Competition Rules

[Grizzly4x4]

When we say body we are including tubers in that definition as long as they resemble a buggy type vehicle. One tube running down the center of the chassis should not count as a tuber though.
My interest lies in keeping these things looking like 1:1 vehicles in order to attract the attention of bystanders and 1:1 people who have never seen anything like what we do. People that do not know anything about r/c will become interested because they look like minature versions of what they drive and have seen in magazines. But if others dont want that I understand, everyone is entitled to an opinion.

Like I said before, if this turns into a robot battle competition with shooting grappling hooks and automated arms that pull the vehicle up an obstacle, you can count me out. I'll go back to driving around the campfire ring.

[theDude]

Originally Posted by Grizzly4x4

Like I said before, if this turns into a robot battle competition with shooting grappling hooks and automated arms that pull the vehicle up an obstacle, you can count me out. I'll go back to driving around the campfire ring.

Easy, nothing but a tire and rim combination accepted at tech.

also see this and tell me what you think.

http://www.rccrawler.com/postt2702.html

[kevinlongisland]

haven't seen any specific rules yet saying that if your vehicle breaks you have until basically the end of the comp/or close to it to repair it. I think this is necessary considering how far people drive for the event, no one want to be out because of something stupid breaking. vehicle breakage, in general, has nothing to do with the drivers skills or the quality of the vehicle.

the more stages you have, the more even it will be in the end. in moab we only had two, and the first one was wayyyyyyyyy too long. Two stages is not enough.

max points has to really make it advantageous to try the obstacle. To get 10 max but only 9 for passing it doesn't sound like it would be worth wasting your valuable total stage time to try it. i think it should be like 5 points for passing it and 10 max if you have to by-pass. this way, the really impossible obstacles that are passed are rewarded.

I think anyone running the course at all before the event has a significant advantage. NO PRERUNNING, BY ANYONE!!!! And i think the course has to be setup by the drivers, not just the people putting on the comp. This is the only fair way to say that the course was not set up for one type of vehicle or driving style.

is there a practical reason to body rules? unlimited means unlimited, anything goes. And anyway, I don’t know why were talking about this, who runs a truck without a body????? Is it only one person out there doing it????? Hehehe Bodies do not affect if the person is a good or bad driver or a good or bad builder.

The guys down in australia run the non-fender bodies like rc10t3 bodies and stuff. They should be allowed. And look at full size comp rigs. the moon buggies don't look like anything else, why? because the rules only set that the driver needs a roll cage around him. If someone made some rule about it in UROC, then the most winning rigs would look different today. Why and for what reason?? we don't need roll cages or bodies, they are not necessary. this is unlimited r/c rock crawling, our goal should be to further the design of the vehicles, to make them the best crawlers they can be.


battery changes and repairs. Not everyone can afford 15 3300mAh packs. Bad idea to penalize battery changes. It doesn’t show a lack of driving skill or bad building/construction.

cannot run more than 2 motors? this is the unlimited class. if someone comes up with the best crawler that will dominate in the future with whatever design then let it be, even if it has 4 motors. remember, we are about moving the sport and vehicle design forward, that means the least possible design limitations.

Originally Posted by kaetwo

For each time a competator yells out a penalty and that individual is not a judge/score keeper, that person will accrue 100 points . HEHEHE Just kidding. I don't mind everyone watching the events, but just let the judges do there job.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry about that, but you should have called out that penalty as it happened!


Design limitations:
remember guys, the full size trucks use winches to suck in there front axles. this sport, in my opinion, is about two things, drivers, and builders. Where would we be today if we said everyone had to run a gecko chassis and stock tires that aren't modified? How can we talk about limiting trucks when people spend like $250 on one set of cut and shut tires with treads from another tire cut and glued on. Should we limit that too? Were will it end, and who makes those decisions. Jtothec had a good servo mount design at Moab, who says, “well, not everyone has welder, so we can’t do that!” So what does unlimited mean? Who makes those decisions?

Every large project undertaken by any company or team in the world undertakes those projects in exactly the opposite fasion as we are trying to create our rules here. We are trying to create rules without first setting what our goals are. If goals are set, then when a rule is created you can compare your new rule to the goal you set.

[Fishmaxx]

Originally Posted by kevinlongisland

haven't seen any specific rules yet saying that if your vehicle breaks you have until basically the end of the comp/or close to it to repair it. I think this is necessary considering how far people drive for the event, no one want to be out because of something stupid breaking. vehicle breakage, in general, has nothing to do with the drivers skills or the quality of the vehicle.

I agree 100% ...... Drivers should be given every chance to finish.

Drivers should maybe get a 1 point penalty for touching vehicle. (You got to have some sort of penalty, or someone will figure out a way to take advantage)

Vehicle must be placed back exactly as it was before touching, or 2 pts for a repostition.

Originally Posted by kevinlongisland

max points has to really make it advantageous to try the obstacle. To get 10 max but only 9 for passing it doesn't sound like it would be worth wasting your valuable total stage time to try it. i think it should be like 5 points for passing it and 10 max if you have to by-pass. this way, the really impossible obstacles that are passed are rewarded.

Not sure what you were trying to say here.

I think if the penalty for bypassing is the same as MAX points everyone would at least try to finish even if its kamakze style. Don't over think this one. For the most part it would only settle the last and next to last place finishers

Originally Posted by kevinlongisland

I think anyone running the course at all before the event has a significant advantage. NO PRERUNNING, BY ANYONE!!!! And i think the course has to be setup by the drivers, not just the people putting on the comp. This is the only fair way to say that the course was not set up for one type of vehicle or driving style.

I agree sort of. I think as long as everyone has the same access.

I see nothing wrong with a little practice time before an event.

I think Moab proved some people are better course builders than others.

At Crawlstock Dirk tested the course for drivability, alllowed drivers to test their trucks on the course before the comp, and everything was fine. Dirk didn't win, and everyone had fun. Lets not over think this one either

Originally Posted by kevinlongisland

is there a practical reason to body rules? unlimited means unlimited, anything goes. And anyway, I don’t know why were talking about this, who runs a truck without a body????? Is it only one person out there doing it????? Hehehe Bodies do not affect if the person is a good or bad driver or a good or bad builder.

The guys down in australia run the non-fender bodies like rc10t3 bodies and stuff. They should be allowed. And look at full size comp rigs. the moon buggies don't look like anything else, why? because the rules only set that the driver needs a roll cage around him. If someone made some rule about it in UROC, then the most winning rigs would look different today. Why and for what reason?? we don't need roll cages or bodies, they are not necessary. this is unlimited r/c rock crawling, our goal should be to further the design of the vehicles, to make them the best crawlers they can be.

I think some what of a scale look and feel is important! Most forms of RC racing require a body. Tubers are also fine....again it should resemble a 1.1 vehicle.

There is a COG advantage to not using a body.

Originally Posted by kevinlongisland

battery changes and repairs. Not everyone can afford 15 3300mAh packs. Bad idea to penalize battery changes. It doesn’t show a lack of driving skill or bad building/construction.

I agree..........we just need ton put in some sort of safe guard so it is not abused

Originally Posted by kevinlongisland

cannot run more than 2 motors? this is the unlimited class. if someone comes up with the best crawler that will dominate in the future with whatever design then let it be, even if it has 4 motors. remember, we are about moving the sport and vehicle design forward, that means the least possible design limitations.

First time "unlimited" has been mention to my knowledge. I think we are trying to limit what might be brought to a comp.

I like Jason's "BOX" idea

In another forum I asked for thoughts on a 24 X 18.

I also mention that the vehicle could not operate outside the "BOX".
This would eliminate mechanical arms, winches, grappling hooks, WHATEVER!

I think as long as tires are intended for RC use.

Also rule about axle driven wheels would eliminate someone building a walker.

I personally have no problem with the # of motors or their size.

I would like the # of axles to be (2)..........Back to the scale look thing

Originally Posted by kevinlongisland

Design limitations:
remember guys, the full size trucks use winches to suck in there front axles. this sport, in my opinion, is about two things, drivers, and builders. Where would we be today if we said everyone had to run a gecko chassis and stock tires that aren't modified? How can we talk about limiting trucks when people spend like $250 on one set of cut and shut tires with treads from another tire cut and glued on. Should we limit that too? Were will it end, and who makes those decisions. Jtothec had a good servo mount design at Moab, who says, “well, not everyone has welder, so we can’t do that!” So what does unlimited mean? Who makes those decisions?

Every large project undertaken by any company or team in the world undertakes those projects in exactly the opposite fasion as we are trying to create our rules here. We are trying to create rules without first setting what our goals are. If goals are set, then when a rule is created you can compare your new rule to the goal you set.

I think our goal is implied, but this is how Jason put it!

Originally Posted by jason

I have had a ton of people ask me about the rules for scoring a comp. I never know what to tell them, because everyone uses a different set.

I think that now while our sport is in it's infancy we need to establish a set of rules that can be used internationally. This will make things very easy for newcomers to hold events of their own, and will make it easy for those that travel to already know the rules when they show up on someone elses playground.

Right now I know people have scoring rules in effect, but I haven't seen anything that limits the vehicles. I think we need to set a max wheelbase, and max tire size, and max width just to keep the whole scale thing into the hobby.

[toyofast]

So.. Why don't we, people in the US, just adopt the rules that have been used for a much longer time period from the Aussie's?? Is that a dumb question?

They have had their rules set for some time now, before anyone on this board even built a RC Crawler... or probably even seen one.

Seems like if we(US) were to join up with the Aussie's set rules/scoring guidlines it'd make life much easier... RIGHT? International comps would be easy to understand, that is once this sport/hobby gets to that level which it will some day.

[kevinlongisland]

I mean for each section of the rules. what are our goals for vehicle requirements, course setup, etc. Is our goal to advance vehicle design, or to limit it? Are our goals to encourage driving as much as possible and not using the rules to win. That is what i mean.

[Fishmaxx]

Originally Posted by toyofast

So.. Why don't we, people in the US, just adopt the rules that have been used for a much longer time period from the Aussie's?? Is that a dumb question?

They have had their rules set for some time now, before anyone on this board even built a RC Crawler... or probably even seen one.

Seems like if we(US) were to join up with the Aussie's set rules/scoring guidlines it'd make life much easier... RIGHT? International comps would be easy to understand, that is once this sport/hobby gets to that level which it will some day.

Actually there are talking about rewriting them to close some of the loop holes.

http://www.outerlimits4x4.com/PHP_Mo...ic.php?t=26911

russell of Outerlimits4x4

Originally Posted by russell

We here in the land down under have been using and correcting the set of rules that we established over twelve months ago.
We have found loop holes and filled them , we have found indicision and corrected them,we have argued points and sorted them and we are still only in the infancy stage of coming up with a final set of rules.BUT THEY WORK.
Sorry if that sounds ignorant or superficial but we tried to tell you yanky beens the pitfalls in rules and still people came up with there own rules, not that there is anything wrong with that.
In every organization there are different rules for different segments of clubs.If we were to have a certain comp we would then have to run a certain type of aggenda.
BUT...if were to try to get ONE set of rules organized i think it wouldnt matter ,because people would interpret them incorrectly or differently.
I commend you on trying to unite the groups under one set of rules but i think there will always be indifferences in rule interpretation.
I say use the rules that work for each group or club and if the chance happens to arrise that two groups can come together for a comp use the rules that are used in that area.
Just like the I.R.O.C and U.R.O.C and W.E.A.L.L.R.O.C.K sets of rules....

Just my two cents worth ... plus i have had a few beers so i am in the mood for rambling.. :armsup:

[kaetwo]

Well hell I can't tell which post to use now .

Look most of you will be totally unhappy with any rule set that goes into effect so it really doesn't matter which set of rules are used.

I applaud all the guys out there creating all the different types of crawlers and we are in no way trying to stunt the growth of the sport. However there must be limitations to these vehicles. As such UTRCRC will come up with our own set of rules. Yes they will have body limitations, truck specs, gate specs, course specs etc....They will be simple, fair and to the point. If your unhappy with them, then those of you that are running the competitions can modify or use a completely different set of rules 8O . Good on you for doing so....

All the feedback on this forum has been great! Okay, so not all, but most. It's funny how this sport has become so competative. UTRCRC will do our best to keep the fun in this sport at our meets. I think the best way to occomplish this is to no longer offer awards to the top three finishers. Points for bragging rights seems to be good enough. We will continue having the Moab event, but the awards may or may not happen. I found that it was more fun to shoot the bull than competing anyway.

For years I raced R/C, and as I became more and more serious about racing and traveling to Nats and other large races the fun quickly faded away. This is the exact opposite of what we would like to see happen.

Good luck with establishing the rules.

[/quote]

[RockSurfer]

well put kaetwo