BC-Brian build body or bodiless

[krawlfreak]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

The way I look at is this. Unbolt the panels and the cab from the truck. Lay it all out. Forget every rule you are looking it.

When you lay it out, is it a body? Instead of reading into every rule, look at it from the most basic stand point.

Is the cab, by itself, a body? Answer the question as its worded. Then you should be able to determine which set of rules to follow.

that is the problem, you cant forget every rule and make a judgement...

1. does it meet the criteria layed out in the rules? it seems it does.

2. is it pushing what is acceptable, most likely.

3. is it illegal? does not appear to be based on 1

if it was made out of a different material would this even be an issue?

 

[BC-Brian]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

As Ricky pointed out, if we call that a cab instead of what it is, a small body, then why is it legal and this one not legal if mounted more securely and some panels placed under to look like skins?

Mounting it securely and putting panels on it is EXACTLY what make it comply with every rule in the handbook.

 

[Der Kampfer]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

The way I look at is this. Unbolt the panels and the cab from the truck. Lay it all out. Forget every rule you are looking it.

When you lay it out, is it a body? Instead of reading into every rule, look at it from the most basic stand point.

Is the cab, by itself, a body? Answer the question as its worded. Then you should be able to determine which set of rules to follow.

So with that rational: If it didnt look like a body then it would be fine?

We are debating the rules here, so why are we going to "Forget every rule you are looking it."?

"Is the cab, by itself, a body? Answer the question as its worded. "

OK. It is not a body. It does not meet the USRCCA requirements for a body.

 

[krawlfreak]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

As Ricky pointed out, if we call that a cab instead of what it is, a small body, then why is it legal and this one not legal if mounted more securely and some panels placed under to look like skins?

by the written rules it possibly could be.

although i dont believe the one in question was a store bought body.

 

[binaryterror]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

The way I look at is this. Unbolt the panels and the cab from the truck. Lay it all out. Forget every rule you are looking it.

When you lay it out, is it a body? Instead of reading into every rule, look at it from the most basic stand point.

Is the cab, by itself, a body? Answer the question as its worded. Then you should be able to determine which set of rules to follow.

I think this embodies all our points, those of us against this being legal and many of those who think it is legal based on not specifically illegal per known rule set.

So if I cut out the area under the body panels and then zip tie the red bull panels in place......

One thing I see is a panel in 1:1 is there to cover a void. Its not like in 1:1 they run both a panel and another panel directly on top of it, that's a sticker. That is how I am seeing the current set up.

Could you make a modeled upper to resemble a 1:1 and mount panels to it...I think that gets you closer than you are currently. But again that's opinion, I'm not on the rules team.

 

[C*H*U*D]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

"Is the cab, by itself, a body? Answer the question as its worded. "

OK. It is not a body. It does not meet the USRCCA requirements for a body.

Which would just make it an illegal 2.2 body, but a body none the less.

 

[binaryterror]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

that is the problem, you cant forget every rule and make a judgement...

Rules are made from similar judgements, making them rules. Hence judges in court hand judgements, not rules. They base judgements on rules.

if it was made out of a different material would this even be an issue?

To me, no, not as it stands, its a small buddy with stickers on it.

 

[Fishmaxx]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

A couple more pictures in case it helps

IMO opinion its a body on a bodiless chassis"thumbsup" Its just been tweaked up with some body panels on it to work around the rules.


8.3 - Violation of Intent: The intent of a written rule may include areas not explicitly expressed or illustrated. *The USRCCA Rules Committee has the ability to define the intent of a rule. A violation of the intent of a rule may be considered a violation of the rule itself. Rulings on Violation of Intent shall only be made by the USRCCA Rules Committee, without exception.

 

[Erik D_lux]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

I appears very simple and very common sense in my eyes. I still do not think that it meets the requirement of a "rigid frame". I dont see any frame at all, thus, I call it a body.

Can you sell me a Jeep Cherokee "frame"?

If I put up some siding on a couple pieces of ply board and make a square out of them did I just "frame" a house?

If you made this "body" out of delrin or CF, it would still be a "body". If you wanted to make it frame, it would need dimension to it, not just a smooth rolling surface.

The body DOES fit the definition of a "unibody" in the rules but it would still be illegal since it is not fastened permanently.

▪ 2.1.6 - Unibody – Constructed of a single piece of solid material (fiberglass, aluminum, plastic, etc) and must be self supporting. A Unibody cannot be fastened together in any nonpermanent way such as, nuts & bolts, pins, rivets, zip ties, etc. The roof must be raised from the main chassis to resemble a cockpit and should resemble a 1:1 vehicle. Unibody vehicles run the same minimum dimensions as bodiless.

 

[Fishmaxx]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

I think this is it in a nutshell. People are arguing the rules for the wrong category. I think the first thing that needs to be addressed is whether or not there is a body. If there is a body, then it is a bodied vehicle. If there is no body then it is a bodiless vehicle.

Only after that is established, should the specific rules of the category it fits into be applied. Don't put the cart before the horse.

Sorry, but I have to change my opinion. I feel this is a bodied vehicle, and should be subject to bodied rules.

"thumbsup"


If that shell was placed on a table by its self and 100 drivers were asked is this a body or part of a chassis what think the outcome would be?

 

[HARDKNOCKZ]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

So based on the current "pro" arguments...can I take an xciter lid, make some creative cuts & strategically place STICKERS on it to meet the bodyless guidelines?

I think in order to be considered a cab...it needs to be a cab from the beginning to the end of concept & execution. The Secret Agent or any current bodyless cab was designed as a cab. Not frankensteined from a body to tip toe around current rules. Sure...theres loopholes in EVERY rule if you have the time & determination to find em but theres no way around the INTENT of the rules & I think THAT is pretty clear in this case.

J.D.

 

[jeremyfowler33]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

so here is a picture of highlucks carbon slingshot with a 1/16 bodiless top bolted on it. why is it that this is legal and my 1/16 body isnt legal on the same chassis?

 

[JeremyH]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

so here is a picture of highlucks carbon slingshot with a 1/16 bodiless top bolted on it. why is it that this is legal and my 1/16 body isnt legal on the same chassis?

Different rules in Australia. "thumbsup"

He ran a body on that truck when he was at this past Nationals.

 

[articzap]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

Because the first one is a cab intended for bodiless rules. It does not in any way resemble or act as a body.. Yours is a body. That was its intent from the beginning and if asked by people is a body.

As fish stated, this would fall under the violation of intent rule.

 

[JohnRobHolmes]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

Definition of MONOCOQUE

1
: a type of construction (as of a fuselage) in which the outer skin carries all or a major part of the stresses



The chassis underneath is providing all the support, and the body is really just along for the ride. Yes it is rigidly attached, and it could be argued that it is providing support, but for me that support would have to be required in order for it to be a monocoque...the Secret Agent underneath can run without that body, so to me the body is not a structural requirement.

The same thing can be said for every bodiless rig. The cab is not needed for structural support. What I am getting at is the construction of the cab doesn't have to match the construction of the underlying frame, it is not a requirement in the rules. Almost all motorcyles are monocoque on the lower frame, but the seat area is generally made of tube. It is all considered part of the chassis, but a mixture of construction is used.

I am considering the cab portion a formed and unified structure that is capable of load bearing and rigid properties. Does it matter if it bolts together, has been heat formed, machined, welded, or otherwise? What I am noticing is that people are saying it is a body because it uses the same materials and techniques, and the "looks" are similar. Looks are not contained in the rules! Materials and manufacturing techniques are not contained in the rules!


Intent :roll: That is the lazy way out Fish, at least post up why it doesn't fit in with bodiless. You will see another design of formed cab with panels on the frame that will force the same issue again. If he cut off the hood to mount on the frame and bolted on the roof panel it would be the exact same thing but uglier and get around your issue of panels being on top of lexan.

 

[JohnRobHolmes]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

"thumbsup"


If that shell was placed on a table by its self and 100 drivers were asked is this a body or part of a chassis what think the outcome would be?

Lets place one part of a chassis on the table and see if they can tell if it came off a bodied or bodiless rig. I wonder what that outcome would be? If we have to pass your table test for cabs, we have to be able to pass the test for other chassis pieces too.

 

[Fishmaxx]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

JRH, its a body plane and simple, and must follow body requirements. If we need to add a section in to the rules explaining what a body then so be it.

 

[C*H*U*D]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

The same thing can be said for every bodiless rig. The cab is not needed for structural support.

Not every bodiless is like this. I have two that need the cab in order to function.

What I am getting at is the construction of the cab doesn't have to match the construction of the underlying frame, it is not a requirement in the rules.

I totally agree with you, and that's not what I was disagreeing with.

I am considering the cab portion a formed and unified structure that is capable of load bearing and rigid properties.

This is where I didn't agree with referring to the body as a monocoque. It doesn't bear the load...the chassis underneath does. If the body was used to bolt the shocks or upper links to, then I would agree that it is a load bearing part of the assembly, but as it is now, it's just along for the ride.

Intent :roll: That is the lazy way out Fish, at least post up why it doesn't fit in with bodiless. You will see another design of formed cab with panels on the frame that will force the same issue again. If he cut off the hood to mount on the frame and bolted on the roof panel it would be the exact same thing but uglier and get around your issue of panels being on top of lexan.

I'm not a big fan of intent either, which is why I agreed with you and Krawl earlier. If you went by the specifics of the bodiless rules, it's hard to argue that it's not legal. But I still think the first question asked should be, "Is there a body"? I honestly see a body, and I think many others do too. That's why I feel this is now in the Bodied section of the rulebook and only bodied rules apply.

I do agree though, that variations of this will come up again, and something should be figured out for when it does.

 

[krawlfreak]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

i do see both sides but i think we should be bery carefull not to limit a formed cab in whatever we decide.

like i said earlier the execution might be off but i do think there is a viable and legal way to use this idea.

 

[jeremyfowler33]

Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion

The same thing can be said for every bodiless rig. The cab is not needed for structural support. What I am getting at is the construction of the cab doesn't have to match the construction of the underlying frame, it is not a requirement in the rules. Almost all motorcyles are monocoque on the lower frame, but the seat area is generally made of tube. It is all considered part of the chassis, but a mixture of construction is used.

I am considering the cab portion a formed and unified structure that is capable of load bearing and rigid properties. Does it matter if it bolts together, has been heat formed, machined, welded, or otherwise? What I am noticing is that people are saying it is a body because it uses the same materials and techniques, and the "looks" are similar. Looks are not contained in the rules! Materials and manufacturing techniques are not contained in the rules!


Intent :roll: That is the lazy way out Fish, at least post up why it doesn't fit in with bodiless. You will see another design of formed cab with panels on the frame that will force the same issue again. If he cut off the hood to mount on the frame and bolted on the roof panel it would be the exact same thing but uglier and get around your issue of panels being on top of lexan.

I like your thinking and style here JRH"thumbsup"