Supercross 2010 - Who's making what

[mxbiker]

the whoops are killing me, but if i had to chose between them i would chose the big ones.
the overall track looks great, but the turns are weared. they are bumped( dont know how to say it).

tip: put these bales on the track http://www.mxsimulator.com/benchracing3 ... f=2&t=3317, those that are on right now are old.

[yomo]

Ha well thats the one i really wanted, its my hometown.

Haha thats cool, could I take dallas?

[Wilson]

Its all you.

[brent26]

Yous guys prolly saw this but http://www.supercrossonline.com/Tracks.aspx

[yomo]

Its all you.

Thanks

[Axle McOctane]

The new version of San Fran is better with the slightly smaller whoops, in my opinion. They are more like the rest of the '10 supercross replica whoops. Even though the layout isn't as interesting as A2, the quality of track-making is top-notch.

[ShackAttack12]

I have to disagree..... The small, close whoops are simply way too easy and kind of stupid. They feel like the whoops in one of the arenacross tracks. We should be hitting the whoop sections in 2nd or 3rd gear with our front tires hitting the top of each whoop. The peaks of the whoops should be about 12 feet apart.

[mxallan15]

[quote = "Essieu McOctane"] La nouvelle version de San Francisco est meilleure avec les whoops légèrement plus petites, à mon avis. Ils sont plus comme le reste de la '10 whoops supercross réplique. Même si le tracé n'est pas aussi intéressant que A2, la qualité de la voie de décision est top-notch. [/ Quote]
I did not trace it, but I wanted to do a track and there was more than San Francisco.
I do not like the whoops too big, I think in real it is not too far away and close (just a little bigger than my little whoops), but I do not know the real size of whoops and I never seen one in real sxus.
But I must say that even small whoops are hard enough, I do not think in reality it is as hard
ps: I have a bad controller, (0% gaz or 100%) not analog.

[ShackAttack12]

On dirtwurx's website, they say real supercross whoops are 8 feet apart peak to peak. Since you are supposed to be making a 1:25 scale track, that would mean the peaks would be atleast 10ft apart. I have found that a distance of 12 feet peak to peak in MXS works the best.

[mxallan15]

Thank you, I looked on dirtwirx but I did not find for the whoops .
But i use 12 feet (11 or 12 )

[JB323]

Whoops should be the most difficult part of a track, this is where speed is lost & made.


Im with shack, i believe since we do have a simulator & full suspension tuning available we should use it to the fullest possible. Riders who figures out setups for each track should excel compared to others. Bring fourth the gnarly whoops


Also maybe once we go to east rounds, we can have the traction changed since the dirt is 100% better then west coasts dry slick hard packed dirt.

[ShackAttack12]

http://www.dirtwurx.com/track_tips4.php

Under the whoops section....

"Spacing is approximately 8' top to top. And the front side of each whoop is much steeper than the back, because it's the side we are working. This is all good for pros, but probably too much for an amateur track."

[mxallan15]

I agree, me to say just that I had not seen before you tell me .


And the front side of each whoop is much steeper than the back, because it's the side we are working.
i try ( before) but I forget to register because my joystick is broken and I do not know to try rolling with the keyboard .

you want me again in the 12 ' and with the front side of each whoop is much steeper than the back ?

[jlv]

Don't worry about it, I've already rebuilt the whoops for San Francisco. You did a great job on the rhythm sections!

[kwic73]

Just need to fix the sand section now.