2.2 Pro Class

[Culetto]

I apologize in advance for this being very long and detailed but its a very specific vision of the future of crawling.

Alot of clubs are running a sportsman class this year, by and large i think that is the greatest thing to happen in crawlers since the invention of dig. Getting new people into the hobby is the ultimate in fun.

Being that crawlers in general have been around for 6+ years now there are many new faces but we also begin to lose some faces. Some people get bored, some people find some other hobby, some just get old and cranky:mrgreen:, lol. Whatever the reason i dont think we should forget that we need to keep people moving with the direction of the hobby and not just focus on new blood. So my idea for this is a cross between a super class (which was originally the premier class) and 2.2 (which %95 of us drive now anyway). I personally feel this could replace the ''super'' class as it allows people to build a more advanced and capable rig with parts they might have now or that are easily available. While this would eliminate the ''super'' as you all know it the spirit and feel of the super class remains in this as there are very few limitations on suspension design. This also has a few goodies to keep it very fun and in the spirit of crawling at the pinnacle of the hobby.

2.2 Pro Class

1) The Vehicle wheelbase is limited to a maximum of 14.5 inches. This is measured from the front axle centerline to the rear axle centerline with all the wheels on the measured side pointing straight. Both sides of the vehicle will be measured at the maximum extension of the axles suspension travel. At no time can the vehicle exceed 14.5 inches in wheelbase throughout the suspension travel.

2) The vehicle track width is limited to a maximum of 14 inches. This is measured from the outermost wheel face with all wheels facing forward at the widest point. At no time can the vehicle track width exceed 14 inches throughout the suspension travel. Toe in or Toe out is allowed provided the outermost face of the wheel-wheel measurement does not exceed 14 inches.

3) The vehicle is limited to 2.2 wheels measured at the bead surface only. Wheels may be modified as needed providing the maximum bead face measurement does not exceed 2.4 inches. Wheels may incorporate any hex size.

4) The vehicle tires size is limited to 7 inches in diameter. Tire diameter is measured at the outermost surface of the tire when mounted on the wheel. If a wheel is in question of being too large it will be measured on the truck with the axle supported in such a way as no weight is being places onto any surface of the tire.

4a) Air inflated tires are permitted providing they dont not exceed the maximum tire diameter in the specified measuring process described above. Remote inflation systems are allowed as long as the maximum pressure available does not force the tire to exceed the maximum diameter at any time. Maximum tire pressure is limited to 45psi for safety reasons.

4b) Any foam or foam system is allowed providing it does not force the tire to exceed the maximum allowable diameter stated above during the measuring process.

​

5) Vehicles are allowed four wheel steering in any configuration, 4ws, crab, front only, rear only or any combination therein.

6) Vehicles are allowed to limit any axle or wheel (DIG) as needed. Electronic and/or physical limiters (DIG) are allowed to any axle or wheel.

7) Vehicles are required to have a body. No Bodiless chassis or unibody chassis are allowed. Body must represent a truck, jeep or other ''crawler'' type body, no cars. Any questionable body styles will be at the discretion of the event coordinator or their delegate.

7a) The body must be at least 14inches in overall length, Measured from above from the forward most point to the rear most point along the factory intended cut lines. Folding out the molding scrap to fit the minimum measurement is not allowed.

7b) The body must be at least 6inches in overall width. Measured from above at the widest point in the body. Bodies must retain their full original width at the cab area. Dovetailing is allowed on the front or rear of the body provided it does not narrow the area in question more than 30% of the original width.

7c) The body must be at least 4inches in overall height. Measured with the body sitting on a flat smooth surface from the highest roof line to the resting surface.

​

8 ) Active suspension is allowed providing it does not alter any other vehicle specs outside of their maximum value as stated above.

9) Forced articulation is allowed providing it does not alter any other vehicle specs outside of their maximum value as stated above.

10) Independent wheel articulation and motion control are allowed providing it does not alter any other vehicle specs outside of their maximum value as stated above.

11) Vehicles are limited to 4 motors in any configuration the designer chooses provided it does not take the vehicle specs outside of their maximum value as stated above.

12) Vehicles are limited to 4 wheels/tires. The rotation of these wheels are the only form of propulsion allowed. No tracked vehicles are allowed. No walker vehicles are allowed.

13) Automated control is not allowed for any function. All functions of the crawler must be controlled by the drivers transmitter. Gyro's and other forms of ''smart'' suspension are not allowed. Any suspension system in question of being legal will be decided by the event organizer or his delegate.

14) Gates will be a minimum of 16 inches apart measured from the innermost point of the markers used.

 

[Fishmaxx]

Variations of this class has been talked about for several years, and for the most part thats all it been is talk.

It basically boils down to building a truck, and holding events.

That how we did it 04. We had 5 drivers from 3 states.

 

[jfraymond]

Very well thought out. "thumbsup"

The only problem I forsee is at a time when we are trying to revitalize the SUper class it just adds another roadblock to encourageing 2.2 drivers to step up and try their skills in the most difficult and challenging class.....Its not a problem IMHO of your actual specs for the class, they are very good....but one of perception and intimidation of learning totally new driving techniques. It would make more sense to me from a "encouraging people to expand into more complicated classes " standpoint to make something like this as a sub-class of Super rather than of 2.2 class. The initial jump to super would be eased by familiarity with 2.2 equipment. and That way the final jump to the big boys wouldn't seem as "intimidating" since this class would already be run in a SUperish style format.

 

[Culetto]

While i know people wont want to hear this.... The idea was to replace supers and in doing so revitalize them at the same time. Supers, in this reference being the ''premier'' class, is bordering on dead (again i appologize, i know not all people feel this way). With something like this you could, in theory, move up a class without a huge initial outlay in money, thus making it easier to get into the premier class without a totally different expensive rig. Anyone who wanted could throw longer links on and play in this class however the inovation levels in suspension design and the addition of 4wheel steering and longer wheelbase would still keep it interesting and challenging among the most hungry competitors.

 

[dieselfuel]

it'd be cool to limit wheel size to 3.2.. i just think a berg with 4ws and maxx sized tires on it with super 300s would be a FUN rig.

 

[run2jeepn]

I'd like to 14'ers come back alive...

 

[TattooKenny]

Taking away our super class the way it is now is not the answer. Your class would not be any cheaper to build than the way it is now. Cost is one of the main reasons people say they don't run supers.

This is why I say make it a "Unlimited" class again! Then you can run your rig and I can run mine. But the course design question comes up with this issue yes? How do you build a course for a 14" rig and a 18" rig? I say you just make course layout requirements.

To me this is no different than dig vs. no dig. When you build a 2.2 course they are built knowing that guys have digs so turns are made tighter. But what happens to the guy with no dig on his rig? Oh well! You set your gate min and build your course! Pre run the course with a rig that's in the middle of the rigs running if that's what has to be done. But you take a 16" super and a 18" super and one will do better than the other on one course and the other way around!

Your never going to build a course that everyone will finish in any class!

(And your 14" body rule would suck for body choices!)

 

[Culetto]

I'll address these one at a time in the quote the way i see them. As i said, i know not all people will agree with me.

Taking away our super class the way it is now is not the answer. Your class would not be any cheaper to build than the way it is now. Cost is one of the main reasons people say they don't run supers.
Correct, cost is a primary reason. With the class i have suggested the rigs would not be cheaper than a 2.2, however, the idea is that people could modify the rigs they have now and compete without spending much MORE money. Thus increasing the available competitors in the class and allowing more people to try it without a big investment.

This is why I say make it a "Unlimited" class again! Then you can run your rig and I can run mine. But the course design question comes up with this issue yes? How do you build a course for a 14" rig and a 18" rig? I say you just make course layout requirements.
While an unlimited class would be great (i designed a 6x6 2.2 just for my imaginary unlimited rig) there would be no real way to run one, ever. The problem is without a ruleset to go by you will get no manufactuer support and will continue to use parts from other rigs to hobble one together and will keep out those who do not have the skill or knowledge to build one. This is another thing holding supers back already so why keep pushing it when its already a limiting factor that keeps people out. Without a ruleset in place no one will invest in something that might not work, why spend $2000 on Jason's ultimate super (which is bad ass) when someone next comp could innovate right past you and you now have a $2000 paperweight? Its not worth it for the good of the sport as a whole because that kind of innovation keeps people from the investment when they know it might be futile. There is no risk without reward but this is a hobby and we should be continually striving to keep people AND generate new interest.

To me this is no different than dig vs. no dig. When you build a 2.2 course they are built knowing that guys have digs so turns are made tighter. But what happens to the guy with no dig on his rig? Oh well! You set your gate min and build your course! Pre run the course with a rig that's in the middle of the rigs running if that's what has to be done. But you take a 16" super and a 18" super and one will do better than the other on one course and the other way around!
This is completely different than dig vs no dig. Course design will not be effected any more than you would run a 1.9 on a 2.2 course. The allowance of dig and 4ws would increase the agility of the rigs on all the different types of terrain we all use and would also open up many new lines to those drivers who look for them, thus increasing the skill base and moving the hobby forward as a whole.

Your never going to build a course that everyone will finish in any class!
I would have to disagree. With your logic on the supers it would be tough to build a challenging course that everyone could finish if you had a 16inch truck and an 18inch truck. However with the wheel base suggested (14.5)it is not only still small enough to make a challenging course in a restricted area (not everyone has huge mountains) but short enough to push everyone to the maximum wheelbase and thus make the courses more even since the wheelbase spread is so much narrower while also increasing the overall ability of the rigs themselves. With the additional control of 4ws any rig would be able to navigate any course (within reason of course) and it would fall to the driver just as much as the rig design and construction. Again this would produce the premier class as driver AND rig would be tested, not just how much money you threw at it or whether you got lucky in the course design for that comp.

(And your 14" body rule would suck for body choices!)
The idea here was to bring a little 'truck' back to crawlers. Bodiless rigs are out of control and dont correctly represent their intended ''vehicle'' design apart from the fact that they have wheels. With 14inch bodies it would again give room for innovation among those who enjoy that sort of thing (again premier class is where 80% of your innovation happens in any competetive sport), while still allowing those who just want to try it to pick up any monster truck body from pro-line (or whomever) and still compete and give it a test drive.

 

[jetboat]

2.2 super class... Im for it, would help transition people to super

 

[krawlfreak]

it'd be cool to limit wheel size to 3.2.. i just think a berg with 4ws and maxx sized tires on it with super 300s would be a FUN rig.

trust me they are cool and they run in the super class now against all the other supers. why would we need to make a whole new class?

 

[MommaBear]

:evil:Why would you want to get rid of Supers? For the millionth time, the comparison in cost to build a 2.2 or super is minimal.

There aren't going to be very many people who are trying so hard to keep the super class alive that are going to be happy about this.

It's time for MommaBear to find some extra money and get joesbruiser's super build going and one for herself. I'm not afraid to step up and learn to build and drive a super. It's my favorite class anyway.

 

[TURBOFEST]

Is there an organized group of people dedicated to killing the super class or something?!?! Seriously...Why the hell would we want another class between 2.2 and Super? Everyone is whining about the fact that Supers are so expensive to build...but hey...lets all build ANOTHER rig on top of it...cause that will save us all alot of money!!!"thumbsup"

Supers are not dying either...There are tons of super builds happening right now all accross the counrty. If anything...I think Supers are well on there way back!!

 

[MommaBear]

Is there an organized group of people dedicated to killing the super class or something?!?! Seriously...Why the hell would we want another class between 2.2 and Super? Everyone is whining about the fact that Supers are so expensive to build...but hey...lets all build ANOTHER rig on top of it...cause that will save us all alot of money!!!"thumbsup"

Supers are not dying either...There are tons of super builds happening right now all accross the counrty. If anything...I think Supers are well on there way back!!

Exactly. "Supers are too expensive" yet the same people saying this have a 2.2 and a 1.9 and are on board with yet another 2.2 class?! Seriously. Either you have the money for a build or you don't. My next rig would have probably been a 1.9. But I'm definitely building a super. It won't be soon, but it will be coming.

 

[krawlfreak]

Is there an organized group of people dedicated to killing the super class or something?!?! Seriously...Why the hell would we want another class between 2.2 and Super? Everyone is whining about the fact that Supers are so expensive to build...but hey...lets all build ANOTHER rig on top of it...cause that will save us all alot of money!!!"thumbsup"

Supers are not dying either...There are tons of super builds happening right now all accross the counrty. If anything...I think Supers are well on there way back!!

very well put.

as far as cost we have (3) going on right now that the only real additional cost over a well built 2.2 is an additional servo.

i think the reason that everyone is whining is that you cant go buy a losi super or an axial for that matter. you have to build it!

super is the class where innovation happens and trickles down to all other classes to make better parts and better performing vehicles................why would you want to get rid of the class all together, to make another 2.2 spec class with differnt rules?

supers are NOT dead

they are going to be thriving this year!

 

[Culetto]

Is there an organized group of people dedicated to killing the super class or something?!?! Seriously...Why the hell would we want another class between 2.2 and Super? Everyone is whining about the fact that Supers are so expensive to build...but hey...lets all build ANOTHER rig on top of it...cause that will save us all alot of money!!!"thumbsup"

Supers are not dying either...There are tons of super builds happening right now all accross the counrty. If anything...I think Supers are well on there way back!!

Exactly. "Supers are too expensive" yet the same people saying this have a 2.2 and a 1.9 and are on board with yet another 2.2 class?! Seriously. Either you have the money for a build or you don't. My next rig would have probably been a 1.9. But I'm definitely building a super. It won't be soon, but it will be coming.

very well put.

as far as cost we have (3) going on right now that the only real additional cost over a well built 2.2 is an additional servo.

i think the reason that everyone is whining is that you cant go buy a losi super or an axial for that matter. you have to build it!

super is the class where innovation happens and trickles down to all other classes to make better parts and better performing vehicles................why would you want to get rid of the class all together, to make another 2.2 spec class with differnt rules?

supers are NOT dead

they are going to be thriving this year!

No i am not against supers in any way, shape or form. I think they are pretty cool honestly and while i dont own one i have driven several of them and if we had interest here i would be running one....... and i still would have posted this.

This is not a ''get rid of supers'' idea, this is a ''move the hobby forward idea'' and as i said before i know not everyone will agree and some will be upset about losing supers, i completely understand.

The idea is to re-create the premier class by creating a ruleset that more people could get into with less investment. Cost is a major consideration by a lot of people in this economy, and while you can build a super for only a bit more than a 2.2 the chances are it wouldn't be as competitive as someones $2000, 17.9999 inch WB masterpiece (and some of the supers i have seen are truly engineering masterpieces, no question). But the fact remains that as crawling has gotten more mainstream there are less people who are interested or skilled enough to make their own chassis, parts, tires, etc. I know someone right now is thinking, ''screw them, then they arent committed enough to compete in the super class then'', this is detrimental to the hobby as a whole. When you exclude people based on budget for one class you will frustrate many more into not even bothering to try the ''budget'' or ''entry level'' classes. ''I cant afford to move up so why bother?''. And yes there are plenty of people who might end up being good drivers and great fans of the sport who have to start with a Losi/Axial kit before they are into it enough to start building custom rigs, this is just the way RC is these days and doesnt mean they wouldnt be a competitor, it just means they may not have the time/resources/ability yet to build their own rig.

As it stands i dont think near as many people are going to publicly support this idea to really move it forward so it probably wont go much further than some talk here but stagnation leads to people leaving and i have seen more than i want to of people leaving my favorite hobby so i encourage everyone to get some discussion going about how to SAVE supers, not just resist the changes.

 

[MommaBear]

As it stands i dont think near as many people are going to publicly support this idea to really move it forward so it probably wont go much further than some talk here but stagnation leads to people leaving and i have seen more than i want to of people leaving my favorite hobby so i encourage everyone to get some discussion going about how to SAVE supers, not just resist the changes.

So that's why you started this thread?:?

 

[Culetto]

So that's why you started this thread?:?

No i started this thread because i had an idea and thought that maybe this would be a way to bring back a class beyond 2.2 and wanted to share it and discuss it. People keep arguing that supers arent dead, and they are right to a fault, its only alive in certain areas and thats really not good for the sport as a whole. I was trying to think of ways we could go beyond 2.2 and still get people involved and this is what i came up with. I probably should have known it would turn into something else but i guess i just hoped we could get some type of decent conversation going about it and maybe find a solution that would work for a larger portion of the clubs out there.

Apparently not.....

 

[dezmoon]

No i started this thread because i had an idea and thought that maybe this would be a way to bring back a class beyond 2.2 and wanted to share it and discuss it. People keep arguing that supers arent dead, and they are right to a fault, its only alive in certain areas and thats really not good for the sport as a whole. I was trying to think of ways we could go beyond 2.2 and still get people involved and this is what i came up with. I probably should have known it would turn into something else but i guess i just hoped we could get some type of decent conversation going about it and maybe find a solution that would work for a larger portion of the clubs out there.

Apparently not.....

im so glad we dont live near each other,,id probably slap you in the back of your head,,,this is why people dont build supers,,because of horse shit like this,,ive seen 2.2 rigs in the sale section here on rcc for as much as 1000 bux,,and people buy em,,supers can be competitively built for less ,,and upgraded as time goes on,,,SUPERS ARE NO WAY EVEN CLOSE TO DEAD,,,if you want to instate a new 2.2 unlimited class,,go ahead,,but in no way shape or form,i will let SUPERS die,,they are the reason your even crawling today,,they are the pioneers of this hobby/sport,,more and more companys are pulling out super foams,,tires,,axles,,wheels,,and super based parts,,major events are growing with super support,,take motoramma for example,,the class has doubled since last year,,,how does that proove supers are dead,,,it doesnt....supers are growing more now than ever,,,im all for making this hobby fun,,make the 2.2 unlimited class,,have fun with it,,but do not even think for one minute about trying to kill supers...........we wont die,,

 

[EvilTwin v2]

The biggest thing that I see keeping people from building Supers is a lack of them in their area. If there is no venue, people are going to be hesitant to build them. The challenge is to encourage people in the areas who don't run Super to make the commitment to the class.

I love Supers, and I'm currently rebuilding 1 (a friend is taking over driving my old comp rig) and doing a fresh build on a 2nd. This past summer was our worst attendance yet for Supers, but there were as many new builds going within the club as people running, so I expect to see 10-12 or more by our next Spring/Summer series. As for cost, I expect that when I'm done with both of these, there'll be a couple hundred less dollars invested than he & I have combined in our 2.2's.

While I appreciate & encourage the ideas, Culetto, I will respectfully disagree that it will help. I really think that for the Super class to really take off, a major manufacturer or 2 would have to step up with a semi-competitive Super size crawler for a fair price. I believe that the reason that the 1.9 class has taken off as quickly and strongly as it has is due to the MRC coming out at an affordable price point, and making a semi-competitive crawler readily available to the masses. Do that for Supers, and they'll take off. I also honestly believe that unless that were to happen with your 2.2 Pro class that it simply wouldn't catch on.

 

[Culetto]

im so glad we dont live near each other,,id probably slap you in the back of your head,,,this is why people dont build supers,,because of horse shit like this,,ive seen 2.2 rigs in the sale section here on rcc for as much as 1000 bux,,and people buy em,,supers can be competitively built for less ,,and upgraded as time goes on,,,SUPERS ARE NO WAY EVEN CLOSE TO DEAD,,,if you want to instate a new 2.2 unlimited class,,go ahead,,but in no way shape or form,i will let SUPERS die,,they are the reason your even crawling today,,they are the pioneers of this hobby/sport,,more and more companys are pulling out super foams,,tires,,axles,,wheels,,and super based parts,,major events are growing with super support,,take motoramma for example,,the class has doubled since last year,,,how does that proove supers are dead,,,it doesnt....supers are growing more now than ever,,,im all for making this hobby fun,,make the 2.2 unlimited class,,have fun with it,,but do not even think for one minute about trying to kill supers...........we wont die,,

Im having trouble understanding this, your comma and period keys might be malfunctioning but to answer your last part the idea was not to kill off supers, just present a different form of a class beyond 2.2 that more people could enjoy. Its pointless to try to keep explaining it to people who are obviously just angry at the very idea of change, so im not going to. Thanks again for your feedback. "thumbsup"

The biggest thing that I see keeping people from building Supers is a lack of them in their area. If there is no venue, people are going to be hesitant to build them. The challenge is to encourage people in the areas who don't run Super to make the commitment to the class.

I love Supers, and I'm currently rebuilding 1 (a friend is taking over driving my old comp rig) and doing a fresh build on a 2nd. This past summer was our worst attendance yet for Supers, but there were as many new builds going within the club as people running, so I expect to see 10-12 or more by our next Spring/Summer series. As for cost, I expect that when I'm done with both of these, there'll be a couple hundred less dollars invested than he & I have combined in our 2.2's.

While I appreciate & encourage the ideas, Culetto, I will respectfully disagree that it will help. I really think that for the Super class to really take off, a major manufacturer or 2 would have to step up with a semi-competitive Super size crawler for a fair price. I believe that the reason that the 1.9 class has taken off as quickly and strongly as it has is due to the MRC coming out at an affordable price point, and making a semi-competitive crawler readily available to the masses. Do that for Supers, and they'll take off. I also honestly believe that unless that were to happen with your 2.2 Pro class that it simply wouldn't catch on.

I would have thought the same thing in regards to a super 'Kit', i hope the bully's will work but im guessing its just going to be a wait and see at this point, the XTM and G-Made supers didnt help nearly as much as i hoped they would. But in the long run i just have trouble seeing it, i hope you are right though.