Go Back   RCCrawler Forums > Competitions and Events > Scale Comp Rules
Loading

Notices

Thread: twin hammers

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-26-2013, 03:40 PM   #61
Old guy
 
ROCKEDUP RICKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northwest Arkie-saw and we got ROCKS!
Posts: 7,548
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockpiledriver View Post
Contradict yourself in the same post. Awesome.

Then there is this part where you tell TH owners to go elsewhere.



According to others it fits class three or class two with a wheel change.

And this:



If there is not time for it, there is no time for it. Which is it?

I do agree that nutswinger is most certainly not a term that describes me.

You will have to try way harder than that to get under my skin. Here's a few more of these since you like them so much.
I was thinking about making a timed course for that type rig with no rules just run it and have fun, whats wrong with that . It would be no part of the gated courses, I'm sure some body would run it. It would take no time from the gated courses.

I'm not Contradicting myself, I'm trying to make it so we can all have a good time, whats wrong with that, I'm flexable.

I'm not trying to get under your skin, I'm just trying to figure out why somebody who doesn't plan on using the rules would be in here trying to get under the skin of the people who plan on using the rules.

Golly gee willickers.

I think you should write up some rules and if then people would have a choice. The wrong way or your way.
ROCKEDUP RICKY is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-26-2013, 04:09 PM   #62
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sin City
Posts: 3,628
Default

Sorta hard to find a reason to even hit the reply button when people have no care about the out comes they are complaining for..... Call it what ya will but the rules work for what they were designed for. Rigs evol, times change, damn sounds about like life in general don't it.

Ricky I agree - 99% of the rigs I build will be within spec of one class or another because I support the rules. And even if nothing comes of some of us wanting the TH or a tuber for that matter into class2 then so be it. Life kinda sucks that way don't it.

I will ask this to try to get the thread back on topic - It seems you don't think the TH is suited for gates comps..... Why?
doublej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 04:14 PM   #63
I wanna be Dave
 
DISTURBIN' tha PEACE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: On the G-Train!!!!!
Posts: 6,081
Default Re: twin hammers

I just set mine up to crawl & not so much for high speed bashing. What I think it boils down to for most, is that they're afraid of change. Particularly this vehicle. I have not even scratched the surface of it's crawling ability & I know for a fact that it will out crawl any, yes ANY C2 rig. As of right now, it's only shortcoming is break over & maybe steering angle.
DISTURBIN' tha PEACE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 04:33 PM   #64
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sin City
Posts: 3,628
Default

Mind you mine is completely stock - but I don't see it ever getting that good. Just 2cents.

But I would love to hear what exactly you think gives it the upper hand. Of course IFS vs solid axle has been on going for years.
doublej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 04:38 PM   #65
Old guy
 
ROCKEDUP RICKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northwest Arkie-saw and we got ROCKS!
Posts: 7,548
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublej View Post
Sorta hard to find a reason to even hit the reply button when people have no care about the out comes they are complaining for..... Call it what ya will but the rules work for what they were designed for. Rigs evol, times change, damn sounds about like life in general don't it.

Ricky I agree - 99% of the rigs I build will be within spec of one class or another because I support the rules. And even if nothing comes of some of us wanting the TH or a tuber for that matter into class2 then so be it. Life kinda sucks that way don't it.

I will ask this to try to get the thread back on topic - It seems you don't think the TH is suited for gates comps..... Why?
The TH don't fit in the rules, thats it. I think they are a cool little rig.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DISTURBIN' tha PEACE View Post
I just set mine up to crawl & not so much for high speed bashing. What I think it boils down to for most, is that they're afraid of change. Particularly this vehicle. I have not even scratched the surface of it's crawling ability & I know for a fact that it will out crawl any, yes ANY C2 rig. As of right now, it's only shortcoming is break over & maybe steering angle.
The only other short coming is the pan chassis, it don't fit the rules. Change the rule and I 'll change with it, I'm not scared.
I wish I would have measured Tommy's this weekend, does it even fit the other measuremnets of class 2.
Is it 4.5 tall,is the front bumper mounted to the rail chassis,does it have a rail chassis,is the chassis 3 inches longer than the wheelbase. If I had one in front of me, I'd go down the list.
It's a class 3 rig at best and would get it ass handed to it, but you want to take it to class 2 and kick everyones butt.

The rules were here before the TH.
ROCKEDUP RICKY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 04:39 PM   #66
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 5,027
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROCKEDUP RICKY View Post
I was thinking about making a timed course for that type rig with no rules just run it and have fun, whats wrong with that . It would be no part of the gated courses, I'm sure some body would run it. It would take no time from the gated courses.
Because, golly gee wilikers, you just excluded a rig from participation and made it an "also ran"

Either allow them or write them out. Make no mistake I do not plan on using sorrca rules because of issues exactly like this.

Great idea! Just tell all the TH owners that want to experience our hobby "you guys go play over there"

Why travel for that?

Besides it was stated earlier that they had no chance against a well built C2 rig. As a TH owner myself, I agree with DTP.
Rockpiledriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 04:49 PM   #67
Old guy
 
ROCKEDUP RICKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northwest Arkie-saw and we got ROCKS!
Posts: 7,548
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockpiledriver View Post
Because, golly gee wilikers, you just excluded a rig from participation and made it an "also ran"

Either allow them or write them out. Make no mistake I do not plan on using sorrca rules because of issues exactly like this. I'm not on the rule committee *

Great idea! Just tell all the TH owners that want to experience our hobby "you guys go play over there" Who said it would be over there, the same people do both. You could go run the course while waiting to run. We could have a top time prize for each day.

Why travel for that? I'm not asking you to go any where.

Besides it was stated earlier that they had no chance against a well built C2 rig. would that be with the same set of rules As a TH owner myself, I agree with DTP.
The only issue with the rules is the rig don't fit in them, why is that the rules fault.
ROCKEDUP RICKY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 04:59 PM   #68
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sin City
Posts: 3,628
Default

I don't want them in C2 to kick anyone's butt bc I don't think it's gonna. I want it in C2 bc it is the most used class for new guys and the rig was made for 1.9s.
doublej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 05:11 PM   #69
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 5,027
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROCKEDUP RICKY View Post

I'm not on the rule committee * Thanks for the compliment! Then your opinion is no more or less valid than mine oh ambassador for sorrca.

Who said it would be over there, the same people do both. You could go run the course while waiting to run. We could have a top time prize for each day. Exactly! An also run, I get it Ricky.

I'm not asking you to go any where. Pretty sure that any national event sponsor wants as many people there as possible. That's a great come back.

would that be with the same set of rules I don't know, what exactly makes it illegal? I haven't seen any actual rule or measurement yet that does. If it does, then so be it. Not adjusting those rules for new stuff is a bad idea.


The only issue with the rules is the rig don't fit in them, why is that the rules fault. It's not. Do you think this is going to be the last new rig offered that will fall into this category?
Crazyness!
Rockpiledriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 06:16 PM   #70
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 16,952
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockpiledriver View Post
I don't know, what exactly makes it illegal? I haven't seen any actual rule or measurement yet that does.
I would guess this one:
• You must run a rail chassis (for example: Bruiser/Mountaineer, SCX-10, Reign RC K2-3S, 3L, 4, 5, MFM, X-Trail, CR-01, UTE, etc...) No TVP (twin vertical plate) chassis' or frame rail extensions on a TVPs. The exception to this rule is the Tamiya CC-01 or TA-02 ,(Hummer, S-10, Ford F-150 and Toyota Hilux)and Modified class Tubers.
JeremyH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 06:40 PM   #71
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: .
Posts: 7,967
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeremyH View Post
I would guess this one:
• You must run a rail chassis (for example: Bruiser/Mountaineer, SCX-10, Reign RC K2-3S, 3L, 4, 5, MFM, X-Trail, CR-01, UTE, etc...) No TVP (twin vertical plate) chassis' or frame rail extensions on a TVPs. The exception to this rule is the Tamiya CC-01 or TA-02 ,(Hummer, S-10, Ford F-150 and Toyota Hilux)and Modified class Tubers.
We have already been over the bogusness of that rule.
ROWDY RACING is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 07:14 PM   #72
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sin City
Posts: 3,628
Default

It's not an illegal rig guys. Sorry if we are confusing ya'll.
as long as the measurements are good (I'm in the middle of moving or I would measure mine) then it is a tuber under class3 ruling.
At that point the pan has nothing todo with it. It's a flat bottom skid like many rigs before it - RC and 1:1.
doublej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 07:44 PM   #73
Gettin’ back on the horse
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hoonsville
Posts: 6,671
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by DISTURBIN' tha PEACE View Post
I just set mine up to crawl & not so much for high speed bashing. What I think it boils down to for most, is that they're afraid of change. Particularly this vehicle. I have not even scratched the surface of it's crawling ability & I know for a fact that it will out crawl any, yes ANY C2 rig. As of right now, it's only shortcoming is break over & maybe steering angle.
You know I thought the same thing about my 1994 Nissan Pathfinder years ago. I though all those guys with two solid axles and lockers were suckers...
TURTLE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 07:50 PM   #74
Gettin’ back on the horse
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hoonsville
Posts: 6,671
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublej View Post
It's not an illegal rig guys. Sorry if we are confusing ya'll.
as long as the measurements are good (I'm in the middle of moving or I would measure mine) then it is a tuber under class3 ruling.
At that point the pan has nothing todo with it. It's a flat bottom skid like many rigs before it - RC and 1:1.
Actually by the definition of the rules it is illegal. IMO and several others it is considered a tub style vehicle. The tube work IMO is a bolt on body.Im not saying I like it, but by definition of the rules it is along with (for instance) the Tamiya DF-01 are not on the approved tub chassis list. Don't put too much into though, things change quickly around here.
TURTLE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 08:00 PM   #75
RCC Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: CALI "209"
Posts: 1,970
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by DISTURBIN' tha PEACE View Post
I know for a fact that it will out crawl any, yes ANY C2 rig. As of right now, it's only shortcoming is break over & maybe steering angle.
I would really like to see these go up against a C2 rig I don't think it would have a chance and for the exact reasons you stated


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockpiledriver View Post
Either allow them or write them out. Make no mistake I do not plan on using sorrca rules because of issues exactly like this.

As a TH owner myself, I agree with DTP.
If the TH was allowed to run in a National event would it even matter to you?, because it's still a SORCCA event.
finishline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 08:13 PM   #76
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sin City
Posts: 3,628
Default

The IFS vs SA battle has gone on for years. Lol the top 10 runners at KOH this year way IFS heavy by a long shot and who won? Bomber Fab in his bullet proof SA buggy. Does that mean anything to us or any agreement for that matter. Nope: I think we will all agree 80% driver, 10% luck of the day, 10% rig. Or something along those lines.

And Turtle I love ya man but there ain't no Pan chassis in 1:1 offroading. So how are we gonna mimic that medium if we don't follow the same terms, rigs, and rules?
doublej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 09:03 PM   #77
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 5,027
Default Re: twin hammers

Class-2 “Trail”
• Description - A stock vehicle that has been modified to become a capable trail rated rig and is not necessarily street legal . check

• You must run a rail chassis (for example: Bruiser/Mountaineer, SCX-10, Reign RC K2-3S, 3L, 4, 5, MFM, X-Trail, CR-01, UTE, etc...) No TVP (twin vertical plate) chassis' or frame rail extensions on a TVPs. The exception to this rule is the Tamiya CC-01 or TA-02 ,(Hummer, S-10, Ford F-150 and Toyota Hilux)and Modified class Tubers. I can modify this tube chassis by cutting off a few tubes.

Class-2 “Trail” Details:

• 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. This one could vary but on a surface plate with a height gauge I measure mine at 4.510"
• A front bumper is required and must be mounted to the vehicle's rail chassis and must be wider than the outside of the chassis rails (chassis cross rails do not count as bumpers).
• You must run a full rail chassis, and the chassis (including bumpers) must be 3" longer than the wheelbase (this includes a chassis with a truggy rear frame). The tube portion of the TH fits within this rule by 1.5"
•Truggies are allowed, but you must replace the ladder frame behind the cab with tube, and the truggy rails must extend past the rear axle pumpkin to be legal. The bed must have a roll bar hoop and integrated shock mounts. It also must be a structural part of the rear of the vehicle. (If your bed does not meet ALL of the preceding criteria, it does not count as a truggy bed).
• Flatbeds that run the full length of the rail chassis are allowed. The bed must be as wide as the cab the entire length of the bed.
• 2 of the 3 following modifications are allowed:
- Dovetailing the rear (a truggy/tube bed that is narrower than the cab counts as a dovetail). check
- Boat sides (no more than 1" measured vertically).
- Pinching the front (2/3 the width of the widest part of the cab).check cab is 5.810" at the screw head. 5.820/3 is 1.936" Front bumper is 2.010" screw head to screw head.
• Sectioning or narrowing of the body is not allowed.
• 120mm / 4.75" max tire size with a 2.2 max rim size including spare.
• Gates will be a minimum of 12" wide (so mind your width).
Rockpiledriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 09:09 PM   #78
RCC Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: RC Addict Garage
Posts: 1,004
Default

Why is the only plastic tub allowed the CC-01? Seems lame. :-) I'll gut one and make a full metal tuber out of it. Just mail it to me.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
Tin Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 09:26 PM   #79
I wanna be Dave
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sin City
Posts: 3,628
Default Re: twin hammers

Here is the bigger problem Rockpile, can't accept one tuber without accepting them all. I can make a list of why I think they should be and one main thing will always make me think twice about it all. What would allowing any tuber in Class2 do for the betterment of all? Just because doesn't do it for me.
doublej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 10:05 PM   #80
RCC Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: CALI "209"
Posts: 1,970
Default Re: twin hammers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockpiledriver View Post
Class-2 “Trail”
• Description - A stock vehicle that has been modified to become a capable trail rated rig and is not necessarily street legal . check

• You must run a rail chassis (for example: Bruiser/Mountaineer, SCX-10, Reign RC K2-3S, 3L, 4, 5, MFM, X-Trail, CR-01, UTE, etc...) No TVP (twin vertical plate) chassis' or frame rail extensions on a TVPs. The exception to this rule is the Tamiya CC-01 or TA-02 ,(Hummer, S-10, Ford F-150 and Toyota Hilux)and Modified class Tubers. I can modify this tube chassis by cutting off a few tubes.

Class-2 “Trail” Details:

• 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. This one could vary but on a surface plate with a height gauge I measure mine at 4.510"
• A front bumper is required and must be mounted to the vehicle's rail chassis and must be wider than the outside of the chassis rails (chassis cross rails do not count as bumpers).
• You must run a full rail chassis, and the chassis (including bumpers) must be 3" longer than the wheelbase (this includes a chassis with a truggy rear frame). The tube portion of the TH fits within this rule by 1.5"
•Truggies are allowed, but you must replace the ladder frame behind the cab with tube, and the truggy rails must extend past the rear axle pumpkin to be legal. The bed must have a roll bar hoop and integrated shock mounts. It also must be a structural part of the rear of the vehicle. (If your bed does not meet ALL of the preceding criteria, it does not count as a truggy bed).
• Flatbeds that run the full length of the rail chassis are allowed. The bed must be as wide as the cab the entire length of the bed.
• 2 of the 3 following modifications are allowed:
- Dovetailing the rear (a truggy/tube bed that is narrower than the cab counts as a dovetail). check
- Boat sides (no more than 1" measured vertically).
- Pinching the front (2/3 the width of the widest part of the cab).check cab is 5.810" at the screw head. 5.820/3 is 1.936" Front bumper is 2.010" screw head to screw head.
• Sectioning or narrowing of the body is not allowed.
• 120mm / 4.75" max tire size with a 2.2 max rim size including spare.
• Gates will be a minimum of 12" wide (so mind your width).
I guess I'm not understanding but how does this meet the rail chassis requirement.
finishline is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



twin hammers - Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Twin hammers rc iceman 1.9 Scale Rigs 7 02-13-2013 12:14 AM
Twin Hammers are in!!! tunnalram North Dakota 0 02-11-2013 04:08 PM
Twin Hammers Rock Concepts Videos! 4 01-31-2013 02:50 PM
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2004-2014 RCCrawler.com