Please critique my course design

Hey, all - the BMC group that I autocross does two of our season events at a very small lot. Over the years they have evolved a simple kind of hourglass shape that works pretty well and is even fairly fun. However, this year I want to change it up a little and I am going to propose a modification to the layout. Before I do that, can you folks please look at this and critique it for me? This is my first course design.

• The course box is only about 375 feet long (curb of the radius end to baseline of the box at the left end) by 130 feet wide (curb to curb).
• We typically run almost 3 full laps, entering bottom left and exiting top left.
• Grid is held back to the driveway area - next car is released to the start box only after the current car has done the left side sweeper for the last time.
• Most of the gates in this design are 16 feet wide to keep speeds down.
• Inside radius of the big sweeper at right is about 35 feet. Tight, I know, but we try to maintain distance from that curb. I may be able to cheat that a little wider, but that's about what we typically use (though it's usually a left not a right)
• The 3-cone slalom is 50 foot spacing, with the middle cone offset 5 feet the hard way.
• I've really tried to avoid aiming at the curb at anything steeper than about a 30 degree angle.
• The site slopes about 4 feet from the left end of the layout down toward the middle. The right half of the course is effectively flat.

So please look this over and give me any feedback, especially negative, so I can improve it as much as possible before I present it. Thanks!

Satellite of site

Plan of design

Aerial of design from left

Perspective from left (west)

Perspective from right (east)

In-car view from start

In-car view entering crossover

In-car view entering slalom

In-car view at exit decision

Thanks again for any feedback.

We ran on a lot similar to that. Yours looks good You might want to tighten the start a little. We usually run 15 ft gates and are thinking of going narrower. When you are restricted on space course design can be a pain. We run on a 4 tenths mile stock car track, so keeping the courses interesting can be a challenge. Good luck.

I only see about 4 cones that are in danger of getting hit multiple times for the day so there will not be a lot of downtime resetting cones.
What you call a 3 cone slalom, I see as a 1 cone chicane.
The 1st cone really does not come into play if you are allowed to keep the come to the right.
The 2nd is the one you work for and will be knocked over many times.
The 3rd is a non-factor as you go wide for the next turn. Looks good.

More thought...
I might move the finish closer. Yes, this makes less course, but...
My concern is that you could gain high speed coming from the slalom to the finish. It seems to me like the kind of finish where the high power guys could aim for the second to last inside cone with heavy throttle and therfore finish with a sideways slide. Of course, this slide will have them right up on the curb. If the finish is right where the exit ramp begins, they will be powering down at that last curve.
Of course, after writting all that, powering down on a curve is not really textbook either. Some local knowledge of the site may be needed to really answer this but, hey, some food for thought.

Might I add...killer graphics!

I have nowhere near enough experience to critique your design, but I'd love to know what software package allows you to do that!

SketchUp. The basic version will do that and it's free! It was a commercial product but Google bought them and distributes the basic version at no cost. The learning curve is really shallow, too. Go download it now and I will be glad to help you out with it.

In reply to Duke: To cut the slalom speed decrease the distance on the last cone. You could also contiue the sweeper 20deg more before you start the slalom. Is there any run off on the lot, or is it all curbed? Where do people watch from?

After reading comments and looking at the layout. I think you do need to do something to slow the finish.

jrw1621 wrote: I only see about 4 cones that are in danger of getting hit multiple times for the day so there will not be a lot of downtime resetting cones. What you call a 3 cone slalom, I see as a 1 cone chicane.

Yes, it kind of is. Unfortunately if you enter the other way, it minimizes the turn at the other end into the crossover. I thought this way worked better, so I offset the middle cone to make it harder.

My concern is that you could gain high speed coming from the slalom to the finish. It seems to me like the kind of finish where the high power guys could aim for the second to last inside cone with heavy throttle and therfore finish with a sideways slide. Of course, this slide will have them right up on the curb. If the finish is right where the exit ramp begins, they will be powering down at that last curve. Of course, after writting all that, powering down on a curve is not really textbook either. Might I add...killer graphics!

Thank you! I'm an architect so I tend to think better in 3D. This model was really not hard to make using the free version of SketchUp and as I said above I will be glad to help anybody who wants to try it.

iceracer wrote: After reading comments and looking at the layout. I think you do need to do something to slow the finish.

Yeah, between you and jrw above I think you're right. I will probably try moving the two gates between the crossover and the exit a little farther outboard, in order to make that less of a wiggle and more of a kink. I set the exit lights where they are so that you're out of the last bend before you really have to brake, and the shut down space is straight, parallel to the curb. I'll fiddle with this and see if I can work that out. Thanks.

clownkiller wrote: To cut the slalom speed decrease the distance on the last cone. You could also contiue the sweeper 20deg more before you start the slalom. Is there any run off on the lot, or is it all curbed? Where do people watch from?

If I reverse the entry to the slalom it amounts to extending the sweeper, but that is worse at the far end, as described above. I may actually space the slalom farther apart to make the turn at the end sharper, and keep the slalom slower by increasing the offset of the middle cone. Sharpening that last turn would also lower the entry speed to the chute through the crossover, and that in turn should also lower the exit speed.

Unfortunately, yes, the lot is fully curbed, so there is no real runoff room except what is built into the course.

The timing booth sits against the diagonal curb at left, looking down the course. Staging cars pass by the booth one at a time when it is safe, along that diagonal line of cones.

Spectators are kept behind the sidewalk along the bottom long side of the course. 4 corner stations are set up evenly spaced around the perimeter on the long sides, behind the curb and back a little.

Thanks for everybody's input. If there are any other comments, please make them! Every bit helps.

Man, that is a tough lot. Never done any course design, but given what you have to work with there that looks like fun. If I were to change anything I might just delete several of those pointer cones. Don't really need one on the middle cone in the slalom, just the first one to show it's not optional. And the ones inside the loop can go. Not a big deal.

Yeah, with curbs, slowing the finish down somehow is a good idea.

Looks like fun! When do we run?

Reviving this thread because we ran the course on Saturday. Here's the final map:

Per some of the comments here, we gave up on the slalom idea and just made it a chicane for ease of understanding. We also tightened up the exit from the original design.

Overall it ran pretty well, with decent flow. Times were anywhere from 50 seconds to 70 seconds depending on car and driver, with most being in the high 50s. I ran a 50.2 and a 50.8 in the Manic Miata but unfortunately lightly coned on both those runs. My best clean run was a 52.1.

We have some older drivers who are very used to running the same course design every time, so there were a number of OC calls, but most everybody seemed to enjoy the change of pace. The cones that seemed to get hit most often were (surprisingly) the inside exit cones at the right sweeper because they are on the off-side of the car. Next after that was the inside cone at the tight bend after the second pass through the crossover box.

Unfortunately, the crossover was right through an area of bad paving, so it was a bit dirty and wet. It looks like a chronic issue so I may see what else I can do to stay clear of that part. I am trying to keep it with a faster end and a slower end, though, rather than being kind of homogenous all the way through.

Needs elevation change

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Needs elevation change

The tan lines are 2 foot contours. The bottom half is essentially flat (slopes about 1.5 feet from the big radius curb up to the crossover box, then about 4 feet from there up to the top. So the tight "2x" turnaround at the left side is cambered to the inside a notable amount.

This is Delaware, though, so the whole state is about as flat as a pool table.

Duke wrote:

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Needs elevation change

The tan lines are 2 foot contours. The bottom half is essentially flat (slopes about 1.5 feet from the big radius curb up to the crossover box, then about 4 feet from there up to the top. So the tight "2x" turnaround at the left side is cambered to the inside a notable amount. This is Delaware, though, so the whole state is about as flat as a pool table.

Post an ad for "Clean fill wanted"?

Thanks for "the rest of the story." It does look like a good course. If the crossover hits bad pavement moving the cross a bit farther east would not be impossible it just makes the right sweeper that much rounder.
Looks like it was a good day.