2013 scale rules discussion or question thead

[War Pig]

Originally Posted by badhoopty

i think this is going way too deep into subjectivity. unless this is all jsut banter and im taking it way too serious.

i dont NEED the oil in the shocks, but they serve a functional purpose. just as i dont NEED shocks on a leafer, but they serve a functional purpose.

the weights in my wheels (or knuckle weights) arent needed, but they have a function. but in my opinion would never be considered a functional item.

imho the functional points are for the cake decorating items that can be used in a comp and arent there to just add realism to the truck. tow rope, pullpal, toolbox that holds things, wrench inside that toolbox for the wheels, etc.

I agree with you. If you really dig, you can count lots of things as functional items. I think we just need to use reason and stick with things like a tow strap, d-rings, pull pal, winch fairlead, sand ladders, opening doors or hood, spare tire mount, bungee cord....those kinds of things that are obviously functional items. The thing about this scale hobby and SORRCA competition is that you have to use your head and be reasonable or it's not going to be fun anymore. Too many rules = no more fun......it's really all up to the competitors.

[johnnyh66]

well put

[youngblood]

Would this count as a custom body?

[doublej]

To be a custom body it must be completely made from stratch.
Thats a clean job though...

[Generis]

Originally Posted by War Pig

The thing about this scale hobby and SORRCA competition is that you have to use your head...

It didn't take long to get 54 points on this thing, and it's not very complicated of a build. I was pleasantly surprised how stuff started adding up in each scoring category, and maxing points in each category is the idea. Having 20 functional items doesn't matter if the max for that category is 8 points (or whatever).
I know I'll be building smart and tough for next year's comps, and it won't be too hard to hit the points max just by doing smart things and adding in categories where you are low.



(PS: are we keeping this going through 2014, or will there be a 2014 thread?)

[War Pig]

You're correct, it's really not that hard to get these points without even trying. I'm sure there will be a few clarification tweaks to the 2014 rules. I'll probably start a 2014 discussion thread once they are updated, until then.....let's keep this one rolling.

[sgtbham]

I am getting ready to build a body but I have one quick question; are "hot rod" fenders where the tires have to be inside for class two? For example; lets look at this pic


rodtruck by sgtbforza, on Flickr

Whats the minimum tire width for calss two? The red arrows or the blue one?

[Meatwad]

"120mm / 4.75" max tire size with a 2.2 max rim size including spare.

Body/cage work must be at least 4.5" tall (including boat sides) and the inside of the front tires cannot extend outside of the width of the cab at the doors."

[sgtbham]

Originally Posted by Meatwad

"120mm / 4.75" max tire size with a 2.2 max rim size including spare.

Body/cage work must be at least 4.5" tall (including boat sides) and the inside of the front tires cannot extend outside of the width of the cab at the doors."

I apologize for this one, I dont know how I got confused on that one - thanks for your patience

[rocksteadily]

so, i have a question, and yes ive read the rules. but, ive been curious about this for a while. in the rules, it states that truggies are tube from behinf the skid back. what if you leave frame in the back and tube in the front? its essentially still have truck, half buggy. what are your thoughts on this?

[TURTLE]

Originally Posted by rocksteadily

so, i have a question, and yes ive read the rules. but, ive been curious about this for a while. in the rules, it states that truggies are tube from behinf the skid back. what if you leave frame in the back and tube in the front? its essentially still have truck, half buggy. what are your thoughts on this?

Illegal. While the name is derived from half buggy half truck the rules expressly stated the back of the vehicle. While I have not been with the rules committee since the beginning I image its this one for a couple reasons. One being duplication of full size vehicles. And two because there can be built in advantages with making a tube front end, such as clearances, weight and so on.

[rocksteadily]

Originally Posted by TURTLE

Illegal. While the name is derived from half buggy half truck the rules expressly stated the back of the vehicle. While I have not been with the rules committee since the beginning I image its this one for a couple reasons. One being duplication of full size vehicles. And two because there can be built in advantages with making a tube front end, such as clearances, weight and so on.

iunderstand, and i figured itd be illegal, i was just qurious on the matter. just another thought, is having a truggy rear end not also an advantage?or would it be too much of and advantage to do a tube front?

[mjderstine]

ok, so my question time:

an F-Toy with full rails. is this a legal C2 rig?
if i decide to cut the rails rear of the center skid and make it a tube frame will i get truggy points for this considering the tube body?

[sam63]

Originally Posted by mjderstine

ok, so my question time:

an F-Toy with full rails. is this a legal C2 rig?
if i decide to cut the rails rear of the center skid and make it a tube frame will i get truggy points for this considering the tube body?

I would like to know as well, this resembles something I may build next...

Never mind, went back a few pages and found it, he already asked if it was legal and got his answer....must have a bad memory.

[mjderstine]

Originally Posted by sam63

I would like to know as well, this resembles something I may build next...

Never mind, went back a few pages and found it, he already asked if it was legal and got his answer....must have a bad memory.

yup. it was kinda an inside joke between me and the wall since the same questions are asked over and over again.

[GiJoe]

Simple question:

If a winch uses a toggle switch mounted to a vehicle to operate, are you penalized with a "Touch" during comps for working the switch?

[War Pig]

Originally Posted by GiJoe

Simple question:

If a winch uses a toggle switch mounted to a vehicle to operate, are you penalized with a "Touch" during comps for working the switch?

No, you can flip a switch for your winch without penalty. The only thing I'd caution is to make that switch easy to access. If you start moving an upside down rig to get to the switch, that's when you get into "touch" penalties.

[dragonracing]

tim, for 2014. will there be a discussion on the change for the spare tire size rule? i know you and hotwheels have had this discussion before. he told me about it. and i would have to agree with him on the tire size. most spares are smaller and considered full size. a full size spare (2013 rules) takes up so much room on some vehicles that there is little room left for other items and it looks disproportionate in the back of my tf2. it would be nice to see that rule made to within 1/2" of full size tires on your rig. it would almost make it possible to mount a full size spare under the bed (stock location) on the tf2 toyota trucks. thoughts?

i run a 1.9 mtz as a spare and its too big. looks wrong. a 1.55 mtz would look much better as a spare. and still usable. maybee it has to be a usable spare and not a fake spare. we had a trail run where we had to change to a spare tire half way thru. all competitors had to change as a team and finish before any team member could continue. was pretty cool.

[War Pig]

Originally Posted by dragonracing

tim, for 2014. will there be a discussion on the change for the spare tire size rule? i know you and hotwheels have had this discussion before. he told me about it. and i would have to agree with him on the tire size. most spares are smaller and considered full size. a full size spare (2013 rules) takes up so much room on some vehicles that there is little room left for other items and it looks disproportionate in the back of my tf2. it would be nice to see that rule made to within 1/2" of full size tires on your rig. it would almost make it possible to mount a full size spare under the bed (stock location) on the tf2 toyota trucks. thoughts?

i run a 1.9 mtz as a spare and its too big. looks wrong. a 1.55 mtz would look much better as a spare. and still usable. maybee it has to be a usable spare and not a fake spare. we had a trail run where we had to change to a spare tire half way thru. all competitors had to change as a team and finish before any team member could continue. was pretty cool.

The current rule is within 1/4" which I think is reasonable. Going to 1/2" I just think is too out of proportion. A 1.9 MTZ is 4.19" and a 1.55 MTZ is 3.3" so the 1/2" argument doesn't matter in that case. I agree that on a 2.2 the spare can look ridiculous but I don't really see an argument for 1.9's.

[Scrap]

On the spare tyre rule topic:
Use smaller tyres on the truck so you can have the smaller spare.

On to my question which has probably been answered somewhere but I couldn't find it.

If running a Class 1 vehicle against Class 2 vehicles on the same course. What would be a reasonable point advantage to the Class 1 vehicle to make it an even race?

Reason for asking is that we are thinking about starting to use these rules in Finland and are a bit worried that we don't have enough drivers for all classes. Our two current scale classes are very close to Class 2 and 3. As a way of getting more stock looking vehicles we have been rewarding the use of small tyres and penalizing larger ones 1 point / 2 mm with 100 mm being the divider (for ease of calculation).

Of course we could just drop Class 1 because you could just put bigger tyres on your Class 1.