pic: Size comparison.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by JesseK

Smaller robots = more room for robots on the field.

More room for robots on the field = more matches at a single Regional and/or more obstacle-style field elements

Smaller robots aren't a bad thing.

How does that make any sense? Changing the size of the robot doesnt change the fact that every match is 3v3.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by ToddF

Now when an outsider sees match video, instead of saying, "How cool!", they'll say, "How cute!"

Sounds like the mini-CIM/Bag motors all over again. I said "How cool!", my entire team said "How cute!"

[Jibri Wright]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

I really can't understand why everyone's complaining about their robot having to be smaller. Every year I've been on the team (w/ the exception of 2007 which was a bad idea) we've built the frame 2" undersized; 36"x26".
This year, our frame is STILL 36"x26".

Kudos to the first person who figures out how we managed to build a 36"x26" frame while still obeying all rules.

In the rules it says you can have up to an 8 inch gap in the frame. It never specified how many gaps you can have. I'm guessing you utilized that like we did.

[Jaxom]

Originally Posted by Jibri Wright

In the rules it says you can have up to an 8 inch gap in the frame. It never specified how many gaps you can have. I'm guessing you utilized that like we did.

I admit...I'm spatially challenged. How does a gap in your frame reduce the perimeter measurement?