Petition/poll ~ Keep bodiless rigs in Sportsman!!!!

[krawlfreak]

If we are "going back to our roots" does that mean we will also do away with:

Adjustable offset wheels, and for that matter, beadlocks, any servo over 150 oz, od/ud gearing, any tire over 5" tall, clocked c-hubs, steering angles exceeding 45*, lipos, brushless, drag brakes, and digital radios?

'cause, you know, some of that stuff is expensive.

Dont give away any ideas for tenhical advancment yet....not till after a rule is written in stone.
Otherwise those creative ideas may be considered hazurdous by some on the rules comitie to the advancement and growth of the class.

Ok.






Are we to expect a 1.9 rule change for 2012 too?

this thread is deteriorating fast with these sarcastic comments.

keep it positive...things dont need to be so "us against them"

the rules committee is a group from within the group and we all have equal passion for what we do...

disagreements are sure to come but it can be handle in a civil manor

 

[krawlfreak]

A class that MIGHT help?
Sounds like an experiment to me when someone on r/c says it like that.

This thread has been up for two,three days now ? And someone just now stepped up to say nothing is set in stone? The sportsman class was run at crawlapaloosa. Allowing bodieless chassis to run,for national points... IMO the whole series now needs to be ran the same way. This should have been addressed long before the start of the 2012 point series.


And then to say you'd rather see new drivers at nationals instead of 100 guys that shaped and supported this hobby for years now?????!!!!!
I don't know how everyone else feels but, I don't belive we as a whole need anyone with that logic deciding our future and rules...

sportsman was run at crawlapalooza as a demo if i am not mistaken...

 

[Stormin2u]

I know exactly how you feel, and PERCEPTION is reality.

I think creating a class that will compete at the National level will do a lot to help with the status part of it, AND I also feel the if the class is perceived ANOTHER high tech class it won't attract NEW members.

If giving current drivers more drive time is what people mean by growing the sport then thats cool ......but not what I was looking for;-)

John, Sorry I missed your post. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts. "thumbsup"

The class will attract new and some old members back as well, but by itself without a strong high level of competition and member participation nothing has changed. Thats still the same boat just a different day.

I sure your enjoying the "Sporty" builds with lot's of that old school creativity and excitement, what a perfect place to introduce new members to our hobby? I have one going myself it's really a irresistible formula. With all this new enthusiasm for the old 2.2 shafty some of it is partly due to the fact that the bodiless chassis has become common place.

We need more than just new drivers to bail out our fading numbers we need to keep the ones we have. Let's put the two together new and old in a great class for a better future?

 

[rock hard]

this thread is deteriorating fast with these sarcastic comments.

keep it positive...things dont need to be so "us against them"

the rules committee is a group from within the group and we all have equal passion for what we do...

disagreements are sure to come but it can be handle in a civil manor

hmmm.I'm not being sarcastic
I'm serious,If a idea is mentioned,a grey area so to speak...and its not well recieved by rules commitie,I have no doubt it would be nipped in the bud while rewritting the rule.

and is not so much us against you.
its YOU against them really

as in,you who support restricting the chassis are in essence,against those who run it,.....using it as it was intended.

I support the use both bodies and bodiless.
so really I'm all inclusive in that reguards....I am however very frustrated to the core that this even happened in the 1st place.as are many others...as such that frustration is evident in our posts...some respones in support are understandable even if we disagree,like fish's and manning.
others however with thier lack of substance simply frustrate even more.

I have had my ass handed to me many times in the rules section
didint hear you or anyone else saying...."hey keep it civil" then.(except maybe fish once)
and I have not been uncivil IMO nor Duuude...
its just hot in here
Now I'm not so good with words like stormin is,as such you may take it as uncivil....its not
this redneck is just callin it like he reads it,in as civil a manner his redneck nature allows

evevryone has to eat crow once in a while

 

[TC09mini]

After reading a good amount of this, I'd like to chime in.

I am doubtful there is any correlation between Bodiless sportsman trucks and the perception of non RCC's that there is a large amount of money tied up. I knew getting into this hobby that it would take some coin to be competitive and I think this is generally understood by anyone considering the Remote controlled world. That being said, I'm not sure how, if any way, we could do research and collect any kind of valuable data in this area.

As someone that came late to the show, I just really started to attend large events in the past year. I traveled to ECC and Rocas Rojas and plan on making it to Motorama this year. Personally, I think it is the large event and seriousness of the drivers that scares the newbs away and rightfully so. I also don't think there is anything any of us can really do about that except try and not take these events quite so seriously. (but honestly, where's the fun without some serious competition right?!)

Additionally, I think prices of tickets for some of these events are a bit too high. That being said, I know these events take some time and planning to put on so I'm not sure what can be done about that either. Possibly instead of having sponsor driven events, having local clubs take on the responsibility of putting together an event. The Alabama guys seem to have a great model for this with their Turkey Crawl.

Finally, the down turn in the economy I'm sure has made people think twice before buying an $500+ plane ticket (or equal amount to drive a car long distances with hotels), comp fees, hotel rates, etc. the list goes on. I can speak personally that the amount of money I'm throwing at my RC's has decreased within the last few months. Certainly not a reflection of the awesome products vendors are putting out, just a caution about the future.

Anyway, not sure I really cured anything with all of that, just my thoughts.

 

[Fishmaxx]

A class that MIGHT help?
Sounds like an experiment to me when someone on r/c says it like that.

This thread has been up for two,three days now ? And someone just now stepped up to say nothing is set in stone?



Believe it or not I actually have other thing to do besides watch RC Crawler threads 24/7.


And then to say you'd rather see new drivers at nationals instead of 100 guys that shaped and supported this hobby for years now?????!!!!!
I don't know how everyone else feels but, I don't belive we as a whole need anyone with that logic deciding our future and rules...

Sorry you feel I am not the right man for the job
fortunately for me others feel that I am.

I my eye there is a difference between growth as a technological advancement, and growth as in attracting new drivers or bringing back old school guys.

I just don't understand how " taking it back to our roots" is helping to push or grow our hobby? I'm not saying it won't, just someone needs to explain how it will...So your point is that all these awsome new parts that our great vendors produce are hurting our sport?

In real estate they call it curb appeal. Its a proven method of attracting home buyers. A house could be perfect on the inside, but if the first thing you see is weeds, leafs, and crap in the yard you get turned off. In RC Crawling some people get turned of by bodiless rigs. Again the thought was doing something that would possible attract some new blood WHILE AT THE SAME TIME keeping it attractive to current drivers.

Its already been proven many times at the local level if the class is not available to the high level drivers it will fail, so beginner & an spec type classes were not considered as options.

this thread is deteriorating fast with these sarcastic comments.

keep it positive...things dont need to be so "us against them"

the rules committee is a group from within the group and we all have equal passion for what we do...

disagreements are sure to come but it can be handle in a civil manor

Don't you know anything Jeremy...so far people have claimed we have ulterior motives, lacking knowledge, or just plain stupid....and people wonder why we don't discuss these topics in public.

John, Sorry I missed your post. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts. "thumbsup"

The class will attract new and some old members back as well, but by itself without a strong high level of competition and member participation nothing has changed. Thats still the same boat just a different day.

I sure your enjoying the "Sporty" builds with lot's of that old school creativity and excitement, what a perfect place to introduce new members to our hobby? I have one going myself it's really a irresistible formula. With all this new enthusiasm for the old 2.2 shafty some of it is partly due to the fact that the bodiless chassis has become common place.

We need more than just new drivers to bail out our fading numbers we need to keep the ones we have. Let's put the two together new and old in a great class for a better future?

Randy, even though I am quoting you don't take this a directed at you;-)

If this class allows bodiless rigs I will run a bodiless chassis or tuber. Maybe that sounds hypocritical, but I am trying to think beyond my personal preferences. If we chase off more than we attract then that is not growth, and I understand that.

 

[92LILREDYJ]

This is what I get out of it (from reading this and other threads)... The committee is heavily Axial favored, and Axial needs to sell some ax10's.




Also the Fastback can not be converted like some of the others chassis. So no Jason its not a 5 min swap.

 

[Hardline]

It'll never work. No, I mean really.

Sportsman is a dual-use class. Some use it for sport entry, others want it to be another hard-core comp class. Anything you do to help one side will hurt the other.

Just making it a national class will attract many accomplished drivers to the "new" national class which will move it further from a "novice class". Most on this forum would refuse to call it a novice class anyway, yet it's frequently used as such.

The King of California event in Monterrey said it was offering a novice class. When asked, the novice class was of course Sportsman.

If you go this way, body or bodiless, the novice class aspect of Sportsman is gone. If you guys don't think you need one, then you'll be happy with the results.

For those who think the future of the sport requires an entry level, then you better keep thinking. I don't like the idea of adding classes, but if you actually offered a class named NOVICE, maybe the hot-shots looking for low-hanging fruit would be too embarresed to enter it.

One half-hearted vote for a national 2.2S and a NOVICE class. Yes locals could do it on their own -- but few do. If it were part of the USRCCA rule-set, might get some action.

/s/ Sportsman Novice

 

[rock hard]

I see the reasoning,but curb appeal is just gonna get you to the door.its not gonna get you to buy the house.

I can appreaciate your ideology on the subject.I do howver feel its wrong.
You said it,its got to be competitive,you have to keep the old inntersted or there will be noone to pursuade the new blood into the hobby.

they will buy thier truck and find thier club doesnt run it,cuz the guys run moa and bodieless.

hopefully you guys have seen by the pole,that the best way to keep shafty alive is to keep bodieless,and shafty is a great entry level plateform.

bodiless is also a great platform.
in moa,me and my wife was instantly getting the hard line easier
in spertsman my son was able to flip it instead of taking the rollover
once I put a cab on his slingshot.and as a result...less penalties,better scores,ect.

bodieless is the way to go,no reason to go agaist the grain.

the curb appeal you mention....everyone who walks up and see my boodieless is floored by its aggressive looks...that IS curb apeal IMO

and when they see its capabilities they are floored again....thats what gets them hooked.not how it looks,but what it does.

the real deal breaker for most is the cost.....the chassis is not bad by itslef...its everything else that adds up.


you guys have to do what you think is best.....but not allowing bodieless will hurt,no 2 ways about it IMO

it will hurt vendors,it will hurt drivers,it will hurt the enthusiasm that has been building in the class itself.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

this thread is deteriorating fast with these sarcastic comments.

keep it positive...things dont need to be so "us against them"

the rules committee is a group from within the group and we all have equal passion for what we do...

disagreements are sure to come but it can be handle in a civil manor

I'm not being sarcastic. If the focus is keeping costs down and making it easier for newcomers to be competitive, then why stop at the so-called "expensive" bodiless designs? Was my bodied vs bodiless price comparison wrong? Aren't custom wheels and outrageous steering angles, earth moving servos, and lipo setups "technological advancements" that would be cost prohibitive to newcomers?

The basis and attitude in this thread has not changed. We argued with the committee's reasoning when you first posted, and we still are. If you feel you are being singled out or taking the brunt of this disagreement, then why not ask your fellow committee members why they aren't helping you out. They've come and gone and not said a word, and those few that have have done far more to make this debate uncivil than I have.

I just find it tiring, insulting, and completely ridiculous that we shafty drivers have to keep taking it in the ass whenever so-called "growth" is involved.

 

[toyotax10]

Hey fish,
I did not mean you are not the man for the job. And I apologize for that coming out like it did.
I'm simply saying, that we need guys on the committee that are swayed more toward the guys who have been in the hobby for years. Not so much the new guys that "MIGHT"
stick around for awhile.
I just don't like that you'd rather see 25 new faces than the 100 that have and will continue supporting our great hobby.

 

[toyotax10]

Oh, and as far as you haveing veterans things to do....
You've been in here alot more than just the couple times you've posted...

 

[rock hard]

Oh, and as far as you haveing veterans things to do....
You've been in here alot more than just the couple times you've posted...

I didint catch that...did he say veterans thing to do?

In fishes defense,he was likly considering the best way to word what he had to say.

it doesnt do any good if your points are not taken as you intended them.

 

[toyotax10]

...
I meant to say other...lol
Damn phone thinks its smarter than me...probably is.
Sorry.

 

[rock hard]

Don't you know anything Jeremy...so far people have claimed we have ulterior motives, lacking knowledge, or just plain stupid....and people wonder why we don't discuss these topics in public.

alterier motive?the whole thing seemed to be kinda shady to me,no knowledge of it till its done....some memebrs not being able to vote on such a bann,no appearent desire to wait for thier opinion,ect.

lacking knowledge?I guess the idea that bodies bring drivers was based on knowledge....I'd deffinatly say its lacking such.

stupid...damn,did we say someone was stupid...or their "idea" was stupid..

even good/smart people have bad ideas sometimes,even with the best of intentions,and it sounds like thats what has happened here.

 

[krawlfreak]

I'm not being sarcastic. If the focus is keeping costs down and making it easier for newcomers to be competitive, then why stop at the so-called "expensive" bodiless designs? Was my bodied vs bodiless price comparison wrong?

The basis and attitude in this thread has not changed. We argued with the committee's reasoning when you first posted, and we still are. If you feel you are being singled out or taking the brunt of this disagreement, then why not ask your fellow committee members why they aren't helping you out. They've come and gone and not said a word, and those few that have have done far more to make this debate uncivil than I have.

I just find it tiring, insulting, and completely ridiculous that we shafty drivers have to keep taking it in the ass whenever so-called "growth" is involved.

the focus was perception. it has been stated by more than one committee member.

also it has been stated maybe we need to re examine our decision.

i assure you you are not hurting my feeling at all. i am a big boy and can handle more than you know.

the fact is i have been on the recieving end of some rulings and i understand your issues and your distress. i came into this not to change your mind but to explain the idea. i am an open person and i speak accordingly.

now you have the bigwig of the deal stating that he is open minded, as well as some of the members that voted torwards running a body...

your last comment still shows you are thinking we hate the shafty class and we want to keep you down, when the truth is we want it to be successful and then some.

 

[toyotax10]

Well I feel like an ass now ...
I did not mean to put anyone down. I am sorry.
I am done posting here,I will continue to read along but, will keep my thoughts to myself.

GOOD LUCK GUYS!"thumbsup"

 

[Fishmaxx]

This should have been addressed long before the start of the 2012 point series.

The previous organizer of USRCCA Nationals was not interested adding another class to the event. I just took my new position in Sept. At that time I was given authority to add additional classes if I wished to organize them.

So I started looking at my options. Do I want to just sell tickets or do i want to give something back to sport. Create something will attract new members. There is a lot of demand for this a sportsman type class. There is also demand for a a spec or novice class.

Creating multiple NEW classes is not possible due time, cost, and limited man-power. I also thought about the name of the class. The class thats being considered is NOT SPORTSMAN...its call 2.2S Class. Sportsman Class has a lot of negative associations with it, and I want something new.


Maybe your right its too late to try to this for 2012, and honestly if its going to be source of this much drama it might be easier to scrap the idea all together.

The last thing I need right now is a bunch people calling Rule Committee names.

Sorry for any inconvenience considering 2.2S for 2012 has caused.

This is my last public post on the topic. If you wish to discuss this topic in a serious intelligent manner with me feel free to shoot me your number. I will call ASAP"thumbsup"

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

the focus was perception. it has been stated by more than one committee member.

also it has been stated maybe we need to re examine our decision.

i assure you you are not hurting my feeling at all. i am a big boy and can handle more than you know.

the fact is i have been on the recieving end of some rulings and i understand your issues and your distress. i came into this not to change your mind but to explain the idea. i am an open person and i speak accordingly.

now you have the bigwig of the deal stating that he is open minded, as well as some of the members that voted torwards running a body...

your last comment still shows you are thinking we hate the shafty class and we want to keep you down, when the truth is we want it to be successful and then some.

Yes, you and a couple others said early on that you were reconsidering. That is good to hear and we all appreciate it.

My intention was never to hurt feelings, merely to openly criticize the committee's ruling. If people are getting butt-hurt because I'm not playing along, then so be it.

Name another class that has been back-seated as much as the shafty class has in the past couple years.

MOA took a big upswing and took drivers and corporate/vender interest away from us. If it weren't for our die-hard shafty drivers and the vendors that support them, this class would be dead. Axial hasn't released a new comp shafty design beyond what they've initially offered us 6 or 7 years ago.

Now we've got renewed interest and growing numbers because some of us have been working hard to develop new products for the aged platform that we love. Banning bodiless is a kick in the nuts to everyone here.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

There is a lot of demand for this a sportsman type class. There is also demand for a a spec or novice class.

Creating multiple NEW classes is not possible due time, cost, and limited man-power.

:roll:

Here, I'll volunteer my time and man-power.

Rules for spec class:

Box stock only.

Rules for Novice:

Sportsman rig rules apply. Force bump into sportsman after x amounts of wins.