2013 Rules

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by Tgreer

All right then Rowdy Racing, I believe you have recently started into the super stuff. Tell me then why you use a 3.8 instead of 3.2? The 3.8 gives you more options! If it works for supers why can't we try it for pro running a 2.8?

Same reason I don't run 1.9's on my 2.2 rigs.

[Tgreer]

Originally Posted by nigels_world

You realize that the id of the wheel can be any size you want, right? Only the bead surface is regulated. You can make the inside a larger diameter to allow the weights to sit lower down in the wheel. Infact, it's already been done on here. Instead of changing classes that have been in effect since the beginning, why not think outside the box?

To do what your saying is very difficult! Dlux has already tried this path without good results. To try and build a wheel with a channel in it then try to get the knuckle weight inside that with clearence is not impossible, but highly difficult, plus the trend of wheel widths is so narrow that the channel is very small when it's all said and done. A 2.8 would allow the outside diameter to be lager so that the knuckle can work just like it does now.

[Calderwood]

Originally Posted by Tgreer

To do what your saying is very difficult! Dlux has already tried this path without good results. To try and build a wheel with a channel in it then try to get the knuckle weight inside that with clearence is not impossible, but highly difficult, plus the trend of wheel widths is so narrow that the channel is very small when it's all said and done. A 2.8 would allow the outside diameter to be lager so that the knuckle can work just like it does now.

Difficult is what makes this segment of the rc hobby so interesting.

[Tgreer]

Originally Posted by nigels_world

Difficult is what makes this segment of the rc hobby so interesting.

True! But why not as you say "think outside the box" and do something different since its been done this way since the beginning? Saying we have always done it this way is not an argument. We have added 2.2s so that shaft driven rigs can compete on a level playing field. The specs for bodies just changed this year to allow new ideas for bodies and chassis, so why not continue to promote innovation to possibly make these pro rigs perform even better. Honestly, who is going to hurt from this, everyone is on the same playing field?

[chad30w]

It's not cool unless its their idea tommy.....lol I mean we had an in depth discussion on how to measure a body less rig

[Calderwood]

Originally Posted by Tgreer

True! But why not as you say "think outside the box" and do something different since its been done this way since the beginning? Saying we have always done it this way is not an argument. We have added 2.2s so that shaft driven rigs can compete on a level playing field. The specs for bodies just changed this year to allow new ideas for bodies and chassis, so why not continue to promote innovation to possibly make these pro rigs perform even better. Honestly, who is going to hurt from this, everyone is on the same playing field?

I guess when I say think outside the box I'm saying figure out a way to do what you want, but do it within the rules. You want your knuckle weights lower, figure out a way to do it. Like you said who is it going to hurt if everyone is on the same field? Just like how it is now.

[Calderwood]

Originally Posted by chad30w

It's not cool unless its their idea tommy.....lol I mean we had an in depth discussion on how to measure a body less rig

Do you have something constructive to say?

[Tgreer]

Originally Posted by nigels_world

Do you have something constructive to say?

Actually I think he is on the right track, if it's not the boards idea, then it's not worth doing! We are betting a dead horse, it would obviusly make for a better rig to have a 2.8 setup, otherwise you guys would use 3.2 in the super class. Basicly what your saying is even though it would make the rig better, you guys don't want to improve it.

[chad30w]

Originally Posted by nigels_world

Do you have something constructive to say?

You mean kinda like your comment "just build a super"

[Calderwood]

Originally Posted by Tgreer

Actually I think he is on the right track, if it's not the boards idea, then it's not worth doing! We are betting a dead horse, it would obviusly make for a better rig to have a 2.8 setup, otherwise you guys would use 3.2 in the super class. Basicly what your saying is even though it would make the rig better, you guys don't want to improve it.

I'm not on the rules board and I don't think it's a good idea. We already have a class for big wheels.
Just because a rules change would make a rig more capable doesn't make it a good idea. Rear steer would make a 2.2 more capable. I don't that's a good idea either since just like allowing bigger wheels, it blurs the line between 2.2 and super.

Originally Posted by chad30w

You mean kinda like your comment "just build a super"

I think that comment was valid. If someone wants to build a rig with big wheels there is already a class for it. I pointed that out.

[The Violator]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

Whenever anyone here wants something addressed by the RC a well written proposal is the best way to go about it.

I always thought arguing my point for 8 pages was how things are supposed to get done.

Originally Posted by Tgreer

Actually I think he is on the right track, if it's not the boards idea, then it's not worth doing! We are betting a dead horse, it would obviusly make for a better rig to have a 2.8 setup, otherwise you guys would use 3.2 in the super class. Basicly what your saying is even though it would make the rig better, you guys don't want to improve it.

I am with you. We should be allowed 2.8 wheels and 15" wheel base. Oh wait. That would be a Super. I think we should be allowed to run super in 2.2. And MOA in shaftsman. And while we are at it, why to we have to run bodies in 2.2S?


Or if you could pull your head out of your ass for a minute you would see that your fighting for more knuckle weight, when all the winning cars are running little to no weight. I know I can squeeze almost 6 ounces per side on my knuckles. If that is not enough, no size wheel is going to fix your horrible car.

[Calderwood]

Originally Posted by The Violator

I am with you. We should be allowed 2.8 wheels and 15" wheel base. Oh wait. That would be a Super. I think we should be allowed to run super in 2.2. And MOA in shaftsman. And while we are at it, why to we have to run bodies in 2.2S?

[Tgreer]

Originally Posted by The Violator

I always thought arguing my point for 8 pages was how things are supposed to get done.










I am with you. We should be allowed 2.8 wheels and 15" wheel base. Oh wait. That would be a Super. I think we should be allowed to run super in 2.2. And MOA in shaftsman. And while we are at it, why to we have to run bodies in 2.2S?


Or if you could pull your head out of your ass for a minute you would see that your fighting for more knuckle weight, when all the winning cars are running little to no weight. I know I can squeeze almost 6 ounces per side on my knuckles. If that is not enough, no size wheel is going to fix your horrible car.

I disagree , and it's not just a matter of more weight, it's a matter of lower weight! Also, having rear steer does blur the line, I agree with that, but using a 2.8 does not, in my opinion and no one said anything about a larger wheelbase! I'm starting to see that this is a shark feast! It's ok for the sharks to be sarcastic a**es, but any outsider with attitude, no, no, no we are not going to listen to you when you have an attitude!

[Hardline]

Tgreer, while not everyone needs to be rude, it's pretty clear no one shares your visions. Most of us feel the rules are there to define a competition category, not the best possible performer. Then you come along and say hey, this will be better. Don't you see? That's not what we care about.

Once your rules are working...and these are...rule changes should just address problems as they crop up. Maybe some necessary bits and pieces become unavailable and we need a substitution. Maybe someone finds a loophole that ought to be closed. That sort of thing. What we don't need is for the rules to evolve in a way that causes us all to unnecessarily replace our current pricey hardware with the new latest and greatest. There's enough of that already just from hardware evolution staying within the current rules. (Have you priced a full-up Villian lately?)

[Fishmaxx]

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???

Don't see it happening anytime soon.

[Tgreer]

Guys, I'm ok with not wanting to change the wheel rule to 2.8, that's fine! My problem now is how incredibly close minded and finger pointed some of you guys are! I went on here with a simple question that needed a simple and respectable response. I was immediately attacked. This is not how it should be, anyone should be able to ask something or request something in here and receive a dignified and respectable response, not a response that basicly says piss off and go away. I hope in the future people on the committee and others can have a little more respect for everyone that's a part of this forum.

[Calderwood]

Originally Posted by Tgreer

Guys, I'm ok with not wanting to change the wheel rule to 2.8, that's fine! My problem now is how incredibly close minded and finger pointed some of you guys are! I went on here with a simple question that needed a simple and respectable response. I was immediately attacked. This is not how it should be, anyone should be able to ask something or request something in here and receive a dignified and respectable response, not a response that basicly says piss off and go away. I hope in the future people on the committee and others can have a little more respect for everyone that's a part of this forum.

No one attacked you.

[Tgreer]

Hardline, not everyone shares your opinion, apparently just the majority in this thread. You have no idea if the "majority" agree with no 2.8 or not!

Guys, I'm ok with not wanting to change the wheel rule to 2.8, that's fine! My problem now is how incredibly close minded and finger pointed some of you guys are! I went on here with a simple question that needed a simple and respectable response. I was immediately attacked. This is not how it should be, anyone should be able to ask something or request something in here and receive a dignified and respectable response, not a response that basicly says piss off and go away. I hope in the future people on the committee and others can have a little more respect for everyone that's a part of this forum.

[ROWDY RACING]

I showed you respect, it's earned not given, show some get some in return.

[Tgreer]

Originally Posted by nigels_world

No one attacked you.

Telling me to go build a super, is not a dignified or respectable response. It does not even answer my original request. That response is basicly telling me to piss off and go away. That's not how questions and suggestions should be received!

Rowdy, telling me to calm down, but joking off hardnockz and Nigel's responce is not treating everyone the same. Your right, respect is earned, but it's not ok to be pushed around and told to calm down, while others comments are joked off!

Did not mean to post the same response twice, moderator can delete one please.