padailey

iTrader: (11)

Probably nothing new from me but I'll put in my vote.

Keep at least the same detail... performance of the body should not matter.

Additional bodies - my order would be

Notchback Mustang
Javelin
Cougar
'70 Mustang
'70 Camaro
Firebird
Ford Falcon

Light buckets would be cool! Just not sure if it would be worth it considering how beat up these bodies get fairly quickly.

Oh and my list above... HURRY!! PLEASE!!

snoopyrc

iTrader: (2)

While I am with you on wanting to at least keep the same detail. It doesnt do much good if the shell doesnt hold up. Thats why Im good with the current formula or going a little thicker on some shells. Im all for light buckets. I would race with them in and lit. Even if it gets beat to crap, it would look so cool. Tail lights baby.


+ Me. I know HPI would outperform Pegasus on the 70 Boss.

kwkride

iTrader: (6)

My vote would be for option "A"
HPI provides a nice level of detail to their bodies already. It might be nice if they could be made a little bit thicker to help with durability.

As others have already said, the cool looking bodies in this class are far more important than the performance. It's the looks that are attracting new drivers.

If you are looking to add other bodies, I think that the Javelin needs to be the next one added. It played an important part in the history of Trans Am and I think it would be great to run one on the track.

I would also like to see a '70 Firebird body.

nashrcracer

iTrader: (1)

only 48 hours to the 2.4 hours

Sohlman113

iTrader: (1)

I have a body question. The USVTA rules state that the bodys have to be accurate Trans Am series cars that raced from I believe from 68 to 72 in the 5 liter class. I want to know why the Bolink 70 Nova is not on the list. If you go to wikipedia and look up the Trans Am series it gives you a list of cars that participated in those years and the 70 Nova is on it. I am just asking because in my oppinion the more cars that are out there the more variety there is and that is awesome.

robk

iTrader: (22)

1966 Chevrolet Chevy II Nova #95
The original builders of this car were Neal Wegner and Dan Spiegel in 1966.

It is the only Nova to ever compete in the SCCA Trans-American Series.

It raced in the July 19, 1970 Road America SCCA Trans-American Championship and the August 16, 1970 Watkins Glen SCCA Trans-American Championship races.


BL2278 '70 Nova

Unfortunately it is not the same model. That's why it was never legalized.

I know, the mustangs aren't exactly the same either.

robk

iTrader: (22)

Andyh

1.Realism
2.Javelin-Firebird-Cougar
3.Roll cages and interiors-OH YES

robk

iTrader: (22)

Speaking of realism, what would you guys think about a requirement to at least run a driver in your car? I have a driver (the famous B. Jucha bobblehead) that I should have in the car more often. Sometimes I think we are worrying about the performance aspect too much.

liljohn1064

iTrader: (17)

If it'll slow you down a little, sure! Can we outlaw programmable ESCs in this class to keep speeds down too?

Sohlman113

iTrader: (1)

I see your point but I still think some of the other older car bodies such as the nova and pantera should be legal. It would just add more variety to the class and plus with a 21.5 the body is not going to make a big difference.

Sohlman113

iTrader: (1)

Drivers are cool but non programmable esc's I disagree with. The whole purpose of this class I thought was to make it affordable and use what you have already. Alsmost everybody that runs uses a competition brushless esc. To change the rule would make people buy an esc that they are only going to run one class with and that makes no sense.

JCarr

iTrader: (2)

I don't think it should be a requirement. I like the idea but it could be a pain if you go through bodies like water. I know a few that do.

liljohn1064

iTrader: (17)

I'm talking about the Tekin RS and the LRP models that have advanced timing profiles specifically and I own 4 Tekin RSs. All Brushless ESCs have some settings you can manipulate. The problem comes when someone feels the need to take their car to the next level and put down big money on a percieved performance enhancement. In this case it is an actual enhancement and the cars run within a couple tenths of the 17.5s. I've seen it happen in this class. It isn't pretty. I will not put an RS in my TA car. Its not fair. A used GTB or Havoc is plenty for these cars. If you have to go that fast, step up to Sedan or RCGT or higher.

hound_dogs_01

iTrader: (16)

If i have to buy another ESC to run in this class i will simply not run in VTA anymore... I build my car around VTA its what ive learnd to drive on road in and a class i would like ot stay in for all of my racing days, but if i have t go buy another ESC I'll simply run 17.5 stock touring car and I knwo a ton of other people that would do the same.... if you change rules people will quit and the class will die.... leave the rules alone except for adding new bodies...


Alex

HarryN

iTrader: (2)

Hello Andy,

I'd like to start off by saying how awesome HPI bodies have become over the years and even able to compete with some of Tamiya's elegant and realistic bodies. Thank you.

Now to answer your questions:

I would prefer unibodies. The two piece bodies are great, but they break way too easily. Sometimes I am scared to race my Mustang. I'd like to get rid of that fear.

My answer is A. By far. And I am sure others here would agree.

It would for concourse events, like the ones at the HPI Challenge. When it comes to racing, again, I'd like to avoid that fear of racing such a beautiful body, especially if it has lights. On the other hand, realistic results after crashes would add a whole new level of realism. Hmmm... something to ponder!

Since this can be an expensive hobby, I think light buckets for LEDs would be great to add as an added option to the bodies.