RCCrawler Forums

Tupers · 07-24-2009, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EeePee

Yeah! It had the big BEC in it. I think?

Yeh 6V bec and they still make it. http://www.teamtekin.com/rebel2.html

mississippirocs · 07-24-2009, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EeePee

Sounds like all my shafty trucks, so I'm in.

4WS is lame. Go back to before dig. 2WS.

Chassis requirements to fit a nostalgic time period or no?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tupers

Limiting the motor specs would be a nightmare but brushed only might be good?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eritex Inc.

Sounds like fun but I am not sure how much less that class would cost. True, you are not buying a dig but the second $100.00+ servo and the 3 channel radio for 4WS offsets that. Also, opening it up to any motor and 3s lipo, you will be seeing some seriously high HP rigs.

True old school class would be a 2.2 version of the 1.9 class...

1. 2 channel radio
2. shafty
3. no dig/disconnect
4. single brushed 35 to 65 turn motors
5. 135oz max front servo
6. 2s lipo or 7 cell NiMH
7. no beadlocks
8. no wheel weights
9. spec tires (Mashers and Moabs)
10. 4 link suspension
11. chassis or link mounted battery

That pretty much looks like what most of the original 2.2's looked like back in '04-'05.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EeePee

Might as well make it a TQ3 and HiTec 645 spec.

We didn't have an ESC with drag brakes either. Super Rooster spec!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tupers

GC1's and Pimp Slaps only.

Sounds like the rig I have now.

So basically you guys think it should be an Axial RTC class but allow comp chassis's

Eritex Inc. · 07-24-2009, 03:31 PM

This is old school....

Shaggin' Wagon................The Begining of Stage 2

TLTCrawlin · 07-24-2009, 03:46 PM

bulu and pimp slaps!!

Tupers · 07-24-2009, 03:46 PM

One make electronics would be cool, any axles with pedes only would good if a little annoying.

dezfan · 07-24-2009, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tupers

One make electronics would be cool, any axles with pedes only would good if a little annoying.

I'm out.

Eritex Inc. · 07-24-2009, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dezfan

I'm out.

You always were a hater

dezfan · 07-24-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eritex Inc.

You always were a hater

Didn't run one of those pieces of shit back in the day, wouldn't run one now.

Hell I haven't touched a crawler in months, so my opinion doesn't matter much.

TLTCrawlin · 07-24-2009, 04:04 PM

Stealth transmissions. I ran one of them.

FrankyRizzo · 07-24-2009, 04:13 PM

I wanted to limit it to 55 turn motors but the Goat was brought up and so that is why it is there.

I would love to have 5" max for tires but the tire people have too much into it to not let them in. So tires not an issue.

I guess the 4 ws could go. I liked it from day one. If you really think that you need a 400 oz in torque servo for the rear then I guess it is an issue.

I would limit the steering servo torque limit but I would hate to see busted servos being an issue and cost.

I left beadlocks in because the Axial come stock with them. Added expense to get another set if the rules dictated it. Trying to keep this so a box stock axial or other rig can drop and go.

I wouldn't mind a 7.4 or 2S limit. That could work.

2 channel radio kind of hard. Most of us run spectrum and at 3 channels or more. I don't think it is an issue.

wonder squirrel · 07-24-2009, 04:14 PM

Shafty only
Single brushed motor
Chassis or link mounted battery
6 cell NimH battery (nostalgia and cheap remember)
2.2 wheel size
No dig/ disco
No four wheel steer
12.5" wheelsbase

Or you could just do a box stock Axial class with limits on tires and electronics.

rj_dio · 07-24-2009, 04:49 PM

I think this is a great idea! I've been in RC for about 10-ish years now and been doing trials/crawling type driving for about 6 years. I've never wanted to compete because it seemed that the constant need for expensive upgrades and technology distract from the fun of the messy outdoors.

I think wonder squirrel has the class nailed. I don't think a "spec" class is needed, but one that focuses more on the raw fun of the outdoors. Simple, fun, affordable

.

TomEGunn · 07-24-2009, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eritex Inc.

True old school class would be a 2.2 version of the 1.9 class...

1. 2 channel radio
2. shafty
3. no dig/disconnect
4. single brushed 35 to 65 turn motors
5. 135oz max front servo
6. 2s lipo or 7 cell NiMH
7. no beadlocks
8. no wheel weights
9. spec tires (Mashers and Moabs)
10. 4 link suspension
11. chassis or link mounted battery

That pretty much looks like what most of the original 2.2's looked like back in '04-'05.

#'s 7,8 and 9... I prefur beadlocks and wheelweights , I could see a weight limit though, that would work. And tires I believe should be up to the driver. Everone has a personal favorite set they think gives then an edge...

IMO........

Harley · 07-24-2009, 05:13 PM

I don't see why 3s would be out of the question. But just as long as lipo is allowed I guess it isn't a big deal.

Just Zach · 07-24-2009, 05:46 PM

In the interest of keeping this cheap for people if that is your goal then I would allow 3s. I know a few people that would have to buy a 2s battery because all they have is 3s.

Harley · 07-24-2009, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Zach

In the interest of keeping this cheap for people if that is your goal then I would allow 3s. I know a few people that would have to buy a 2s battery because all they have is 3s.

<---- this guy

bigflex · 07-24-2009, 06:01 PM

This is a cool idea. But I have one suggestion. Theres alot of guys that own clod axles that are just collecting dust. What about allowing stock width clods? I know a lot of guys ran them back in the day ( me included ) and they didn't have any kind of advantage really. By requiring them to be stock width if there was a 5" tire limit they will really lose any advantage they might have.

dieselfuel · 07-24-2009, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Zach

In the interest of keeping this cheap for people if that is your goal then I would allow 3s. I know a few people that would have to buy a 2s battery because all they have is 3s.

and me, i don't own any 2s batteries.

Reflection · 07-24-2009, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetboat

An 8711 type servo can be made to fit in a 645 case

Make it plastic knuckles and C's ONLY,no aluminum upgrades. Kills that idea

Tupers · 07-24-2009, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dieselfuel

and me, i don't own any 2s batteries.

Woe is you.

07-24-2009, 03:31 PM	#23
Eritex Inc. RCC Addict Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: in the woods Posts: 1,915	This is old school.... Shaggin' Wagon................The Begining of Stage 2

07-24-2009, 03:46 PM	#24
TLTCrawlin I wanna be Dave Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Eastern WA Posts: 2,489	bulu and pimp slaps!!

07-24-2009, 03:46 PM	#25
Tupers Rock Crawler Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Great Britain Posts: 935	One make electronics would be cool, any axles with pedes only would good if a little annoying.

07-24-2009, 04:04 PM	#29
TLTCrawlin I wanna be Dave Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Eastern WA Posts: 2,489	Stealth transmissions. I ran one of them.

07-24-2009, 04:13 PM	#30
FrankyRizzo I wanna be Dave Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Vegas Posts: 7,172	I wanted to limit it to 55 turn motors but the Goat was brought up and so that is why it is there. I would love to have 5" max for tires but the tire people have too much into it to not let them in. So tires not an issue. I guess the 4 ws could go. I liked it from day one. If you really think that you need a 400 oz in torque servo for the rear then I guess it is an issue. I would limit the steering servo torque limit but I would hate to see busted servos being an issue and cost. I left beadlocks in because the Axial come stock with them. Added expense to get another set if the rules dictated it. Trying to keep this so a box stock axial or other rig can drop and go. I wouldn't mind a 7.4 or 2S limit. That could work. 2 channel radio kind of hard. Most of us run spectrum and at 3 channels or more. I don't think it is an issue.

07-24-2009, 04:14 PM	#31
wonder squirrel Rock Crawler Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Central Coast Posts: 667	Shafty only Single brushed motor Chassis or link mounted battery 6 cell NimH battery (nostalgia and cheap remember) 2.2 wheel size No dig/ disco No four wheel steer 12.5" wheelsbase Or you could just do a box stock Axial class with limits on tires and electronics.

07-24-2009, 04:49 PM	#32
rj_dio Pebble Pounder Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oregon Posts: 104	I think this is a great idea! I've been in RC for about 10-ish years now and been doing trials/crawling type driving for about 6 years. I've never wanted to compete because it seemed that the constant need for expensive upgrades and technology distract from the fun of the messy outdoors. I think wonder squirrel has the class nailed. I don't think a "spec" class is needed, but one that focuses more on the raw fun of the outdoors. Simple, fun, affordable .

07-24-2009, 05:13 PM	#34
Harley 20K Club Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Sending illegals home one Hayabusa at a time. Posts: 22,981	I don't see why 3s would be out of the question. But just as long as lipo is allowed I guess it isn't a big deal.

07-24-2009, 05:46 PM	#35
Just Zach '08 2.2 National Champ Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UTRCRC Posts: 5,585	In the interest of keeping this cheap for people if that is your goal then I would allow 3s. I know a few people that would have to buy a 2s battery because all they have is 3s.

07-24-2009, 06:01 PM	#37
bigflex I wanna be Dave Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: drillin Holes for the man Posts: 2,736	This is a cool idea. But I have one suggestion. Theres alot of guys that own clod axles that are just collecting dust. What about allowing stock width clods? I know a lot of guys ran them back in the day ( me included ) and they didn't have any kind of advantage really. By requiring them to be stock width if there was a 5" tire limit they will really lose any advantage they might have.

Sponsored Links

RCCrawler Forums

Thread: The Class 1 discussion thread