|
|
|
| Buttboarding (778 Posts)
|
| Topic |
Buttboarding Info |
|
|
|
On 9/20/2003 FL
wrote in from
(65.119.nnn.nnn)
PSR...Good to see your tag up on the electronic wall . Haven't seen it for a while.Tube chassis since '78 .FL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/18/2003 PSR
wrote in from
(24.53.nnn.nnn)
The 'Floating Axle Rule' is nutty,period. I can think of only two trucks,both hellishly expensive,and rather hard to find,that could even be slightly construed as being a speed advantage because of bearings holding the axles.Funny thing is that both the Moe Speed and Hickey trucks are designed by avid downhillers pretty much for Downhill Riding and Racing.So,what is the point here? Is it a "safety issue" because Z-Rollers use an 'undersized' axle nut? C'mon,really,that is not an issue,anyone whose used those trucks fix that by changing axles,IF there's any REAL reason for concern. All this takes me back to Providence,R.I.,where my woodie was deemed "unsafe",as it 'might break' on the College Hill run.Ha,I still USE that sled,going on 24 years on it now(and with Mundos on it,it'll still do a comfy 65mph).Abritrary Rules are what have kept me AWAY from being a competitor,and probably always will.I'm heartened by Mr.Lott's continued use of wood,impressed with Roger's Bro's Sleds,using tubing(like what Dan and I ran in '94)with a seatpan wrapped by the frame,and more recently using Pegless Sleds(my Wooodie has been pegless for two decades now),with some thought towards proper air management.Rules could have snuffed the improvements in the sport that these innovators have brought out,but then we'd have racing that dosen't improve the breed,which would be a horrible thing to see happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/18/2003
EK
wrote in from
(204.246.nnn.nnn)
Good to "hear" from you, Mario.
Sounds like business as usual with you... working out some tech stuff with boards. Sorry about landing on your head while stand-up... sounds like you at least wore a helmet... Hey... I remember in my younger beginnings when I did stand-up. The skaters nowdays are very fortunate with the high stuff that's available... I had "old school" equipment like Bennett Trucks, road riders, and loose ball-bearings. Talk about worrying about speed wobbles back then... Signal Hill flash-backs. Going 40 mph+ was a rush and congrads to the survivor. I went 49+ mph on a homemade 48" fiberglass/wooden board (no different from my buttboard)with loose ball-bearings and Cadillac wheels (the first urethane wheel...). Nuts... talk about putting the fear of God in you...
It would be cool to see your new creations. I will be going to the course as soon as I arrive at Oakland on the 19th and pick up my rental. Hopefully I will have enough time to set-up my bike and do a couple of practice runs. I'm pretty stoked about this weekend. Until then, peace my brahda.
---- EK
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/18/2003 Mario
wrote in from
(148.87.nnn.nnn)
About spinning axle trucks... I don't have any, and have never used them. They are, I guess, safer in the event that you seize a bearing. I've never seized a bearing, I don't know anyone who has. How often does that happen in racing? There has been some debate over whether the axle even spins at all. Personally, I could care less if the guy next to me has spinning axles, but I would care if his bearings seized up and he took me out.
EK - I'm still on the fence about racing this weekend (practice starts tomorrow). I don't know if I can justify the cost. I built a grav bike I'll bring it up and show you. I also built a new luge, it's based on a Darren Lott buttboard but 25% bigger (16" x 60", 92mm wheels, 12" homemade CrMo trucks w/out spinning axles). I guess I might come and race classic luge and run the rest of my stuff in practice to see how it works. If my G-bike is competitive, I may well run it, ditto the luge. I fell on my head at 35 mph recently doing standup, so I may not do that....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/18/2003 David Rogers
wrote in from
(66.14.nnn.nnn)
Tommy,
I am not referring to riders that were complaining about the rules this year...I am sure there were a few. I am referring to prior years. Why was the rule about floating axles added in the first place? Why were we able to run them in 99,00,01? Were racers complaining back then? I don't think so. I never heard a single complaint or concern.
Educated and/or experienced riders realize that floating axles don't make you faster on the racetrack. The cost of these trucks is not an issue, riders chasing the "world cup" or "world championship" will spend ten times that on their first international airline ticket.
This was a PREDATORY rule...period. It is a shame that the authors of this rule don't have the balls to admit that they made a mistake and change it.
Marcus? Gerhard? Ozman?.......Got Balls?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/18/2003
EK
wrote in from
(204.246.nnn.nnn)
This goes out to my fellow "laydown" boarder, Mario.
I will be racing in this weekend's San Francisco Gravity Festival. But I will not be doing the "laydown" class. I will be in the gravity bike division, stock class.
I have not given "buttboarding" up... just focusing on gbing in organized events. I still have the board you gave to me last year and working on it for "recreational" rides. Maybe I will get back into it on the racing level next year. Hope to see you there this 19th-21st Sept.
EK
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/18/2003
Tommy
wrote in from
(212.185.nnn.nnn)
Dave,
just to answer your questions: When saying: “they“ I meant the IGSA who came up with the rules.
With “the others” I meant all the riders complaining about spinning trucks at the swiss champs and hot heels… I won’t post any names on this message board, because maybe they in the meantime have changed their minds, who knows? I can only speak for myself, but if you want to discuss this issue with them let me know and I will give you a few names via email.
I think the reason why many people where complaining at those events is: Many riders who are not in the sport as long as you/we are read today’s rule books and what did they see? They saw: . Fact. They don’t know why and they don’t know the “old” rules. So they come to an event like hot heels (with their equipment set up within the rules they read on the internet). Then they recognise… ohhh, what’s that, there are many riders using the spinning axles and give a s#@! what the rules say… Don’t you think they don’t just wonder why there are rules at all? So then they ask IGSA why it is possible to ride spinning axles although its not allowed in the rules… IGSA then says, stop, it’s only allowed if the spinning axles are blocked in any way so there is no spin??!?! All this confusing discussions at an event look like complains about trucks etc. but in fact it is just a mess!
My personal opinion is that each rider should complete a whole race track on his “buttboard” doing stand up. If it is possible, it is a skateboard to me. If it is possible but looks just stupid because of the shape, setup or anything? It is ok to me, I don`t care, every single riders prob. ;-)
This would be the definition of classic style for me :-) (lay down skateboardin).
Again: that’s just my personal opinion and nobody should take it too serious ;-)
Cheers
Tommy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/17/2003 Darren Lott
wrote in from
(68.4.nnn.nnn)
"Bad rules drive people away, and rules that drive people away are bad."
Five Fold Path to Rule Making:
1) Promote growth of the sport.
2) Promote safety.
3) Preserve the integrity of the sport.
4) Ensure fair competition.
5) Rules which benefit the rule makers should be avoided.
I think you can apply these premises in order, and determine which rules need to be added or amended.
'"Predatory Rules" (designed to hinder specific riders or manufactures) quickly fail the test.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/17/2003 Mario
wrote in from
(148.87.nnn.nnn)
I'd go for that, the same rules for standup and buttboards. Then you have two classes with the same equipment "Standup" and "Laydown" (finally killing the embarassing "buttboard" name).
The ride height rule is stupid. Did you know that ice luges have a *maximum* ride height (4" btw), not a minimum? Yup, the higher they get the less chance there is of dragging something, and there's less turbulent air under the sled.
The no-spin-axle rule is stupid, it's there just to keep the cost down. If they want to make buttboaring cheaper, they should lower the entry fee; this weekend's race is $150!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/17/2003 David Rogers
wrote in from
(66.14.nnn.nnn)
I agree with you on making the rules the same for skateboard and buttboard. They are nearly identical as it stands right now. Wheel size, bearings and ride height are the only issues that separate the classes. Wheel size is the only one of those issues that makes any significant difference in performance.
It's a shame that a standup rider of today with a dropped landy race board, Randal Comp IIs, 76mm kryptos and some ceramic bearings is not even close to passing tech if he wants to race in the buttboard class.
It seems as if the push for "purity" in the rules eliminates most of today's downhill skateboards from being legal buttboards...the opposite of what one would expect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/17/2003
sean c
wrote in from
(205.188.nnn.nnn)
yeah, i agree with dave it's very silly. i've seen guys who've shoe glued the bearings in the truck so the axle won't spin. The stupidest part, if the downhill skateboard guys can use trucks with spinning axles shouldn't they be allowed to race that same board in the buttboard class? isn't this how the buttboard class was started? isn't this why the weight limit is the way it is?
which brings me to the next thing that bothers me.
i made my own buttboard out of 3/4" 11 ply birch and i've added nothing to the board except plastic hand grabs and i ride indy 215's (by no means a beefy truck). i've also shaped my buttboard to look like everyone else's and it's still over the weight limit. all because the weight limit was based on a sector 9 board. (so i've heard)
i guess i'll also bring up a point that i have heard second hand. there was a buttboarder in Oklahoma who had a buttboard that was apparently similar to mine, i.e. normal in every way except it weighed too much. i heard they let him race anyways because he wasn't a contender.
sean c
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/16/2003 David Rogers
wrote in from
(66.14.nnn.nnn)
My boards are 12x48 plywood, 2 trucks and 4 70mm wheels..simple huh?..I don't add weight to the board, I don't use ceramic bearings, no headrest, no handles. These are the same boards I raced for 3 years in the IGSA....illegal now because the axles spin and probably over the weight limit by a pound or so.
I have been told that guys wrap tape around the axles or freeze the bearings to make them "legal". How silly is that?
What is the point with this rule? Who wrote it? Who backs it? What has been accomplished? How does it level the playing field? What was the problem with the way things worked in 99,00 and 01? Are we trying to give the tech inspectors something to do? Anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/16/2003
Mario
wrote in from
(148.87.nnn.nnn)
I follow the IGSA rules because they hold a race in my neighborhood, and if I don't bring an IGSA-legal board I don't race. Other racing organizations either don't have a race near me, or don't have a classic luge class, or I'd race in them as well. I don't uphold the IGSA rules without question. In fact I started this by saying I think the rules for wheels should change to 76mm.
Dave, what's different about your board than an IGSA-legal board? Spin-axle trucks and ceramic bearings have gone through classic luge tech inspection the past two times at the IGSA races in SF, I don't use them, and I'm not naming names, but they get by. They do allow a 1kg weight variance, and most of the boards I saw were 5.5 kilos. Is it the ride height that's the difference?
What do other racing organizations allow that IGSA does not? If you could write the rules for buttboarding, how would you write them? What would you allow that is currently not being allowed by IGSA?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/16/2003 David Rogers
wrote in from
(66.14.nnn.nnn)
"they think (and thats what maybe others think too)"
Who is they? Who are the others?
Please give me a few names of riders that complained about the trucks and/or agree with that rule. I can't find any riders in the USA that agree with or pushed for that rule.
Do they still teach physics in europe? Maybe you could find a high school(gymnasium?) physics student to show "them and the others" a proof of why spinning axles don't and can't add energy to the downhill equation.
For now, I will stick up for what I know is right. All the buttboarders with no balls to stand up for their friends, fellow riders and their own beliefs can follow the silly IGSA rules like a bunch of sheep.
The classic (buttboard) race at Hotheels was my favorite event of the year until "they" and "the others" started these silly predatory rule changes.
This type of rule making takes the fun out of our sport...we are riding skateboards guys, not racing Formula 1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/15/2003
Tommy
wrote in from
(212.185.nnn.nnn)
Dave, I really don`t know why you can`t ride your buttboards at Hot Heels or say IGSA Events anymore... probably because they think (and thats what maybe others think too) the spinning axles are more a streetluge truck than a longboard/skateboard truck? I know it`s counterproductive to the safety aspects. I am not aware of any rider votes concerning the rules, but what I know is that you would be able to podium Hot Heels on a board that matches todays rules, so why don`t you? Honestly, did anybody ever say your victories were less legitimate or you were cheating? Did they? Many people don`t like todays rules, in one way or another but they try to cope with it. What if the riders would have a vote and the outcome would be counterproductive safetywise? Would that change your opinion? Whould you then change the setup of your racing boards? I know that you know the guys who are writing the rules... so what? We don`t have to be in mind with everybody to race everybodies events. Just do it... and if you really think our safety is in danger let`s try to get a vote as soon as possible! There was a vote for the streetluge aspects... why not have one for buttboard too?
cheers Tommy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/15/2003 David Rogers
wrote in from
(66.14.nnn.nnn)
Tommy,
I was not at the race, so my information is very possibly flawed. Here is what I know: I have 2 buttboards in my collection. Both of those boards are Hotheels winners, one of the boards has been on the podium 2 times at Hotheels. Due to rule changes since my victories, I can no longer ride those boards at IGSA events. Why is that?
Did riders complain about my equipment? Was there a vote about rule changes I was not aware of? What is the major difference between my boards and the ones that are currently raced? Do my boards offer some other advantage over others? Are my victories less legitimate because I was "cheating" and had an unfair advantage?
No matter how I look at the rule changes, I seem unable to find the "good" in them.
Perhaps I am missing something...clue me in. Don't forget, I know the guys that write the rules.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/13/2003 Tommy
wrote in from
(212.185.nnn.nnn)
sorry, had a prob with posting the pics... I try the links now. cheers
http://www.sven-photo.de/jb/Camp&Partytime/pages/HH03_camp103.html
http://www.sven-photo.de/jb/buttboard/pages/HH03_buttboard134.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/13/2003 Tommy
wrote in from
(212.185.nnn.nnn)
Dave,
you are right, some of the rules don`t make sense at all. But what are they doing? Why do you think IGSA defines those rules then at all? Isn`t it right that you can run almost anything you want in the streetluge class? Why not trying to keep the buttboard or whatever we call it class a little bit to what it comes from? For myself I always try to find the good thing in what other people do... Why should they on purpose try to piss us off?
cheers
Tommy
By the way... When I remember it right the austrian guy (Michi) who won Hot Heels this year did not use swiss Magum trucks! I am pretty sure he was on Randals.
cheers
Tommy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/12/2003
FL
wrote in from
(65.119.nnn.nnn)
Went 67mph on some red kryps .Do I get a prize ? FL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/12/2003
David Rogers
wrote in from
(66.14.nnn.nnn)
You guys trying to make sense of IGSA Buttboard rules?........Good luck!
The IGSA banned the $75.00 Randals I use on my buttboard and told me they were too "expensive" for the euros to afford. This year an Austrian wins Hotheels on $600.00/pair Swiss Magun trucks and nobody says a word....Duh...OK.
I hear the IGSA was checking the ride height of boards to make sure they were not dropping below the "magic" 80mm ride height as the wheels wore down.......what a waste of everyones time! Don't you think the speed loss from worn wheels would outweigh any gain from a 5-10mm drop in ride height?
They make a big deal about a board that is overweight by a kilo......another waste of time......the difference in rider weights can be on the order of 50 kilos.
These are rules for the sake of having rules. They are a waste of time to even read them. They waste the tech inspectors time, they waste the riders time, they narrow the field of riders, they piss guys like me off.
If you want to get picky and anal with the rules, spend your time worrying about something that matters...like safety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/12/2003
Tommy
wrote in from
(212.185.nnn.nnn)
Yes, it is possible to use bigger wheels if they are worn down to 70mm. I saw tech inspections when 76mm Kryptos passed because they where worn down to 70mm. cheers Tommy
(PS: Ansted sounds like a great track... curvy and active, thats exactly what I love! unfortunately far far away :-(
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/11/2003
sean c
wrote in from
(205.188.nnn.nnn)
http://www.gravitypublishing.com/Buttboarding/Definitions/FAQ.htm#FAQ_15
sean c
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/11/2003
sean c
wrote in from
(205.188.nnn.nnn)
is it legal to use cherry bombs or flywheels that are ground down to 70mm? just curious
on a side not, buttboarding ansted was insane. i've never ridden such a curvy active road on my buttboard, and it probably was the most fun i've had on my buttboard. it was also one hell of a workout, my abs are still sore today and it's almost a week later. you guys all missed out on a fun road.
sean c
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/11/2003 Tommy
wrote in from
(212.185.nnn.nnn)
I think the intention was not only the euro thing... As far as I am aware the main reason for limiting the wheel size was to make the race itself equal for all. The intention was to let the best rider win, not the biggest or most expensive wheels... so I think there should be a limitation, at least for official racing (why not 76mm). If its no racing we can still ride...lets say for example cherry bombs, when hitting the streets with our buddies :-)
cheers Tommy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 9/11/2003
sean c
wrote in from
(64.12.nnn.nnn)
i think the original intent was that 70mm was more available to the euro's then a 76mm wheel. so i think it needs to be looked at from that angle. of course every euro i've ever seen on luge has been able to afford u.s. wheels, but on the same hand the only euro's i've ever seen were the ones who could afford to make a race in the u.s..
but by the same rational you could allow all wheels under 101mm because it let's more wheels become available.
i like my 70 mm wheels. as it is i can't run my trucks as loose as i want in fear of wheel rub, and i don't feel like hacking up my buttboard to bits.
sean c
|
|
|
|
|
