1441 replies to this topic

[Cheater]

Noose is 100% correct: everyone on the IRRA BoD and many of our Senior Advisers contributed during the creation of the 2009 rules. It has truly been a group effort.

As I have posted before, what impresses me most about IRRA is that every member of the BoD is actively involved in the decision-making process, and no one seems to be promoting any kind of personal agenda. In the forty years I have been involved in this hobby, I can't ever remember seeing this sort of cooperative effort being expended for the good of slot racing.

To all of the other guys involved in IRRA, thank you. You make me proud to be a part of the organization.

[Josh Crutchfield]

Larry,

I think the cutline being the bottom of the door is to help the bodies fit the chassis better. It would also help lower the bumpers too. Just a guess.

[JerseyJohn]

Thank you, Greg, and all those involved. It's a great boost to the sport.

[bobo]

Noose,

I like the spec GT Coupe class, but aren't the three bodies listed open cockpit type?

[NJ Racer]

Hi Bob,

The JK Spec class requires the use of one of te three specific JK Can-Am bodies.

GT Coupe (GTC) gives you the choice of several GT Coupe bodies listed on the separate approved body list.

[Noose]

Bob,

Ray is correct.

[Noose]

I'm done venting. I'll live with it. Any NASCAR is better than no NASCAR...

Here are some pics of the test car that was built to check out the rules that were written. (Yes, we do actually build 'em and test 'em first, guys!)

The tires actually look decent and as you will notice, so does the body. We ran this car on an old style King and an oval. It was a blast! It may be hard to tell from the pics but the body can't be mounted any lower otherwise the "cutting into the wheel arch" rule could not be met. This body had space between the door line and the bottom of the body.

[Marty Stanley]

I for one like the new rules.

Thank you to all that worked on the rules committee for all the work that went into making come to fruition.

That being said, we all have to understand that the folks working on that committee put their pants on just like anyone else, one leg at a time. They are human and we don't always fully understand what they meant to say.

There is a spirit of the game that should also be taken into account here. I think that is a very necessary part of what is trying to be accomplished. I kind of like it.

I have to applaud the "Flexi GT" class as well as the "JK D3 Spec" class. Without those categories, I do not think Retro Racing would ever get off the ground. Yes, there are a lot of folks that like to scratchbuild, but there are many that can not or have not tried to build a chassis. By the inclusion of those classes, we can get more folks interested and I think, at least in the area I live in, those 2 classes will be the more popular ones.

From being one that has been on the other side of the discussion many times in the past, I have a good idea of what the folks on the rules committee went through, all the work and discussions. I for one appreciate all that they did for us.

[Larry Mattingly]

Doesn't look too bad, although it is hard to get a true perspective with a clear body shell.

Would have looked even better with .850" tires...

Still don't understand why the cut line was raised to the bottom of the door?. You did say the test mule handled well with the body cut below the door, which I assume was at, or close to the original cut line.

LM

[Noose]

When you see the actual bodies you will see there is not much there between the door line and the bottom of the body. I mean really not much there. We had to allow for some trimming so the door line was set as the point.

[Hworth08]

The BoD did a good job. The package looks nice and friendly.

BUT , in the GT Coupe division, will body clips be allowed? Also, if a builder used brass body tubes, can the frame holes be drilled to allow a floating body tube? Last, is it legal to leave the JK pan in ONE piece and not have floppy pans?

[Noose]

Thanks from all of us.

GT Coupe: Yes, you can do all that you said.

JK Spec: Yup.

[Larry Mattingly]

When you see the actual bodies you will see there is not much there between the door line and the bottom of the body. I mean really not much there. We had to allow for some trimming so the door line was set as the point.

OK...

I'll learn to live with it.

Can we still fight about the tires?

LM

[Noose]

Can we still fight about the tires?

Nahhh... But hey... no one said you can't run .850s if you want. The rules only define a minimum. Use them and build a better mousetrap!

[Marty Stanley]

Perhaps I have missed this in another post on this thread, but I am still going to ask the question:

"What is the difference between JK Spec and GT Coupe?"

Both use the same chassis, motor, wheel size, and body type.

To me it looks like the same class. Might this be something put into place for use of anglewinder chassis later on?

Thanks for clarifying.

[Noose]

The JK Spec class is one where only the JK Chassis Kit and three JK bodies can be used in simplest terms.

The GT Coupe class is the same as it was before except for three things.

- Motors (F7 and D3 only)
- Gears (production only... no modifications)
- Weight (now 110 min).

And in case anyone didn't notice, the rule saying no drilled rear hubs has been deleted for any class where it was previously listed.

[Larry Mattingly]

Nahhh... But hey... no one said you can't run .850s if you want. The rules only define a minimum. Use them and build a better mousetrap!

Come on, there is nothing else (yet... ) in the rules to fight about.

The big question remains... Who is going to keep 'Liquid Lou' straight on which motors are legal in which classes? Sound like a project for Matt... It's a good thing for all of us that Cicconi has a sense of humor.

BTW is Matt donating his custom F1 front wheels/tires to PdL for the museum?

LM

[MantaRay]

Clarification please, regarding the JK Spec Class below:

Chassis Construction: ...

All chassis are to be constructed using longitudinal side pan hinges (floppy pans).

I have seen a couple of JK builds on the Gallery that show split pans with floppy pan AND torsion/plumber movements.

Are these considered legal in this class?

It seems to me that for newbies starting out, that building a chassis with just the torsion movement should also be allowed. Splitting pans and multiple movements should be in the regular Can-Am class

[Noose]

Any chassis on the Gallery may not be those for the JK Spec class but those that used the JK kit.

Torsion chassis are allowed since the rules don't state that you have to cut the pans. It states limits on what you can do.

[Noose]

Just a note folks. There were a few linky problems in the IRRA website and thanks to all who let us know. They should be fixed. If anyone else sees anything please PM me as soon as you can.

IRRA Website

[MantaRay]

Thanks, Noose... And whoever edited my post...

[Noose]

For the record, we are reviewing the JK Spec Class Chassis wording and a slight revision for clarity purposes will be forthcoming. We will let everyone know and make the necessary modifications to the printable rule sheets.

Hey... we ain't poifect!

[Marty Stanley]

F
Hey... we ain't poifect!

Joe,

Over half the battle is understanding the above statement and living it!

The more I read the rules, the more I am seeing a whole lot of thought went into them. Here's what I am seeing y'all (never said that in NJ!) did for Retro Racing.

You created a very easy way to get folks to try the sport of Retro Racing without a big expenditure. Simply take a running Flexi chassis, put a Falcon or the Pro Slot Euro Mk 1 4002 motor into it, a different body onto it, and put a real set of 5/8 inch diameter tires on it. You now have a Flexi GT competitive car to race.

If you like the Retro Racing type of competition AND want to start down the road to scratchbuilding, then there is the JK Spec Class. One chassis, one motor, one body style, and one way of building. NOW, that is a true "Spec" class. It's all about set-up and driving in this class. An IROC type of class, done retro style to boot.

If they want to "play" a bit more, then there is the GT Coupe class - more chassis options, a motor option, and body choices.

If that same racer wants to move up to Tier 1 racing, then they can choose either Can-Am or Formula 1 and hopefully both. I see these are the more "advanced" categories of racing. The inclusion of the Pro Slot Euro Mk 1 4002 and Pro Slot Euro Mk 1 4002B (American Arm) is a good choice towards making this a performance style of racing.

Yep, y'all did a good job.

Thank you!

[Hworth08]

You created a very easy way to get folks to try the sport of Retro Racing without a big expenditure. Simply take a running Flexi chassis, put a Falcon or the Pro Slot Euro Mk 1 4002 motor into it, a different body onto it and put a real set of 5/8 inch diameter tires on it. You now have a Flexi GT competitive car to race.

If you like the Retro Racing type of competition AND want to start down the road to scratchbuilding, then there is the JK Spec Class. One chassis, one motor, one body style, and one way of building. NOW, that is a true "Spec" class. It's all about setup and driving in this class. An IROC type of class, done retro style to boot.

There may be a problem with the .015" clearance on the Flexi chassis. Shimming the guide is the only true way to maintain .015" clearance with a Flexi. The front axle can be either bent or dropped down to show the proper clearance on a block but a Flexi seldom finishes a race with the front axle in the same condition (location) as it started.

The JK Spec class does look exciting! Spec 15, though a bit slower.

[Cheater]

Guys, there will be some slight revisions in the JK Spec class shortly. The BoD and Senior Advisers have made made over 150 posts to a thread in our private forum, hammering out some minor tweaks in the wording of the JK Spec class specs and we will soon issue revised rules for that class. Nothing major, but we have a clearer vision of what we want this class to be and have restated some regulations to point in that direction.

Whoever said (Marty?) that there has been a lot of thought (and discussion!) expended in the creation of these rules is absolutely correct.

And, speaking for myself, I'm honored to be a part of such a group.