Basically, at least.
So if I'm buying all sorts of LS parts, including manifold flanges, and I'm cutting them up and welding them together for my 300 head, do I multiply everything by 3/4?
I'm destroying stuff to build more stuff, and its unlikely the remaining parts would be able to be sold, but 1/4 of those manifolds aren't ending up on the car.
In reply to Mr_Asa :
You paid x dollars for something that weighed y pounds. Price per pound is x divided by y. Multiply that price per pound by the weight of the parts that make it onto the car. :-)
I'm not sold.
I'd be down if you scrapped the aluminum by weight for recoup. Or even better if you recast it into other parts.
Now, if you make it a significant part of your theme, you might be able to pull off the 3/4 thing?
Really the heads are the only thing it wouldn't be cheapest to diy from bare materials anyway right? Like with header flange, you should make a template and cut your own out of scrap plate for max budget advantage. Might be better than 3/4 of 2 ls header flanges anyway.
I am aligned that the materials used should be treated as a "bulk buy" and the purchase price multiplied by weight used / weight bought is fair. Mostly because no one EVER thought that would be applied to a PORTION of a cylinder head.
Robbie (Forum Supporter) said:Like with header flange, you should make a template and cut your own out of scrap plate for max budget advantage. Might be better than 3/4 of 2 ls header flanges anyway.
I might be going this route with the exhaust, but with the intake I'm concerned about sealing and the flanges have a built-in o-ring recess. Additionally the bolts for the intake are at an angle so it's not a 100% just cut it out of plate deal. Not insurmountable problems, but potentially worthwhile to pick up a dedicated part to use for the intake.
nocones said:I am aligned that the materials used should be treated as a "bulk buy" and the purchase price multiplied by weight used / weight bought is fair. Mostly because no one EVER thought that would be applied to a PORTION of a cylinder head.
Having a Challenge rule named after me would be the highlight of my year.
In reply to Mr_Asa :
I think the multiplying by 3/4 would make sense for bulk material purchases. Things like paint, bondo, fiberglass and epoxy, spools of filiment for a 3d printer, etc.
I just bought a turbo rebuild kit and am only using half the parts, but won't be multiplying the cost by 1/2.
Cast the heads into something you use on the car and talk about it at the concours. You'll score more in innovation points than what you would have gained by trying to recoup budget in this way.
From the rules:
A part’s cost may be pro-rated by weight or quantity if from a homogeneous parts lot (example: zip ties, nuts and bolts, a box of 20 identical axle shafts, etc.), or relative retail value if it was purchased as part of a heterogeneous parts lot (all-you-can-carry sales, storage unit buyouts, garage cleanouts, etc.) Relative retail value is calculated as follows:
Assign and prove a fair market value to every part in the lot.
Add those fair market values together to calculate the total fair market value of the lot.
Express the fair market value of the part you are pro-rating as a percentage of the lot’s total fair market value.
Multiply the actual price paid for the lot by that percentage in order to determine the part’s relative retail value.
So, no, one manifold would not count as a parts lot, because it's only one part.
Another opinion: just because you bought something for full price and ruined 1/4 of it doesn't mean it's suddenly 3/4 price. Whenever I pro-rate stuff for the Challenge budget, I test myself on the Don't Be A Dick Rule by asking myself "would I pay a pro-rated price for this?"
Example: I buy tubing by the pound, so any lengths of tubing leftover get pro-rated out. Fair enough, many of us do that.
Another: I buy bondo in a 1 lb container. Even though I sand at least half of it away, I can't pro-rate the weight of dried bondo because I don't ever buy dried bondo by the pound. So once it's out of the tub, it's in the budget.
Can you sell, or would you ever buy, 1/4 of a cylinder head?
Tom Suddard said:From the rules:
A part’s cost may be pro-rated by weight or quantity if from a homogeneous parts lot (example: zip ties, nuts and bolts, a box of 20 identical axle shafts, etc.), or relative retail value if it was purchased as part of a heterogeneous parts lot (all-you-can-carry sales, storage unit buyouts, garage cleanouts, etc.) Relative retail value is calculated as follows:
Assign and prove a fair market value to every part in the lot.
Add those fair market values together to calculate the total fair market value of the lot.
Express the fair market value of the part you are pro-rating as a percentage of the lot’s total fair market value.
Multiply the actual price paid for the lot by that percentage in order to determine the part’s relative retail value.
So, no, one manifold would not count as a parts lot, because it's only one part.
Gimme a second to get back in gear on this.
To start, I think there may be a bit of a misunderstanding? So, I'm making two manifold flanges into one manifold flange with 1/4 of the two flanges not being used. The manifold itself is going to be created by tubes and other various bits later.
This is how the flanges are sold pretty much anywhere online, this couldn't be considered a homogenous lot of parts?
maschinenbau said:Can you sell, or would you ever buy, 1/4 of a cylinder head?
To be honest, I'm thinking of maybe one day seeing if I can churn these out for sale to the 300 crowd, so maybe? And one of the guys in the thread I started about this expressed interest in the remaining 1/4 of the pair of heads, I'm going to be mailing them off for free. But I get what you're saying.
Mr_Asa said:Tom Suddard said:From the rules:
A part’s cost may be pro-rated by weight or quantity if from a homogeneous parts lot (example: zip ties, nuts and bolts, a box of 20 identical axle shafts, etc.), or relative retail value if it was purchased as part of a heterogeneous parts lot (all-you-can-carry sales, storage unit buyouts, garage cleanouts, etc.) Relative retail value is calculated as follows:
Assign and prove a fair market value to every part in the lot.
Add those fair market values together to calculate the total fair market value of the lot.
Express the fair market value of the part you are pro-rating as a percentage of the lot’s total fair market value.
Multiply the actual price paid for the lot by that percentage in order to determine the part’s relative retail value.
So, no, one manifold would not count as a parts lot, because it's only one part.
Gimme a second to get back in gear on this.
To start, I think there may be a bit of a misunderstanding? So, I'm making two manifold flanges into one manifold flange with 1/4 of the two flanges not being used. The manifold itself is going to be created by tubes and other various bits later.This is how the flanges are sold pretty much anywhere online, this couldn't be considered a homogenous lot of parts?
While I appreciate your creativity I think that your interpretation would be analogous to trying to budget only the part of a zip tie that you actually use based on the fact that part of it gets cut off and isn't used on the car.
In reply to APEowner :
It would violate the D.B.A.D. rule, but based on what Tom posted you could do that if you measured the bulk zip ties via weight.
I disagree on violating the DBAD rule... If you put in the effort to capture and weigh Bondo sandings write 'em off. The whole concept of this event is putting in the effort others won't to go fast for cheap.
Byrneon27 said:I disagree on violating the DBAD rule... If you put in the effort to capture and weigh Bondo sandings write 'em off. The whole concept of this event is putting in the effort others won't to go fast for cheap.
And there's historical precedent for it.
Byrneon27 said:I disagree on violating the DBAD rule... If you put in the effort to capture and weigh Bondo sandings write 'em off. The whole concept of this event is putting in the effort others won't to go fast for cheap.
I couldn't have said it better!!!
Byrneon27 said:I disagree on violating the DBAD rule... If you put in the effort to capture and weigh Bondo sandings write 'em off. The whole concept of this event is putting in the effort others won't to go fast for cheap.
One's punishment for violating the DBAD rule in this ridiculous manner would be having to sweep up, weigh, and do accounting on Bondo sandings :)
You'll need to log in to post.
