so does this mean we can run timing and boost in our esc's?

Very easy, I'm in charge.

??????


6/2014: THIS CLASS WILL NOW ALLOW ROAR SPEC CLASS ("BLINKY") APPROVED ESCS

This is very unfortunate news. Our asphalt season opener is this Saturday, and I'm about to try out the Riley Prototype for the first time.

My question is, why do we care more about what bodies fit the "spirit" of the class, yet having scale paint jobs is just encouraged? I'm not sure about everyone else's programs, but a lot of the cars in VTA and USGT end up being plain one color wonders, with the paint so thin you can nearly see through it.

As long as a body isn't providing a tangible advantage, and still looks flippin' awesome, doesn't that seem like a better option than just a bunch of skittles? This may be a knee-jerk reaction, but it seems strange to nit-pick one over the other.

-Ryan

just sayin...

Can we expand on the ceramic motor bearing "dork" rule to include additional criteria? :-)

To all, please look up "benevolent dictatorship".

So since it has been said that the desire is for more modern GT styled cars, which must very loosely translate to GTLM and GTD classes such as those that race in 12Hrs of Sebring and the 24Hrs of Daytona, would this be correct?

At the same time you want to exclude at least 2 bodies that were previously legal, that are scale representations of the current "prototype" class cars that race on the same tracks, at the same time, at the same events, side-by-side with the aforementioned GTLM and GTD cars.

And again, at the same time, it is the desired to keep a 63 vette, and a couple of Rally styled bodies legal?

Wait.....I get it now.....

In comparison, the old rules made much more sense, logically speaking. But I think I get it now, these changes have to be based strictly on appearance.

I like the new rules, the grey area has been removed on bodies. Now the arguing over certain bodies will cease and desist.

Thank you RobK and KevinK. We know you have the best interests of the class at heart!

Thanks for replying. I was going through the McAllister bodies and I just wondered.

It's hard to put rules together like this and make everyone happy. Especially when your doing it in your free time and not getting paid. There's always going to be a few unhappy ones out there. I would say you conform to the rules or don't run the class.

However Rob and Kevin. I would definitely try to stick with a time frame of real racing and street car GT body types. ex. 1980 to Current or something of that nature. Regardless of peoples reaction they'll conform or not race the class.

Just my 2 cents but i would have preferred the weight limit stay high. I think it helps slow the cars down and reduce traction rolling. Which is a real problem now with the new CRC carpet. Keeping certain things based on ROAR rules is also a good thing for yourselves (less to manage) and to make it easy for everyone.

For those complaining about bodies needing complex paint jobs to run this class is BS. Not all of us can paint or want to pay someone $50+ to paint a body that will last 3 months. Do it if you can but more people running the class is more important than having cool looking bodies run around the track.

Just a thought to Rob and Kevin
Can you create 2 different pages on the US VTA website, 1 for VTA and 1 for USGT? This will make it much easier to find the rules.

Thank you for doing that. In addition, the Hot Rod GT isn't really a scale version of an actual car. I think we should at least be using scale bodies.

I'm also in the camp that the DP bodies are not "GT" bodies.

Carry on!

We need to be careful here. There is a very popular body on the list that isn't scale. Pasting the front end of one car onto the rear end of another car, using some artistic license, really isn't to scale. I don't have any problems with it, since it looks like something that could exist. But it doesn't.

I would love to see USGT adopt a 'minimum weight rule' for body shells. That way we could paint them in scale, multicolor liveries and not be at a disadvantage to the 'ghost' paintjobs. This would also allow for shoe-gooed reinforcement tapes, etc., and make the bodies more durable.

It also would stop the 'lightweight body shell' craze and arms race.

Make it 100g or 125g, or whatever would be appropriate.

I say no on minimum body weight. I would rather see the 10mm wing rule enforced instead.