RRCA raises the Stock-Modified bar ...

[Jaffer]

In a December 2002 joint press release RRCA and CAL-Rocks declaired they were all going to abide by the same set of rules for the 2003 season "for RCAA National Championships, CALROCS, NARRCA, and RCRC Regional Championships" which are now published on their respective RRCA and Cal-ROCS web sites.

In the Modified-Stock section ...

"• All OEM tub/cab configurations are approved for competition. Aftermarket tubs must be OEM width and RCAA approved.
• No cutting of floor is allowed with the following exemptions.
The center section of the body is approved for cutting & raising to allow drivetrain clearance directly over drivetrain components. This does not include axles or axle shafts. Cutting and reboxing for the clearance of non suspension items, including tires, shocks and fuel tank is permitted.
Tubs/cabs may be cut along the bottom (rocker) area of the vehicle."

In a phone call yesterday to Cal-ROCKS Pres. Rich, he flatly stated that Cal-ROCKS would "absoulutely not allow 'dove tailing' (i.e. pushing the rear side panels toward the center) the rear of Modified Stock vehicles."
Left unsaid is the assumption that floorboard chopping to boat-side the rocker panels will also not be allowed.

Yet, in Reno yesterday, both the Sisson entry with a severly dove-tailed rear and the Standish entry with a severly boat-side rockers choped through three inches of floorboard on each side sailed through RRCA Modified-Stock tech inspection.

Sisson


Standish


Rich said he was heading up to Reno today...
I think he's in for a shock and a showdown with Ranch, the RRCA head honcho.

And for the rest of us Modified-Stock hopefuls ... ... go figger!

[RustoleumWhite]

I like the fact that... as I read those new rules, tubbing will be allowed... thats good because I plan on do that to my trail rig, but I want to be able to run Stock Mod should I wish...

No need for dove tailing, and I alread nixed the raisign the rocker idea after playign with it for a bit....


go get them Big Rich!!

[Dirty Harry]

Doesn't the Skyjacker Jeep run an LS1 motor and Dana 60s front and rear? I'd be more concerned about that in "Stock Mod" than the sheetmetal modifications, but you are right Jaffer, rules are rules.

[Spankbomb]

The Sisson entry is dove-tailed? I think I can see the bend but not sure.

Got a pic from the rear of the rig?

[nobody20]

Jaffer, good points.

I want to run stock modified, but can't due to the rear springs being shackled front and rear. This is not near an advantage with my 5's wheelbase compared to everyones 95+ inch wheelbases and the way courses are designed for the longer wheelbases. I think the stock modified rules need a lot more work.

[NE-RokToy]

Hopefully they start getting stricter with this, looking through pictures I can hardly tell mod stock from the other classes. Rock crawling is going the way of NMCA drag racing pro street cars used to be limited to be back halved, now they are pro mods without the wings..... Hopefully this is capped off before mod-stock is just smaller tires.

[Ryan]

Sissons vehicle is definitely "dove tailed". We ran right before/after them at UROC in Farmington last weekend. The Sissons are great guys.

I'll tell you something though---there's a whole lot of people, at least in UROC, that are a bit tired of spending time and money to comply with the rules, only to find that Joe Shmoe wasn't required to comply with the rules(BTW, I believe the Sissons comply 100% with UROC rules). It's a WHOLE lot better than it used to be, but it's still somewhat of a problem in UROC, and apparently in RCAA as well. I think it comes down to the fact that they just don't want to send anybody home. There's still a certain level of comraderie that it seems is difficult for some inpecting officials to cross, sending someone packing after they drove 3, 6, 8, 12, 20 hours.

With the purses getting bigger, and more and more sponsors coming on board, they are going to have a whole mess of lawsuits on their hands unless they start being anal about the rules. I don't give a rip who you are, how far you drove, or how much time and money you spent----if you don't comply, you should have a limited amount of time to comply, or you can't compete. All the other competitors may say it isn't that big of a deal-----as long as THEY are higher in the standings than the offender. When someone uses their golden tongue to squeeze through tech with a violation, and then wins the money you would have won had they not been allowed to compete, all of a sudden it isn't okay any more.

It's sad that it's come to this, but hey, competition isn't your weekly trailride with your buddies any more. People are putting a lot of time and money on the line, and MOST of them hope to win at least some of it back. If not, they would be out on the trail instead of dodging cones.


Of course, I can say all this, because I don't drive any more, I just spot

[Ryan]

Originally posted by NE-RokToy
Hopefully they start getting stricter with this, looking through pictures I can hardly tell mod stock from the other classes... Hopefully this is capped off before mod-stock is just smaller tires.

Just a note--I believe all of the top 5 Legend competitors in Farmington(we were 4th) took at least 4, and some 5 Unlimited lines. That's half of the obstacles. The guy that took 2nd used to run Unimited in both RCAA(so I'm told), and UROC, but bumped down to the Legend class because the Unlimited class was "too hard"(his words, and I would add "to win"). I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with that---hell, that's why we're there--more so, I'm just saying that for a Legend competitor to win in the Legend class, he has to take Unlimited lines, which he may or may not have designed his vehicle for. I actually enjoy it, because it adds a new level of strategy. You used to know that '0' was the best score you could get(along with spotter rides), now -110 is the best score you can get, but it's most likely not feasable. You used to know that the Legend lines were fairly drivable, and you wouldn't risk a rollover on every obstacle. Now that's gone out the window, and you're goal is more to take as many Unlimited lines as you can without any 40's. A whole lot more risk is involved now. You are encouraged to take lines you probably didn't design your vehicle for. No, you don't HAVE to, but if you want to win you probably will. I haven't read the RCAA stock modified rules completely, so I can't comment on the differences there.

Anyway, I think it's fun and interesting to watch the sport develop.

[1uglyranger]

Originally posted by nobody20
Jaffer, good points.

I want to run stock modified, but can't due to the rear springs being shackled front and rear. This is not near an advantage with my 5's wheelbase compared to everyones 95+ inch wheelbases and the way courses are designed for the longer wheelbases.

If the courses were really set up for longer wheelbase rigs, then how come a spring under CJ5 keeps winning???


Just something to think about while your making excuses

[Jaffer]

The rules do say "OEM tub/cab configurations are approved", skinnying the front (grill) is talked about (not allowed) as are the floorboards (no cutting) in the middle.
The Sissons and at least one other regional team saw a loophole in the wording and took advantage of it as nothing was said about the rear section.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with that since the front and the middle (floorboards) of the vehicle are addressed. The floor boards are not molested when dove-tailing a SWB Jeep tub.
And Ranch, the Pres. of RCAA did in fact verbally approved this modification prior to it being done with Garrett and Matt Sisson's rig.

Based on this, and immediately after the UROC meet here, we tore down the tac welded cage on my work in progress and have completed a dove-tail job and associated rear bumper narrowing just on the assurance from Ranch that it would be RCAA Mod-Stock legal. This modification passing Mod-Stock tech yesterday in Reno reaffirms it's legality, or at least acceptance (with my great relief on such a gamble) within RCAA, no matter what Rich of Cal-ROCS says was the intent in wording of the rules.

What does bother me, however, was yesterday's blatant disregard for the floorboard and rocker panel rules. I just can see no justification for allowing that entry to violate the explicit wording of those rule provisions.

The dropping of Pro-ROCS "like suspension for frame" rule very late at the start of this season and now this fiasco is enough to make me fell like I am being jerked around ... at the expense of personal time and $$$.
As I said earlier ... ... go figger!

I'm eyeing the outer edges of my TJ tub's floor boards now ... wondering just how much to try and get away with!

[pure-adrenaline]

the rules are there to abide by and to bend all you can w/ out breaking them. We moved the sides in on Sisson's and Ted Grady's rig 2 weeks ago. It works sweet. In tight leaning turns it keeps you from hanging up w/ your corners of the body.

[Big Rich]

First Off:

Double shackles are allowed in the mod stock class.......

Next: inner fenders must be retained, meaning rear, that means no dovetailing as I see. My conversion with Ranch (as always is civil and friendly), about the boated sides and dovetailing, found us in agreement, both have been or will be told that they must change to conform with the rules or be required to start running the other class.

If anyone is wondering about what would be legal and what won't be, if it's not spelled out well enough, please call and ask, so as to eliminate any and all confusion.

Rich

PS...at the regional events there are somethings that I (CalROCS/NARRCA) will be more relaxed about, due to many of the competitors being new and not having competition designed rigs. If you are wondering about these items please call or e-mail me.

[Jaffer]

Originally posted by Big Rich
...
Next: inner fenders must be retained, meaning rear, that means no dovetailing as I see. My conversion with Ranch (as always is civil and friendly), about the boated sides and dovetailing, found us in agreement, both have been or will be told that they must change to conform with the rules or be required to start running the other class.

Now you are changing the wording of your own rules here, Rich.
Your published rules state "Rear inner fenders must be maintained."
They do NOT say "retained" as you state here.

THAT leaves a LOT of play in the wording ...

From the Websters Dictionary:

"re·tain
Pronunciation: ri-'tAn
2 : to hold secure or intact
synonym see KEEP"

"main·tain
Pronunciation: mAn-'tAn, m&n-
1 : to keep in an existing state (as of repair, efficiency, or validity)"

"Retain" means to hold intact.
'Maintain" can mean to preserve it's exhistance and function.

Nice try ... everyone loses ...

One or two words do come to my mind though ... "snake pit".

[pure-adrenaline]

Well I have a problem I guess w/ the rule(dovetailing). I'm sure the Sisson's will too. Since they just took second place. What does it do to enhance a jeeps performance. It really just keeps the corner of the body off the rocks. There was a lot of work that went into the Sisson's rig. Are you saying that they might not be able to leave their body that way? You guys make the rules. We have to wait for ever to even get them. (Hince) You should have plenty of time to figure out what you want. It takes about 1 day to bend them. Let me stress bend them not break them. So it sounds like it should be addressed next year. How can a rule be changed during a series? So who can tell me if this is rumor or fact? We all know we can't get answers from RRCA in a timely manner.

[Paul Gagnon]

I'm no expert on rules but it seems to me that it is too late to close any loopholes created by this year's rules. Once the modification has been allowed to pass tech doesn't it in effect become sanctioned?

[Jaffer]

I don't just have a problem with all this, I'M TOTALLY DISGUSTED!

Wanting to compete in both RCAA and Cal-ROCS plus Pro-ROCKS. I chose last summer to base the new rig off a TJ to keep within Pro-ROCK's "like suspension for frame" rule. I'd prefered to go with the more ideal Scrambler's wheelbase but wanted a coil suspension so a TJ it was even though the frame and body parts are 3 times more expensive to obtain.
While gathering axels and drive train components this fall and winter and holding back actual construction I anxiously awaited the new RCAA/Cal-ROCS rules due out in November yet finally posted in December.
Next, and well after the new year Bob Hazel of Pro-ROCKS, facing withering participation and a boycott for stingy payouts, tosses out his Mod-Stock "like suspension for frame" rule. Well OK I say to myself, too late to change back to a Scrambler now ...
And now with the rig only half built and already into the season two rigs show up at UROC with dove tailed rears and intending to also run them in RCAA's Mod-Stock division with Ranch's prior OK and acceptence of this intrepretation of this modification.
Attempting to keep the new rig up to date, we tear apart the already constructed cage (and many hours of work) and began dove tailing the tub.
I called Rich/Cal-ROCS on Thursday, the morning of tech inspection in Reno, about it and he said it wasn't going to fly yet when I tracked down Garrett Sisson at the Reno Hilton that evening after tech inspection he confirmed acceptence of the dove tail modification.
So, for almost a year ... I bought and imported the TJ frame in May last year ... I've done everything within reason to make sure I could compete in regional santioned Mod-Stock contests.
AND NOW YOU ARE SAYING YOU AREN'T GOING TO ALLOW IT AND WE CAN'T COMPETE IN THAT CLASS???
JUST GO HOME AND FIX IT BEFORE YOU COME BACK???
Nobody can afford to rebuild their rig every six months until you #^%*&@'s make up your minds!
BULL FAWKING $HIT !!!

[1uglyranger]

You seem a little upset???

If I were you, I would have called and gotten an approval from Rich before dovetailing the tub. That would have saved you a lot of headache.

[Shrock]

IMHO, dovetailing the back violates the whole notion of a stock-mod class. These rigs are supposed to look fairly stock, so spectators can see something that resembles their rig and people considering getting into the sport can see rigs competing that do not appear fundamentally different than their trail rigs.

Just my $.02

[Jaffer]

Originally posted by 1uglyranger
You seem a little upset???

If I were you, I would have called and gotten an approval from Rich before dovetailing the tub. That would have saved you a lot of headache.

I don't intend to participate much in Cal-ROCKS. I did intend on going to many of the RCAA events. The Pres. of RCAA was the one who authorized the modification. And he allowed it past tech.
How much more should one need?
It was hard enough for Garret to get a hold of Ranch on the phone to get an OK much less getting something in writing.
Is getting a verbal answer from Rich worth more than from Ranch?
Rich SAYS you can cut the bed and re-box for shocks but not for coil overs. Can I believe him and not have to try and get an interpretation from Ranch at RCAA to confirm?
A shock is a "suspension component". The rule is fuzzy. Is this another thing that will come back and bite me? Will I need a clarification in writing from both organization's heads before doing it, or should I take one, the other's, or need both's word for it?

Maybe now I'll just stretch the wheel base back where I wanted it in the first place and stick with UROC, or play with Bob H. and his 'there are no rules, rules' outfit when it comes around, then tag along with Matt and Garrett on the trails since they won't be going anywhere else either ...

[bigdude]

Originally posted by Jaffer
Maybe now I'll just stretch the wheel base back where I wanted it in the first place and stick with UROC, or play with Bob H. and his 'there are no rules, rules' outfit when it comes around,

That sounds like your best bet. If you don't like the way they play then fuck 'em and don't give them your entrance fee.

[TEX]

Originally posted by Jaffer
Is getting a verbal answer from Rich worth more than from Ranch?

Rich & Ranch run two SEPARATE sanctioning bodies. In an effort to keep things consistent, they agreed to the same verbage in the offseason. Now, it appears that it's RCAA that is not holding up their end to follow the literal interpretation of the rule. From what I see, Rich is enforcing it the way it reads - and frankly, it appears he's also following the "spirit" of the rule as well.

Bottom line, if you want to compete in multiple sanctioning bodies, you're going to have to comply with the strictest one.


TEX

[Jaffer]

Originally posted by Shrock
IMHO, dovetailing the back violates the whole notion of a stock-mod class. These rigs are supposed to look fairly stock, so spectators can see something that resembles their rig and people considering getting into the sport can see rigs competing that do not appear fundamentally different than their trail rigs.

Just my $.02

No argument, and in fact, that is exactly what Rich told me on the phone as this was supposedly the intent of the writen rules ... and how I intended on building.
But now we are seeing dove-tailed and boat sided Modified-Stock rigs competing ... and winning ... in Reno.
As I said in the beginning, go figger!
I hope they get this settled ... before winter.
Excuse me now, I have to go barf ... I'm done.

[jeepguru7]

I left my rear body panels stock for this reason. I think the Legends or Stock Mod class should be vehicles that can be bought and built on a limited budget and that look factory. If I had unlimited funds to build something then I would expect to be put in the unlimited class, but I do not therefore I want to compete against vehicles that are built under the same guidelines that I built mine, not someone that can pour tons of money into building a "stock mod" rig that is pushing the limits of the rules and makes the field of competitors vastly different. It does nothing but create gaps between the top competitors and everyone else that can't afford to stay on top of the leading technology. They have different classes so that competitors in each class compete with vehicles of their own catergory, creating a way to test the drivers and spotters abilities, not their wallets. Erocc has the most lienent rules on the legends class allowing almost fully tube chassis rigs to compete with those mostly stock appearing vehicles with full bodies and less than ideal components. It makes it very difficult to compete head to head with someone that built a specialty vehicle that stretches the rules to stay in a lower class. It's fine with me if you want to have a vehicle built like that but I think these vehicles need to be in another class.

There are many things in this sport that need changing until it finally gets worked out to everyones liking and this is one of those things. Think about other forms of motorsports and look at the different classes and why each was done, to keep the field of competitors for each class close toghether and to keep someone from coming in a having a distinct advantage therefore elimating the rest of the competition from having a chance. We have the most relaxed rules in any form of motorsports, be it in classes or safety, and we as a group need to work to make the future of competitive rockcrawling grow and it all starts here on the PBB with everyone that competes bringing something to the table.

[TEX]

Originally posted by jeepguru7
There are many things in this sport that need changing until it finally gets worked out to everyones liking

Take it from someone who's been in 4x4 competition for 15+ years. It will NEVER reach the point of being to "everyone's liking".


TEX

[jeepguru7]

At least to the point where everyone that competes does so knowing that it's a level playing field. Yes their needs to be different ideas, rigs and ways of doing it, but we all need to start at the same level assuring competitors are competing against each other and not each others wallets. At least in the stock mod/legends classes. It is called unlimited for a reason.