• Welcome to RCCrawler Forums.

    It looks like you're enjoying RCCrawler's Forums but haven't created an account yet. Why not take a minute to register for your own free account now? As a member you get free access to all of our forums and posts plus the ability to post your own messages, communicate directly with other members, and much more. Register now!

    Already a member? Login at the top of this page to stop seeing this message.

Super mini class

So, either way, the idea is the same. No rules other than a 4.75" tire, and the intent being the "ultimate" setup. No chassis limits, no motor limits, any sized wheel as long as the tires aren't over spec, and any axle/trans/chassis setup you deem "ultimate." Am I getting this right? What about bodies while we're here? Bodiless topper or lexan body with no limits on either?
 
EeePee said:
Yeah, this looks like a three guy fantasy.

Why water down the classes already in place?

Need another 1.9 class to fail? Or another Super class to fail?
Click to expand...

Super Class fail? I've seen more super builds lately than I have in a long time. We've got lots of supers being run/built in the PNW and still run them every comp.
 
Well, that's good news then. PNW was always strong on attendance. I remember seeing a pile of trucks and people there, unlike almost anywhere else. But across the board? Not.
 
EeePee said:
Why water down the classes already in place?
Click to expand...

You act like there is something to lose :lmao:


Remember when people were worried about splitting 2.2 class when MOAs hit? Nothing was done for years because it was feared it would water down the comps. We all know how well that worked out.
 
We are considering running shafty pro rigs again here in Oregon. just saying...
 
Not much to lose when there's hardly anyone around I guess. :ror:

Of course I remember that. Ultimately, it led to the Sporty class to get attendance back up, which led to people spending quite a lot on trucks and not doing what the point of the class was to do. That's completely debatable, I suppose. Spec class was shot down, which was brought up to keep costs down. Buy an AX-10, do minimal allowable stuff, and rock out. Nope.

1.9 class was done in 3 years? With Losi as the heavy hitter, maybe the only hitter I suppose, that would have been the perfect spec class. Missed opportunity, maybe.

I can't see how this would be good for anyone's wallet, or newcomers.

I have no dog in this hunt but I've seen a heck of a lot go down. This doesn't make sense to me. 14'r made more sense.
 
Well I wrote about 2 pages and after looking at it I thought , it really don't matter as long as a few people are making there $$ the rest of us will follow.

30 years of playing with advanced "big kid toys" I have seen just about everything ruled and dollared to death and really don't see comp crawling being any different.

Kind of hard to explain to a new guy with a 350.00 rtr kit why I have 2700 in a moa, they just don't get it.
Guess that's why I have 1 comp rig and 6 trail rigs.
 
My personal thoughts on the original talk: was to build a super 1.9..

4ws, Dig(not motor mixing or dual esc's), 4.25" tire limit, and 12"(?) Gates.. Body or bodiless.. Not scale......

My OG thought for a rig was/is.. LCC tranny, maybe xr or ar60 modded mrc axle's.. Then Erik's 1.9 popped into my head.. LCC tranny and axle's(narrowed and fitted with XR steering)..

But that's just me and my take on it.. 1.9 shaft driven super..
 
EeePee said:
Not much to lose when there's hardly anyone around I guess. :ror:

Of course I remember that. Ultimately, it led to the Sporty class to get attendance back up, which led to people spending quite a lot on trucks and not doing what the point of the class was to do. That's completely debatable, I suppose.

I can't see how this would be good for anyone's wallet, or newcomers.
Click to expand...

This... This is my thoughts on MOA axle's in the sporty class..

If it was born to Pro class, let it there..

I've talked to a few guys that wants to build rigs and start crawling..
They asked, "what's the point in spending the money/building a modified sporty, just to not have it keep up with a MOA axled sporty?"

I dunno.. I welcome any challenge, that makes me a better crawler or strive to make me the best I can.

If it's going to drive more ppl away from the hobby, it's not worth it tho...
 
winnerone23 said:
My personal thoughts on the original talk: was to build a super 1.9..

4ws, Dig(not motor mixing or dual esc's), 4.25" tire limit, and 12"(?) Gates.. Body or bodiless.. Not scale......

My OG thought for a rig was/is.. LCC tranny, maybe xr or ar60 modded mrc axle's.. Then Erik's 1.9 popped into my head.. LCC tranny and axle's(narrowed and fitted with XR steering)..

But that's just me and my take on it.. 1.9 shaft driven super..
Click to expand...

Agreed on all but the wheel limit. 4.25" tires, 12" gates, body or bodiless, not scale. I'd like to see the wheel options opened up though. I have a few modded 1.9 tires I've been saving that I would like to see stretched over a super narrow set of light weight glue on 2.2s (or even larger?). I love the skinny low-pro super tires, and would love to see a similar trend trickle down the line.
 
Having more than one comp rig for a certain class isnt more to play with, it's more often just a spare parts rig with the old chassis. But having 6 trail rigs probably means you have variety in just about every one. Different tire sizes, wheelbases, track widths, cg, suspension, look, etc...


The only real distinguishing trait to the classic comp rig is specific dimensions which also make the body proportionally smaller than the wheelbase, like a rock buggy on roids. There is nothing inherently unscale about them otherwise. There are many examples of carbon fiber bodiless chassis that look fantastic, merely made from materials that are more affordable in toy amounts. The BAstard jr. chassis is a great example of a welded buggy that would pass any "scale" event. It looks great and is comp legal too. When you say "not scale" I don't understand where the line is drawn.
 
Sounds like a Mod (shafty) or Unlimited (MOA) trail vehicle with a 4.25" tire and 12" gate for classic comp style fits everything y'all want. Manufacturers would like to see the Stock Trail vehicles broken into smaller tire sizes as well, so it makes sense to apply it to all.
 
I agree with a topper, a body, and even tube and rod cages if that's your thing and allows you to run in multiple classes. What I am afraid of is this turning into another scale points pissing match, when all we want to do are build some comp rigs to push the edges of what is possible with as few rules as possible, a wide range of parts, and a common tire size. Should it look like a real rig in one way or another? Yes. Should my CF topper'd rig be at a disadvantage right off the start because it doesn't have any scale features other than a silhouette of cage? No.
 
If a full interior and a full bodied driver is required then that's scale... I think I know what Erik is trying to build, just think of a Super in its current "robot" form and make it much much smaller. Sounds fun to me, I'm in.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
My K5 hightrail build
Replies
9
Views
215
Silver04v
S
D
Junction City Has a 24th scale crawler comp comming up
Replies
9
Views
768
Saltrock
S
H
Tiny Trucks and Tiny Christmas Trees (Axial Scx10 iii Gladiator)
Replies
5
Views
237
Hanshotfirst
H
M
Another random question
Replies
1
Views
327
89Industries
8
D
Dr. Tiki's Bar and Garage, a build thread
Replies
7
Views
319
cul8tr
C
Back
Top