madweazl

iTrader: (12)

They also tell you what batteries, what engine/motor, what size, what tires/wheels, etc you can use.

All of this creates class separation, why wouldnt we want that? Rules usually come into play because their is a performance advantage. If this body comes out and is better than the rest due to the lighter weight, higher airflow to the engine and shocks, and lower center of gravity, it puts the rest of the field at a disadvantage. So now eveyrone else has to pick up this body to remain competitive which increases costs across the board (which few people want). In addition, we're stuck using a body that isnt appealing to the eye just to remain competitive. This rule serves the racer and maintains the spirit of the vehicle.

jkirkwood

iTrader: (8)

I was glad to see ROAR step in.

madweazl

iTrader: (12)

You've obviously never looked at the rules (ROAR, IFMAR, or otherwise). Perhaps that IQ comment somebody left on another forum wasnt off base...

bentgear

JD, sometime back didn't ROAR ask body manufacturers for opinions on body specs or something similar?

Ed M.

NitroLuver

iTrader: (48)

What I find funny is the only reason you guys are agreeing with roar is because you don't like the body. Roar didn't have rules against Cab forward designs just says something that resembles a real car but Last I checked neither buggy nor truggy bodies remotely resemble the real deal. With that said It's BS to say that roar had rules against the body. At the end of the day you guys know it's BS to DQ the body but you won't admit it just because you don't like the design of it...HOW CHILDISH LOL

Teufel Racing

iTrader: (30)

Wow,

Can't say I didn't see this comming. That is, I thought it would have been a little sooner. I dig the new truggy bodies, buggy? Well, not sure yet. I do understand what ROAR is after, but it is following very close to what happened with the Touring Car class. Things in that class got out of hand pretty quick with bodies, but the aero effects on those bodies are way more noticable. This isn't to say that aero doesn't play a part in off road, it does, just maybe not to the extent of on road. There is one execption, the SC class. Their bodies do look like real trucks, but get them in the air with a little wind comming off a jump and they are not very good. Some racers I know refer to them as Kite bodies. Anyway another topic.

My only issue here is that the rule change is in part comming from a dislike for the body style on ROAR's part. In that case one's opinions should be checked at the door and see where the body stands on every other spec. point for that class. Looking at some of the new gen of buggy bodies, to me they do somewhat look simular, though the styling lines make some stand out more than others. Yet, they don't look alot like the buggy bodies did back in '92-'95. I would like to know what or where the end result will be for the new bodies. Not only now, but tomorrow. Because without some change we never know what works and what doesn't.

Krio

iTrader: (159)

What's childish is thinking its being banned only for looks.
The purpose of the cab forward is driven by the desire for a better aero package. ROAR has had very loose specs for offroad bodies as they counted on the good will of the manufacturers to maintain the present course. This worked for a very long time, but now the class is so mature that there are relatively big benefits from massaging the bodies. If a line isn't draw somewhere there will be a point where the bodies are purely aero (function) and no looks (form). I honestly think the bulldog is great except for the "bed" where the cooling head pokes out. A sloping canopy is a buggy trait that I think should be hard coded into the body rules.

Slider30250

JD, I understand that there needs to be rules governing what body types and dimensions are allowed in each class, but when there seems to be a situation where a sanctioning body banned a particular body style because members on the board didn't like the body style seems a bit much, I can understand there being an uproar over the perceived reason for the rule change. I for one think the cab forward body's should be allowed if for no other reason than the design helps direct more airflow over the cylinder head of the engine to help it run cooler, and maybe because I'm just a freak, I like the cab forward body style.

And this is for all the people who are posting on here who think the cab forward body's should be banned just because you don't like them.....

There should [B]never[B] be a time when you're freedom of choice in what body you want to run is infringed upon. If you like the body, run it. If you don't like the body, then don't run it. But to argue that the body's shouldn't even exist just becasue you dont like them?I don't think so. If the rules for the race say no, then fine. Otherwise keep your opinions to yourself please.

NitroLuver

iTrader: (48)

You are one of the few who don't hate it but read the majority of the posts people are only wanting the ban because they don't like the looks of it and there is no other reason being posted yet other than yours.

JDCrow

iTrader: (32)

Nothing against Cab Forward Designs in buggy class.







Truck Like Bodies have always been deemed not for use in buggy class.



Bulldog buggy body definately is more truck inspired or look than buggy.

ROAR has always left much to the artist/mfg to work with. And on many occasions encouraged them directly to protect the integrity of the class look.

On many occassions they have all been involved in development of specs. Be it motor design, wheel and tire designs, and most recently in the full specs for Short Course Trucks.

On occassion some chose to ignore and go out on their own path. Then try to make ROAR and the other participants be the bad guys for not letting their new idea play.

Krio

iTrader: (159)

I only skipped a couple pages in this thread so I got a good sample of what people are saying, but the people that think it should be banned for ugliness aren't necessarily saying that is why roar is banning it.

Creative freedom for the styling of various bodies is great for the body manufacturers and is one of the many reasons I prefer offroad to onroad is the style variances allowed by the much looser body specs.
I think some general dimensions should be laid out for buggy bodies just like they were laid out for sct bodies. For example: Minimum roof height. Max sidepod height relative to the roof height. Maximum angle of winshield. Minimum angle sloping off the roof.
Still lots of room for creativity without loosing the buggy feel we all know.

Slider30250

JD, I was actually thinking of the Proline bulldog buggy body as well as the truck when I said I thought they should be allowed, I'm sorry for not making that clear, but I do understand the desire for not letting buggy bodies morph into something that looks like a truck.

sickboy

iTrader: (75)

how many of you have done 5 roar races in your entire life? its not that big of a deal, get over it. roar holds maybe two or three 1/8 scale races a year, its not like these rules will be applied everywhere. rules need to be implemented to set the standard.

rdeppen

iTrader: (9)

I've done probably 50

tony montana

iTrader: (76)

you hit the nail on the head. What tracks really police roar rules anyway. There still gonna make the cab foward designs in buggy and truggy. Just wont be able to run them at roar events