Budget-Exempt Replacement Parts at the $2000 Challenge

All Challenge cars need to buy well AND build well. 

Done. 

Those aren’t classes. That’s just basic execution. 

I haven't been frequenting the forum in a while and just came across this discussion. Did we ever come to a resolution on the suggested rule?

To me the whole notion would be more applicable to cars that were not bought/built solely for the challenge as wear and tear can be expected on any car that sees regular use.  Dinging the guy that daily drives his challenge car for every repair that has come up in the past 5 years doesn't seem like it is equal to dinging the dedicated challenge car that sees no other use besides some shake downs and testing.  What should and should not be counted against the budget is a lot easier to determine on the dedicated challenge car.

A DD Would Be to me like bringing a Champ Car Or one from another series because they are Kinda Exempt from "Maintenance" Items,  In that 'A car is only Valued at the Time of the Show'  or with the parts on it while Competing.

 Example ;  A car that Made an Extreamly Fast Drag Pass Was 'Charged ' For the Torque Converter that was in it at the time of the Pass, NOT the 10 or more Converters used to Get It to that Point.

 I can Live with this. 

Here is kind of my small take on this rule and it really kind of applies for the entire gastropod subclass too unless your car is really inexpensive and you have lots of budget cushion.  And honestly if you are building a race car of sorts (even and inexpensive hobby one), $2,000 doesn't leave a lot of cushion.

Let's say my challenge mustang gets a coolant leak weep from the lower radiator hose.  That hose is $4.43 on rockauto and will have their normal $6.95 shipping.  That's $10.39 I will not have in the budget.  I have a $2000 car.  I have a $500 parts car that is zeroed out now.  I am working to eek out $500 more recoup on the challenge car.  It's going to be dang hard.  I'd like to take that $500 and use it to paint, do some welding to the car and make it a bit faster.  I will not have $10.39 to buy a hose if that's done.  This car will likely be driven from TX to the event and back.  It's going to be used in CAM locally pre-challenge.  It's going to see some drag passes locally too.  It's going to be street legal and have an interior and be a driver per the real SCCA CAM rules.  If $10.39 is going to push me over budget or heaven forbid my windshield crack gets too big and it won't pass inspection, I may as well stop the build now and not even bother.  I didn't know about the crack when I bought the car.  It was not in the ad.  I've driven 6 hours to get there and the other guy drove 7 hours to meet me.  What do you do?  Nah, a windshield that may not pass inspection just doesn't work for me.....  yah right. 

This rule will not effect the results, but it has a direct impact on whether or not a lot of cars can even compete.  If the goal is to get more entries, more variety and more people participating, then this rule is awesome.  If the goal is to limit this thing to the same small pool of people with amazing fabrication talent, a stash of cheap chassis and spares and tons of space that trade amongst themselves, then this rule is terrible.  

If this rule is nixed or neutered significantly, I've already wasted two full weeks going to Idaho bring back stanger-missles car, stripping that car, parting it out and going to Kansas to obtain the challenge car.  While it's been an adventure in itself, I am really looking forward to bring it to FL to play.  I'm not going to win squat.  It's a 3200 lb underpowered pig, and I haven't turned a steering wheel in anger in about 15 years, but I wanted to have my fun.  Don't get all crazy about maintenance parts that don't affect performance and make me say "I WAS" looking forward to it.  

Don't know why y'all are debating sometime already set in the rules.

https://2000challenge.com/rules/

Emergency Repairs/Wear and Tear: 

Maintenance is a reality of vehicle ownership, especially when that vehicle is used for competition. We understand that many $2000 Challenge cars can be unreliable, as a winning entry only needs to run for one autocross run and one drag race. With this in mind, competitors may replace parts that break during other competitions, daily driving, trips to or from the $2000 Challenge and during the $2000 Challenge, with identical or as-close-to-identical-as-possible parts without adding to or subtracting from their budgets. Any parts replaced under this exemption must be listed on the budget sheet as exempt, with an explanation of why this failure was not expected and budgeted for in advance. Parts may not be replaced at no budget impact under this rule if they were broken or heavily degraded when the car was purchased, or if the competitor knew failure was likely due to modifications. In the case of a protest that deals with a part or parts replaced under this rule, a group of nine event attendees will be selected by GRM staff, and they will vote to determine whether the part replaced without budget impact was fairly exempted. 

In reply to Stampie :

Thanks. It's always nice to have closure in the thread where the discussion occurred.

In reply to Stampie :

Because this last Challenge proves rules can and will be broken with full knowledge of staff/organizers so we just need to figure out what to ask for prior approval on.

In reply to AnthonyGS :

It’s just a fact of life that some are better fabricators than others.  I’m sure if you’ve ever raced you know that some are better drivers than you.  

While I made a very good career out of selling, I knew people who were better at trading/ selling/ swapping cars than I was.  

Finally the one real currency that isn’t talked about. Time.  With more time everyone can improve everything they do.  It’s just a question of how much time they can devote. 

In reply to Tom Suddard :

The one currency no one has addressed is time.  With sufficient  time everyone can improve their fabricating skills their driving skills and their trading/swapping/bargaining skills.  

Perhaps that would create added interest, to find some creative cars took less than say 200 hours while another person has 2000 hours in his.   

Then I guess a definition of time used is needed.  Would for example thinking or dreaming of the car count?  Driving to get stuff? What if it’s on your way to do something else?  If friends come over to help does that count?  Prep work to work on it?  Clean up to get a place to work on it?  

Justjim75 said:

In reply to Stampie :

Because this last Challenge proves rules can and will be broken with full knowledge of staff/organizers so we just need to figure out what to ask for prior approval on.

Can someone explain this please?

In reply to SVreX :

Yeah I was there too and don't remember any blatant rule-breaking. In fact there's a section in the rules for "challenging" someone you think is breaking the rules. And I don't remember any such challenges last year. 

In reply to maschinenbau :

If it was 2016 I might understand the reference. I don’t for 2018. 

Please enlighten me. 

If there were proper firewalls in place the pro driver never would have been scalded by hot coolant for one, in the tube chassis race car.

How about Wrecks exhaust that came out the front of the car and pointed sideways ?

In reply to Justjim75 :

Ok, I’m not going there.

Edit: But your facts are incorrect.  

In reply to SVreX :

You asked, and it's true.

Facts are facts, what did I say that's not true? Tom Suddard told me at the Challenge that both Wreck racing explained their exhaust had a 5° rearward rake, and that he knew of the tube chassis race car with the mini, minivan body before the race.  Was there a firewall between the engine and the driver? There was a FAQ that explained before $2018 that exhaust could not come out the front, or point at the car next to you which Georgia's did both.  Tell me please how these are not violations of the rules, or that Tom did not know about them.

In reply to Justjim75 :

I did ask. And I appreciate your response. But it is not entirely true. 

In reply to SVreX :

If you're going to dispute my statements you need to tell me and everyone else watching, which things I said are not true.

You're right, the tiny car didn't have a firewall. There is also a rule saying you can email the judges ahead of time and ask about special cases. If they got special permission to run it that way, then it's okay. But I don't know the full story there. Either way, no one formally challenged them about that rule, therefore their competition that was present (Paul and I included) accepted it as OK. 

Nothing in the current rules say exhaust has to exit behind driver, just that it can't go inside the passenger compartment. I do remember that being an old rule a few years ago, but not anymore.

That firewall rule was beefed up and clarified extensively after the $2018 event, which is why it is so clear in its current form. 

In reply to Justjim75 :

Jim, I am hesitating to respond because an argument serves no value. On the specific things you referenced, here is the truth as I understand it:

- The car was driven by pro driver Alan McCrispin. Alan is a qualified tech inspector, and personally signed off on the car (not the staff). Alan was not scalded, but realized after the event how he had made a mistake, and it could have been bad. I heard him discuss with staff afterwards about being more careful about this in the future. 

- The exhaust rule is an NHRA rule which requires the exhaust to exit toward the rear. As you have noted, Wreck Racing’s exhaust did. 

- You did not file a protest. As a competitor, that is your tacit endorsement. 

I know you may view these things a little differently, but that’s racing. 

Thank you for sharing your concerns. 

And the tube chassis was approved in advance, in accordance with the rules at the time. 

Current rules permit tube chassis. 

SVreX said:

In reply to Justjim75 :

Jim, I am hesitating to respond because an argument serves no value. On the specific things you referenced, here is the truth as I understand it:

[edited out stuff I cannot comment about]

- You did not file a protest. As a competitor, that is your tacit endorsement. 

I know you may view these things a little differently, but that’s racing. 

Thank you for sharing your concerns. 

Exactly so on all counts. Well put.

Anyone else reading, please don't let a few outliers and rule-pushers discourage you from building and bringing a car to the Challenge. It's an amazing experience that I look forward to every year, no matter how (un)competitive my car is!

I was asked to explain my statement, so I gave 2 specific examples of how the rules, as they were written prior to the $2018 event, were not followed, and the staff was well aware of the participants plans before the event.  I was a first timer myself and was very much disappointed to find out after following every rule to the letter, others were allowed to "avoid" them.  I was also disappointed to find that most "racers" were "competing" with times earned by a borrowed pro driver.  To never drive your car seems to me like it's not at all in the spirit of "let's go racing for two grand!"

People considering the Challenge should be made well aware that the rules have been broken, as they were written, in the past, with full knowledge of the event staff and that they will not necessarily be racing against other home builders and drivers, but against pro drivers, so that they can decide whether that's the kind of event they want to pour blood, sweat, tears, and money into.

In reply to Justjim75 :

All of that is very clear in the rules. 

I’m sorry you were disappointed. I was too my first time, but then learned to appreciate the event for what it is, not for what I thought it should be. .