Dana's ford buggy, wraiths are buggys, chads tuber.
-
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.
MNRCRC 2016 Rules Discussion Thread
- Thread starter dna4engr
- Start date
1.9 Trail Rules
I would allow the CF frame rails. Heck if someone wanted cardboard even, but they have to be frame rails that extend past the front and rear axles and a must look like stock ladder frame profile. So basically no 2.2 pro frame rails just made longer to extend past axles.
2.2 Trail Rules Look Okay.
But I will only be competing in 1.9 and 2.2 trail next season and he running order is fine.
I would allow the CF frame rails. Heck if someone wanted cardboard even, but they have to be frame rails that extend past the front and rear axles and a must look like stock ladder frame profile. So basically no 2.2 pro frame rails just made longer to extend past axles.
2.2 Trail Rules Look Okay.
But I will only be competing in 1.9 and 2.2 trail next season and he running order is fine.
Boopernator
Pebble Pounder
Point well taken, I never considered the effects on the vehicle. That's what I like the most about attending any of these events, people are always ready to give advice that really helps new people, without being negative. When the experienced drivers share their information it really helps people like me who are new to Scale RC. I just have to remember to let you guys have your fun too, because that's why you show up in the first place.
I wanted this post to respond to the reply from Nerby
Re: MNRCRC 2016 Rules Discussion Thread
There would be no way for everyone to run the same truck the motor would never hold up they get warm after a single run let alone running constantly back to back, and then gives members no reason to build and design new things.
Sent from Team Purpmart
I wanted this post to respond to the reply from Nerby
Re: MNRCRC 2016 Rules Discussion Thread
There would be no way for everyone to run the same truck the motor would never hold up they get warm after a single run let alone running constantly back to back, and then gives members no reason to build and design new things.
Sent from Team Purpmart
Last edited:
Stormin2u
I wanna be Dave
I liked the growth and the competition created by the current rules. So many people upgraded equipment last season and the result was a bunch of close very exciting competition. I'd be skeptical of loosing the momentum we have now if we get to picky or defensive with our rule making.
The current 1.9 scaler I'm building now is gonna run circles around my top heavy tuber. I hardly see where a bumper rule is gonna level out the playing field.
I vote keep it simple.
It's a lot easier convincing a new guy to compete when i get to tell him their vehicle is legal.
I vote keep it simple.
It's a lot easier convincing a new guy to compete when i get to tell him their vehicle is legal.
CmdrZod
Quarry Creeper
After reading most of these comments I just have one thing to say... Just keep it the same. It obviously works and the attendance was up all year, not just in the beginning, and the competition in all classes was outstanding. I really don't see a need to change anything from last year.
Let the schedule discussion begin!
Sent from the land of sky blue waters.
Let the schedule discussion begin!
Sent from the land of sky blue waters.
Stormin2u
I wanna be Dave
I hope that an attempt at leveling the playing field by adding rules would not be at the expense of our improved growth and competition. I'm sure there are some who might like a more complex rule system and I'd like to hear their reasoning in all fairness. The MNRCRC has been a democratic club and its members have the final say. Plus its possible we've missed something important in the rush to our new "Outlaw" status? Its just hard to argue the 2014 and 2015 seasons weren't the most fun and competitive in many years.
Orange58Crush
Newbie
Here's my toosense.
Run the 1.9 class first. Most races/competitions start with the smaller models first, and end with the big boys. To me, it's a question of doing the classes that have more people first, getting more people thru the process faster.
Another thought: How about having a sign up desk right at the site? Take people's money, put them in an order and make sure everyone knows what's next. To me, comp day seems very chaotic. And the newer guys might appreciate a more communicative process.
Oh, yeah, and any vehicle that is orange gets a free roll-over on each course it runs.
Run the 1.9 class first. Most races/competitions start with the smaller models first, and end with the big boys. To me, it's a question of doing the classes that have more people first, getting more people thru the process faster.
Another thought: How about having a sign up desk right at the site? Take people's money, put them in an order and make sure everyone knows what's next. To me, comp day seems very chaotic. And the newer guys might appreciate a more communicative process.
Oh, yeah, and any vehicle that is orange gets a free roll-over on each course it runs.
I started when there were little rules and watched attendance turn to shit. It was easy to blame the economy at the time but the truth is that the rules killed it.
As much as i like hanging out i will put my rigs up for sale before going back to sanctioned type events.
As much as i like hanging out i will put my rigs up for sale before going back to sanctioned type events.
The evolution of trucks killed our numbers, not rules. People did not want to have to change their trucks to keep up. Nothing to do with rules.
Like I said earlier, Let them run Carbon Fiber, as long as it has a stock appearing profile. No 2.2 Pro Chassis that has extra CF to make rails longer than the wheel base and running 1.9 wheels with a full body. I don't mind the ones that want to spend their dollars to be able to place weight where they want it, they still have to drive the course and complete it.
Maybe make it to where you do have to have at-least 1 bumper at frame rail height that is as wide as the vehicles body and attached to the frame.
Maybe make it to where you do have to have at-least 1 bumper at frame rail height that is as wide as the vehicles body and attached to the frame.
fast5xc
Quarry Creeper
I agree with this. This is the reason I got out of it for a few years, it got to the point where it was not fun to do anymore.
diesel kawboy
Quarry Creeper
I like having classes that are more driver based than tech based.
diesel kawboy
Quarry Creeper
We should bring back the mini class, as long as the cf rails extend past the axle housings of course. My pro chassis with cf frame extensions should be OK, right?
diesel kawboy
Quarry Creeper
Isn't evolution how the sportsman classes got started? Because the moa rigs killed the competition between shafties and moa rigs. Do we allow moa scale trucks next? Moa rigs seem about as scale as cf frame rails. There needs to be a level of neverlution.