2013 Rules

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

i am sure tomy brought it up so he could design a chassis with that being the basis for the width.

which by the rules now is legal."thumbsup"

i really dont think there should be any arguing about this. :roll:

I'm not arguing, but we made the measurements smaller and now it's still not taking any gray areas out, the same one are there just smaller.

I read it as he is now using the spacer and shock to get his side rail to the min. To me it 's to far in the gray.
Maybe we should go to the rule committee board and discuss this with the rule committee.
There is a differance in how it is read and needs to be clearer.
I read it , he crossed the line, he reads it different, thus needs to be fixed. I don't care which way, but I think when read we should see it the same afterwards.

 

[krawlfreak]

I'm not arguing, but we made the measurements smaller and now it's still not taking any gray areas out, the same one are there just smaller.

I read it as he is now using the spacer and shock to get his side rail to the min. To me it 's to far in the gray.
Maybe we should go to the rule committee board and discuss this with the rule committee.
There is a differance in how it is read and needs to be clearer.
I read it , he crossed the line, he reads it different, thus needs to be fixed. I don't care which way, but I think when read we should see it the same afterwards.

that particular measurement is not smaller..

and to me there is no grey area, it says you can use bumpers and stingers to meet minimum dimensions.

seems cut and dry to me.

if you want to change it the suggestion i said previously is the answer"thumbsup"

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

that particular measurement is not smaller..

and to me there is no grey area, it says you can use bumpers and stingers to meet minimum dimensions.

seems cut and dry to me.

if you want to change it the suggestion i said previously is the answer"thumbsup"

It does say you can use bumpers and stingers, But it looks like he's using the spacer and shock to get his side rail to the min.

 

[J-FAB NOR-CAL]

All fixed end of discussion.;-)

Its way wider then 3'' before the shocks."thumbsup"

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

Now don't you feel better about it. "thumbsup"I do

 

[J-FAB NOR-CAL]

Now don't you feel better about it. "thumbsup"I do

I do!"thumbsup" And like I said,not my style to be the guy that has the ''illegal rig''.I take pride in my designs and pusing the limits of what can be done with these trucks.

 

[krawlfreak]

All fixed end of discussion.;-)

Its way wider then 3'' before the shocks."thumbsup"

wuss:lmao:
.
.
.
.


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
thats all in fun by the way....

 

[Oz Bruiser]

All fixed end of discussion.;-)

Its way wider then 3'' before the shocks."thumbsup"

Well done. This is what i was thinking along the lines of and was talking with Tomi a few hours ago when this discussion started, off line . But you have done it neater than what i was thinking off and discussing with Tomi.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

I do!"thumbsup" And like I said,not my style to be the guy that has the ''illegal rig''.I take pride in my designs and pusing the limits of what can be done with these trucks.

Looks a hell of a lot better too."thumbsup"

 

[slowride1]

so why cant the rule say the chasis must be 1 1/2 in. wide rail to rail. seems to be what every chasis out there is anyways. the skid aera is all 1 1/2 in. an the everyone spaces out to get 3 in. now

just saying

an thats cut an dry

 

[J-FAB NOR-CAL]

I'm glad we can all agree that this is legal the way i have done it now.I banged those out in frustration in about ten minutes.I would like to do something cleaner in cf."thumbsup"

 

[Olle P]

Throwing a proverbial spanner into the discussion I think this rule interpretation goes clearly against the original intentions.
Since the bodiless design should somewhat represent a real (1:1) vehicle the height and width requirements should be met (and measured) at or close to the centre of the vehicle, say within 1" of half way (along the horizontal straight line) between the axles.

I suppose this would make a bunch of the existing designs illegal though...

 

[mfawv]

the rules say 3" width. they don't say it has to be achieved any specific way. that alows for creative thinking"thumbsup", which helps to expand the hobby and sport of RCCrawling."thumbsup"

 

[articzap]

the rules say 3" width. they don't say it has to be achieved any specific way. that alows for creative thinking"thumbsup", which helps to expand the hobby and sport of RCCrawling."thumbsup"

▪ 2.1.5.5 - Body panels must be fitted to the vehicle, and not be exaggerated in size or shape that intentionally distorts the vehicles legal measurements.
▪ 2.1.5.1.6 - Shocks and fasteners (nuts, bolts, washers, or spacers) shall not be included in the measurements of the vehicle.

 

[Wicked Monkey]

the rules say 3" width. they don't say it has to be achieved any specific way. that alows for creative thinking"thumbsup", which helps to expand the hobby and sport of RCCrawling."thumbsup"

Unless I missed it, that clearly is using a spacer to make the width. Sort of like the CC Switch that flares out in the rear of the side panels, using a spacer...am I wrong?

 

[racer_zh]

Unless I missed it, that clearly is using a spacer to make the width. Sort of like the CC Switch that flares out in the rear of the side panels, using a spacer...am I wrong?

That`s correct the Switch is using this Trick to get to his 3" but i think this are 2 diffrent things.

on the Switch:

- It`s a complet Side panel mounted to the Spacer go get to the 3" , so its fits to the Vehicle

In this option:

IT`s just a piece of Lexan screwed to a Spacer....

Would be interested whats Legal and what kind of stuff Illegal, because i do the Tech`s in our Country for the Comps....

 

[mfawv]

Okay so in the case of the spacers, nuts rule, every chassis uses spacers to get its width, so what is the difference? and the piece of Lex is just for demonstration I plan on making it out of carbon which would make it a part of the chassis.

▪ 2.1.5.5 - Body panels must be fitted to the vehicle, and not be exaggerated in size or shape that intentionally distorts the vehicles legal measurements.
that is not my body panel. it is my slider.

▪ 2.1.5.1.6 - Shocks and fasteners (nuts, bolts, washers, or spacers) shall not be included in the measurements of the vehicle.
all chassis use SPACERS to get there width. where is this different.

Can i get some feed back from the rules committee, not MEMBERS. no offence to anyone.

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

▪ 2.1.5.5 - Body panels must be fitted to the vehicle, and not be exaggerated in size or shape that intentionally distorts the vehicles legal measurements.
▪ 2.1.5.1.6 - Shocks and fasteners (nuts, bolts, washers, or spacers) shall not be included in the measurements of the vehicle.

You nailed it. "thumbsup"

 

[mfawv]

Unless I missed it, that clearly is using a spacer to make the width. Sort of like the CC Switch that flares out in the rear of the side panels, using a spacer...am I wrong?

thats what the spacer is for on the outside of the cab?

 

[articzap]

Okay so in the case of the spacers, nuts rule, every chassis uses spacers to get its width, so what is the difference? and the piece of Lex is just for demonstration I plan on making it out of carbon which would make it a part of the chassis.

Can i get some feed back from the rules committee, not MEMBERS. no offence to anyone.

I suggest you start reading at post 87, see link below, up until your post.

If you still feel confused, please post up again stating so.

http://www.rccrawler.com/forum/rules/420729-2013-rules-5.html#post4152359