BC-Brian build body or bodiless

[Robbob]

Question on a bodiless rig we saw this past weekend.

It was presented as a bodiless using a secret agent as the main chassis. The body is attached only by the 4 upper link mounts at the chassis. Side panels are the silver pieces double sided in place. The side panels meet requirements but the cab/body is what's questioned.

Would this be looked at as a Body being its one piece lexan/polycarb type material? Would it be allowed to run in a regional/national level event?





Thanks.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

[ROWDY RACING]

I am guessing no because the chassis is missing the cab therefore not bodiless, if the cab was on the chassis underneath it would be good?

If that were legal people would run mini body's and say it's the cab of a bodiless.

Eager to hear what someone with some pull thinks.

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

It's a illegal bodied rig.

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by ROCKEDUP RICKY

It's a illegal bodied rig.

It's an illegal bodied rig.

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

an.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

I am guessing no because the chassis is missing the cab therefore not bodiless, if the cab was on the chassis underneath it would be good?

If that were legal people would run mini body's and say it's the cab of a bodiless.

Eager to hear what someone with some pull thinks.

Yup that's what I was thinking, we'd see more pieces of lexan just wrapped over chassis.

Originally Posted by ROCKEDUP RICKY

It's a illegal bodied rig.

Thanks Ricky.


Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

[crawlinghulls]

Robbob - Thanks for posting this up - We let it run and the owner has a compelling argument, I'm sure we'll be hearing it soon.

[JohnRobHolmes]

Originally Posted by krawlfreak

As much as I don't like it...

If it has the required dimensions of the bodiless rig I can't see why it would not be legal.

There is no mention in the rules of what type of material has to be used to present a cab and it has additional body panels as well....

I am sure the intent would be argued but,

It is clever, none the less.

That is how I see it too, there is nothing that states a cab couldn't be made from lexan, nor is there a testable "rigid" definition. There are bodiless chassis made from lexan already, they are just cut and bent instead of vacuum formed- at this particular time. Unless there is going to be a rule that mandates material thickness and being made of XX number of pieces there isn't a good way to define it without relying on "intent" rules that are hazy at best. It is probably time that bodied and bodyless dimensions are brought together anyway.

[krawlfreak]

Originally Posted by Speedracer19

▪ 2.1.5 - Bodiless vehicles: Must be a self-supporting, structurally complete, rigid frame. The 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). Bodiless vehicles should resemble a 1:1 vehicle.
There is a rigid frame and a roof raised 1" from the main chassis

It appears to meet the height requirement

▪ 2.1.5.1 - Bodiless vehicles must have solid hood panel, solid roof panel and a minimum of 2 solid side-panels.
They look to be solid and all there

▪ 2.1.5.1.1 - Hood, roof and side panels must be separate pieces of solid material installed onto the bodiless vehicle frame.

See above


▪ 2.1.5.1.2 - All body panels are to be separate pieces from the complete structural frame.
Again see above


▪ 2.1.5.1.3 - Body panels must be solidly installed in a manner that is representative of a 1:1 vehicle.

See above again

A number of these would cover why that is not a Bodiless chassis...

I really can't fully agree with you on this

[BC-Brian]

Hey Guys,

This is my Rig. I read the rules pretty carefully and can not find anything in the rules that show it not being a legal bodiless chassis.

▪ 2.1.5 - Bodiless vehicles: Must be a self-supporting, structurally complete, rigid frame. The 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). Bodiless vehicles should resemble a 1:1 vehicle.

The cab/topper is a structuraly complete rigid frame. It has a roof that is raised 1" from the main chassis. It is 8.1" long, 3.1" wide, and 3.85" tall.

▪ 2.1.5.1 - Bodiless vehicles must have solid hood panel, solid roof panel and a minimum of 2 solid side-panels.

The 4 panels were cut out of a Redbull can, seen lots of people running beer cans so there should be no problem there.

▪ 2.1.5.1.1 - Hood, roof and side panels must be separate pieces of solid material installed onto the bodiless vehicle frame.

They are separate pieces and are installed onto the topper (bodiless frame)

▪ 2.1.5.1.2 - All body panels are to be separate pieces from the complete structural frame.

See above

▪ 2.1.5.1.3 - Body panels must be solidly installed in a manner that is representative of a 1:1 vehicle.

Using double sided tape, representative of 1:1 is iffy, never seen body panels attached to a real truck with zip ties. That being said i could easily use screws, rivets, or zip ties.

▪ 2.1.5.1.4 - 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.

They are all the appropriate size.

▪ 2.1.5.1.5 - Body panels must be fitted to the vehicle, and not be exaggerated in size or shape that intentionally
distorts the vehicles legal measurements.

They are not exaggerated


So with all that being said, I do understand that this is taking advantage of some vagueness in the rules. But isn't that what it's all about.

Some other things to think about.

What if it was not Lexan? I can just as easily vacuum form Delrin.

What if it were thicker? It is around .030" but what if it was .080, thicker than most of the material cabs are currently made of.

Rob mentioned that it is attached with the 4 upper link screws. What if it were attached with more screws, or screws solely used to mount the cab.

I am curious to hear what people have to say but i can't find anything in the rules that specifically identifies this as an illegal approach.


Thanks

[Speedracer19]

How can you say this resembles a cage on the top? No bars? No cross members?

Before long the damn rule book is going to be like R.O.A.R.'s...

[BC-Brian]

Originally Posted by Speedracer19

How can you say this resembles a cage on the top? No bars? No cross members?

Before long the damn rule book is going to be like R.O.A.R.'s...

Where does it say it has to resemble a cage, or have bars or cross members?

[krawlfreak]

Originally Posted by Speedracer19

How can you say this resembles a cage on the top? No bars? No cross members?

Before long the damn rule book is going to be like R.O.A.R.'s...

Where does it mention it has to look like a cage or bars?

I mean how can you even say any of these comp crawlers even resemble a 1:1?

I guess my new laminated carbon fiber cab wouldn't be legal in your eyes?

[Robbob]

its 11.5" long x 5 " wide and a little over 3 inches tall

This body was questioned for its legality in the 2.2s class. It's obviously under body specs but if he wants to run 2.2 it would fit as long as he says its 'bodiless' ???




Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

[BC-Brian]

Originally Posted by Robbob

This body was questioned for its legality in the 2.2s class. It's obviously under body specs but if he wants to run 2.2 it would fit as long as he says its 'bodiless' ???

And he attaches a Hood, Roof, and 2 side panels. Sure.

Screwing it to the chassis instead of using body clips may help his cause.

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by BC-Brian

Screwing it to the chassis instead of using body clips may help his cause.

1:1's sometimes use hood pins to secure body panels.

[krawlfreak]

Originally Posted by Robbob

This body was questioned for its legality in the 2.2s class. It's obviously under body specs but if he wants to run 2.2 it would fit as long as he says its 'bodiless' ???




Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

It is lacking the body panels needed.

Like I said earlier, think this guy had a very clever way to meet the requirements of the bodiless vehicle.

Whether I like it or not I can't find a reasonable answer to why it is not legal other than what the "accepted" view as to what a bodiless chassis looks like.

I think it will never be seen as acceptable in some people's eyes but I am not seeing where it is illegal by any specific wording in the rules

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by krawlfreak

It is lacking the body panels needed.

So if he attached panels on the mini body it's good?

[BC-Brian]

Based on what is in the current rules I would say Yea...

[krawlfreak]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

So if he attached panels on the mini body it's good?

I would caution the word "good" because more than likely it would be turned away at any national level comp , but.....

if it met the required dimensions it would be hard to say it was illegal by anything other than your perception of the accepted look of the bodiless chassis available....

I think this is a discussion the rules committee should look at.