New AM C-Base Chassis vs. Old IFI KitBot Chassis?

[ChuckDickerson]

As far as I can tell by the rules this year the old IFI KitBot is still legal for use since it is a COTS part any team can go to IFI and buy right now. Even the mounting brackets for the AM Toughboxes are still available as COTS from IFI so the two similar chassis can pretty much be considered functionally equivalent. Aside from the fact that the AM C-Base chassis is free (because everyone got one) what advantages does it have over the IFI KitBot chassis we are all familiar with? It the C-Base lighter? Stronger? More flexible in designs? If so, how?

Our team is very comfortable using the KitBot chassis having used it every year since it was introduced in 2005. Why wouldn’t we want to just purchase a proven KitBot chassis from IFI and stick with what we know works for us? The durability of the IFI KitBot is a known battle tested quantity. The AM C-Base is not.

This is not a slam against AndyMark in anyway. Andy knows we love him and his products and knows we have purchased our fair share of his stuff over the years. I am just looking for insight into what other teams feel the strengths of the new AM C-Base might be over the IFI KitBot. I do not want this to deteriorate into a thread about how the KitBot sucks, or why you wouldn’t want to use either the C-Base or the KitBot, or that custom chassis are the only way to roll. Assuming you were required to use either the new AM C-Base chassis or the old IFI KitBot chassis which would you prefer and why?

Note to the rookies that may not know what an IFI KitBot chassis is you can get it here and as I have said above it should be perfectly legal for any team to use this year as far as I can tell. Someone please direct me to the specific rule otherwise if I am incorrect.

[EHaskins]

The C-Base chassis is more flexible in terms of designs, since they use the corners brackets in stead of end caps. We haven't fully assembled ours, yet, but it seems like it won't have any structural issues.

I don't see any reason not to use the C-Base chassis, but since you have several IFI chassis already they may be more practical.

Unless there is a specific rule regarding the IFI kitbot, then normal cost accounting and parts use rules apply. There shouldn't be any issue with using the IFI chassis.

[waialua359]

Its simply a new vendor that FIRST chose to provide in the KOP.
I cant see how a discussion on its durability/reliability should be a factor. Its simple enough to know that it should be reliable much like the IFI ones if teams choose to use them.

[Billfred]

Advantages I noticed:

-Toughbox mounting aside, there are only two types of pieces to the frame (C-channels and corner connects). I don't have to worry about freshmen getting more rail when we needed bumper--they're all the same now.
-It's free and in your possession right now.
-Drop-center 6WD is still doable...well, if you want to do that this season.

Cons I've noticed:
-Bolts only. (1618 riveted their frame last year to much success; I let out an obligatory small grumble when we couldn't do it out of the box this year. That said, you could make gussets to do the job if you wanted.)
-If you're going for something more compact than 28"x38" (or vice versa), you could be drilling new axle mounts.
-If you liked the low-rider approach in the past, tough; it's not an option this year. (After all, all...my...friends...know the low-rider.)

Even with the Kitbot legal this season, 1618 will all but certainly be using the C-Base. I can't find enough cons to the C-Base to justify spending an additional $189.95 (plus shipping, plus time) on the former. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

[Chris Fultz]

what is the weight of the two kits?

[Greg Peshek]

I did a completely unscientific scale test at our workshop with a standard bathroom scale and got about 15lbs with the IFI frame and around 14 lbs with the AM frame. Both of these were the frames cut to the exact same dimensions (37" x 27")

Now that was just our inaccurate testing. YMMV.

-Greg