realistic, and the parrallel parade around most analog tracks is its least realistic feature...but it DOES allow passing anywhere on the track (except for those routed tracks with their lane convergence features). In digital, you HAVE to wait until you get to the passing points on the track.
I don't understand this point. Analog allows passing anywhere but digital only at certain points? If you have X number of cars running side by side whether it be analog or digital you can pass anywhere. You don't need the lane changers to pass another car. Am I missing something?
Dave
I don't understand this point. Analog allows passing anywhere but digital only at certain points? If you have X number of cars running side by side whether it be analog or digital you can pass anywhere. You don't need the lane changers to pass another car. Am I missing something?
Dave
That's what I thought at first too but when I thought about it I think what he was trying to say is if the cars are all taking the fastest lane around the track they will be running one in front of another in the same lane.
That's what I thought at first too but when I thought about it I think what he was trying to say is if the cars are all taking the fastest lane around the track they will be running one in front of another in the same lane.
That may be what he's trying to say but that's what makes digital so exciting and challenging.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Profoxcg
^ both of you are a correct. Granted being side by side doesn't mean you can pass. There is some strategy to both games.
Strategy? Where is the strategy in analog? You drive the best you can in one lane until it's time to stop the race to switch lanes and drive the best you can in that one..etc etc. I'm sorry, I'm not trying to fuel the fires here , I have been there and done that.
Dave
[ 
If you have X number of cars running side by side whether it be analog or digital you can pass anywhere. You don't need the lane changers to pass another car. Am I missing something?
, I have been there and done that. 
Linear Mode
