Official RCCrawler.com comp rules.

[jason]

Here is a copy of the official RCCrawler.com Radio Controlled Rockcrawling event rules. The reason for me releasing these is to hopefully get all the groups of people all on the same page. This will make it much easier for when we get together with different groups.

Keep an eye out as RCCrawler.com will be organizing competitions all across the country, with all of the current groups of crawlers. More details coming on that soon.

Well, here they are:

http://s94251975.onlinehome.us/rulebook2004.pdf

[SlinkySam]

Looking good thus far Jason. I say you ripped that off from the 1:1 competition rule book, but who is looking right? hehe

Anyway, I like some of the changes within these rules that didn't make sense in the 1:1 rules.

I had a question on these this rule though which I would like to see changed. Maybe I am viewing it wrong though. See the rules that are bolded for reference.

Suspension
The following are approved for competition:
· Reactive suspension systems
· Manual suspension controls are not approved.
I presume you are referring to Forced Articulation systems where they are controlled by being able to lift a tire at the controllers command. The next rule is a suspension control though which is approved. I am a fan of neat things and if someone can raise or lower their truck via a winch or lift a tire to help it get up an obstacle, that is innovation that isn't beyond most fabricators. Furthermore, it is done in the real world rigs, so it is still a scale function. It also doesn't break the Tire rule highlighted below either since it is still tires that are only touching the earth. What are your thoughts on having this rule?

· Wheelbase may be changed during or between obstacles when it is done by remote, and still fits into the “Box”
at it’s longest length.

Tires
The following are approved for competition:
· Tires can contain commercial weight enhancing products.
· All vehicles can only have four (4) tires.
· The tires can be the only form of propelling the vehicle in any direction.


Anyway, the rules look good. I like em so far.

-Sam

[jason]

Yes Sam I did modify the 1:1 rule book to fit our needs, but I did it the correct way and went through the proper channels and have in my possesion a signed copyrite release from UROC, giveing RCCrawler exclusive rights to use their rules.

Good suggestion on the winch rule, I will make a change that allows this to happen.

That is why I posted these, let's hear some more good constructive comments!

[Grizzly4x4]

How about a minumum weight?

A lot of neat ideas will never get used in competition because they add weight to the vehicle. Also good products such as Maxximizer beadlocks and IMEX JumboMaxx Swamp Dawg tires are great products but they are heavier than stock wheels and Giant Trac tires.

Making it so that we can use these products and remain competitive would help to get in good with different companies
Besides the 1:1 rules have a minimum weight so why not us?

[jason]

minimum weight is a good idea, altough I'm not sure if we'd be able to enforce it. At every event someone would have to have a scale. To be accurate enough it couldn't just be a cheap bathroom scale, we'd need good scales.

If there is enough interest I'll try to figure out a way to make this happen.

[jason]

No input on the 24" X 17" max size rule? That was my biggest hang up. Is it just right? Too big? Too small?

[SR5Dave]

I say no min weight, we want to encourage new ideas, which may include finding ways to make rigs lighter. I also do NOT want a max weight which has been mentioned before, that is rediculous

I like this set of rules, its pretty open, allows for most things within reason, and the scoring system seems logical.

[Grizzly4x4]

Originally Posted by SR5Dave

I say no min weight, we want to encourage new ideas, which may include finding ways to make rigs lighter. I also do NOT want a max weight which has been mentioned before, that is rediculous

But then you could distribute weight better. Just like Jason and Bastard did with their new buggy. I will never be able to run my wide axles, you wont see a competitive "Slinky" rig because it adds too much weight, and you wont see a competitive tuber either. I think having no minimum weight hurts alot of the creativity. :(

Originally Posted by SR5Dave

II also do NOT want a max weight which has been mentioned before, that is rediculous

I agree.

[kevinlongisland]

I have to read through the rules more thoroughly, but I’m glad you guys decided to go with the rules that you ran at the “End of Summer Run”. We used your rules at Boulder Battle 1, and in my opinion, they are much more suited to rock crawling compared to the rules I have competed with in the past. One thing I think is absolutely necessary is a shorter version that can be handed out to the competitors. Most competitors won’t need the whole document.

the first page starts with page number 3. are adjustable ride height systems allowed? Great job guys!

[SR5Dave]

Originally Posted by Grizzly4x4

But then you could distribute weight better. Just like Jason and Bastard did with their new buggy. I will never be able to run my wide axles, you wont see a competitive "Slinky" rig because it adds too much weight, and you wont see a competitive tuber either. I think having no minimum weight hurts alot of the creativity. :(

How would Slinky being too heavy have anything to do with a min weight? :?
If Ace wants to run an adjustable Wheelbase, he is going to have a disadvantage because its heavier than everyone else, its not fair to try to bring others down to make him better. Correct me if I read that wrong.

As for the wide clod... You can, you'll just have to run different offset wheels which will only leave it slightly wider, but your steering will be 100% better!

[JasonInAugusta]

Minimum weight is a bad idea.

For max width...take a set of X-Factor axles, throw some stock Kongs on there, and that's your max width. The widest axle/tire combo on the market.

There are also a few typos in there that Word didn't catch.

[SR5Dave]

Originally Posted by JasonInAugusta

Minimum weight is a bad idea.

For max width...take a set of X-Factor axles, throw some stock Kongs on there, and that's your max width. The widest axle/tire combo on the market.

There are also a few typos in there that Word didn't catch.

X-F on stock kongs would be way too huge, IMO. I think narrowed kongs on an XF is more acceptable... if they want to run huge tires, they better be willing to put some work into it.

[kevinlongisland]

i agree with jasoninaugusta, xf axles are popular, and the best place for kongs are on xf axles. i feel they should be allowed, unmodified.

[hackster]

Kinda curious here. If there were to be a minimum weight what would that weight be. Maybe if we knew what it was we could build our rigs to fit the rules. I dont know if it would fly but it may be an option to look at.

Next question. The stopping rule of four seconds. Has anyone on this site ever had this rule in a competition? I know that here in the nw we have some obstacles that you have to slide down sideways to eventually go forward or even some that you have to stop and work your truck to the left or right to get a tire to finially catch. Just a thought though.

The whole backing rule I understand it and I am not complaining about it I just think that we should be allowed a minimum distance that we are allowed to backup say around a corner or nosing up to a rock. We run that you can backup one truck length without imposing a penalty.

These are my only two questions. Otherwise I think they are ok and I appreciate all of your hard work to put an actual rule book together.

[JasonInAugusta]

BTW, I didn't see anything that specified widths of gates.

[jason]

Hackster, we have used the four second stop rule here and it works well. In those places where you are searching for traction, the guy that finds it first, doesn't get the points. Thats the whole idea of competition.

Same principal on reverses, plus it's alot easier to tell if someone reversed at all, then exactly how far they reversed.

Just so many of you know a lot of these rules are the same as UROCs rules, it will make it a whole lot easier if we hold some events in conjunction with the UROC events, and use their Judges.

BTW, UROC is currently discussing dropping the "stop" rule. If they drop it we will as well.

Minimum gate width wasn't put on the list, but was discussed, and I haven't come up with an exact number yet, I'm thinking max width is 17", minimum gate width is 20"

[Ace]

Well my vote is to have a minimum weight. Nothing too restrictive but right now Giant Tracs kick A partly because they are light.

If I mill a titanium chassis down 4 oz lighter than anyone else can people would rightly bitch (well some would). I really think w/o min weight you automatically say "NON CLODS NEED NOT APPLY"

I also LOVED the stop penalty and reverse penalty at the last get-together. Speed the comp up unbelievably. When this sport really takes off how are we going to run 50+ guys thru a comp? Taking 2 minutes + per gate isn't much fun to stand around watching waiting your turn.

The stop and reverse penalties also make you think on your feet and I like that.

[Highmark]

Who'se buying the scales?

The rule itself doesnt matter to me really (even with that little 4 pound rig setting over my sholder), but I have to wonder who is going to supply all of the stuff needed to run the trucks threw tech, and do it accurately. The box rule is no biggy seeing as how you can get a yardstick for $4 but once we start talking precision scales it gets complicated.

[kevinlongisland]

just one more thing. At Boulder Battle #1, we ran the simplified version of these rules and, in my opinion, found 1 serious problem.

#1 Rollovers. "Vehicles must be turned over sideways."

90% of the time, this will position the vehicle facing in the reverse direction. Secondly, our courses here have gates close together due to the terrain. We found that often when a rollover occurs, the truck will roll past a completed gate. Now the competitor has to redo a gate he/she has already completed. I believe some provision for re-position would greatly improve rollover situations.

i also think a 40 point boundary marker is a rather steep penalty, but thats up to you guys. and i don't think a minimum weight is a good idea. the rollover issue is most important in my opinion.

[Fishmaxx]

I couldn't find a rule on repositions.

No more repositions?

I do think repositions should carry steep penalty.