World GT Body Debate Thread
03-07-2009, 02:03 AM
#107
03-07-2009, 03:56 AM
#108
i really don't see what all the fuss is about. rc racing IS REAL RACING. it does not have to imitate some other form of racing to be legitimate. if scale bodies are important to you, there are plenty of classes available, including Vintage trans am, and even drifting!
....and i hope that they make a bunch more door stops for variety.
The "door stop" cars look really good, and so what if they aren't "realistic"? they don't have to look like real race cars, because THEY ARE REAL RACE CARS!!
there is even someone dissing the paint jobs, saying that they should all be painted to resemble a full scale counterpart. I don't go to the track to pretend to be Ron Fellows, i go to race, and i want the car to look like my car, not someone elses.
there is even someone dissing the paint jobs, saying that they should all be painted to resemble a full scale counterpart. I don't go to the track to pretend to be Ron Fellows, i go to race, and i want the car to look like my car, not someone elses.
Paint schemes will always be a matter of opinion, but there are very few 'distinctive' paint schemes out there, as you've mentioned, once racing they all look similar and that includes the multicolour 'blurs', so why would you bother painting like that....because you like the look of it.
what people need to understand is that good racing is good racing, and it does not really matter what the cars look like, if thay are fast and fun to drive, they will be popular.
If the cars are allowed to become wedges and get faster and faster (lets not forget the rules in the US are for 13.5's!) then real racing fun will be lost.
Ask yourself why Pan died in the first place if it's so cheap and easy!
Your class had it's chance and died, it's now time for people to have a look at GT's, learn from the mistakes of Pan-cars and do what we think is necessary to help keep it alive.
Skiddins
P.S. You want a wedge car that can slip through the air easily, stick some headlights and a wing on this...it is a real car.
Better still, justify why RC cars don't already look like this if realism means nothing!
03-07-2009, 05:37 AM
#109
Your'e right it doesn't, however if just driving as fast as possible is what your after there are plenty of classes for you, 1/8 Onroad, 1/12, dragsters and Pan-cars, oh no, sorry the last one has already died!
A contradiction in terms
They are indeed real car's, but we do not race a one-make series. So why make them look they are.
Paint schemes will always be a matter of opinion, but there are very few 'distinctive' paint schemes out there, as you've mentioned, once racing they all look similar and that includes the multicolour 'blurs', so why would you bother painting like that....because you like the look of it.
If this is true why are you so adament that they should not look realistic or at least vaguely proportionate?
If the cars are allowed to become wedges and get faster and faster (lets not forget the rules in the US are for 13.5's!) then real racing fun will be lost.
Ask yourself why Pan died in the first place if it's so cheap and easy!
Your class had it's chance and died, it's now time for people to have a look at GT's, learn from the mistakes of Pan-cars and do what we think is necessary to help keep it alive.
Skiddins
P.S. You want a wedge car that can slip through the air easily, stick some headlights and a wing on this...it is a real car.
Better still, justify why RC cars don't already look like this if realism means nothing!
A contradiction in terms
They are indeed real car's, but we do not race a one-make series. So why make them look they are.
Paint schemes will always be a matter of opinion, but there are very few 'distinctive' paint schemes out there, as you've mentioned, once racing they all look similar and that includes the multicolour 'blurs', so why would you bother painting like that....because you like the look of it.
If this is true why are you so adament that they should not look realistic or at least vaguely proportionate?
If the cars are allowed to become wedges and get faster and faster (lets not forget the rules in the US are for 13.5's!) then real racing fun will be lost.
Ask yourself why Pan died in the first place if it's so cheap and easy!
Your class had it's chance and died, it's now time for people to have a look at GT's, learn from the mistakes of Pan-cars and do what we think is necessary to help keep it alive.
Skiddins
P.S. You want a wedge car that can slip through the air easily, stick some headlights and a wing on this...it is a real car.
Better still, justify why RC cars don't already look like this if realism means nothing!
Spot on mate, spot on
03-07-2009, 09:37 AM
#110
nobody said slip through the air easily or whatever, they mean have adequate aerodynamics to allow the performance of the car to atleast provide a pleasurable experience.. here, let's turn your argument on it's head..
since performance doesn't matter why do cars have adjustments for performance.. just put a nice realistic body on a slab of fiberglass, put some crappy electronics in it, and race it? after all, handling isn't important for fun, right? i mean come on, why does team corvette take one of the best handling cars in the world and put an aero package on it to race? or ferrari or lotus? why don't they just slap them on the track and go? perhaps because as the dynamics of chassis and body change with scale and speed? if you want to stick a mabuchi and a couple AA duracells in them, you can race anybody you want folks..
look, can the bodies stand to have a few shaper edges? sure, mabe an actual seam or two rather than a smoothe slab of a car, sure.
here's what i know.. going as fast as you can is called racing.. looking good and going slow is called a parade.... feel free to quote me on that.
since performance doesn't matter why do cars have adjustments for performance.. just put a nice realistic body on a slab of fiberglass, put some crappy electronics in it, and race it? after all, handling isn't important for fun, right? i mean come on, why does team corvette take one of the best handling cars in the world and put an aero package on it to race? or ferrari or lotus? why don't they just slap them on the track and go? perhaps because as the dynamics of chassis and body change with scale and speed? if you want to stick a mabuchi and a couple AA duracells in them, you can race anybody you want folks..
look, can the bodies stand to have a few shaper edges? sure, mabe an actual seam or two rather than a smoothe slab of a car, sure.
here's what i know.. going as fast as you can is called racing.. looking good and going slow is called a parade.... feel free to quote me on that.
03-07-2009, 09:58 AM
#111
nobody said slip through the air easily or whatever, they mean have adequate aerodynamics to allow the performance of the car to atleast provide a pleasurable experience.. here, let's turn your argument on it's head..
since performance doesn't matter why do cars have adjustments for performance.. just put a nice realistic body on a slab of fiberglass, put some crappy electronics in it, and race it? after all, handling isn't important for fun, right? i mean come on, why does team corvette take one of the best handling cars in the world and put an aero package on it to race? or ferrari or lotus? why don't they just slap them on the track and go? perhaps because as the dynamics of chassis and body change with scale and speed? if you want to stick a mabuchi and a couple AA duracells in them, you can race anybody you want folks..
look, can the bodies stand to have a few shaper edges? sure, mabe an actual seam or two rather than a smoothe slab of a car, sure.
here's what i know.. going as fast as you can is called racing.. looking good and going slow is called a parade.... feel free to quote me on that.
since performance doesn't matter why do cars have adjustments for performance.. just put a nice realistic body on a slab of fiberglass, put some crappy electronics in it, and race it? after all, handling isn't important for fun, right? i mean come on, why does team corvette take one of the best handling cars in the world and put an aero package on it to race? or ferrari or lotus? why don't they just slap them on the track and go? perhaps because as the dynamics of chassis and body change with scale and speed? if you want to stick a mabuchi and a couple AA duracells in them, you can race anybody you want folks..
look, can the bodies stand to have a few shaper edges? sure, mabe an actual seam or two rather than a smoothe slab of a car, sure.
here's what i know.. going as fast as you can is called racing.. looking good and going slow is called a parade.... feel free to quote me on that.
----------
This following is a general point that is not directed at any specific person, but if everyone has to run a crappy handling body then that creates an even playing field for everyone. The problem with allowing wedge bodies is that we as r/c racers are a follow-the-leader crowd. Once a wedge body is perceived to be better it will obsolete all other bodies.
Unlike real racing, there is no way to level the playing field between different handling bodies. In real racing horsepower limitations, weight penalties, or aerodynamic changes help even the differences between cars. Unless there is a fair way to allow all the bodies to compete on a somewhat even playing field, then the latest wedge or blob body that won the last big race will be the norm in this class just like every other on-road class in recent memory.
Here is an interesting thought, allow someone running a "less desirable" body to weigh less or someone running the latest high downforce body to have to run a weight penalty. Maybe giving some incentive for people to run different bodies....but just brainstorming here.
03-07-2009, 10:36 AM
#112
that's pretty my my point made for me.. even if we run realistic bodies, one is always going to have an advantage over others, and people will run it.. my favorite gt car is the corvette, but if the porsche is faster, i guess i'll run that cause i'm not giving anything up... so instead of a field of "different" blobs we get a field of identical corvettes, or minivans or rickshaws..... that's exciting.. i wonder why nobody drives legends anymore.. good close racing and semiscale bodies.. oh yea, they were hard to drive and slow..
03-07-2009, 11:33 AM
#113
Tech Rookie
yo Skiddins,
i hear ya, i just just don't have the priorities as you. again, i like really realistic cars and classes, it is just that from my experience, pan cars are much more sensitive to aero than the TC cars. if you race a pan car, go make some laps with one of the super realistic bodies, then throw on a GTP body, or even an old
CAN AM body, and make a few more laps. you will not believe how much more fun they are with a high dowforce body.
I know a lot of folks paint their cars oddly, (airbrush bomb above for example) but if that is what they like, then go for it. there is probably someone out there the does not prefer the paint on my car, and even yours, too.
i feel you on the lack of variety, so if the body manufacturers are out there, here are some cars that would look realy good squished into doorstops
Cadillac XLR
Dodge Viper GTS
Panoz Esperante
Toyota Supra
TVR Tuscan
Donkervoort
also, if there were no rules at all, the cars would not look like teardrops, they would probably end up somewhat like the curent slot cars, and i think that would be OK for a really high powered mod class.
i hear ya, i just just don't have the priorities as you. again, i like really realistic cars and classes, it is just that from my experience, pan cars are much more sensitive to aero than the TC cars. if you race a pan car, go make some laps with one of the super realistic bodies, then throw on a GTP body, or even an old
CAN AM body, and make a few more laps. you will not believe how much more fun they are with a high dowforce body.
I know a lot of folks paint their cars oddly, (airbrush bomb above for example) but if that is what they like, then go for it. there is probably someone out there the does not prefer the paint on my car, and even yours, too.
i feel you on the lack of variety, so if the body manufacturers are out there, here are some cars that would look realy good squished into doorstops
Cadillac XLR
Dodge Viper GTS
Panoz Esperante
Toyota Supra
TVR Tuscan
Donkervoort
also, if there were no rules at all, the cars would not look like teardrops, they would probably end up somewhat like the curent slot cars, and i think that would be OK for a really high powered mod class.
03-07-2009, 09:29 PM
#114
give me a body.
give me a motor.
give me a radio.
give me a chassis.
give me a battery.
Tell me what class I'm in.
Let's race.
If I absolutely have to win, I'd let someone else drive my car.
I'll run my Sophia, then I'm going to try a DB9. I'll keep my car slow enough that aerodynamics aren't a huge issue and I'll have fun. I plan on running slow enough to have fun in the future too. I hope to travel a bit and meet more drivers just like me who like to race, but a little slower. I'm getting older, my hand eye isn't like my 22 year old son's anymore and I just want to have fun. I want this class to succeed and not choke itself over symantics. The hardest place for me to resolve if a car is realistic enough for me is in my own mind. I look at my CRC Gen X 10 and I see a flat out race car. I look at the Pro 10 bodies and understand they are meant to go over 50 mph at top speed. My car will never see 35 mph most likely and will probably only see small indoor carpet tracks. I'm happy with the bodies on the IIC list. I'm generally happy with the rules too. If the cars end up looking a little cartoony to fit the current chassis and tires, so be it. If one of the bodies ends up being too dominant, I hope the manufacturer will step up and find an equalizer in the form of a fix or a new design all together. We need less about body war, battery war, motor war and such.
Again, lets race. The rules are there for a reason.
give me a motor.
give me a radio.
give me a chassis.
give me a battery.
Tell me what class I'm in.
Let's race.
If I absolutely have to win, I'd let someone else drive my car.
I'll run my Sophia, then I'm going to try a DB9. I'll keep my car slow enough that aerodynamics aren't a huge issue and I'll have fun. I plan on running slow enough to have fun in the future too. I hope to travel a bit and meet more drivers just like me who like to race, but a little slower. I'm getting older, my hand eye isn't like my 22 year old son's anymore and I just want to have fun. I want this class to succeed and not choke itself over symantics. The hardest place for me to resolve if a car is realistic enough for me is in my own mind. I look at my CRC Gen X 10 and I see a flat out race car. I look at the Pro 10 bodies and understand they are meant to go over 50 mph at top speed. My car will never see 35 mph most likely and will probably only see small indoor carpet tracks. I'm happy with the bodies on the IIC list. I'm generally happy with the rules too. If the cars end up looking a little cartoony to fit the current chassis and tires, so be it. If one of the bodies ends up being too dominant, I hope the manufacturer will step up and find an equalizer in the form of a fix or a new design all together. We need less about body war, battery war, motor war and such.
Again, lets race. The rules are there for a reason.
03-08-2009, 11:48 AM
#116
N
03-08-2009, 03:19 PM
#117
i feel you on the lack of variety, so if the body manufacturers are out there, here are some cars that would look realy good squished into doorstops
Cadillac XLR
Dodge Viper GTS
Panoz Esperante
Toyota Supra
TVR Tuscan
Donkervoort
Cadillac XLR
Dodge Viper GTS
Panoz Esperante
Toyota Supra
TVR Tuscan
Donkervoort
As an aside, today I raced my GT10 for the first time outdoors, I tried it with PF's Corvette C6R and this Kyosho body;
Despite the weight penalty of an extra 30g (it's a 1/10 nitro shell) my fastest lap was only 0.2 secs slower over a 20 sec lap, and I found the Kyosho Honda easier to drive and subsequently went 1 lap faster.
Skiddins
03-08-2009, 03:50 PM
#118
At least 2-3 heats of 12th scale, a heat of Speed Spec and a heat of WGT has been springing up.
Though it might be an even bigger topic to tackle than the scope of this thread I would venture to say that if Europe stopped doing everything in their power to destroy pan car racing you might see more of them. Pan cars are designed to run on carpet, with traction additives and low slung highly aerodynamic bodies and they are meant to be fast. Either get with the program or don't run it, enough of this bastardization already.
Nick
03-08-2009, 09:00 PM
#119
We are in the northeast US and we are all about pan cars up here. Our race nights lately have been 1-2 heats of foam touring, one heat of rubber touring and the rest is all pan cars.
At least 2-3 heats of 12th scale, a heat of Speed Spec and a heat of WGT has been springing up.
Though it might be an even bigger topic to tackle than the scope of this thread I would venture to say that if Europe stopped doing everything in their power to destroy pan car racing you might see more of them. Pan cars are designed to run on carpet, with traction additives and low slung highly aerodynamic bodies and they are meant to be fast. Either get with the program or don't run it, enough of this bastardization already.
Nick
At least 2-3 heats of 12th scale, a heat of Speed Spec and a heat of WGT has been springing up.
Though it might be an even bigger topic to tackle than the scope of this thread I would venture to say that if Europe stopped doing everything in their power to destroy pan car racing you might see more of them. Pan cars are designed to run on carpet, with traction additives and low slung highly aerodynamic bodies and they are meant to be fast. Either get with the program or don't run it, enough of this bastardization already.
Nick
Which just makes a "low slung highly aerodynamic body " all the more important.WGT is intended to be a high performance racing class. A race class with race bodies. There was never any intent to have ultra-realism as a goal, and as has been mentioned, there are classes to run that do. If you want realism, race one of those classes and stop trying to rewrite the rules of this great new class
03-08-2009, 09:34 PM
#120
Wow...quite a lengthy conversation here. Good sign of interest in this type of racing. Since our Ferrari 599 has been mentioned a few times, I'd like to say a few words about it.
My reason for producing the body was for the enjoyment of being involved with 1/10th pan cars on road course again. For those who know me, I've raced pan cars for 30 years now and actually produced one of the first 1/10th pan car chassis' and GTP bodies in the mid 80s. So I really wanted to have an entry in this class.
I always try to incorporate as much realism in our bodies as possible, however as it's been discused already, the proportions of our 1/10th pan cars don't match up to the full size cars. So there is always a certain amount of fudging that is necessary. Also I will admit that I take some license on some of the shapes simply because I know that's what I will have to compete with from other manufacturers. I will also admit that it's kind of fun to do that, since some of the RC manufacturers actually make the shapes better looking than the full size cars. It sort of gives us a chance to exercise our design skills as well as our modeling skills. Rest assured we are only trying to produce what we think is a better product for the racers. Of course you can't please all of the people, all of the time.
I certainly appeciate anybody giving our bodies a look, and maybe giving them a try. I'd be the first to try this class if our local racing program decides to try it.
By the way, I've tried to find someone involved in the rule making for World GT, and have sent emails from the info on the website but have gotten no response. If anybody has a contact I'd appreciate any info. I doubt if the Ferrari is on the approved list since I haven't found anybody to talk to.
Thanks,
Hope all the issues get resolved and the class grows.
Gary McAllister
McAllister Racing
My reason for producing the body was for the enjoyment of being involved with 1/10th pan cars on road course again. For those who know me, I've raced pan cars for 30 years now and actually produced one of the first 1/10th pan car chassis' and GTP bodies in the mid 80s. So I really wanted to have an entry in this class.
I always try to incorporate as much realism in our bodies as possible, however as it's been discused already, the proportions of our 1/10th pan cars don't match up to the full size cars. So there is always a certain amount of fudging that is necessary. Also I will admit that I take some license on some of the shapes simply because I know that's what I will have to compete with from other manufacturers. I will also admit that it's kind of fun to do that, since some of the RC manufacturers actually make the shapes better looking than the full size cars. It sort of gives us a chance to exercise our design skills as well as our modeling skills. Rest assured we are only trying to produce what we think is a better product for the racers. Of course you can't please all of the people, all of the time.
I certainly appeciate anybody giving our bodies a look, and maybe giving them a try. I'd be the first to try this class if our local racing program decides to try it.
By the way, I've tried to find someone involved in the rule making for World GT, and have sent emails from the info on the website but have gotten no response. If anybody has a contact I'd appreciate any info. I doubt if the Ferrari is on the approved list since I haven't found anybody to talk to.
Thanks,
Hope all the issues get resolved and the class grows.
Gary McAllister
McAllister Racing