howardcano

iTrader: (37)

You've got everything you need. Take one of those old 2WD cars, replace the shocks with turnbuckles, and you're good to go. Then you can use up that big box of tires you've got stashed!

gary47

iTrader: (7)

I see hit sore spot in this class I am sorry for . I will run what ever body the class runs next year. Gary

Das 1/8th Mopar

If you want to race with the pan cars, bring a pan car! Great way to use up old rears but you'll need harder fronts.

Das 1/8th Mopar

Yes I do get carried away at times and it might seem that I was attacking you, I am sorry!

howardcano

iTrader: (37)

Yes, but Grenade doesn't have a traditional pan car. A locked suspension car is legal, functionally equivalent to the WRC (except that the WRC has a zero-roll front end), and has run in the class already.

For me, I still have my old RC300D, and I might even continue building a new "true" pan car.

Das 1/8th Mopar

Sorry to have to tell you this, YOU'RE ALL READY A MENTOR. You and Tom are doing a fine job of getting Dave up to speed! So did that hurt?

So if someone gave me 3 4wd cars, I couldn't afford the time to keep them going. I grew tired of trying to keep 1 going. Nope! Pan cars are the deal in money and time. Been there, done that!

MrHistory

iTrader: (2)

+1

Das 1/8th Mopar

Earlier in this forum the locked suspension car was talked about. It seems that in the eyes of older and wiser racers, the L/S car might have helped to bring the pan class to its demise. ROAR may have screwed up on this one, but we're not locked into following the same path.

Maybe Grenade should sell his suspension car and buy a pan car, my old 4wd stuff helped pay for my pan stuff.

It just seems that if you're trying to get a pan class going, you might want to start with pan cars.

hitcharide1

iTrader: (1)

I still have no prob with someone using a locked out car. I don't think that many will do it, it's not cost effective, and it'd have no significant advantages. True, the smart move would be to sell the antique and run new pan, but whatever gets the people to the track is fine by me.

aarcobra

iTrader: (12)

Engines, locked out suspension, bodies, vintage pan cars (300's), etc.

If there were RULES you would not have to keep going over this stuff again and again...

Something you should also keep in mind is that once basic rules are set, exceptions can be made at the club or regional level. As a club Cincinnati allows locked suspension cars in their club races, no problem. Toledo decides to have the GLC Pan class run Sedan Bodies. All they have to do is inform potential racers on the race information that that is the rule and the individual racers can decide to run or not.

What's so difficult about that?

aarcobra

iTrader: (12)

Howard,
As you know I usually am in agreement with you, but the argument that a locked suspension car is legal won't fly with me. 1) In the French rules, which appear to be the most developed and usable, clearly do not allow it. 2)The One-Eighth Racer's rules, (although unpublished) have been the basic standard for a few years and they do not allow it. 3) To take another tack, if L/S is ok then so is 4WD and suspension, since there are actually no published rules!!!

Let L/S race on an individual exemption. RC 300 "Vintage Pans:, clearly meet the spirit and intent of the rules, Bring it on!!! (I have SIX! Just got two complete ones "hot off the track" from Cinci!)

Ned

aarcobra

iTrader: (12)

It's ok... Just don't let it happen again! or I'll stop "mentoring"!!!

howardcano

iTrader: (37)

Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea either. But if it means another racer participating, it's okay by me.

Certainly my choice of the word "legal" was unfortunate.

Here are some features of a a new "pan" car from a European manufacturer: uses the same front uprights, rear uprights, pivot balls, stub axles, layshaft, and half-shafts as their suspension car; and has adjustable camber, toe and front caster. It is legal.

Here are some features of a locked-suspension car: uses the same front uprights, rear uprights, pivot balls, stub axles, layshaft, and half-shafts as the suspension car; and has adjustable camber, toe and front caster. But it's not legal?

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on why a locked car should not be allowed.

Please don't read anything into this that isn't intended; I'm not trying to provoke anyone. The reason I ask is because there may be a very valid reason why the locked car should not be allowed, and at the moment I'm unaware of it.

hitcharide1

iTrader: (1)

You're killing me, Ned.

The Roar rules apply. Technically, a locked out suspension car would be legal under the rules, and club consensus has been to this point to allow the locked out suspension car but not allow it to compete for points. We can do whatever we like at the club level, but at the series level, the rule book is in full force, IMHO. Any waiving of rules at that point can be handled nicely by either the race director or the series director. The only thing we're going over again is bringing people up to speed who are getting into the hobby, and frankly, it's a little kinder for us to do so rather than just refer them to a rule book. If there is a part of the rules that you don't like, or a new rule you think necessary, we can discuss it in this forum or elsewhere, then submit the change to ROAR for modification. It's like that with engines, currently...it's run what you have, but if our membership decides otherwise (like cost or 3 port) then we submit that and have it promulgated accordingly. And we've discussed THIS issue over and over again as well, and I still don't see a problem!

I recommend to all interested parties; during the off season, take some time to look up the existing rules concerning 2wd nitro in the ROAR rule book. Let's have a deadline of January 1st for consensus, and at that time, we'll put in a request to ROAR to add/delete/modify whatever rules we think need help. And I'll start the ball rolling with my thoughts:

1. Engines. No changes needed.
2. Bodies. Run what you like, but existing rules concerning cut outs and so forth apply.
3. Chassis. My opinion is still that the "suspension plate" on WRC and Moto is illegal, but they are the only real manufacturers at this point, most people are running their products, and the consensus has been that it is not suspension. Since the ROAR rules don't speak about it and because the consensus is clear, we continue as we are.
4. Fuel capacity/weight/foam tires/etc. all apply as written.
5. Vintage vs. classic vs. current. Doesn't really apply. To my knowledge, Tom and I are the only ones running a vintage on any basis. They all passed according to the rules in the past and still pass now, nor do we have such numbers as to support splitting our class. If some guy shows up with a '72 Heathkit, that's just peachy by me, since I doubt that guy will have any advantage.
I don't know what the "vote" was on pan guru, but I suggested Lon Sr. If he'll be so kind as to weigh in on this and give some direction to it, it'd be appreciated....I'd like to hear Rick weigh in as well given his experience with all types of pan over many years. I'm happy to go with whatever the group decides, but my vote is let things be as they are and keep it simple.

hitcharide1

iTrader: (1)

Those have been my points as well. Except the converted car is typically a bit heavier and therefore at a disadvantage, so I don't see why we'd exclude someone already working at a disadvantage. And no one can convince me that a little slop in the workings of a locked out car can equal an entire wobble plate (called a suspension plate in the diagrams) for a WRC. Further, it's silly because there aren't these huge numbers of people waiting to run Super Eagles because parts are a little hard to come by (I think I have the worlds last remaining stock of gears for those things) and most people will shelve the 2000 dollar antique (current Ebay value) vs. a 450 dollar WRC. What we're getting ready to build and sell is a lot more "pan" than the others on the market, yet I am encouraging and supporting those companies in their efforts to promote pan.

Frankly, I'd have to see something pretty extreme before I'd vote to disallow it.