Petition for unified body/bodiless measurements

[JohnRobHolmes]

wouldn't changing the min. on bodiless rigs line the pockets of every bodiless chassis maker and force people to buy new bodies. :ror: and both would be cheaper. :ror:

If there has to be change, to make bodied and bodiless them same. Wouldn't it be better to change bodied measurements to the bodiless.

My point is that there would be no forced changes taking all the minimums. If we just swapped to bodiless dims, bodies would be too squat by .75" and require people to buy another or at least attach new door panels. With shorter vertical height for bodiless there would not be a requirement to purchase a new chassis. It would be an option, just like trimming up a body would be optional.


The difference is forced obsolescence. It would be better IMO to avoid it so everything ran last year can still run next year. Change would be optional.

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

I really don't see the negatives of changing the rule. People can still keep all the same bodies they run now if that's what they like. And I bet you wouldn't see just 1/16th bodies on our rigs. I am guessing you might see people push the width and height rules.

I personally dropped the bodied rig just because the wide difference in rules. I prefer a bodied rig but dis like the min body dimensions.

If bodied rigs were the same as bodiless, I'll be the 1st to put a little body on a little chassis. I never have liked the looks of a bodiless rig, but I run one.:roll: Am I running what I want, no I'm running what I have to, because I want to play too.
A newb walking in, there's not as much coolness factor with a bodiless rig than there is with a bodied rig. Just my opinion and what I see.

I feel if a spark is needed to bring life back in to 2.2pro class, that I feel the bodiless chassis has taken life out of the class. I think making the bodied measurements the same as bodiless and leaving the bodiless where they are would bring fire back in and we would see more of a mix of the 2.

Just my opinion from an old guy who has been around the RC for over 30 years of competiting.

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

The difference is forced obsolescence. It would be better IMO to avoid it so everything ran last year can still run next year. Change would be optional.

Change is an optional. You know and I know they will buy that new chassis and body to stay competitive. The change option I worry about is to another RC sport. Come on RCC has a Rally section now. :roll:

 

[articzap]

Am I running what I want, no I'm running what I have to, because I want to play too.

I'm sorry but that's a terrible statement. I know plenty of guys that run what they want and do very well even on a national spot light.

Saying you have to run what everyone else is, is just a horrible attitude.

With tuning and practice almost any hunk of metal, carbon fiber, or delrin can succeed.

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

I'm sorry but that's a terrible statement. I know plenty of guys that run what they want and do very well even on a national spot light.

Saying you have to run what everyone else is, is just a horrible attitude.

With tuning and practice almost any hunk of metal, carbon fiber, or delrin can succeed.

What do mean a terrible statement, it's my opinion, I share the same opinion with alot of newbs.
You said:
With tuning and practice almost any hunk of metal, carbon fiber, or delrin can succeed.

Then I ask you, why do you want this rule change. Tune what you got.

 

[JeremyH]

And I bet you wouldn't see just 1/16th bodies on our rigs.

I can tell you that I wouldn't run one. I might trim the sides of mine a little more, but I like the way a 1/10 body looks on my trucks...

 

[TURTLE]

Come on RCC has a Rally section now. :roll:

Why are you so hung up on that? Does it personally affect you? There is also a 1:1 section, non crawler section, Formula off-road section, speed shoot out and chit chat. None of which focus around crawlers.

 

[articzap]

The reason to change the rule is to remove the stupid grey area and push the design limits for those looking to try new things.

Grey areas exist when rules are too exact and to forceful. The classes that have the most fun, in real life, are the ones with the simplest of rules. Most real life racing is more safety rules then anything.

 

[BC-Brian]

Im all for rule changes to help advance the sport but not at the expense of alienating one class to feel like its a go big or go home class.

Decrease the body rules a bit AND increase the bodiless AND give us a clearer definition of the difference. All 3 and everyone gets a little of what they want. :mrgreen:

Increasing the bodiless minimums woild allienate every single person running bodiless. Se how many people drop oit when they find out that the $120 chassis they just bought is a paper weight (and not even a good one).

It has been said a dozen times. Make bodied the same size as bodiless and give bodiles the 3" tall spec. This way every single rig that is legal now remains legal. Mfg's have an opportunity to create new chassis and body designs but no one is forced to take them on.

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

Why are you so hung up on that? Does it personally affect you? There is also a 1:1 section, non crawler section, Formula off-road section, speed shoot out and chit chat. None of which focus around crawlers.

And all that should be in the NON Crawler section and below the vendors section. Becuase none of it focus on crawling. And I know it gets your goat and I like having fun with it. :lmao: loosen your jeans a little.

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

Increasing the bodiless minimums woild allienate every single person running bodiless. Se how many people drop oit when they find out that the $120 chassis they just bought is a paper weight (and not even a good one).

It has been said a dozen times. Make bodied the same size as bodiless and give bodiles the 3" tall spec. This way every single rig that is legal now remains legal. Mfg's have an opportunity to create new chassis and body designs but no one is forced to take them on.

Decreasing the bodiless measuremente would do the samething. In my opinion

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

I can tell you that I wouldn't run one. I might trim the sides of mine a little more, but I like the way a 1/10 body looks on my trucks...

So do the newbes."thumbsup"

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

The reason to change the rule is to remove the stupid grey area and push the design limits for those looking to try new things.

Grey areas exist when rules are too exact and to forceful. The classes that have the most fun, in real life, are the ones with the simplest of rules. Most real life racing is more safety rules then anything.

Build a Super.

 

[articzap]

Build a Super.

I have no interest in that money pit, and our club has zero supers in it anyways.

It's as simple as this:

This debate is like politics, and has two sides. Those who wish to get back to the roots, and those who wish to push forward.

And then there's the undecideds whose vote shouldn't count because they can't think for themselves. i kid, i kid

 

[ninja turtle]

I'm a newb and I don't comp so it probably doesn't matter but me and all my newb friends like the bodiless. I would say its what got me to finally pull the trigger and jump into this hobby.

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

I'm a newb and I don't comp so it probably doesn't matter but me and all my newb friends like the bodiless. I would say its what got me to finally pull the trigger and jump into this hobby.

Well maybe I'm learning something, you say you don't comp. why

 

[Robbob]

Increasing the bodiless minimums woild allienate every single person running bodiless. Se how many people drop oit when they find out that the $120 chassis they just bought is a paper weight (and not even a good one).

It has been said a dozen times. Make bodied the same size as bodiless and give bodiles the 3" tall spec. This way every single rig that is legal now remains legal. Mfg's have an opportunity to create new chassis and body designs but no one is forced to take them on.

I disagree ..... make the cab the same as body, not chassis. Its 10$ worth of spacers.

Got to look at things from another angle. ;-)

A chassis is a chassis ...... the Cab is what makes it bodiless 8)

Even my Sniper can be made wider for less then 10$ and I barely touch 3'' with that unless Im tricky with the side panels.


Also making to big a dive in body specs I dont believe we'll see any support from the manufacturers out there. We have JConcept who molds bodys barely to spec now, Proline who really hasnt released anything new in how long for the comp scene and Parma who made one mold that for the most part everyone loves. We change 2'' its gonna be even longer before we see support besides guys who are gonna flash them at home.

Im with Ricky on the theory if we make them the same we're just gonna push people into the bodiless. And sorry but we need the support of the manufacturers just as much as the local vendors here. BUT I do still think we need a change.

 

[EddieO]

So what about touring car, drift, rally, pullers, F1, drag cars, short course and scale crawler competition?

Short Course seems to be more popular then stadium trucks and buggies. Hell, I can't even remember the last time I saw a stadium truck.

Plus road cars, rally and F1 are huge in Japan and Europe.

Let's go over your examples


Touring Car.....hardly realism. Though they switched back to rubber tires, the real body rule was abandon long ago, why....because it was stupid and not followed anyways. Other than a grille and maybe the lights, no Alpha romeo looked like a real one....and if you look, the TC class has died off a TON over the last 5 years.....and it certainly was not because of realism.

F1....very real like....and also one of the smallest classes in the world. I've been to nearly every major onroad race and they never run it. The only place that supports F1 is the TCS....and even then its less popular than the mini cooper class last I looked. The cars are extremely expensive for the competive ones and one wrong turn yer out big bucks. And it's really not that popular in europe.

Puller....uh yeah. This segment of RC is one of the smallest in the world. Most states dont even have a group of guys who do it. Sure they look real, but it certainly hasn't gotten them anywhere. Crawling is by FAR bigger than this, shit I think Supers are more popular.

Drag Cars....see pullers. Its very small......very very small. Where has realism gotten it in the hobby? And the realism is minimal with the fast guys....they do the bare minimum to meet the rules and thats it. And they push it to the extreme.....I've been building motors for these guys for a while, trust me when I say a small plague could wipe them out in a day.

Drift Cars.....again, smaller than crawling. Is there even a national championship for these guys? Are they still using those really real looking wheels made out of PVC?

Rally car? Do you mean short course? Losi tried to rally cars based off their 4wd years back....never took off. Sure looked cool though. I think traxxas made a rally version of the short course, didn't see to take off in my area....is it big in yours?

Scale, well my examples were from the racing arena....but scale is fun and cool.....fairly cheap to build, lots of custom fab and fun to drive....

Short course is popular for a few reason.....it was cheap....cars had limited adjustments and they were easy to drive.....also helps when its pushed by a company like traxxas....but the writing is on the wall, now Losi, AE, etc are in the game...they are full blown race trucks now....way faster and adjustable....and $$$$.

Stadium trucks are still plenty popular and we have seen lots of people moving back to them from Short Course because all the Short Course trucks have become is a stadium truck with longer arms and different tires.

Competitive RC boils down to a three main things

Time
Effort
Money

I know time and effort can be argued to be the same thing, but they are not.

People quit a class or rc in general when one or more of the 3 become beyond what they are willing to commit. Nobody quits a class because the bumper doesn't look scale.

Besides, look at the climbs these trucks are doing on rocks currently, or even what the 2.2s trucks do....Scale that rock up full size and show me a truck that can climb it.

Let's look at the simplest thing here....Holmes and I agree on something, that's a rarity, so it must be the correct thing to do.

Later EddieO

 

[Hardline]

Competitive RC boils down to a three main things

Time
Effort
Money


People quit a class or rc in general when one or more of the 3 become beyond what they are willing to commit.

Actually, I only personally know two people who have packed it in. I would say their reason was discouragement. Not only do some people seem to have unmatchable talent, but these same people get all their parts for free and push the technical aspects of the sport beyond where those guys thought they could ever get to. The last straw was the 3-lb featherweight thing. They felt the sport was being pushed out of their reach. I don't believe any of them gave a rat's ass what the bodies looked like.

Were they right about being permanently left behind? Maybe, maybe not. But the important thing is they thought so.

 

[EddieO]

I've see this arguement before...

Is it the perception they felt left behind or is really the perception that they didn't want to

A. Spend the MONEY to go 3.xx lbs
B. Make the EFFORT to make their truck lighter through research, wrench time and a little thinking
C. Devote the TIME to practicing

Guys like that appear in RC all the time.....they like to point to getting out skilled by the guys who do ABC. This isn't basketball, nobody just picks up a transmitter and is Kobe Bryant....this is part of society now, everyone wants a trophy....and its killed tons of RC areas where they tried to make a class for every type of guy out there 2wd masters sporstman stadium truck spec tires class...you end up with 3 guys in every class!

Reality.....someone has to get first, someone has to get last.


Later EddieO