World GT Body Debate Thread
03-10-2009, 07:10 AM
#151
If people want to put a bunch of downforce in the cars they should either be running PRO10 or working to update the rules for PRO10 to fit the new cars and have reasonable bodies.
The Protoform Mulsanne body is SWEET. If you want downforce and a car that looks more reasonable than what we had in Pro10 before (and 12th now) make some rules and go race.
03-10-2009, 08:18 AM
#152
Hi Rick,
I don't think you could be more off-base with that statement. The reason modified is too fast is completely different than why people want aerodynamics in WGT.
The idea of WGT has always been about putting a simple car on the track that people can drive. The more aero the better in my opinion, we are controlling the raw speed with the motor and battery limits. Why on earth should we make these cars harder to drive? Are you proposing we make everything as difficult as mod and have the only 12 people on earth who can do it race while the rest of us watch?
Sounds like tons of fun...
I guess in the end, if you want to race models then WGT isn't for you. Why are we still debating this? If you don't like it, move on. Lots of people don't care for dirt or oval but I don't see threads popping up about how we can make oval cars turn right so that 10% of the RC Tech population can be happy about something.
Nick
I don't think you could be more off-base with that statement. The reason modified is too fast is completely different than why people want aerodynamics in WGT.
The idea of WGT has always been about putting a simple car on the track that people can drive. The more aero the better in my opinion, we are controlling the raw speed with the motor and battery limits. Why on earth should we make these cars harder to drive? Are you proposing we make everything as difficult as mod and have the only 12 people on earth who can do it race while the rest of us watch?
Sounds like tons of fun...
I guess in the end, if you want to race models then WGT isn't for you. Why are we still debating this? If you don't like it, move on. Lots of people don't care for dirt or oval but I don't see threads popping up about how we can make oval cars turn right so that 10% of the RC Tech population can be happy about something.
Nick
Unrealistic bodies and the faster speeds that come along with them plus the push for 2S LiPo sends the class in the same direction as mod touring. It won't take long before they become difficult to drive for the majority.
I care about this class because I have a long term interest in the R/C racing hobby. To be honest, R/C cars don't interest me at all. But RACING R/C cars is awesome (on-road in particular). I want racing to continue in an industry where it is becoming less and less of a priority to manufacturers and the media.
World GT has the potential to become the next TC or Slash but I think that taking away realism so early in the game will result in self-destruction before it has even left the ground.
03-10-2009, 09:22 AM
#153
Hi Rick,
I don't think you could be more off-base with that statement. The reason modified is too fast is completely different than why people want aerodynamics in WGT.
The idea of WGT has always been about putting a simple car on the track that people can drive. The more aero the better in my opinion, we are controlling the raw speed with the motor and battery limits. Why on earth should we make these cars harder to drive? Are you proposing we make everything as difficult as mod and have the only 12 people on earth who can do it race while the rest of us watch?
Sounds like tons of fun...
I guess in the end, if you want to race models then WGT isn't for you. Why are we still debating this? If you don't like it, move on. Lots of people don't care for dirt or oval but I don't see threads popping up about how we can make oval cars turn right so that 10% of the RC Tech population can be happy about something.
Nick
I don't think you could be more off-base with that statement. The reason modified is too fast is completely different than why people want aerodynamics in WGT.
The idea of WGT has always been about putting a simple car on the track that people can drive. The more aero the better in my opinion, we are controlling the raw speed with the motor and battery limits. Why on earth should we make these cars harder to drive? Are you proposing we make everything as difficult as mod and have the only 12 people on earth who can do it race while the rest of us watch?
Sounds like tons of fun...
I guess in the end, if you want to race models then WGT isn't for you. Why are we still debating this? If you don't like it, move on. Lots of people don't care for dirt or oval but I don't see threads popping up about how we can make oval cars turn right so that 10% of the RC Tech population can be happy about something.
Nick
03-10-2009, 09:30 AM
#154
As mentioned, the World GT drivers I have spoken with feel that the cars are HARDER to drive with more aero. I am not sure about others, but the corners are the hard part of the track for me. I do pretty good on the straights. Increase corner speeds and you increase the difficulty in my opinion.
Unrealistic bodies and the faster speeds that come along with them plus the push for 2S LiPo sends the class in the same direction as mod touring. It won't take long before they become difficult to drive for the majority.
I care about this class because I have a long term interest in the R/C racing hobby. To be honest, R/C cars don't interest me at all. But RACING R/C cars is awesome (on-road in particular). I want racing to continue in an industry where it is becoming less and less of a priority to manufacturers and the media.
World GT has the potential to become the next TC or Slash but I think that taking away realism so early in the game will result in self-destruction before it has even left the ground.
Unrealistic bodies and the faster speeds that come along with them plus the push for 2S LiPo sends the class in the same direction as mod touring. It won't take long before they become difficult to drive for the majority.
I care about this class because I have a long term interest in the R/C racing hobby. To be honest, R/C cars don't interest me at all. But RACING R/C cars is awesome (on-road in particular). I want racing to continue in an industry where it is becoming less and less of a priority to manufacturers and the media.
World GT has the potential to become the next TC or Slash but I think that taking away realism so early in the game will result in self-destruction before it has even left the ground.
Everything else you mentioned I am 100% on-board.
03-10-2009, 09:35 AM
#155
As mentioned, the World GT drivers I have spoken with feel that the cars are HARDER to drive with more aero. I am not sure about others, but the corners are the hard part of the track for me. I do pretty good on the straights. Increase corner speeds and you increase the difficulty in my opinion.
Unrealistic bodies and the faster speeds that come along with them plus the push for 2S LiPo sends the class in the same direction as mod touring. It won't take long before they become difficult to drive for the majority.
I care about this class because I have a long term interest in the R/C racing hobby. To be honest, R/C cars don't interest me at all. But RACING R/C cars is awesome (on-road in particular). I want racing to continue in an industry where it is becoming less and less of a priority to manufacturers and the media.
World GT has the potential to become the next TC or Slash but I think that taking away realism so early in the game will result in self-destruction before it has even left the ground.
Unrealistic bodies and the faster speeds that come along with them plus the push for 2S LiPo sends the class in the same direction as mod touring. It won't take long before they become difficult to drive for the majority.
I care about this class because I have a long term interest in the R/C racing hobby. To be honest, R/C cars don't interest me at all. But RACING R/C cars is awesome (on-road in particular). I want racing to continue in an industry where it is becoming less and less of a priority to manufacturers and the media.
World GT has the potential to become the next TC or Slash but I think that taking away realism so early in the game will result in self-destruction before it has even left the ground.
03-10-2009, 09:56 AM
#156
If I can ask your indulgence for a moment, I'd like to try to shed some light on the body situation from a manufacturer's point of view.
There are two types of manufacturers, the large ones such as Tamiya, Kyosho, HPI, etc., who make complete cars and have a huge world wide marketing strategy.....and there's the smaller manufacturers who make accessory products, of which McAllister Racing is the latter.
The larger companies do as they please and do make very realistic, even scale car reproductions. Their body lines are primarily support for their car kits. Due to their marketing and budget abilities, they will sell bajillions of what ever they make and don't have to be terribly concerned about the RC racers in the world. We are actually a very small segment of RC car sales.
On the other hand the smaller companies have to be more agressive with their products to compete in the racer market. If we can make a better handling body yet keep the basic look intended for a particular class, that will probably sell more product. That's how we stay in business...sometimes.
Add in the fact that there are no organizations running RC events that acurately regulate the body shapes, and you have a very difficult situation for the manufacturers to deal with. As you can see from this thread, hardly any two people agree on anything, so it's very difficult for us to know what to do or which way to go. So we usually have to rely on our best judgement, design wise, to compete in the market place.
Therefore, don't expect a clear solution to this problem any time soon. It's difficult to get a single club to agree on body rules, let alone a national concensus, and forget a world wide agreement.
The only real solution would be pick a few body styles for a class...have one manufacturer create the molds...have all other manufactrers back pour those molds and sales would be determined by marketing abilities. Of course that will never happen, so for now it will all be done on a subjective basis of personal taste by whom ever is organizing the events.
Don't mean to sound negative, it's just the way it is and has been for the 30 years I've been involved. Not to worry, we'll still keep racing...and debating...that's just our competitive nature.
Gary McAllister
McAllister Racing
There are two types of manufacturers, the large ones such as Tamiya, Kyosho, HPI, etc., who make complete cars and have a huge world wide marketing strategy.....and there's the smaller manufacturers who make accessory products, of which McAllister Racing is the latter.
The larger companies do as they please and do make very realistic, even scale car reproductions. Their body lines are primarily support for their car kits. Due to their marketing and budget abilities, they will sell bajillions of what ever they make and don't have to be terribly concerned about the RC racers in the world. We are actually a very small segment of RC car sales.
On the other hand the smaller companies have to be more agressive with their products to compete in the racer market. If we can make a better handling body yet keep the basic look intended for a particular class, that will probably sell more product. That's how we stay in business...sometimes.
Add in the fact that there are no organizations running RC events that acurately regulate the body shapes, and you have a very difficult situation for the manufacturers to deal with. As you can see from this thread, hardly any two people agree on anything, so it's very difficult for us to know what to do or which way to go. So we usually have to rely on our best judgement, design wise, to compete in the market place.
Therefore, don't expect a clear solution to this problem any time soon. It's difficult to get a single club to agree on body rules, let alone a national concensus, and forget a world wide agreement.
The only real solution would be pick a few body styles for a class...have one manufacturer create the molds...have all other manufactrers back pour those molds and sales would be determined by marketing abilities. Of course that will never happen, so for now it will all be done on a subjective basis of personal taste by whom ever is organizing the events.
Don't mean to sound negative, it's just the way it is and has been for the 30 years I've been involved. Not to worry, we'll still keep racing...and debating...that's just our competitive nature.
Gary McAllister
McAllister Racing
03-10-2009, 10:15 AM
#157
If I can ask your indulgence for a moment, I'd like to try to shed some light on the body situation from a manufacturer's point of view.
There are two types of manufacturers, the large ones such as Tamiya, Kyosho, HPI, etc., who make complete cars and have a huge world wide marketing strategy.....and there's the smaller manufacturers who make accessory products, of which McAllister Racing is the latter.
The larger companies do as they please and do make very realistic, even scale car reproductions. Their body lines are primarily support for their car kits. Due to their marketing and budget abilities, they will sell bajillions of what ever they make and don't have to be terribly concerned about the RC racers in the world. We are actually a very small segment of RC car sales.
On the other hand the smaller companies have to be more agressive with their products to compete in the racer market. If we can make a better handling body yet keep the basic look intended for a particular class, that will probably sell more product. That's how we stay in business...sometimes.
Add in the fact that there are no organizations running RC events that acurately regulate the body shapes, and you have a very difficult situation for the manufacturers to deal with. As you can see from this thread, hardly any two people agree on anything, so it's very difficult for us to know what to do or which way to go. So we usually have to rely on our best judgement, design wise, to compete in the market place.
Therefore, don't expect a clear solution to this problem any time soon. It's difficult to get a single club to agree on body rules, let alone a national concensus, and forget a world wide agreement.
The only real solution would be pick a few body styles for a class...have one manufacturer create the molds...have all other manufactrers back pour those molds and sales would be determined by marketing abilities. Of course that will never happen, so for now it will all be done on a subjective basis of personal taste by whom ever is organizing the events.
Don't mean to sound negative, it's just the way it is and has been for the 30 years I've been involved. Not to worry, we'll still keep racing...and debating...that's just our competitive nature.
Gary McAllister
McAllister Racing
There are two types of manufacturers, the large ones such as Tamiya, Kyosho, HPI, etc., who make complete cars and have a huge world wide marketing strategy.....and there's the smaller manufacturers who make accessory products, of which McAllister Racing is the latter.
The larger companies do as they please and do make very realistic, even scale car reproductions. Their body lines are primarily support for their car kits. Due to their marketing and budget abilities, they will sell bajillions of what ever they make and don't have to be terribly concerned about the RC racers in the world. We are actually a very small segment of RC car sales.
On the other hand the smaller companies have to be more agressive with their products to compete in the racer market. If we can make a better handling body yet keep the basic look intended for a particular class, that will probably sell more product. That's how we stay in business...sometimes.
Add in the fact that there are no organizations running RC events that acurately regulate the body shapes, and you have a very difficult situation for the manufacturers to deal with. As you can see from this thread, hardly any two people agree on anything, so it's very difficult for us to know what to do or which way to go. So we usually have to rely on our best judgement, design wise, to compete in the market place.
Therefore, don't expect a clear solution to this problem any time soon. It's difficult to get a single club to agree on body rules, let alone a national concensus, and forget a world wide agreement.
The only real solution would be pick a few body styles for a class...have one manufacturer create the molds...have all other manufactrers back pour those molds and sales would be determined by marketing abilities. Of course that will never happen, so for now it will all be done on a subjective basis of personal taste by whom ever is organizing the events.
Don't mean to sound negative, it's just the way it is and has been for the 30 years I've been involved. Not to worry, we'll still keep racing...and debating...that's just our competitive nature.
Gary McAllister
McAllister Racing
Great response! However, from what I counted, there are more than "any two people" that agree on realistic bodies because they feel that realism should be maintained as "originally assumed".
We've heard one underlying reason why realistic bodies are not recommended by Protoform and Parma (for example). That reason was because of the tire diameters. They are not made to scale with 1:1 cars.
What some of us are saying is that we enjoy the class because it is easier to drive and we can simulate real cars that are raced in Le Mans, GP, etc. We're just worried that the doorstop bodies are going to be the only way to compete and will ultimately ruin the uniqueness of this class, similar to VTA. Where VTA is about cars of the yesteryears, WGT is with cars of today. We're worried of the class turning into a Doorstop cheese-wedge blob class. We like being able to recognize our cars. We like being able to race cars that we are fans of with the 1:1 cars (but obviously can never afford
).
03-10-2009, 10:18 AM
#158
Been reading and soaking in all the sides of this debate. I am on the side of a little more realism. From a club racer standpoint, from looking at the pics that Mr. Epp put on here of his car versus the full size, and the other cars that have been in the mix the problem for me lies in the area infront of the front tires. It looks like this area on all the bodies in question is overly stretched and that's what gives it that "doorstop" look. I know that is probably to get the amount of front downforce that they are looking for, but that is the area that really messes these cars up for me. Is there not another way to get the downforce without stretching that area so much?
03-10-2009, 10:56 AM
#159
Tech Champion
iTrader: (32)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: In a land of mini-mighty mental giants
Posts: 8,854
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
As mentioned, the World GT drivers I have spoken with feel that the cars are HARDER to drive with more aero. I am not sure about others, but the corners are the hard part of the track for me. I do pretty good on the straights. Increase corner speeds and you increase the difficulty in my opinion.
Unrealistic bodies and the faster speeds that come along with them plus the push for 2S LiPo sends the class in the same direction as mod touring. It won't take long before they become difficult to drive for the majority.
I care about this class because I have a long term interest in the R/C racing hobby. To be honest, R/C cars don't interest me at all. But RACING R/C cars is awesome (on-road in particular). I want racing to continue in an industry where it is becoming less and less of a priority to manufacturers and the media.
World GT has the potential to become the next TC or Slash but I think that taking away realism so early in the game will result in self-destruction before it has even left the ground.
Unrealistic bodies and the faster speeds that come along with them plus the push for 2S LiPo sends the class in the same direction as mod touring. It won't take long before they become difficult to drive for the majority.
I care about this class because I have a long term interest in the R/C racing hobby. To be honest, R/C cars don't interest me at all. But RACING R/C cars is awesome (on-road in particular). I want racing to continue in an industry where it is becoming less and less of a priority to manufacturers and the media.
World GT has the potential to become the next TC or Slash but I think that taking away realism so early in the game will result in self-destruction before it has even left the ground.
They are getting huge entry counts at races in Cali.
I personally like the idea of the WGT class. I just think the way in-which it came about was flawed a little. If the class would have been like RCGT or VTA where you use existing 4wd sedans that people already own it might be even bigger. As soon as I saw these WGT car prices at 300 dollars I was shocked. To me it seemed more logical to get this class going with 4WD sedans because they work on all surfaces and used ones can be had for cheap.......one of the reasons that VTA has been so big in some areas. Plus the use of Lipo in Sedans was becoming the norm. Now WGT is at a cross roads....you have companies that spent time and money on 4cell chassis that now look like they need to re-tool for lipo's....plus this body debate. There wasn't much forethought on that part of the rules other then a few manufacturers that did think about this when they made their cars for this class.
Either way the RCGT class might be more what you are talking about and they are not limited to what bodies you can use because you need to make the car work. RCGT is really what racing was like when Sedans first started to get big…..scale looking bodies….slower speeds. TC has gotten way out of control as far as speed goes. The slower classes seem to be gaining ground every where…..17.5 1/12th scale…..VTA....17.5 foam. Why is that…….??? Maybe its because the cars are more controllable for 90% of the racers out there.
03-10-2009, 11:14 AM
#160
I disagree with that comment. This class had been given as much thought as VTA was. Have you looked at the VTA scene lately? It has it's growing pains, and lack of limitations has the POTENTIAL to kill that class as well. Why is it that you can go to the classifieds section of this very forum and find X-ray 009 chassis fully outfitted and being sold specifically for VTA. That is a $500+ sedan chassis. It definitely doesn't fit in with the intent of the class. IMO on that one is that it should be plastic tub chassis only. At some point, most sedan mfgs had a plastic tub chassis, and those are the only ones that should be allowed.
Back on topic, the WGT chassis out there are full blooded race chassis. Not much else is needed to have a chassis that will compete at the top level that is being competed at now. Most chassis are street priced well under $300. Lowest street priced sedans? The Losi JRSX-R, well above $300 at my LHS. Because you had sticker shock is A direct relation to the crappy economy and the fact that carbon fiber is in high demand by the military to the point that there is shortages. This drives up prices, as does the exchange rate for the other components required to complete kits.
Back on topic, the WGT chassis out there are full blooded race chassis. Not much else is needed to have a chassis that will compete at the top level that is being competed at now. Most chassis are street priced well under $300. Lowest street priced sedans? The Losi JRSX-R, well above $300 at my LHS. Because you had sticker shock is A direct relation to the crappy economy and the fact that carbon fiber is in high demand by the military to the point that there is shortages. This drives up prices, as does the exchange rate for the other components required to complete kits.
03-10-2009, 11:17 AM
#161
GT10's at the Autosports show UK
03-10-2009, 12:08 PM
#162
I believe the carpet was Nylon and they had Nitro's running so speeds were 'very slow'.
GT10's at the Autosports show UK
GT10's at the Autosports show UK
I am still tempted to run that PF NasTruck shell, and yes I do have one
03-10-2009, 12:27 PM
#163
Didn't realise it was from the Autosports show, cos they told the drivers to keep speeds down and drive together to make it look good for the spectators, the organisers didn't want to see cars crashing every 4 yards.
I am still tempted to run that PF NasTruck shell, and yes I do have one
I am still tempted to run that PF NasTruck shell, and yes I do have one
03-10-2009, 01:40 PM
#164
Tech Champion
iTrader: (32)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: In a land of mini-mighty mental giants
Posts: 8,854
Trader Rating: 32 (100%+)
I believe the carpet was Nylon and they had Nitro's running so speeds were 'very slow'.
GT10's at the Autosports show UK
GT10's at the Autosports show UK
Why is it that you can go to the classifieds section of this very forum and find X-ray 009 chassis fully outfitted and being sold specifically for VTA. That is a $500+ sedan chassis. It definitely doesn't fit in with the intent of the class. IMO on that one is that it should be plastic tub chassis only. At some point, most sedan mfgs had a plastic tub chassis, and those are the only ones that should be allowed.
03-10-2009, 03:14 PM
#165
Suspended
As mentioned, the World GT drivers I have spoken with feel that the cars are HARDER to drive with more aero. I am not sure about others, but the corners are the hard part of the track for me. I do pretty good on the straights. Increase corner speeds and you increase the difficulty in my opinion.
World GT has the potential to become the next TC or Slash but I think that taking away realism so early in the game will result in self-destruction before it has even left the ground.
World GT has the potential to become the next TC or Slash but I think that taking away realism so early in the game will result in self-destruction before it has even left the ground.
At the time there were three total bodies that worked (including the original TOJ) and every other aero-body that was designed around some current Nissan GTP body or something didn't work worth a damn.
To me it was just proof that everything from 1:1 didn't transfer down to our smaller scale RC cars.
We also staged a race once in which we had to run TransAm-style bodies, anything that was remotely modeled off a doors-smaller, so there were a lot of Mustangs and Corvettes and Camaros and Chargers and I'd be willing to bet it had the biggest fan interest (walkers-by that stopped and stayed watching for more than a fleeting second) of any race I ever attended.
Why? We asked. It was because the cars looked like what they drove.
I disagree with that comment. This class had been given as much thought as VTA was. Have you looked at the VTA scene lately? It has it's growing pains, and lack of limitations has the POTENTIAL to kill that class as well. Why is it that you can go to the classifieds section of this very forum and find X-ray 009 chassis fully outfitted and being sold specifically for VTA. That is a $500+ sedan chassis. It definitely doesn't fit in with the intent of the class. IMO on that one is that it should be plastic tub chassis only. At some point, most sedan mfgs had a plastic tub chassis, and those are the only ones that should be allowed.
I think the VTA could have a bigger following if it weren't for the fact that people feel pressured to have the latest and greatest platform to compete, it's not hard to figure out what the fast guys have, and to me it would have more of a vintage feel if the cars would actually have to be vintage instead of just looking vintage.
The only thing vintage about the class now is the bodies.
But if people had somewhere in which they could throw down their old tub chassis TCs, and not feel they were being outclasses or outspent before getting to the track, the class would have more room to grow as well as attracting the lowbudget racer.