"Sportsman" class feedback

[C*H*U*D]

The intention is to run on easier courses.

The intent is to give newbies a place to get started and then work up to the 2.2 class.

It's a "gateway" class.

I thought this class was geared more towards expense.....not skill level?

I really like the idea of this class, but I'd hate to see good drivers shy away from it because of any stigma that might be attached. If we are all driving similar vehicles, I have no problem with someone better beating me....I think it would be a great way to learn from more experienced drivers.

 

[Almighty Malach]

I thought this class was geared more towards expense.....not skill level?

I really like the idea of this class, but I'd hate to see good drivers shy away from it because of any stigma that might be attached. If we are all driving similar vehicles, I have no problem with someone better beating me....I think it would be a great way to learn from more experienced drivers.

Will I be allowed to run in this class? I realize the intent for getting more people into crawling but driving for 15 to 20 minutes all day just doesn't cut it for me and I don't really have the funds to build a 1.9 and super right now, yet I have a no dig shafty sitting on the shelf ready to go.

 

[THnCS]

Will I be allowed to run in this class? I realize the intent for getting more people into crawling but driving for 15 to 20 minutes all day just doesn't cut it for me and I don't really have the funds to build a 1.9 and super right now, yet I have a no dig shafty sitting on the shelf ready to go.

x2 on what Casey said. I know this will allow newer drivers to compete at a lower cost, but unless you say the so called "pro" drivers can't compete in this class, they will dominate it. Everyone of us has an old axial sitting on a shelf at home, I have enough parts for two of them:shock: Now you will have two full 2.2 classes. Not sure if you will have enough time. Without letting the "pro" drivers in this class, I am not sure if there would be enough to make it worth while. I know you give Casey, Timmah or Rubba a stock Axial and they will dominate that class, especially if the courses are easier from the comp lines. I agree with Casey as if there is a class I can run in, I will, better crawling than standing around waiting for the class to finish.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of it, but it really is going to depend on what kind of newb signs up for it. As far as the rules Go.

Battery: Don't like the limit, but 8.4 would be acceptable. I think 3c lipo would be a good limit. You can get a decent 3c lipo from Japan for $11.

Motor: 35t and up or 540 can limit. Especially if there is a voltage limit on batteries. LIke Chris said earlier, your just asking for someone to put a 35t inards in a 55t can.

ESC: Whatever you want to run

Servo: No limit. I have fried so many smaller servos starting out, I should have bought an 8711 from the beginning, I spent enough on cheapos that I could have.

Rims: I can see just a plastic or plastic B/L limit. But would this just apply to just axial/proline. What about custom delrin ones(loophole) just mentioning.

radio: Agree on only two channels being used for the comp.

Shocks: To many different kinds on stock RTR's these days to limit that. The losi comes with comp shocks stock.

Tires: 6" max and you should be able to cut and shut if you like.

Hopups: Alum Knuckles, axle c's and straight axles--- I say those should be allowed. Ask yourself, how many plastic Axial knuckles did you break before you bought the alum. I think that should be one of the first upgrades you do to a shafty.

MOA: If you are not going to allow a Berg, the Cliff Climber should not be included either. You can buy a stock Berg kit just like the CC. SHAFTIES ONLY.

 

[Ralphy]

I agree with THnCS...but no limiting to plastic wheels, cause you can always make them as heavy as you want. I say make it basically like a 2.2 version of the mini class, no dig, and no MOA and leave the rest to the drivers. If they are new they will probubly start with plastic parts and upgrade to aluminum as they break stuff, only making their rigs more durable. It's not like the upgrades will make them better drivers or make their rigs perform any better, it will just keep them on the courses longer, which is always encouraging to a starter. I like the idea of the class and am only torn about the idea of keeping some of the more experienced drivers out of it. On one hand I can see myself wanting to run in it, like others have said...got an extra rig and would like to use it for more driv e time at the comps.....but wouldn't want to run a clinic on a new-comer because the lines are set up for them and not me. Well, not me per-say, but "more experienced" drivers. Like the Log said, guess it depends on how many actual NEWBs sign up for it.

 

[Cruzin Illusion]

I think it is a great idea, but I too wonder if there will be enough time in the day to run this class in conjunction with 1.9, 2.2's, and supers. I would be nice to see it run as a stepping stone to the more competitive 2.2 class that we currently run. I also have a axial sitting at home that I could easily demode to run in this class. As for the rules:

Batteries: I think they should allow up to and including 3 cell lipos. It will be less of a cost in the future for others to upgrade and those, if allowed, that currently run in the 2.2 class to run what the currently have for power.

Motors: What about limiting the motors machine wound not hand wound. This will reduce the cost and make you think about running lower turn motors to gain wheel speed with the consequences of loosing some of the torque you would gain in a hand wound.

ESC: This should be open to whatever you would like to run

Servos: I also agree with the majority that you should be able to run whatever servo you are willing to pay for, but what if you disallow the running of a BEC. This would work until ESC come out with adjustable built in BEC's.

Rims: I see no need to limit the rims to plastic. I don't see a major advantage to running aluminum or delin over the plastic.

Radio: I think it should be limited to a 2 channels but allow 3 channels for future upgrades so a second does not need to be purchased if moving into the 2.2 class. If caught using the 3rd channel should result in 50's for ever course for that day.

Shocks: I think that you should be allowed to run whatever shock you want. The LCC comes with competition level shocks out of the box and it wouldn't be fair to the axial drivers to have to run the plastic shocks that comes in thier RTR kit. I also believe this will help the beginner drivers to learn how to tune their rigs for different types of terrain and torque twist with different shock oils and spring rates.


Tires: I think you whould be able to run any tire, 6" or under, as is out of the box. No cut and shuts and no sipping.

Foams: Should be open top any type of foam. This will also help with learning how to tune your crawler when moving up to the 2.2 class.

Hope ups: I think upgrading parts to make your crawler stronger shoule be allowed. I do not see gaining any advantage running aluminum C's versus plastic C's except strength.

Steering: No behind the axle steering. The question is going to be if high steer knuckles and steering should be allowed. This can give a driver an advantage on clearance.

MOA's: I think this class should be for shaftys only.

Courses: Should be easier than the 2.2 class.

Chassis: I don't believe there should be a limit on them. Just another area to help tune you crawler.

Bodies: Same as the 2.2 class

 

[TURTLE]

Here's my vote;...........1. One motor, one servo.2. Shaft driven only.3. Only two channels to be used on the radio and receiver.4. Tires may be modified but not to exceed 6'' dia., or 2.2 wheel size.All other measurements, body, WB, width, etc. must conform as previously stated.5. Two cell Lipo or 8.4volt max......................................No limit on motor, servo strength, BEC, etc.......................................JC8)

Totally agree although I dont see the harm in more voltage...

I think it is a great idea, but I too wonder if there will be enough time in the day to run this class in conjunction with 1.9, 2.2's, and supers.

Who says we are even going to run this? I think we might need a club all its own for this... Possibly...

 

[Cruzin Illusion]

Totally agree although I dont see the harm in more voltage...




Who says we are even going to run this? I think we might need a club all its own for this... Possibly...

I completely agree with you Ty. I was typing hypothetically."thumbsup"

 

[Grizzly4x4]

Thanks for the feedback guys! "thumbsup"
Based on discussions in the Rules Committee and your feedback here, the main things that I will push for are.

- No MOA
- 2 channels only.
- 8.4V limit.
- 540 can motors only

I really like the 8.4V limit because it means that guys with RTRs can use their stock ESC.

As far as things like no BTA and plastic wheels, I know those will not go over well but I had an idea.
We could implement some local rules that would handicap the top drivers but still allow everyone to participate. If a driver has a certain number of top 3 finishes then they are not allowed to run certain items like BTA, aluminum wheels, etc. Use those things to handicap the pro drivers who win alot.

 

[Neil76]

I understand why we want all the rules to keep the cost down, but I think really this should be for NOVICE only! The good drivers would still win and everyone wants to win and a newbie doesnt have a chance. I think the only rule should matter is that you are a novice and if you win a few times you have to bump up. I know that Tim Barger's daughter came out with a fully tricked out MOA and it didn't matter she needed easier courses and would of had way more fun. I let my son drive my berg all the time and Casey can out crawl him all day with his old no dig haven AX.

I REALLY like this idea but it should be for new people NOVICE only!! ANd if people get a good deal on a tricked out rig and plan on moving up in class's once they are better why make them spend money twice. Just make them not use dig if it is already equipped and MOA or not we have good MOA drivers getting beat by shafties all the time.


As I would love to let my son have fun in a class where he could finish a course, but I don't want to buy an RTR only to sell it in a year for a better rig8)

Just my .02 cents

 

[Almighty Malach]

As far as things like no BTA and plastic wheels, I know those will not go over well but I had an idea.
We could implement some local rules that would handicap the top drivers but still allow everyone to participate. If a driver has a certain number of top 3 finishes then they are not allowed to run certain items like BTA, aluminum wheels, etc. Use those things to handicap the pro drivers who win alot.

Don't forget cvds
I'm cool with a handicap system since I built my rig with plastic c's and knuckles anyway. Plus it makes for more of a challenge8)

 

[chrisjlittle]

I understand why we want all the rules to keep the cost down, but I think really this should be for NOVICE only! The good drivers would still win and everyone wants to win and a newbie doesnt have a chance. I think the only rule should matter is that you are a novice and if you win a few times you have to bump up. I know that Tim Barger's daughter came out with a fully tricked out MOA and it didn't matter she needed easier courses and would of had way more fun. I let my son drive my berg all the time and Casey can out crawl him all day with his old no dig haven AX.

I REALLY like this idea but it should be for new people NOVICE only!! ANd if people get a good deal on a tricked out rig and plan on moving up in class's once they are better why make them spend money twice. Just make them not use dig if it is already equipped and MOA or not we have good MOA drivers getting beat by shafties all the time.


As I would love to let my son have fun in a class where he could finish a course, but I don't want to buy an RTR only to sell it in a year for a better rig8)

Just my .02 cents

I think in local comps we could make exceptions for people's kids driving MOA's. We don't have to follow USRCCA rules to the tee. I know I'd be OK with allowing a 5 year old to drive a berg for the sake of letting them have fun"thumbsup"
But for the national rules, I still say no MOA.


Something else occured to me, how about limiting rigs with metal or machined delrin wheels to plastic wheel hexes? That will put a practial limit on the amount of power a rig can have, either the plastic wheel will strip out or the plastic hex will strip out, effectively barring high power motors without having to tech motors beyond a visual inspection. We could also require plastic driveshafts with 5mm ends (I.E. axial or stampede shafts, no maxx/revo stuff) for the same reason.

I'm also not fond of the idea of barring handwounds for 2 reasons. If someone wants to wind their own motor, let them, we should not limit what you can do yourself. Beyond that, a machine wound arm with good brushes, springs and magnets and a true comm will outperform a stock machine wound, but still technically be machine wound. Again, too many loopholes, too hard to enforce.

 

[Hoppa]

What about the guy with the LCC running a brushless motor and the stock aluminum hex's? The dig is easy enough to disable.

 

[monkeyracer]

I think for the local comps, we need to figure out who the "intended audience" of the sportsman class would be; newbs only or anyone cost-conscious.

If it's newbs, then how do we judge how newb a person is. Example; me. I've been going to comps for a few months now, but never placed in the top 10, partly because I'd been driving a sportsman's class rig in the normal class.

So am I "newb" enough to compete? Well, not anymore that I've done BTA (without a kit, btw.)

If it's designed for newbs and cost conscious (or those with spare sportsman rigs) then we would need to find a way to provide a handicap system. If rubba takes a box stock Losi Nightcrawler he could still probably out-drive most other guys, especially newbs. So maybe have a delineated point bonus for newbs. Start out with 30 point bonus, and next comp is 29, then 28, etc. Place top 5 in a comp, lose 3 bonus points for the next comp. Once you get down to 0 bonus points you can either move into the tougher 2.2 class, or stay where you are and have to outweigh your opponents newbie bonus with skillful driving. (If you're good, your bonus diminishes quick, if not, you have time to hone your skills.)

The only hard part would be tracking the # of points. If a newb goes to all the different series in the area (assuming they all have sportsman classes) then how does one comp judge know what other comps they've been to?


I don't like the plastic hex thing, or even the plastic driveshafts. AX10 rtr's come stock with metal hexes, and there are some metal driveshafts that are pretty inexpensive (they don't increase capability, they just allow the truck to last a little longer.)

One other way to do it, is at tech, if you have certain upgrades, maybe you receive penalty or bonus points... Say someone with aluminum wheels receives a 2 point penalty, or something like that.

These would be up to the locals on how to do our comps.


For nationals, I'd say keep it simple, keep it basic:

Match the rules of the 1.9 class, except for the size difference. No MOA, no dig. Delineated bonus for newbs. Make it a class for anyone to enter, but non-newbs are handicapped.

It should be a class where a newbie can actually finish a course. Where they can have fun and learn new skills and progress into 2.2 class.
But, for those of us with "extra" no-dig shafties, we can still compete, albeit with a handicap.

 

[Cruzin Illusion]

I think in local comps we could make exceptions for people's kids driving MOA's. We don't have to follow USRCCA rules to the tee. I know I'd be OK with allowing a 5 year old to drive a berg for the sake of letting them have fun"thumbsup"
But for the national rules, I still say no MOA.

I know that there have been a lot of great guys out there that have judged my niece when she competes for fun. I know Grizzly4x4 has basically put the points aside when she points out and lets her advance as far as possible till time runs out and if she is close to progressing he let her get through the gates. She doesn't care about the score she just wants to have a good time doing something with dad. So hats off to the Griz and the other judges that makes the right choices when those special occasions come up."thumbsup"

 

[chrisjlittle]

What about the guy with the LCC running a brushless motor and the stock aluminum hex's? The dig is easy enough to disable.

I don't like the plastic hex thing, or even the plastic driveshafts. AX10 rtr's come stock with metal hexes, and there are some metal driveshafts that are pretty inexpensive (they don't increase capability, they just allow the truck to last a little longer.)

The point of my idea is only to put a weak link in the rig which would not generally be a problem with normal motors, but would be a significant weak link when used with burly motors. Griz said he didn't like the 2s limit on 1.9's because it forced people to buy good motors to compete, this would make high end motors problematic because it would break the truck a lot more than a cheap lathe, and it's inforcable with a visual tech inspection. Metal driveshafts (well, not integy ones, but others) do increase capability to handle strong motors, which is contrary to the framework of the idea.

And I may have not made myself clear, I would only want to require plastic hexes with aluminum or machined delrin wheels. This is based on 2 assumptions: Plastic wheels strip out in the hex when used with strong motors making plastic hexes redundant, and people willing to drop the coin on metal wheels can afford plastic hexes. So, aluminum hexes would be fine with plastic wheels, allowing all RTR's I can think of to compete.

Please understand I don't care if people spend a lot of money on motors. I was in kind of a bad mood last night and I kinda tried to rip the whole motor limit thing to shreads, which was shitty of me. I stand by my assessment of the situation, but it could have been worded better. This idea was an attempt to submit a constructive alternative to motor KV limits rather than just being argumentative.

 

[Almighty Malach]

Instead of giving a bonus, what about for each time you win after the first time, you lower the max points attainable by 5? This way after winning two comps I'd be running the 3rd with only 35 instead of 40. This seems to me a more fair way to handicap than trying to give points for wheels, bta etc.

I'm all in favor of handicapping the sh** out of the good drivers, 1 to make it fun as hell and 2 to give other guys a better shot at placing in top 5.

 

[Rubbaneck]

I know that there have been a lot of great guys out there that have judged my niece when she competes for fun. I know Grizzly4x4 has basically put the points aside when she points out and lets her advance as far as possible till time runs out and if she is close to progressing he let her get through the gates. She doesn't care about the score she just wants to have a good time doing something with dad. So hats off to the Griz and the other judges that makes the right choices when those special occasions come up."thumbsup"

We used to do that for Cato :lmao::lmao:

 

[C*H*U*D]

If this class is for inexperienced drivers only, and they have to move out after winning too much, then why even bother with having the trucks be the same? Eventually, everyone will end up winning as the class dwindles down because everyone has been forced up to 2.2.

I moved to Colorado to race mountain bikes, and every weekend I knew I wasn't going to win. I kept racing for the enjoyment of it, and knowing that there were people better than me that I could still chase after. I don't have a problem losing, as long as I feel I'm starting out with close to equal equipment.

I'd still like to see anyone compete in this class if they want to. If it becomes a problem, restrict them later but at least get people into this class so it can fill up a bit.

 

[cato]

We used to do that for Cato :lmao::lmao:

:shock:"thumbsup"

Still do don't ya????????

 

[BILLYGOAT]

well i took a day to ponder this and i have to say there are a lot of valid points.

a gateway class should be limited to non pro drivers. i have been to a few events that had an non pro class and it worked great.

i think shafty only, no dig, 2.2 guidlines. 8.4v, non hw motors, any servo, any stock readily avalible tire in stock form.(this lowers cost and there are great stock tires out there. why overcomplicate the class. static hopups like alu are a given as things break. i think the radio should be open as long as only 2 channels are used. winch down again sounds over complcated for a newb class.

i know lots of pro drivers want to drive more courses and classes but i think if done correctly this could be a good thing. give people a chance to develop and then move up.