2017 Scale Rules

[Scrap]

Originally Posted by Ditchrat

I don't give a shyte about knuckle weights, rules are rules, play by them or don't play that's the options. Its the fake indignation that it isn't scale that I find amusing.

If you don't care then why are you even commenting in this thread? Rules are rules. But why must I or anybody else not ask why the rules are the way they are?

[xXxCheeziexXx]

On the new traxxas trx4 would the locking/unlocking diffs being switched on course be the same as dig? It would essentially cause a variance change in ratio of the drivers/passenger side axles. Just curious as it was brought up in a debate and I would like yalls opinion on it.

Thanks

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

[Highmark]

Not in my opinion. Someone else might disagree with me but unless you have cutting breaks I don't see it as a dig.

[Ambis]

Batteries must be chassis mounted and should be hidden from view.

OK so this is only a mock up, but is this battery location considered legal IF I manage to hide it out of view? (By changing it to a smaller size and creating a shroud for it.)



Does the rule basically mean "Do not attach battery mount to your axles/links" or do batteries ACTUALLY have to be mounted to the chassis/frame, not body?

[Jeepy84]

Originally Posted by Ambis

OK so this is only a mock up, but is this battery location considered legal IF I manage to hide it out of view? (By changing it to a smaller size and creating a shroud for it.)



Does the rule basically mean "Do not attach battery mount to your axles/links" or do batteries ACTUALLY have to be mounted to the chassis/frame, not body?

I had saddle packs under my seats in my C1 last year and always passed tech.
They literally held my seats up off the floor so my passengers required no amputations... They just sat a little cross-legged, lol.

Can you flip you battery on its side? It may squeeze up into the
console

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Ambis]

Thanks for your reply but I need a committee member answer because the rule is very specific.

[boob dude]

Originally Posted by Ambis

OK so this is only a mock up, but is this battery location considered legal IF I manage to hide it out of view? (By changing it to a smaller size and creating a shroud for it.)



Does the rule basically mean "Do not attach battery mount to your axles/links" or do batteries ACTUALLY have to be mounted to the chassis/frame, not body?

Your definition of the rules is correct, the battery can't be mounted to the axle or links, but can be mounted in the body

[devilman_76]

Originally Posted by devilman_76

Hi Guy..

I am sorry, an other question..

about:

3D engine: -4
•Must be in a reasonable location and appear to be powering the drivetrain of the vehicle

about dimension..
the 3d engine must have of a reasonable dimension?
can be "little" smaller? but How much little?

can an engine like 0,150 liter take point like 4 liter ??

tks for answer...

any answer?

[Highmark]

I would just ask yourself it it looks realistic. Motors are worth 4 points, which is a pretty large amount of points, so I would say it needs to be as close (proportionally) to the real deal as possible.

[xXxCheeziexXx]

Dash, and steering wheel are separate but the seats are molded into the floor. I wanna say it would be the same as a dinky interior that has the floor/seat combo but would like an official ruling on if this body with interior will get 3d points or no. Thanks for your response in advance.

[Grimreeper]

How about a sawback body. Would it get 3d interior points?

[boob dude]

In my opinion I would say no, the rules says they must be seperate pieces. Is the floor and seat formed into the body? Or are they a seperate piece?

[sgtbham]

Originally Posted by boob dude

In my opinion I would say no, the rules says they must be seperate pieces. Is the floor and seat formed into the body? Or are they a seperate piece?

If thats the sticking point couldnt you just cut the interior out and then re-attach? It meets all the other criteria

[avanord]

Originally Posted by sgtbham

If thats the sticking point couldnt you just cut the interior out and then re-attach? It meets all the other criteria

Which in all honesty would be pointless and it wouldn't look as nice as the molded interior. Sometimes things should be looked at on a case by case basis. This is one of those times. If it meets all those other criteria why not let it go? Sorry. Not trying to be rude, but why make someone go through all that trouble to count points for something that already meets the criteria?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Highmark]

Originally Posted by xXxCheeziexXx

Dash, and steering wheel are separate but the seats are molded into the floor. I wanna say it would be the same as a dinky interior that has the floor/seat combo but would like an official ruling on if this body with interior will get 3d points or no. Thanks for your response in advance.

IMO - same deal as the Dinky interior and would receive points for a 2-seat interior. All parts of the interior are there and complete except maybe a little portion of the floor (which would be under the seat), but the acceptance of the dinky interior (again IMO) sets precedence that this would be considered a 2-seat as well.

I don't like the 'separate' language and IMO it should say 'complete'. People keep mentioning cutting an interior apart and then rebuilding it but that would never turn an interior cover into a full 3D interior. As an example the apache interior below gets cover points because there isn't a complete seat / steering wheel / dash as they're all mashed together. The drivers hands take up part of the steering wheel, part of the seat, the steering wheel is part of the dash, ect. Even if you cut this up and glued it back together these attributes of the interior would not be complete.

[sgtbham]

Originally Posted by avanord

Which in all honesty would be pointless and it wouldn't look as nice as the molded interior. Sometimes things should be looked at on a case by case basis. This is one of those times. If it meets all those other criteria why not let it go? Sorry. Not trying to be rude, but why make someone go through all that trouble to count points for something that already meets the criteria?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, I agree - it was my intent to point out how silly it is to make this illegal on those grounds.

[maxbonv]

Originally Posted by devilman_76

Hi Guy..

I am sorry, an other question..

about:

3D engine: -4
•Must be in a reasonable location and appear to be powering the drivetrain of the vehicle

about dimension..
the 3d engine must have of a reasonable dimension?
can be "little" smaller? but How much little?

can an engine like 0,150 liter take point like 4 liter ??

tks for answer...

It 'a sensible and reasonable question

Originally Posted by Highmark

I would just ask yourself it it looks realistic. Motors are worth 4 points, which is a pretty large amount of points, so I would say it needs to be as close (proportionally) to the real deal as possible.

Sorry, but it's not a complete and reasonable answer ....

A reasonable answer, takes into account the possibility of verifying legality
in a simple and clear and identified way.

In this case, have you thought about what are the minimum requirements for the pre-race checks ?

Excuse me again, but i always have the impression that in many responses of the Committee,
there is awareness that this rules has now become one of the most popular in the world,
this consideration should also provide clear answers in the way of expression, as well as easy identification of the limit,
you have to think that the various local committees of other nations must translate your answers into another language.

I apologize again with you, but my observation wants to be a constructive criticism,
to facilitate the dissemination and application of the regulation also to the extra US Committees,
without misunderstanding or "dark sides"

[sgtbham]

Originally Posted by xXxCheeziexXx

Dash, and steering wheel are separate but the seats are molded into the floor. I wanna say it would be the same as a dinky interior that has the floor/seat combo but would like an official ruling on if this body with interior will get 3d points or no. Thanks for your response in advance.

So is the official answer on this no? (My personal opinion is that is should be a yes!!!) We have a club member asking.

[Scrap]

I'm no committee member but I'd judge that as a full 3D interior.

[Highmark]

Please see my thoughts below in pink.

Originally Posted by maxbonv

Sorry, but it's not a complete and reasonable answer ....

A reasonable answer, takes into account the possibility of verifying legality
in a simple and clear and identified way.

Unfortunately it would be difficult to determine if a scale motor appears realistic by using measurements or proportion because in the 1:1 world there are large variations in the sizes of engines. We could say that every motor must be 1" x 1" x 1" but one could then use a very small v8 that wasn't realistic, while a more scale I4 or smaller engine might be deemed illegal. Thus, we leave the decision up to the event organizer to as to if the scale engine is realistic. Ultimately, the determination of if a vehicle, or a part is 'scale' is always subjective and up to the interpretation of the individual making the decision. This reduces the complexity of the rules, making it easier for a new person to get started so long as they embrace the spirit of scale competition and attempt to build something realistic.


In this case, have you thought about what are the minimum requirements for the pre-race checks ?

Excuse me again, but i always have the impression that in many responses of the Committee, there is awareness that this rules has now become one of the most popular in the world, this consideration should also provide clear answers in the way of expression, as well as easy identification of the limit,
you have to think that the various local committees of other nations must translate your answers into another language.

One consideration that might be of benefit to you is that we encourage groups to modify the rules to fit what works well in your region (for instance, some groups don't run any scale points). If you feel that each scale item should have an associated measurement or something to establish a 'minimum' then you can add it. If it works well, you can propose it and it might get incorporated into the rule set.

I apologize again with you, but my observation wants to be a constructive criticism,
to facilitate the dissemination and application of the regulation also to the extra US Committees,
without misunderstanding or "dark sides"

No apology necessary, your comments are appreciated