Forum

Lets get this back on topic. This is not a thread about the current challenge class rules and the pros and cons of a WOF in that class. I have been hanging around the winch event scene for a couple of years as support crew and more recently as a compeditor. I have seen the drop in numbers at events (yes probably in part to the economy) but I have also seen the increase in numbers with the introduction of the club class. The clear problem that has arisen is that there are some vehicles in club class (including mine) that are substantually modified and really dont fit the intent of the rules (although fit the book). Hence the discussions about what to do.

I think it has been widely accepted that the current challenge class is going to be left as is and, in the interest of building the sport, a third class MAY be added. It is the level of specification that is being discussed here. Any one who has ever been involved in a minority sport will know that things have to change and move, hell even rugby has had rule changes.

Yes a line could be drawn in the sand that if you want to play you build a truck to the current rules, BUT no one cared when club class was initally introduced as it was seen as a way of adding numbers to the sport. Now that there are trucks that dont fit the challenge rules but are equally compeditive and in need of a class to run in to return club class to its original intention. Why is there an issue with this.???? Lets go back to offering a spec base with reasons for offering it up.

I support a third class with a minimum of specs.

Keep them looking like a vehicle from the outside B pillar foward, some base of OEM chassis, a tyre size restriction (more about looking after tracks for the other classes) and what ever else you feel you want / can justify to the minister of finance. WHY because there is little point in running an identical class to challenge class but minus the WOF req so make the new class more open. The club class will encompass the less modified.

And one last thing. The reason that there is a want to go to 37" tyres is not so much the clearance but the range of tyres that it opens up. Would people use them? Who knows but when looking for sponser might be nice to have more options than Silverstone and Simex.

But hey end of day if no new class is developed and I get ruled out of club class then I guess the Vitara sitting at the olds will get the good bits off my 413 and go visit the cert man. (if I can get it past the minister of affairs.)

Well said Dan

And directly in further response to J Evans the argument against allowing 37" tyres, I would like to point out that the public Image of WINCH CHALLENGE'S is not negative, and we do not compete on public land, so therefore your argument is again irrelevant.

The rules we are discussing and suggesting here are in relation to WINCH CHALLENGE'S, not club trucks or rescuing your mates in the bush, we are talking about what could be the next best step for OUR sport.

Having an optional WOF requirement in the modified class does in no way impact on your choice to keep your truck road registered so you can go rescue your mate's form the Aka's.

If you want to enter your truck into the modified class, we aren't going top turn you away because your truck is road legal.

My personal opinion and argument I would like to put forward for allowing 37" tyre's is that in a winch challenge, its neither here nore there, as the events are (besides the Vegas event) run on farm land where there aren't wheel ruts, and if they do develop, everyone running 37" tyres will still get stuck after the 1st truck on 37's has dug them down.

Look at Danial Clevers truck, (hilux axles on 32's or 33's??) it has the least clearance of the whole field, and he didn't get hung up anywhere that effected his score vastly.

Open up the tyre size!!!!!

What about the rear mounted radiator's and the no glass????

I'm all for those as well!!!!

[Modified by: Peter Hall on December 05, 2009 10:52 AM]

Alright here goes.
WHAT IS THE GOAL HERE?!
To get more people into Challenge Class. As far as I am concerned 5 trucks in a competition isn't a comp.
How do we achieve this ?
Drop the requirement for WOF and Rego. This will allow some of the club class guys who don't have a WOF and Rego to enter Challenge Class. Now the pros and cons of this were discussed down Taupo. It would require yearly srcutineering and log books. We are heading this way anyway aren't we?
We don't need another class yet. Maybe in 4 or 5 years if we take away the requirement to have a Wof and Rego as the trucks will slowly get highly modified.
If people want to keep their Wof and Rego (as I will on the truck I have at the moment) they can. The non Reg and Wof trucks won't have any advantage as the existing rules will stop this. They are already transporting their trucks on trailers.
Remember the goal is to get more people into Challenge Class. If we can focus on this and not our own agenda's we might get 6 trucks in the comp next year!lol

Just another thing to think about.
This year trying to compete in 5 Winch Challenges was pretty hard yakka. What I was thinking is only your top 3 scores goes to the National series. This will allow competitors who run competitions to be part of the National series.
Another thing.How about at each comp we hand out a form for people to vote on new rules and submit new rules or ideas this will allow people to discuss it over the whole weekend and will eliminate the need to have long winded debates at the end of a comp?

Cheers
Keri

There is a real need for the third class due to changes that must happen to the Club class and the desire not to change Challenge.

We are not going to tell people who have become the core of the sport, they can't race because a couple of people have spent a lot of money and don't want rules changed to allow other trucks to race against them.

This new class IS happening. The question is what shall the rules be?

As for 37" tyres, I have been talking with a potential series sponsor but they will not be involved unless we allow 37" tyres. The current tyre rule was changed to cater for a sponsor and this happens in ever motorsport. As for public perception of WC. Get real, what we do is an organised motorsport. It is the wankers who don't even join clubs that give us all the bad reputations (generally) so anything we do here is completely irrelevant.
Also you can use 36.5x13.5 Super Swaper Irok radials and they are 36.5 and are legal so going to a 37 is such a small difference that no one will even notice. That is to assume that anyone will even change anyway.

For those that think the rules need to be changed to allow different vehicles, that is not the case at all. I am building a truck that will have a spaceframe chassis but it will have the factory chassis as part of that spaceframe. It will have most of the inner guard removed to allow for the motor and coil overs to be fitted. The firewall has ben cut out and will be modified and then reistalled about 100mm further back to allow for the engine to fit. The rear suspension will have 24" of travel and under the current rule I will have to build a push rod system to achieve this. If there were less restriction on chassis mods then I'd just mount the c/o onto the rear lower TA and that would save a whole heap of money and time.
Now everything I have descibed above has been either approved (in concept) by my certifier or have been done by others already. It will ultimately be road legal and can be made to fit Challenge Class rules. BUT if the rules are loosened it can be built a lot cheaper by some small mods to the chassis.
So in this case Challenge rules don't stop the mods they just make them alot more expensive.

You have always been able to do what I have described above as the rules around that have never really changed bar maybe the inner guard rule (that was added) and the moving of axles rule. People haven't because you really need to build it from scratch rather than a series of small mods.

So removing a whole lot of rules that don't really stop anything but make it hard to understand, won't actually change what you can build if you want to. Removing the need for a WOF means you don't have to have one, but I would say most still will due to it making the truck more useable.

The sport is about people doing winch challenges. Challenge Class is one class within that sport and at present it is a small part of it as Club class has more competitors and more interest.

So what is more important, keeping things the same as they were years ago or go with the flow and let the sport evolve to include more people?

Quote Darin Neeley:

So what is more important, keeping things the same as they were years ago or go with the flow and let the sport evolve to include more people?

Who are we not including by doing what Keri suggests?

Regarding the meeting on sunday and any rule changes/additional classes, am I correct in the assumption that nothing can be officialy voted on until the A.G.M. next year?

Since the conception of club class there has been a drop in numbers this year but no one seems to notice it or is it a location thing. Will there be the same numbers next year or will they all be in challenge class if we drop the WOF.

I WOULD LIKE TO COMPETE IN CLUB CLASS NEXT YEAR. My question is can we change the rules so a driver can go down a class

Quote Jeremy Walker:

Quote Darin Neeley:

So what is more important, keeping things the same as they were years ago or go with the flow and let the sport evolve to include more people?

Who are we not including by doing what Keri suggests?

No one, but there has been such an outcry about dropping the WOF from challenge that it would appear we can't do that. That would be the easiest way around the problem but.....

Quote Tim Fensom:

Regarding the meeting on sunday and any rule changes/additional classes, am I correct in the assumption that nothing can be officialy voted on until the A.G.M. next year?

As has been agreed, we set the rules at the end of the season before the end of the year, so the rules will be set for next year now. The process for changing these rules can be changed at the AGM but the competition rules has a different timetable to suit the competition season. It is possible that we will set rules now that would come into effect after next season if there was a reason to. eg like we did for 6 point cages.

It also needs to be remembered that the process we follow for the rules review includes meetings but the actual decision is not made at the meeting. The reason for this is to ensure we get all the feedback possible before making any change or implementing any new class etc. We want to be very sure that the vocal minority don't over influence any decisions.
[Modified by: Darin Neeley on December 10, 2009 01:07 PM]

Quote Darin Neeley:

Quote Jeremy Walker:

Quote Darin Neeley:

So what is more important, keeping things the same as they were years ago or go with the flow and let the sport evolve to include more people?

Who are we not including by doing what Keri suggests?

No one, but there has been such an outcry about dropping the WOF from challenge that it would appear we can't do that. That would be the easiest way around the problem but.....

If by "outcry" you mean a couple of computer literate and vocal people putting their case forward on the forum, then I wouldn't write that idea off just yet.

Its very easy to come across quite forcefuly in writing.

You must take into account those that can't type out a 200 word post in under 3mins, so don't have the time to spend in front of the computer tapping away with 1 finger, but face to face have something very valid to say.

Don't let the voice of a few dictate the masses especially when course of action is so obvious and the arguments against are purely sentimental.

(Yes I am stirring again )
[Modified by: Peter Hall on December 10, 2009 02:40 PM]

Quote Peter Hall:

Don't let the voice of a few dictate the masses especially when course of action is so obvious and the arguments against are purely sentimental.

I dont think sentiment has any thing to do with it..........

But even if the arguement is based upon sentiment, it is still a valid arguement. The rules should reflect the desires of those they apply to. If the majority want it to stay the same then the reason is irrelevant as a clubs rules reflect the club.

No arguement will change that!