RCknight

iTrader: (5)

That's all. Why not add some more mussle cars to the line up? What's the big deal with having more bodies from that time era? I thought this was a fun class. Why not appeal to all those folks that were street racers and didn't give a squat about Trans Am Racing. lol Heck, it was the baby boom era. What we need to grow this class is a vintage RTR. Just a thought. Otherwise give me my SS hood! lol

DJ919

Hey Guys, its cool to want different looks. Personally I LOVE these mixed Bodies ideas, but lets respect the hard work ,time , and efforts that the USVTA body has put into building such an appealing rc racing class.

dodgeboy

iTrader: (1)

Here is the list of legal bodies right now .

From a painters stand point the car bodies I think are cool looking , that I am working on now , are the Pegasus Hobbies 1970 Mustang it has a great shape to it and the HPI 1970 Plymouth AAR 'Cuda also the Pegasus Hobbies 1970 Camaro SS that is great looking too . But there the approved bodies so far till some one else decides to make something different.


HPI part numbers:
17510 - 1970 Plymouth AAR 'Cuda
17519 - 1966 Ford Mustang GT
17508 - 1965 Ford Shelby GT-350
7494 - 1968 Chevrolet Camaro

Parma part numbers:
10143 - 1969 Z28 Camaro
10141 - 1970 Boss Mustang
10113 - 1970 'Cuda

Pegasus Hobbies part numbers:
PGH4001 - 1970 Camaro SS
PGH4002 - 1970 'Cuda
PGH4003 - 1970 Mustang

k_bojar

iTrader: (30)

I'm guessing you didn't look at the website

Here is what the USVTA allows for bodies:
So its not just limited to the HPI bodies - its just that the HPI bodies are more widely available...and look better in some cases

If anyone wants to mix in bodies - do it at your track...Stop coming in here and disrespecting all the work the Doug and eveyone else has done over the last year to get this class where it is. This class is ABOUT the ponycars from the 60s and 70s - not the dilluted version of TransAm that ran in the later 70s until the end...This is all about the HEIGHT of Trans Am where it was JUST American Muscle - Mustang, Camero, Javelins, Cudas, Cougars (ok, so there isn't a Javelin and Cougar body available)

DJ919

Has anyone actually ran a USVTA spec Vintage TA on a clay or packed dirt oval? Would the tires hook up, and maybe give you a little drift action in the corners? ...Or is this just wishful thinking?

Scottrik

iTrader: (261)

Careful...the Trans-Am originally WASN'T just American pony cars. The class was broken into "O-2" and "U-2" (Over 2-litre and Under 2-litre) classes that ran together on the track. Fact of the matter is that the very first Trans-Am race was won outright by an Alfa.

By the time of the Datsun 510, though, the series had changed to where Trans-Am was only the American pony cars and the smaller cars ran in a separate series called the 2.5 Challenge (engines up to 2.5 litre). The 2.5 Challenge larger displacement upper limit allowed the Vega to compete albeit heavier than the competition with the larger engine. Not sure anyone actually ran one though.

That said, the class is clearly about modeling the O-2 TA class and the rules have been clearly structured as such. If those cars don't float someone's boat there are several other RC classes available (Touring Car, 1/12) that might come closer to the mark for them and their tastes.

snoopyrc

iTrader: (2)

Theres nothing wrong with that. I have been considering doing a street spec class myself. You can see a quote of my proposed class on this very page. But if you do that then its not vintage Trans Am.

HPI almost has you there. The car still needs a Novak GTB and a 21.5 to be legal. But they have a car that comes with the correct shell, wheels and tires. It comes with a brushless system too, but its not a legal system.

snoopyrc

iTrader: (2)

I dont think he is being disrespectful. He just wants something differrent than what we do, and also differrent than the TC class. I have been there. And I have been flamed in here for asking what I thought was a reasonable question. Water under the bridge.

UltegraSTI

iTrader: (20)

yeh, i think folks just understand why it keeps gettin brought into their thread here and not on one of its own, naturally arguing that here is a bigger audience thus post it there for a reaction instead of somethin that just drops off the pace of RCTech.

be nice for them to give apex admin rights over his thread and any non TA talk gets wiped.

R

robk

iTrader: (22)

Honestly, what is really holding things up is that the body makers have to consider license agreements. There COULD be a Cougar, Firebird, GTO (or was it Lemans??), Javelin, Dart, etc., but beyond actually making the bodies, they have to pay the auto companies. I think that some guys may be dodging this ("Big Fish" for example) but the auto companies have a lot of people who will eventually find you.

DJ919

LOL....On to something new

I was reading over that excellent Vintage TA article again...It brought this question to mind.
I would like to know...PLEASE be honest...Even though we all promote the "FUN" factor in Vintage TA, or any form of RC Racing. How many of you are actually out there racing to be competitive, to win or place well?...Keep it real please.

squarehead

iTrader: (75)

I race to have fun. I stopped thinking that I could win a long time ago. Don't get me wrong, I try to do as well as possible, but I don't race every weekend, and I'm nowhere near as sharp of a driver as I was 15 years ago. Too many other things in my life that are now a LOT more important than R/C racing. If I get to race 4 or 5 times a year, I'm thrilled.

And the best part of this class is that with the brushless/lipo setup and the lower speeds, not only is my race-day workload extraordinarily reduced, but it's not an overwhelming car to just jump back into after a long time away.

Honestly, my goals in racing in the last 10 years have been to make the A-main, or at least finish the day above the 50% mark in the field. If I can manage that without breaking, I'm a happy camper.





And lately, my joy in R/C racing has been away from the wheel. Being able to bring this class to so many new and old racers is singlehandedly keeping me in R/C. I really enjoy seeing this formula work so well and make so many racers excited again about racing toy cars. Without this class, I would have been out of R/C completely at this point.



doug

squarehead

iTrader: (75)

Oh, by the way...

For those of you trying to find other bodies that would work in the class, here is a list of the REAL cars that raced in the SCCA over 2-liter series from 1966 through 1972:

• American Motors Javelin
• Chevrolet Camaro
• Dodge Challenger
• Dodge Dart
• Ford Falcon
• Ford Mustang
• Mercury Cougar
• Plymouth Barracuda
• Pontiac Firebird
• Pontiac Tempest

If someone makes something that fits the bill, you can be assured it will be considered in the rules.

DJ919

I like those answers Doug. Dude you are brilliant by the way!

I race for a mix of both. The fun and the competition. I use one to fuel the other. To me, it wouldn't be fun if it wasn't competitive, and its the close competition that brings out the fun. Bragging rights, "friendly" trash talk, and having good times with racing friends at the pit tables. Being all business on the track, setting goals and trying to place well or get that win. That is what any type of Race day is all about. I think there is no other rc racing class better, at this point, that can provide that more than Vintage TA.

Sunshine86

I don't mean any disrespect towards their efforts nor am I trying to dismantle what they have created--I was merely suggesting something that, in my opinion, would expand VTA racing.

That is exactly my intention. With the exception of the body regulations, I love the the idea of VTA racing. However, I have never really cared for the O2 domestic cars, in 1/1 or 1/10th scales.