Outer Limits 4x4 Board

jeep97tj wrote:It would be cool to see this class up and running, but i think there are to many rules on how to build it already, I think u could get ride of the max weight, the box frame, the irs ifs rule and the minimum supension travel rule, let people think for them selves and build what ever is cheap for them... just a thought???

EXACTLY.

Toughnut wrote:Stop being so negative about the concept. If you don't like it, make your own. I don't need to explain myself a thousand times why we've made a particular rule. Just know that we've made it for a reason, like the mimimum suspension travel.

It's not being negative - As far as I can most of the "rules" put forward are more the design solution.
Take a step back. base the "rules" around the fundamentals of the safety aspects required and aspects that define a "little buggy".....this does NOT include restrictions on type of suspension, rim type or size, and certainly not minimum amounts of suspension travel.
If you have valid reasons for putting this sort rule then I suggest you put forward a reason yourself - because the only reason I could see some of these "rules" is because someone is trying to build a class to which they commercially sell the foundation of the vehciles.......

So please take it back to the basic objectives of the class becuase so far "Budget" has been mentioned - then promptly disregarded......"Entry Level" was banter about then a few comments suggested that it wasn't really...... There's talk about making people think - then conflicting statements and "rules" about what can & can't be used.....

Sorry guys I don't want to be negative but FFS make up you mind.

jeep97tj wrote:this ones $4200 full welded and is made to hang of the back of a 1300cc GSXR engine





They also sell the plans and u can buy individual pieces from them.

daaaaamb, I like that set up, easy to make with half a brain, even buy the bit that bolts on to the wheel and make the rest yourself would be easy, set is up to use a standard shackle bush and iether get a few usnis and weld them up using box....remeber this is slow so it doesnt need to be real ballanced unless you want this to be dual purpose ie speed as well

I think I would go the ATV wheels and tyres though, the bike ones I have may be a little diffcult to adapt plus the ATV ones would be good for the gearing

Beastmavster wrote:[Classes exist so like minded people can play. Obviously you're not like minded and dont want to play in this class. That's fine, accept the fact that there are others who really like the path it's heading as it is now.

Indeed they do. But when "cheap entry level" was thrown about, it should be exactly that. You can't just get something off the ground with nothing.

Look at Tuff Truck as you mentioned, that didn't just happen overnight, from a bunch of people building from scratch. Look at the first TT and the vehicles competeing, they were nothing more then vehicles that competed in other events thats owners, looking for a new challenge from a new event decided to compete in, from there it escalated. It was all from pre-exisitng vehicles.

Classes need rules, i agree. But if you are trying to get something new off the ground from scracth (especially something supposedly cheap for all) you need to allow already exisitng vehicles to be able to enter, or ones that require minimal build/preperation to compete, deveoping larger restrictions comes later after everything is established.

Wooders wrote:If you have valid reasons for putting this sort rule then I suggest you put forward a reason yourself - because the only reason I could see some of these "rules" is because someone is trying to build a class to which they commercially sell the foundation of the vehciles.......

So please take it back to the basic objectives of the class becuase so far "Budget" has been mentioned - then promptly disregarded......"Entry Level" was banter about then a few comments suggested that it wasn't really......

Nail on the head... the first posts were all about low-budget, creative, amateur hobbyist stuff...

Sorry guys, but if you don't have a few basic fab skills, and a few basic tools at home (drop saw, grinder, drill, welder, and some hand tools) then you shouldn't be looking at building a buggy, be it big, small or otherwise. I've never built a buggy, or even a serious 4wd before, but, after thinking about this for a couple of days, have a fairly good idea of what I'm going to build, using wrecking yard parts, and looking at a budget of $1500 - $2000 all up, possibly less if I really scratch around for second hand parts, and can find a wrecked bike for the right price. I have only the tools listed above, and an empty bay in my garage. If that doesn't look like entry level motorsport, then maybe it's time to look at knitting or needle point as a new hobby......

Keep talkin' boys.
Just done the rounds of the back yard, and I got most of the stuff for a start off....

Ya DO need a minimum weight though ... maybe 359-400 kg, and scrap the maximum weight rule.

And I would like a few more cc.s ... maybe 550 - 600 that'll let me use a LJ50 zook motor







And don't get too bitey and snaky about the negative feedback either.

Eddy wrote:Keep talkin' boys.
Just done the rounds of the back yard, and I got most of the stuff for a start off....

Ya DO need a minimum weight though ... maybe 359-400 kg, and scrap the maximum weight rule.

And I would like a few more cc.s ... maybe 550 - 600 that'll let me use a LJ50 zook motor







And don't get too bitey and snaky about the negative feedback either.

I dont see a min weight being a problem, if you make the frame an everything light as possible, then put the driver in and work out the ballance and add lead shot ballast if required in the right places to make the thing realy ballances, even run some ballast in the tyres is an option

I think the 450 maybe 500cc motorbike engine only, no gearbox, reverse by spotter or the small starter motor, after all the idea imo is to make is as technical as possible and minimize the use of reverse etc, i think courses should be about traction and taking the right angles and turns and HP at the right time, tight turns to get around sections on either end of an obsticle would get anoying and adds heaps to the cost of the vehicle and parts required.

How many people have or know some one with an old bike, pump, mower at a stretch that could be used to power something like this??

ferret wrote:Sorry guys, but if you don't have a few basic fab skills, and a few basic tools at home (drop saw, grinder, drill, welder, and some hand tools) then you shouldn't be looking at building a buggy, be it big, small or otherwise. I've never built a buggy, or even a serious 4wd before, but, after thinking about this for a couple of days, have a fairly good idea of what I'm going to build, using wrecking yard parts, and looking at a budget of $1500 - $2000 all up, possibly less if I really scratch around for second hand parts, and can find a wrecked bike for the right price. I have only the tools listed above, and an empty bay in my garage. If that doesn't look like entry level motorsport, then maybe it's time to look at knitting or needle point as a new hobby......

For $2-4000 you could buy a second hand 2 stroke buggy of some description, that is only marginally inelligble by these rules from either suspension setup or slightly wider by 200mm or so, or something trivial like that.

So what if someone can't weld or build one, should they instantly be ruled out because they can't do this and make something slightly different to whats already available.

Only need to ease up the rulings a little and be slightly more leaniant with dimensions, suspensions etc and you instantly have opened up the doors to a host of pre-existing buggies that could get something like this off the ground. That alone would make it 'cheap entry level' motorsport. Not only that, but maybe might discover that other setups that aren't "allowed" under whats been said are just as effective or an even better way to go.

ferret wrote:Sorry guys, but if you don't have a few basic fab skills, and a few basic tools at home (drop saw, grinder, drill, welder, and some hand tools) then you shouldn't be looking at building a buggy, be it big, small or otherwise. I've never built a buggy, or even a serious 4wd before, but, after thinking about this for a couple of days, have a fairly good idea of what I'm going to build, using wrecking yard parts, and looking at a budget of $1500 - $2000 all up, possibly less if I really scratch around for second hand parts, and can find a wrecked bike for the right price. I have only the tools listed above, and an empty bay in my garage. If that doesn't look like entry level motorsport, then maybe it's time to look at knitting or needle point as a new hobby......

Overall I agree with what your saying.
But my point was that some aspects make undertaking such a project beyond and it was more about the context.
Originally it was touted as "Entry Level" and my understanding would probably be similar to your - but reading some of the responses, and that includes some from those most interested in proposing this, it seems that some aspects and attitudes are pushing it away from "Entry Level".....

Just to elaborate IMHO the BasicRegs should be:
4 wheels. Engine Max 500cc.
Fits into a box trailer.
BASIC safety requirements.
No physical connection between rig & navi.

Why not encourage all manner of design - as long as it mets the BasicRegs above.....if people develop flexible high clearance Independant suspension great, if people want to pay the weight premium of solid axle housings why not.
This way there could be all manner of designs, could be achieved VERY cheaply...or not......but at least it's the competitiors option, and they would obviously work to design what they feel would work best.

Weight: Why should there be a minimum? This encourages usage of smaller motors, and smarter design. And if there's no phyical connection allowed between rig and navi .....well seems to me that lighter SHOULD be encouraged. Besides lighter means it's possibly weaker (ie a disadvantage), but means the vehicle could easily be lifted off the track too
Suspension: Sorry the specific suggestion of only IFS/IRS is just dumb. Let people decide what will work for them.....a lot would probably go IFS/IRS anyway....but being open allows people to think about what would work for THEM.
Driveline: Same thing. Some people might like the benefits of chain drive, others might see benefits in direct drive, shaft drive, heck someone might want to put a 125cc engine on each wheel....who cares....it's their junk & their design......and it fits the BasicRegs.
Steering: Same again.
Engine/Motor: Petrol/electric/fartgas/ who cares.....Petrol generally gives better HP. Electric better instant torque. Any eletric motor with equivilent utput to that available to a 500cc petrol engine is going to be massive and the battery packs heavy......
Tyres/Wheels - Must not be tracked. Size unrestricted withing the overal vehicle size restrictions.

So basically I think of the overal class specs are left fairly open then you'll see some clever/fun designs.

Basic Safety.
4point Harness - no brainer.
1x 1kg fire ext - doesn't need to be big the amount of fuels would be small - but just means IF there is a small fire it can be contained. Cost $20.
2x cutoff switch. 1 within reach of the driver and one externaly accessable. Cheap and easy to do.
Helmets and wrist restraints obviously.
As for the roof /intrusion debate....As said back X# pages, it doesn't seem to be an issue for WeRock...BUT people can always add one if their kids are going to be driving it and they want to add MORE safety......but I think the rules should focus on the basic ROP.

I'm pretty sure some people are deliberately trying to stir the pot by suggesting car bits and solid axles.

If you want to build 800kg mini replicas of tough truck competitors, then fine. Start your own thread with your own preferred mini class rules.


Here's what I think we need to specify:


Safety requirements:- chassis, exhaust, body components, protection/intrusion, seats, rollcage and harnesses. No cut down car chassis.

Cant see why it has to be box or tube, either should be fine, so long as the minimum structural strength is there.

I agree it should be compliant with existing oddysey, sidewinder and similar bike buggies.


Braking systems. Seperate hydraulic disc front and rear.

Driveline: - Minimum 2 wheel drive, maximum 4wd.

Engine capacity 500cc motorcycle engines. Belt or chain driven. No car engines. No car differentials.

Note that if high horspower engines become prevalent/dominant (eg 400cc supersport engines) mutliple classing (if numbers permit) OR intake restrictors may be applied to these rules.

Reversing system must be fitted. This may be a electric starter motor based, like a Honda Goldwing type arrangment, or may be a more complex arrangment. Hey, it may even be a handcrank. Your call, just make sure it exists.

Guidlines for electric engines will follow - the expectation is that this would be given effectively a hp disadvantage (say 25kw maximum).

Suspension: - IFS and IRS.

Honestly guys, building an IFS and IRS system is SIMPLE. Look under an IFS car. It only needs a lower wishbone and a mcpherson strut. 3 mounting points.

If anyone can't get their head around that, then they're obviously not capable of building any kind of buggy, even copying someone elses.

The pictures and diagrams on edges website are basically enough for any competant builder to copy. If not buy one of their kit manuals for $75 and learn.

It's not just to stop people copying existing 4by design and scaling it down. Replacing the IFS/IRS with a solid axle creates too many complications with belt or chain drive, and creates a dangerous safety issue for those who feel otherwise and have to push their luck.



8" travel per corner may be pretty hard to acheive, I think a lower minimum should be applied, say 6". 8" travel is a lot per corner on a very small rig.

I certainly dont get that much movement on my GQ front end.


Tyres: Free choice of current Trials, Trail bike, Motorbike or ATV fitment up to Maximum size 27".

Tyres must be mounted at four corners of the vehicles. Dual trailbike wheels are allowed.

*As to why you'd use motorbike ones I dont know... but if it got you out there competing a few weeks earlier using what you'd found in the back shed, well good luck to you.


Size and weight: The intention is that this is a light, trailer class that can be towed behind almost any car. As such this must fit into a 8'x4' trailer with the tailgate closed, and be of light weight.

As trailer sizes very slightly, this equates to a maximum of approximately 2400mm long x 1200mm wide. Please make sure you have measured your trailer before building.

Maximum weight 500kg.


Rule may change on short notice until completed vehicles are tested.

Beastmavster wrote:I'm pretty sure some people are deliberately trying to stir the pot by suggesting car bits and solid axles.
.....................
Honestly guys, building an IFS and IRS system is SIMPLE. Look under an IFS car. It only needs a lower wishbone and a mcpherson strut. 3 mounting points.

It's not stirring the pot.
Infact the inital post made reference to some bike parts but it seems to me mostly YOU specifiy No Car Parts.
Although the fact that you then reference back to it seems funny.....
But the reality is if you have tight size /weight upper limits then there's not going to be many/any car parts.

Initally I was interested but I'm getting less so........Initially it sounded like a great idea, but it sounds like you guys have already set up in you mind what you want - but aren't clearly explaining it......
Whatever...I'll watch and if it looks interesting then maybe - but I'm over this thread as clearly you're not taking suggestions and not actually debating what form this could/should take.....

i like the trailer size idea

what about a wheel set up like this ???

Nah should be more like This

jeep97tj wrote:i like the trailer size idea

what about a wheel set up like this ???

That looks awesome. Reckon it comes under the weight limit?

Agree 100% with wooders. This brainstorming needs to at least have a clear concept.
The rules as they stand will knobble the potential of a half decent buggy. If it's entry level then it doesn't matter (although you may just as well buy an old Odyssey than spend 100 hrs building a kids toy).
At the end of the day I think the most popular concept will be a class of buggy that is as capable as possible and as cheap as possible.
Otherwise have fun building ur buggy and then playing in the backyard with it.

Wooders wrote:It's not stirring the pot.
Infact the inital post made reference to some bike parts but it seems to me mostly YOU specifiy No Car Parts.
Although the fact that you then reference back to it seems funny.....
But the reality is if you have tight size /weight upper limits then there's not going to be many/any car parts.

But then some people are saying we shouldnt have a weight limit (the weight limit has already stretched out), so that's going to allow more car parts.

The weight limit was always to push new ideas and different ways of building rather than the standard competition 4wd model we see now.

If the end result ends up being an LJ50 zook with no body panels, really, whats the point of this idea at all? You only need to chop a couple of hundred kilos out of an early LJ to get to that weight......


Forcing IFS/IRS bascially forces people of their existing thinking path. This should be considered a good thing, not the cause an ongoing whine session.


Ok... amend the rules. Let them have their solid axles. But make the minimum weight for solid axle vehicles 750kg, and the chassis thickness much stronger to support them - say 51mm and 4mm thick). And it still has to be under 4' wide and fit in the trailer. And it still has to run ATV or trailbike tyres. And it still has to run a 400cc or 500cc motorcycle engine.

No-one will build one anyway, despite their b*tching they'll all end up building an IFS/IRS rig or, far more likely they wont build one at all.

But at least then we'll end the useless constant requests to change the rules "because *I* wanna use Solid axles and cant cope of thinking of doing it differently" crap.

F*ck it I'll put it even plainer like I just did in a PM.


Basically, I'm f*cking sick of at least 5 comments per page along the line of... solid axles are so much better, so change the rules to suit me or I wont play.


Now it's not my set of rules, but this is my position:

Fine then, dont play.

If you want to make a set of rules of your own go for it. Set up a competing idea and all the naysayers can go join that and see if they can be constructive over there, or if they just b*tch about the ideas you come up with too.

AFL footballers didnt get the rules of cricket changed to suit them, they made their own sport. Constructive criticism is ok - sports change rules all the time - but dont deliberately try and steer the concept in your direction.

But just cos you're too lazy/stupid/redneck to think of a different way to do things dont f*ck it up for everyone else.



Maybe, if enough people are interested, one day the "IFS" class and the "solid axle" class can have a competition and we'll see who wins. A no rules, no holds barred competition with no minimum weights, with only agreed capacity, dimensions and tyre size. May the best design win.

Until that day, start a new LIL-SAS thread, and get your boys building.

the big question.....do we allow digs

Chimpboy just sent me this....


for those who'd rather chop something up than make their own start with this.


http://www.alibaba.com/catalog/11396403 ... Model.html


For that price I'd almost want one anyway

edit:

Added in this..... 400cc, forward and reverse, automatic transmission and already on big ATV tyres.


http://fribestgroup.en.alibaba.com/offe ... Quad_.html



Look at the weihgt... cant see any need for a 500kg maximum....I still think it should be 350kg guys....

Tiny wrote:the big question.....do we allow digs

Didnt see anything in the rules saying no...... yet

chimpboy wrote:

jeep97tj wrote:i like the trailer size idea

what about a wheel set up like this ???

That looks awesome. Reckon it comes under the weight limit?

Nope..... but it's a 2 seater using a subaru engine.

A single seater of same, using a motorbike engine would come in under the initial 350kg limit, let alone the current 500kg one.

I was talking about the dual wheel set up when i posted that pic, nice and light and would give good down pressure on such a light buggy compared to a 12" wide atv type tyre. So duals allowed??

AS far as I know duals were allowed. Someone referred to that pagers earlier.



It's not my class... ask madzuki and toughnut... i'm just holding the fort lol

Hmm, put a short CV between the two wheels on each corner... for extra flexiness

Beastmavster wrote:AS far as I know duals were allowed. Someone referred to that pagers earlier.



It's not my class... ask madzuki and toughnut... i'm just holding the fort lol

OK Where to start

Car parts are allowed, It will be a dissadvantage but that is there choice

Sure you can use solid axles, has to fit in the trailer tho

Digs are OK

Must have mechanical reverse of some sort, be it a elec' motor or transfer case.
There are classes that cater for chopped up zuks...We wont be.

Drive to all 4 wheels

Duallies are fine as long as the total tyre size fits within the current rules ie add the two tire sizes together. Thanks for all the imput guys and I'm over my little dummy spit this morning. OK here goes.

We set the IFS/IFR rule because we wanted the class to go down a certain path and to basically force people to develop suspension ideas instead of sticking with conventional rigid axle designs and whilst the concept is to encourage different ideas from people you still need to have rules to guide the class in a certain direction. Don't be mistaken. This IS definately a cheap, entry level class. But only if you look around and sorce parts from what may seem like strange places. This is just as much a designing exercise as it is a building exercise not to mention the fun you can have scrounging the parts for it. Just from chatting with a couple of people interested I haven't heard the same design yet. As for using a honda odesey etc. They wouldn't be within the safety guidlines. The basic chassis that we came up with has come about because a few people needed a base to start from and this also sets it up so that everyone builds from the same base. I've only specified the cockpit area. What you hang off that is up to you. I'm going to change it to allow tube instead of box and also to use pretty much whatever you'd like to hang everything off that as long as there isn't any sharp edges etc that can cause injury. You could buy an odesey to get all the drive line and steering parts off and use them in your buggy frame. The overall size was to make it easy to transport and store when not in use. We have already stretched the length to suit the taller guys. We really don't want to make it any wider because now you have to really think more about center of gravity and the ride height of the vehicle. Some of the rules are going to change and when we get a couple of these buggies built the rules will change again. As we start to get people competing then we can allow other things to come into the rules. This is called development and will continue until the sport ends

Maybe this sort of ATV might impress.

http://www.monsteratvs.com/four%20wheel ... C-003F.JPG

http://www.monsteratvs.com/four%20wheel ... C-009S.JPG

http://www.monsteratvs.com/four%20wheel ... C-002S.JPG

http://www.monsteratvs.com/four%20wheel ... C-022S.JPG

http://www.monsteratvs.com/four%20wheel ... C-026S.JPG

http://www.monsteratvs.com/four%20wheel ... C-032S.JPG

http://www.monsteratvs.com/four%20wheel ... C-026S.JPG

http://www.monsteratvs.com/index.htm



Seeya James

So madzuki saying solid axles ok, toughnut saying not.


Previously it was 2wd allowed, now it's 4wd only.

Etc....

Have you updated the rules page?

There is no point in running 2wd with the way the tracks will be built.

Steve agree's with me...He just doesnt know it yet

And with the solid axle..Just over the arguing...I will let them figure out the hard way that it wont be benifical to run that type of setup in this class.