2013 Rules

[stubs179]

Won't it be out of spec every time he digs and the rear shocks are fully compressed?

[Calderwood]

Originally Posted by stubs179

Won't it be out of spec every time he digs and the rear shocks are fully compressed?

I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case with a few of the "new spec" chassis that are barely 3" tall and have angled skids.

[JeremyH]

Originally Posted by stubs179

Won't it be out of spec every time he digs and the rear shocks are fully compressed?

Well, the tech judge is supposed to measure the truck at any point in suspension cycle, so the truck would need to meet that measurement at all of those points. However, I have yet to see a judge measure the bodiless chassis dimensions while cycling the suspension.

[Illeagle]

I have been reading along and just biting my tongue but I am going to throw my 2 cents in anyway. In my dumb ass opinion I think a chassis should be able to meet the specs just sitting ON ITS OWN. In other words if you put the chssis on a table with nothing bolted to it, it should pass tech. I probably missed where any rule says it will be measured at ride height on a vehicle but if you look at rule # 2.1.5.1.7 it doesnt say anything about the chassis being measured at ride height and it even shows an illustration of a chsssis sitting by itself with the spots to measure it. Can one of you way smart guys enlighten me as to what I am not seeing in the rues? TIA.

[JeremyH]

▪ 2.1.2 - All vehicle specifications regardless of class, body or bodiless the measurements are to be taken in the vehicle's ready to run condition while sitting on a flat surface (i.e. tech table).

[krawlfreak]

this is not a hard concept guys...

place the truck on the tech table in the ready to run condition, as mentioned in 2.1.2


measure the lowest to highest point.
under 3" = bad
over 3" = good

this particular truck measures 3.1"

[ROWDY RACING]

Can you define tech table please?

[HARDKNOCKZ]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

Can you define tech table please?

Well its not that easy. Can you define the word define?

[stubs179]

Originally Posted by JeremyH

Well, the tech judge is supposed to measure the truck at any point in suspension cycle, so the truck would need to meet that measurement at all of those points. However, I have yet to see a judge measure the bodiless chassis dimensions while cycling the suspension.

I understand why they wouldn't with any traditional chassis. With suspension at both ends it won't change much. But the chassis in question will change drastically considering the lowest point is at one end and the tallest at the other and it only as shocks at one end.


I guess it doesn't really matter because that chassis is in no way an advantage.

[JeremyH]

Originally Posted by stubs179

I understand why they wouldn't with any traditional chassis. With suspension at both ends it won't change much. But the chassis in question will change drastically considering the lowest point is at one end and the tallest at the other and it only as shocks at one end.


I guess it doesn't really matter because that chassis is in no way an advantage.

You're right, but sometimes questions need to be addressed.

[Olle P]

So I suppose this body (with no width issues) is perfectly legal for a shafty...



... provided it's sitting at an 11 degrees tilt.



Length > 12.5".
Height > 3".
Roof > 1" above hood.

Correct?

[JeremyH]

Originally Posted by Olle P

Roof....hood

Where? And where?

[stubs179]

Originally Posted by JeremyH

Where? And where?

It's the thin piece sticking off the front.

It's an exaggerated version of the chassis in question but every bit as legal according to how they are saying to measure the hight per the rule book.

[JeremyH]

Originally Posted by stubs179

It's the thin piece sticking off the front.

It's an exaggerated version of the chassis in question but every bit as legal according to how they are saying to measure the hight per the rule book.

I dont have a problem with the overall height of the chassis, but I dont see a roof to measure the 1" difference from.

BTW, so he says this:
"So I suppose this body (with no width issues) is perfectly legal for a shafty..."

Are we talking about the S class? Because these rules being discussed are only for bodiless chassis.

[Hardline]

Originally Posted by Olle P

So I suppose this body (with no width issues) is perfectly legal for a shafty...



... provided it's sitting at an 11 degrees tilt.



Length > 12.5".
Height > 3".
Roof > 1" above hood.

Correct?

In my opinion, no not "perfectly legal". More like technically legal under some interpretations. For example, some will say it has to actually be a body and what you've described isn't. Some will share that interpretation, some will not. If it ever got to be an actual problem instead of just something to have fun arguing over, they'd do a clarifying rule change. But that's just my take.

[HARDKNOCKZ]

C'mon guys. Read the rules...ALL of the rules & quit trying to manipulate them for your own benefit.

Read section 2 & tell me how you can interpret ANYTHING there as using a 3" wide stick set on an angle as legal.


2.1 - General:
▪ 2.1.1 - Vehicles are limited to 4-wheeled vehicles only. These 4 wheels can be the only source of propulsion for the vehicle.
▪ 2.1.2 - All vehicle specifications regardless of class, body or bodiless the measurements are to be taken in the vehicle's ready to run condition while sitting on a flat surface (i.e. tech table).
▪ 2.1.3 - Wheelbase is measuring from centerline of front axle stub to centerline of rear axle stub.(See rule 6.4)
▪ 2.1.5 - The Vehicles roof must be raised a minimum of 1” from the main chassis to resemble a cockpit. The frame sides must be an overall minimum of 1” tall (The cockpit & frame side are to be measured vertically from where the hood intersects the cab).
▪ 2.1.5.1 -Vehicles should resemble a 1:1 vehicle.
▪ 2.1.5.2 - Vehicles must have a hood panel, roof panel and a minimum of 2 side-panels.
▪ 2.1.5..3 - Body panels must be solidly installed in a manner that is representative of a 1:1 vehicle.
▪ 2.1.5.4 - All panels (roof, hood, and sides) must have at least 2x measurements greater than 1", and a minimum of 3.5 square inches of exposed solid surface area.
▪ 2.1.5.5 - Body panels must be fitted to the vehicle, and not be exaggerated in size or shape that intentionally
distorts the vehicles legal measurements.
▪ 2.1.5.1.6 - Shocks and fasteners (nuts, bolts, washers, or spacers) shall not be included in the measurements of the vehicle.
▪ 2.1.5.1.7 - Vehicles body/ bodiless measurements must reach a minimum of (A) width, (B) length, and (C) height. Measurements may include, but not limited to bumpers, stingers, frame-rails, side-rails, skid plates, roof, hood, and side panels.See Illustration B.
Illustration B.

[Tgreer]

This is off your current topic, but I would like to see 2.8 wheels become legal for the pro class! What's the pros and cons to this???

[Calderwood]

Originally Posted by Tgreer

This is off your current topic, but I would like to see 2.8 wheels become legal for the pro class! What's the pros and cons to this???

Just build a super.

[Tgreer]

Originally Posted by nigels_world

Just build a super.

Nope! Not what I want to do! Super uses a 3.8 wheel, so I would like to see the pro class run 2.8 it's comparable in my opinion!

[HARDKNOCKZ]

I'm sure that I can speak for the whole rules committee when I say that we have no plans of changing the allowable wheel size. We have enough issues to juggle as it is.

If you feel compelled...write up a nice proposal explaining why changing the allowable wheel size of 2.2 would benefit the competition crawling community as a whole & I'll gladly present it to the RC for a vote.

J.D.