TRUCK OR COUPE?

[McRat]

And, of course, you can prove that 500 were produced?   

Mike

I can use WiteOut with the best of them!

No, I just always thought it would be fun to hotrod one of those for kicks.  Big Fins on a Pickup; you'd never have any trouble finding it in a parking lot.

My real project will be a Subaru Brat with a 500ci/1500HP twin-turbo diesel in it running MDT.  If I could only figure out how to keep the frame from twisting 360 deg when I hit the go-pedal...

[Seldom Seen Slim]

Big Fins (Finns) on a pickup -- you mean like those overweight and muscular guys from Helsinki: Toivo and Heikki and Paavo?

[McRat]

Big Fins (Finns) on a pickup -- you mean like those overweight and muscular guys from Helsinki: Toivo and Heikki and Paavo?

I wouldn't touch that with a 10' Pole, or two 5' Swedes...

[MAZDA1807]

   FEEL FREE TO EXPLAIN YOUR OPINION

   Release the CAP LOCK.

    FREUD

Sorry about the cap lock.

[bbarn]

From my question on class, I was neither advocating for or against, meerely raising the option. If it were a real issue full-size vs. Mid/mini, you could put qualifications on a class to either cause controversy or remove it. Either way, you will always have someone poor mouth the decision against them or for someone else as to why the do or don't fit into a class.

[Salt Junkie]

...for those that do not know there has been a new rule initiated that would allow smaller car-based "trucks" like the ones he listed to run in the mid-mini truck class. 

That's misleading, multiple Rabbit pickups have been competing in mid-mini for almost a decade and have held records at both Bonneville and El Mirage for almost as long. The rule change proposal was just to explicitly state that they are mid-mini class vehicles in the rule book, which is the same as has been allowed by the SCTA for almost a decade.

The full sized car-based trucks are significantly smaller in profile than a full sized truck of the same circa...

You're absolutely correct, thats why Rancheros and El Caminos can't run against full size trucks.

and I can confidently say that the mid-mini sized car-based trucks are also significantly smaller than normal mid-mini trucks.

Sorry, but despite your confidence, you are very mistaken.

The 1972-79 Datsun pickups frontal area is 26.39 square feet.
http://www.olddatsuns.com/620specs.htm

The 1980-95 VW Rabbit Pickup’s frontal area is 26.33 square feet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Golf_Mk1

The 1977-78 Toyota SR-5 Pickup’s frontal area is 26.43 square feet.
http://www.toyotareference.com/hilux

The 1972-76 Ford Courier pickups frontal area is 26.95 square feet.
http://darkforestcreature.com/Courier/Information.html#Brochures

All have areas of 26.xx square feet and the difference between the Datsun mini truck and the VW mini truck is a mere 0.06 square feet, (8 square inches). The difference between the VW and the Toyota SR-5 is only 12 square inches. The frontal areas of the VW, Datsun and Toyota pickups are easily within one half of one percent of each other and they all have the same basic aerodynamic shape. I don't think anyone can reasonably state that the VW is "significantly smaller than normal mid-mini trucks" as the facts prove this statement to be false.

I consider these trucks to be evenly matched and the Mid-Mini class to be the correct place for these vehicles. Apparently so does the truck committee and so does the rules committee.

[NathanStewart]

Frontal area is only half the story.  You're forgetting CD.  I'd say a car based truck is a bit more aerodynamic than your standard pickup truck.  And if they're already allowed to run as trucks then why change what isn't broken?  I'm willing to bet that by wedging the rules to explicitly allow car based trucks to run in mid-mini that you'll start to see things like these show up:





I'm guessing someone is worried about being borderline acceptable with the rules and by adding a line or two of text they'll be covered. 

[Salt Junkie]

Frontal area is only half the story.  You're forgetting CD.  I'd say a car based truck is a bit more aerodynamic than your standard pickup truck.

Why?

Because the car based truck has a smaller engine? nope
Because the car based truck has a smaller payload? nope
Because the car based truck has a shorter wheelbase? nope
Because the car based truck only carries midgets, not full size adults? nope

They both are constrained by the requirement that they carry adults so the minimum height and width are pretty much set. The nose of the vehicle can be anything and is not required to be anything other then the styling desired and all the mini trucks are getting more aerodynamic with every year. The vehicle manufacturers are always trying to make every vehicle as aerodynamic as possible but as long as the height and width are comparable and they all have beds, what are you afraid of? Brand new Toyotas are very aerodynamic at the front end. Same with Nissans, VW's, Chevrolets and more. If they are not then they should run slower and shame on you for picking one as your race vehicle.

And after looking at the pictures, I hope they do show up. They would make a hell of a lot more sense than racing a square box. And remember, the class is Mid-Mini truck. What do you think a mini truck is???

But, to address your pictures,

#1, The gray Chevrolet something or other. That thing is an aerodynamic mess. Bring it on.
#2, The silver Ford. thats pretty nice but as with all trucks, the dead zone behind the cab is a disaster but it is better than most trucks.
#3, The silver VW, nice, but probably not as nice as the Ford. and probably the best of the bunch.

I think you should define what makes a vehicle a mid-mini truck. The fact that it is car based is not a factor (IMO). the fact that it carries at least two occupants, has a bed of a minimum dimension and a payload of a minimum amount seems to be far more relevant.

And another thing, you know what I see when I look at those pictures? mini trucks.

Maybe you should propose a classic mini truck category to protect the vintage iron.

[LittleLiner]

Maybe you should propose a classic mini truck category to protect the vintage iron.

You say you want "classic" - You say you want "mini" and  - you want small frontal area.   Here it is.



Wonder where it would be classed if you put snowmobile running gear under it and used a diesel engine?

But seriously - my take on this is if it is an El Camino or Ranchero - do what the rule book says.  If it is one of those trucks already mentioned in the rule book for Mini Pickup - do what the rule book says.  If it is anything else, consult your appropriate rules committee . . . . This isn't rocket science folks.

[4-barrel Mike]

Classic mini pickup?  How about a Honda T360/T500??



If I'm reading the spec sheet  http://www.hondasportsregistry.com/images/brochures/t360brochure7_9.jpg correctly  it is

1.295m wide & 1.525m high.

Mike

[sockjohn]

I think I've brought it up before, but the Chevrolet SSR might have a lower cd than most pickups.  Notice I said "might"

The Japanese mini trucks seem like they would be a squeeze to get  a cage in them, and probably hard to exit unless you are also similarly sized.

[bbarn]

Sorry, I can't resist ...

I think that the truck category needs an additional rule. (This should also apply for the Craftsman Truck Series as well) Any vehicle participating in the truck category MUST carry one large househould appliance and two small househould items as cargo during the competition. Large appliance = Refreidgerator, deep-freeze or a washer/dryer. A chord of wood or full load of construction debris may be substituted for appliances... I mean come on, it is after all a truck right?   

[NathanStewart]

IMO the mid-mini truck class is still in its infancy.  It's been around maybe ten years now but not too many compete in the class.  It seems to me that the class was created to let the other than full sized trucks have a place to run.  Well now there is some disparity within the class because it was decided to lump all mid and mini sized trucks together when obviously some of the "trucks" allowed to run in the class have an aerodynamic advantage over other vehicles in the same class.  I guess if you're keen on leveraging weakly written rules you could sneak something in that's super aero and own the class if one should choose to take that path.  As more and more competitors start to participate in the class it'll only be a matter of time before the class rules are revisited and changed to even the playing field.  The Classic Category is my indicator of this.

Oh well Pete, maybe next time.  

[NathanStewart]

Sorry, I can't resist ...

I think that the truck category needs an additional rule. (This should also apply for the Craftsman Truck Series as well) Any vehicle participating in the truck category MUST carry one large househould appliance and two small househould items as cargo during the competition. Large appliance = Refreidgerator, deep-freeze or a washer/dryer. A chord of wood or full load of construction debris may be substituted for appliances... I mean come on, it is after all a truck right?   

I kind of sort of agree.  IMO A truck competing in one of the SCTA truck classes should have a body that mounts on top of a full length frame, has a separate bed and cab, and is rear wheel drive. 

I have a question... does this now mean that an El Camino can run as a mid sized truck?  After all, it is smaller than a full sized truck. 

[McRat]

Hmmm...  That is a good question.  Seems that Elky's and Ranchero's are larger than mini-trucks, so they would not be an advantage.  But there is a displacement cap on gasoline mini's, which is lower than many of the stock Elky's & Rancheros.