Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik
The intent here is to prevent bumpers from possibly snapping in half, etc. under repeated impacts. I submit that if the "frame member" behind the bumper isn't going to protect your robot in this event, then it probably doesn't count for this rule. Per usual, try to avoid lawyering to gain an advantage. If I were an inspector, I don't think I'd be passing any robot claiming at something classified as a "strip" was somehow a structural frame member.
|
This is lame. Really lame. 973 has built a bumpered west coast from 06-08 without a single failure. Why punish us and force us to awkwardly reinforce bumpers that don't need it?
We'll do it, I'm just annoyed.