[Billfred]

I believe it was Dr. Joe who first said (or at least got spotlighted saying) that there's a high correlation between a solid drive system and an inspirational season.

A lot of people griped in 2005 with the Kitbot that everyone's robots were looking the same from about eight inches down. To me, this is a good thing--if you followed the instructions, you would have a solid drive system. This is the bar--you will move.

Now, let's say this open system is released freely with good results. Matter of fact, let's say it eclipses the Kitbot in popularity. All of a sudden, this is now the bar. You've now established the basic standard of mobility. Someone will figure out a tweak that lets them get just a bit more out of the drive system, and uses it to kick butt in one season (and I'm perfectly willing to give them a season to enjoy the spoils of their own developments). Once that spreads out, someone will come up with a new trick. This desire to keep up with (and one-up) the Joneses is what will cause folks to want to improve upon the setup as it sits. Hopefully, they'll be awesome enough to share.

This makes me wonder, what would the general aim of the drive system be? Minimize fabrication? Reduce cost? Toughness? Lightness? Any consideration for obstacles? There are a lot of paths in drive system fabrication, and there are often several right answers (see also: the 2006 world champions with 2WD, 6WD (I think), and treads).