I assume you mean the German peasant's revolt in 1524/5?
If so, I can give a quick and dirty answer, but others here might have more firsthand knowledge of the subject. I've only read about it in a non-academic sense.
In any case, the German Peasant's War was sharply contrasted in the social classes at the time. The revolt was overwhelmingly comprised of peasants, opposed overwhelmingly by nobles, knights, and mercenaries hired by monied interests. The results of the various battles tell that tale, too: most of the peasants are slaughtered and routed very quickly, which few losses for the other side.
Is it class warfare? Well, that necessitates a better understanding than I can give about the classes in Early Modern Germany at the time, but I can tell you that, with the Protestant Reformation, the typical association between the more-or-less typical classes was shifting dramatically. Just a few years before the war, for instance, there was a fairly widespread revolt among German knights, who revolted because of legal and economic shifts in their status. Burghers - urban workers and merchants - were an increasing power bloc, and their rising influence came at the cost of minor lords and peasants alike.
Peasants had it extremely rough, and the Reformation helped by shaking up the foundations of traditional medieval associations of power and hierarchy. When they revolted, it wasn't a single major uprising, but several smaller ones that bled out around these centers and expanded, eventually coalescing into the major revolt that we know of.
Aside from a few nobles like Florian Geyer, there was almost no support from burghers or minor lords, making the peasant army truly expressive of the peasant classes. But it remains to be argued as to whether that, alone, constitutes class warfare. They weren't looked for any dramatic shift to the status quo, nor were they looked to erect gallows in city centers to hang aristocrats, but were fighting for a rather conservative goal of returning to a more prosperous power dynamic between them, their lords, and the burghers.
Friedrich Engel complicates the historiography because he was one of the first to really study the war in depth and to provide a analytical argument about the overarching causes. The topic is still - at least in the english sources I've had access to - relatively under studied, so that initial conception of the peasant's war representing a proto-communism is a strong strand of DNA in the historiography. It's not a bad thing, necessarily (though I suspect one's reaction to Engel's analysis strongly correlates to one's sympathy for marxism in general), but it's more interesting in the historiographic sense than it is for the analysis on the ground.
It's also problematized by its proximity to The Reformation which, like a black hole in Early Modern history, sucks up all of the analytical energies of historians by its very nature. Again, not entirely horrible, but a little speed bump for those wishing to know more. Like me!
Obviously, Engel's own work is a wonderful resource for this, and thanks to commies, it's available in English online for free: The Peasant War in Germany
Not too many other english monographs talk specifically about the war, but both Peter Blickle and Janos Bok have written on the subject. I can speak to Blickle's, which is readable and informative, but not for Bok's. Owing to my lack of familiarity with the historiography I can't say how generally well they're regarded, but it might be a good first step.
Michael Baylor has put together a document packet about the war and relates it to the Reformation. Although short, it's well worth looking into: The German Peasant's War: A Brief History with Documents.