krawlfreak
I wanna be Dave
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
I suggest 3 tall 6.5 long and 2.5 as a minimum for all
I suggest 3 tall 6.5 long and 2.5 as a minimum for all
-
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.
Petition for unified body/bodiless measurements
- Thread starter Speedracer19
- Start date
- Status
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
But a bodied rig only needs to be 3" tall, not 3.75"
It's Pros vs Cons.
So a bodied rig has lower CG, but is wider.
A bodied rig doesn't get it's shock hung up druing recoveries, but the bodiless has better visibilty.
A bodied rig doesn't have a minimuim chassis length. Sure the body needs to be 12.5" long, but all that covers is the upper links. Because the lexan can flex, it's no big deal. If the bodiless chassis wa that long, it'd look funky, and would impede suspension movement.
Perhaps, make the bodys 12.5" long, 3" wide and 3.75" tall? Pro-line better come out with an Oscar Mayer Weeniemobile body
Just make a micro class then
2.4.10 – 1.9 Crawler class bodiless 6.75" overall length, 2.5" overall width, and 3.25" overall height.
But a bodied rig only needs to be 3" tall, not 3.75"
It's Pros vs Cons.
So a bodied rig has lower CG, but is wider.
A bodied rig doesn't get it's shock hung up druing recoveries, but the bodiless has better visibilty.
A bodied rig doesn't have a minimuim chassis length. Sure the body needs to be 12.5" long, but all that covers is the upper links. Because the lexan can flex, it's no big deal. If the bodiless chassis wa that long, it'd look funky, and would impede suspension movement.
Perhaps, make the bodys 12.5" long, 3" wide and 3.75" tall? Pro-line better come out with an Oscar Mayer Weeniemobile body
Just make a micro class then
2.4.10 – 1.9 Crawler class bodiless 6.75" overall length, 2.5" overall width, and 3.25" overall height.
Last edited:
But we still need to define what makes a body different/distinguishable.
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
krawlfreak
I wanna be Dave
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
If you go with unified dimensions it wouldn't matter..
If you go with unified dimensions it wouldn't matter..
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
Some things that could help clarify that came to mind
Bodielss:
- minimum 8" x 3" x 3.75" (L x W X H) combined chassis/cab structure
- fully exposed upper shock mounting locations and shocks
- Cab potrion has a maximum length of 6" and maximum height of 3" UNLESS suspension components (links or shocks) mount to it (**this cleaerly makes the cabs of the Fly and Switch legal, and also makes the Viper series legal although they vary greatly in design)
Bodied:
- minimum 12.5" x 5" x 3" (L x W x H) external body/shell dimension
- no minimum chassis/structure dimension
- no suspenson components hard mounted to the body
- upper shock mounting locations are NOT EXPOSED
Some things that could help clarify that came to mind
Bodielss:
- minimum 8" x 3" x 3.75" (L x W X H) combined chassis/cab structure
- fully exposed upper shock mounting locations and shocks
- Cab potrion has a maximum length of 6" and maximum height of 3" UNLESS suspension components (links or shocks) mount to it (**this cleaerly makes the cabs of the Fly and Switch legal, and also makes the Viper series legal although they vary greatly in design)
Bodied:
- minimum 12.5" x 5" x 3" (L x W x H) external body/shell dimension
- no minimum chassis/structure dimension
- no suspenson components hard mounted to the body
- upper shock mounting locations are NOT EXPOSED
Last edited:
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
And I really don't see it getting smaller than the bodiless measurements we have now. I could see killing one but not both.
Can we get a why.
And I really don't see it getting smaller than the bodiless measurements we have now. I could see killing one but not both.
krawlfreak
I wanna be Dave
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
it is a suggestion so that no one gets left out and everyone get some room to manuever.
and why dont you see it getting smaller?
what is your reasoning?
why are you so against change?
it is a suggestion so that no one gets left out and everyone get some room to manuever.
and why dont you see it getting smaller?
what is your reasoning?
why are you so against change?
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
Ny reasoning is that you want to make a chassis thats smaller than a 1.9 class truck run 2.2 tires. Wouldn't that just be a mini super class?
I'd think some perspective would have to be kept in place relative to tire size.
Ny reasoning is that you want to make a chassis thats smaller than a 1.9 class truck run 2.2 tires. Wouldn't that just be a mini super class?
I'd think some perspective would have to be kept in place relative to tire size.
Last edited:
krawlfreak
I wanna be Dave
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
why? is this a scale comp?
why not let it be unlimited?
do you think you will have some sort of disadvantage?
why? is this a scale comp?
why not let it be unlimited?
do you think you will have some sort of disadvantage?
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
Isn't the Super Class kind of the unlimited class? moa, 4ws and dig?
This is already an expensive hobby. The more "unlimited" the most popular class becomes, the more expensive it becomes to "keep up with the times" and then you lose more hobbyists, especially the young ones.
Also, your suggestion defines a minmum spec, whats your ideal maximum spec for a 2.2 class?
Isn't the Super Class kind of the unlimited class? moa, 4ws and dig?
This is already an expensive hobby. The more "unlimited" the most popular class becomes, the more expensive it becomes to "keep up with the times" and then you lose more hobbyists, especially the young ones.
Also, your suggestion defines a minmum spec, whats your ideal maximum spec for a 2.2 class?
Last edited:
DickyT
I wanna be Dave
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
The idea of unified size is cool! I agree with TSK that size relative to wheel\tire size is a good idea as well.
Otherwise, what's next? Running just a frame that only mounts shocks and links?
Allowing all to share 1 common size is a cool idea though for 2.2p, and current bodiless and unibody size is good with the tire size. Maybe change the height to 3" to not effect the bodied guys so much.
The idea of unified size is cool! I agree with TSK that size relative to wheel\tire size is a good idea as well.
Otherwise, what's next? Running just a frame that only mounts shocks and links?
Allowing all to share 1 common size is a cool idea though for 2.2p, and current bodiless and unibody size is good with the tire size. Maybe change the height to 3" to not effect the bodied guys so much.
krawlfreak
I wanna be Dave
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
i am good with that. it was a suggestion.
but your "what next" has been here for a long time.
i havent had anything in my chassis for quite some time, it only mounts my links and shock
i am good with that. it was a suggestion.
but your "what next" has been here for a long time.
i havent had anything in my chassis for quite some time, it only mounts my links and shock
krawlfreak
I wanna be Dave
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
and how would making the dims smaller make it more expensive?
thats reaching right their.:roll:
and how would making the dims smaller make it more expensive?
thats reaching right their.:roll:
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
I not afraid of change, I all for good change, the rules have changed alot sence I've been on the committee, some things I agreed with some not. But I support the rules.
If you would read and not just pick out the parts you like. I told you why and the reason. :roll:
I not afraid of change, I all for good change, the rules have changed alot sence I've been on the committee, some things I agreed with some not. But I support the rules.
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
Jeremy's argueent is that making a unified spec for the 2.2 class will allow people to become more creative and push the envelope.
Problem is, without a distinct difference between bodied and bodiless, the 2.2 class will ultimately become more cookie cutter as trends will lead in one specific direction.
Case in point. When bodiless really started to take off, people were taking bodied chassis dimensions and adding to them to meet bodiless specs (Del Monte's & Hulsksta's Chump RT). Now that bodiless rigs are the predominant chassis platform, people are now running them with out the cabs (BigStu's Viper 2 and Tydl's Stingray).. Making a unified spec will result in LESS creativity on the end users behalf.
If you read properly, you will see that I stated it would get more expensive because people will have to chasse the current trend.
But alas, at some point it will all be the same stuff, and cost will go down. So I'll call that null.
So what is your maximum spec for 2.2?
Jeremy's argueent is that making a unified spec for the 2.2 class will allow people to become more creative and push the envelope.
Problem is, without a distinct difference between bodied and bodiless, the 2.2 class will ultimately become more cookie cutter as trends will lead in one specific direction.
Case in point. When bodiless really started to take off, people were taking bodied chassis dimensions and adding to them to meet bodiless specs (Del Monte's & Hulsksta's Chump RT). Now that bodiless rigs are the predominant chassis platform, people are now running them with out the cabs (BigStu's Viper 2 and Tydl's Stingray).. Making a unified spec will result in LESS creativity on the end users behalf.
If you read properly, you will see that I stated it would get more expensive because people will have to chasse the current trend.
But alas, at some point it will all be the same stuff, and cost will go down. So I'll call that null.
So what is your maximum spec for 2.2?
Last edited:
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
Read, he never said anything about dim. being smaller making it more expensive, he said having a unlimited class would. See how narrow minded your being, you can't see or hear anything but what you think. I hear what you think.
The Violator
RCC Addict
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
I say no rules. Just a flat out overall dimension. Less rules. Maybe overall 9" long, 4" wide, 4" tall. As long as it falls into that box (or whatever size, I would think bodiless dimensions we have now would be a great start, and would keep the hundred if not thousands of cars out now legal). There really is no use asking them to resemble any kind of full size crawler because they just do not. That opens it up for the guys who want to push the envelope, and those who want to run a body. The body guys are chopping them to death as it is. It eliminates the body or bodiless argument. Tech would be easy. 12.5" wheelbase, overall chassis length, width, height. Have a good day.
I say no rules. Just a flat out overall dimension. Less rules. Maybe overall 9" long, 4" wide, 4" tall. As long as it falls into that box (or whatever size, I would think bodiless dimensions we have now would be a great start, and would keep the hundred if not thousands of cars out now legal). There really is no use asking them to resemble any kind of full size crawler because they just do not. That opens it up for the guys who want to push the envelope, and those who want to run a body. The body guys are chopping them to death as it is. It eliminates the body or bodiless argument. Tech would be easy. 12.5" wheelbase, overall chassis length, width, height. Have a good day.
krawlfreak
I wanna be Dave
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
i am talking about the dimensions. not an unlimited class.:roll:
stop taking it so personal ricky. i am being civil here.
the argument that it will cost more is stupis at best.
every time a top driver farts right now the sheeple run out to smell or buy what it is.
the arguments you guys are fighting for about "cost" and "cookie cutter" are already here!
i am talking about the dimensions. not an unlimited class.:roll:
stop taking it so personal ricky. i am being civil here.
the argument that it will cost more is stupis at best.
every time a top driver farts right now the sheeple run out to smell or buy what it is.
the arguments you guys are fighting for about "cost" and "cookie cutter" are already here!
The Violator
RCC Addict
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
People have been chasing trends the entire time. AX-10, then Moa. Bodied, then bodiless. Heavy, now everyone is chasing the featherweight cars. Using your logic, full size cars going from carbs to Fuel injection was chasing a trend. They are just progressing to better tech. Things change, and to fight it only hurts everyone. Allow people to "run what you brung" as long as it meets the basic overall dimensions would allow people to do what ever they want and open things up to innovation.
People have been chasing trends the entire time. AX-10, then Moa. Bodied, then bodiless. Heavy, now everyone is chasing the featherweight cars. Using your logic, full size cars going from carbs to Fuel injection was chasing a trend. They are just progressing to better tech. Things change, and to fight it only hurts everyone. Allow people to "run what you brung" as long as it meets the basic overall dimensions would allow people to do what ever they want and open things up to innovation.
krawlfreak
I wanna be Dave
Re: Legal Body Panels Help Guide and Disscussion
maximum spec... i dont know what your refering to ..size wize?
maximum spec... i dont know what your refering to ..size wize?
- Status
