Zootcapri

iTrader: (6)

I thought I did... but then had to jump the pipe (try that in 1/10th or 1/8th) to get back on the track

Scott Fisher

iTrader: (28)

You guys make up a set of rules (even if the rules are "run what you brung"). I will then do what I did this time. I will decide if I want to get a car and race. Keep this in mind: Foam tires will increase grip. More grip means the car can handle more power. More expensive engines. Higher speeds. Possibly more broken parts.

Zootcapri

iTrader: (6)

.21?

garen

iTrader: (7)

For once you are right! ;-)

Arboleda

iTrader: (15)

I think we're seeing the same tendency towards a few subclasses that has been seen elsewhere. Specifically, I think we've had people gravitate towards one of the following two:

- Box-spec class. Tires can be upgraded to other rubber tires but you must run stock Kyosho engine, stock car bodies, and use all the original parts on the car (replacing them as needed with like parts). Only reason for allowing tire upgrade is that you pretty much have to. Stock tires are made of something that can wear through in a day or two of racing.

- Open-spec class. Any 1/8th buggy-based chassis, any engine, any tire (foam or rubber), any sedan/rally body, any parts on the car may be upgraded, etc.

Now *IF* we had 6 guys interested in the box-spec class and another 6 guys interested in the open-spec class, we could pull the old trick where you run all 12 cars together but you've got two classes with two winners, etc. Obviously with 10 guys interested in both classes you run them separate.

I think this would be a great way to approach. Someone like Scott who wants to keep a very level playing field is going to gravitate towards the box spec class. Others will gravitate towards the open-spec class realizing that it's still a fun and even entry-level class but we get to put new parts in the car and a hotter engine, etc, which some people find to be a fun part of the hobby.

EDIT: I knew that some work had gone into preparing some common classes for IGT but I should I have gone back and read them before this post. They're here, midway down: http://www.rctech.net/forum/showthre...=183735&page=3. Basically, these subclasses provide a great set of differing flavors for the people who want to run box spec (JSpeed calls this Kyosho Inferno GT Spec Class), a mid-class (Kyosho Inferno GT SS) which allows upgrades but sticks to rubbers and the IGT specifically, and an open class (1/8 Rally Open) that allows more chassis's, foams, etc. With this in mind I would rephrase what I mentioned above as that some people are going to gravitate toward the Kyosho Inferno GT Spec Class but I'd like to run 1/8th Rally Open personally since this allows me to run foams

trt3r

iTrader: (8)

I vote run what you brung

Rules just make this class less fun.

Its not a serious race car, and never will be.

It is a FUN class to run. It should stay fun, and not serious.

technazi

+1

This could also end up like the parking lot races that used to occur years ago. There's classes for those that want to run what they brung, but there could also be a more restricted class that really limits the rules and enforces them. This way not everyone needs to compete against themselves. For those that want a friendly competition they can enter one class, and for those that feel rules should be enforced can enter another class. Either way, I'd like to see the class grow as it does appear to have the largest fun factor of any on road racing in a long time.

Scott Fisher

iTrader: (28)

Regarding a "run what you brung" class: I just don't know how much fun people are going to continually have when they are running a $500 IGT car and getting blown away by somebody running a $1000 IGT car. With basically no rules, $1000 will be easy to do. Remember $400 for the car. Many people will the change the electronics which will (conservatively) $250. Even a cheap new engine is $150 and obviously we can spend a lot more on the engine if you want to. Sway bars, new brakes, turnbuckles.... that is probably another $50-$75. We are already at $850 using my conservative numbers. Now find the guy that buys a $350 engine and spends another $200 on hopups. These cars are still more durable and way more realistic looking, but you are approaching the point of getting an Evolva at that point.

People talk about having fun, but when you race most people want to be on a level playing field and at least feel as if they have a chance to compete. You can do that with any set of rules I just would rather not spend a ton of money. To me, the fun is in a close race, not the speed. I can have just as much fun racing a $500 car as I can racing $1500 cars as long as the racing is close and competetive. The difference is I have a lot more money left in my pockets.

Arboleda

iTrader: (15)

Scott - I think your concern can be addressed in one of two ways.

Two-class solution approach

Some people want a box-spec class to keep costs low and keep the playing field very level. Other people want to run their cars in an open class. There's nothing wrong with either of these preferences - they're both valid. Right now I see people passionately arguing why they want box spec or why they want open. Why not have both!!!

Work has already gone into defining classes: spec, ss, and open. However, despite what people might think the difference between spec and open is nowhere near the difference between electric stock 1/10th and electric modified 1/10th. I only mention this to suggest that they could run at the same time. Read on...

If an April Silver Bowl race had 10 entrants and half are box-spec variety and the other half are the open variety, I see no problems with running them together though you're competing against the people in your class. Most (all?) R/C racing software is smart enough to allow two classes to run together but keep the results separate in terms of what you see on the computer printouts, etc.

So all the guys who are aguing for a box-spec class would be happy. They would get it. All the guys arguing for an open class would be happy. They'd get it. And no one would need to feel like their box-spec car is no fun due to unfair competition.

This approach is my preference.

Single class, run what you 'brung

If for some reason Rich is against running open and spec, it would be ideal to just view the car as a run what you 'brung class. The key here would be running the car *for fun*. If you don't think you can have fun knowing that the next guy upgraded some parts on his car and you didn't, you're not having enough fun and missed the point. HAVE MORE FUN!

If the approach taken were the run what you 'brung approach, you would essentially have both box stock cars and open class cars running together and competing against each other. Would the open class cars have an advantage? Yeah, but we'd each be running the car BECAUSE WE LIKE RUNNING IT

Why can't there just be one class and have it be box-spec?

2/3rds of the guys that raced at the Airtronics race no longer even have a box spec car. My Kyosho engine got used up long ago, and the box tires were gone in like a day.

To restore my car to box stock, I'd have to pay $200 for the Kyosho GXR .28 engine. There's no way guys like me are going to do that. As you already know, I'm not against putting $200 into my car but I just can't bring myself to pay $200 for an engine that seems worth about $50 (new) to me

Anyone new to the class is eventually going to go through the same thing.

Therefore I conclude that it will never be viable to only have a box-spec class. On the other hand I'm arguing that it sounds like people would enjoy having both a box-spec class and an open class. There's a middle class as well (SS) but two classes seem more viable.

Hope this makes sense...

Scott Fisher

iTrader: (28)

It makes sense to me. I am not against upgrading your engine or some of the weak spots on the car, I just would like to see some restrictions. Price limts, engine claiming rule... something to keep the class viable.

trt3r

iTrader: (8)

Thats what is nice about these cars, They are pretty level no matter what you do to them.

The chassis is such, that most "hop ups" are not going to make that big of performance difference.

This car is only going to be so fast, no matter what engine you stick in it.

Set-up is the biggest thing on these.

technazi

As some people say in motorcycle racing, it's 80% rider - 20% bike. The same can almost be said for this class. Now I'm not saying I'm a good driver by any means, but the only upgrades I did to my car were some hinge pin supports. It seemed to handle very well once I figured out how to set it up (with Garen's help), and I don't believe upgrading anything else would have made a difference.

So what if a guy wants to spend an extra 80 bucks on some option shock towers and another 80 dollars on center gear uprights. I say let them! It won't improve handling to any unfair advantage, it helps smaller companies sell option parts, and it allows the consumer to feel better about his car. Like trt3r said, it really doesn't matter what you do them - they're still going to handle pretty much the same.

Scott, I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think you're comparing apples to oranges. In a 1/10 or 1/8 on road, you make a small change and it's going to alter the car's performance to a noticable amount. You take a larger platform, such as an IGT based vehicle, and do the same upgrade to it and you will not have the same reaction. Take a full size car for instance. Put on some nice coil over shocks, but keep the ride height at the same level with the same spring rate. It doesn't change a single thing in the way the car handles, but the person just spent a grand doing it. Sure, if you change the spring rate, suspension height, and other bits it will change the car's handling. In this case, maybe you do have a separate class. However, you'll never know until you run them side by side.

If a person decides to race this class with a $2000 IGT car against everyone else who only spent a grand, should this person be bumped to a more rule enforced class? Now what if that person never finished a race or always came in last? Are you really going to blame the car or should you blame the driver?

Scott Fisher

iTrader: (28)

Everyone always says this kind of stuff when they are competetive and/or winning. As soon as they lose to somebody with a better car that they used to beat that all changes. I haven't been racing as long as some, but I have seen it happen. I entered sedan after it had evolved quite a bit, but you still hear people talk about the class when you could go racing for a few hundred dollars. I bet the racing was just as competetive and just as much fan.... a bit slower albeit, but now it costs a lot more money.

I look at IGT as a class that has two big advantages over sedan and 1/8th. One is the cars look cool. The other is the simplicity and cost that comes with that simplicity. Take those things away and I something is going to go away. That is why I have been so vocal about my opinions. I have a good job, and have the resources to get the car, engines, parts and hopups and it won't cost me a ton of money. It isn't about me saving money. I think if this class does not stay as an entry level fun type class then something is going to go away. It happens like this all the time.

Monster truck (T-maxx) is a good example of this. People used to buy a T-Maxx and race it stock from the box. Then it became buy a t-maxx, take the body out of the box and throw everything else away. Now we have purpose built Truggies. Very popular class, very expensive class. Something had to give. Where did 1/10th stadium truck go.... Shelf Queens now. Started with a cheap class but the net result was now offroad has taken a less expensive entry level class (t-maxx) evolved it and killed off a lesser expensive class.

I will be cool if IGT gets as popular as Truggy even at high costs, but I would rather not take that chance. Onroad is sketchy at best in the USA. I want to add to it, not trade one class for another.

Arboleda

iTrader: (15)

The tone of the debate still seems as if there's an assumption that we need just one class and we continue to debate between whether the one class should be spec or open (or something in between like what the midwest calls SS). Are we really convinced that there must be only one class? And if so are we really convinced that it can't be run what you 'brung?

Zootcapri

iTrader: (6)

20 people running IGT at the next race won't happen (2 classes with the required 10 per class). Perhaps the luxury of multiple classes will occur with growth.. until then we should focus on the number of participants.

The question about foams is the result of someone breaking one of the only four rules. The national trend is rubber tires for the IGT. But, I guess the four very simple rules were too constrictive.

Sooo.. run what you brung. Well then.. don't start stating things like buggy based chassis... that is a rule you know. Do we need to make sure that there are four tires... oooppps... another rule. If infact you want a 'run what you brung' class... I think there will be some very creative interpetations of what that means. If you want to run the IGT class... then... rules... even simple rules need to be followed... or don't call it a IGT class. A IGT class by it's name has a rule... Better change the name of the class too ...

Yeah.. I just finished running a crew of 18 people (mostly temps) for the last 10 hours... and I'm freakin' tired... does it show??