Does that mean you want in? PM me. We already have one fly-in. And he never build a contraption like your crazy thing either.
How much do you want for you wagon? No, seriously, how much? PM me again.
OK OK, /hijack for me too
Does that mean you want in? PM me. We already have one fly-in. And he never build a contraption like your crazy thing either.
How much do you want for you wagon? No, seriously, how much? PM me again.
OK OK, /hijack for me too
In regards to headlights, if the car had pop-up or motorized headlights, do they still have to be present, or can the covers count?
unevolved wrote: In regards to headlights, if the car had pop-up or motorized headlights, do they still have to be present, or can the covers count?
That's a trick question. The headlights have to be present and functioning, but some have skirted the rules in the past with devious (clever?) ways.
Bryce
Nashco wrote:unevolved wrote: In regards to headlights, if the car had pop-up or motorized headlights, do they still have to be present, or can the covers count?That's a trick question. The headlights have to be present and functioning, but some have skirted the rules in the past with devious (clever?) ways. Bryce
Eh, I'm not a fan of that "cleverness". To me, the spirit of the rule has been that the lights, horn, wipers, etc should all be there, functioning in the manner in which they were intended to function.
Skirting those rules just seems kind of half assed. If you don't really need that stuff to work, change the rule, which is also fine. If the rule stands, then that stuff should all be there and working.
Pat wrote:Nashco wrote:Eh, I'm not a fan of that "cleverness". To me, the spirit of the rule has been that the lights, horn, wipers, etc should all be there, functioning in the manner in which they were intended to function. Skirting those rules just seems kind of half assed. If you don't really need that stuff to work, change the rule, which is also fine. If the rule stands, then that stuff should all be there and working.unevolved wrote: In regards to headlights, if the car had pop-up or motorized headlights, do they still have to be present, or can the covers count?That's a trick question. The headlights have to be present and functioning, but some have skirted the rules in the past with devious (clever?) ways. Bryce
I completely agree, Pat. On the Fiero, it would have been WAAAAAY easier if I didn't bother making the wipers and/or pop-up headlights work. I put a lot of effort into keeping those parts because it not only helped the car look like it came that way from the factory (even though it was heavily modified) but also because it was a true road-going car. I drove it about 2500 miles down to San Diego and back for the West Coast challenge. Didn't help me at all in the performance tests and didn't get nearly as much kudos as I hoped for in the concourse, but I was a lot more proud to show off my work when it was done "right" instead of being created as a one-trick pony. If the goal is to make the cars equipped as a road-going car would, it seems like they should actually be able to be a road-going car. Spirit of the rules and all that.
Bryce
I think it's safe to say that all of the winning cars/teams read the rules to their creative benefit. The spirit of the event is to be creative otherwise there would be a lot of boring/slow/boring cars. With the event being based on good editorial, cleverness is a great thing if it falls within the way the rules are written. If these were real races the rules would be pages and pages long to limit the creative ideas. With the Nissan 343, having my headlights in the trunk for ballast was within the rules and added to the story, success for everyone. 
Uranus heavy light motors were removed and brackets were made... still within the rules. I hope to see more creative rule reading!
Having heard of the semi-famous trunk l mounted lights, I decided to move the Horn on my GRM Challenge XR4Ti to the trunk area. I figured a hair more weight toward the rear could not hurt. I was going to mount it under the car, but I'm getting old, so it's mounted Inside the passenger compartment. It's not as horribly loud as you might think. The rules just say working horn.
My Fiero had working headlights mounted in the factory position, but The headlight doors kept popping up at a high speed autocross, so I screwed them shut. So they do work, but they don't light up anything.
Nashco wrote: If the goal is to make the cars equipped as a road-going car would, it seems like they should actually be able to be a road-going car. Spirit of the rules and all that.
I know this kind of stuff is a sore spot for you, and I'm trying to be sensitive to that.
But there is nothing in the rules that actually says the goal is to make the cars equipped as road-going cars. You have interpreted them as such.
There are a enormous percentage of Challenge cars that have come, performed well, won various classes, and been loved by the contestants, staff and readers that were not road legal. Many were not even close.
The spirit of the event is NOT the rules. The spirit of the event is to create editorial content for the magazine.
I'm gonna have to side with the clown on this one.
If we want to get technical, i would bet a huge number of those cars weren't road legal for a lack of cat anyways.
Mine isn't legal for that reason. Technically.
I remember dealing with NY inspections. The letter of the law was something like "The catalytic converter must be affixed to the vehicle" - that one was easy.
tuna55 wrote: I remember dealing with NY inspections. The letter of the law was something like "The catalytic converter must be affixed to the vehicle" - that one was easy.
I would weld it to the roof just to make some inspection lackey's day.
If the rules call out that the car "must be roadworthy" (exact quote) and proceeds to call out lighting, horn, etc...that sure indicates to me that the car must be roadworthy. I'm not saying people/editors can't like a car that breaks the rules, the batvan is one of my favorites and wasn't allowed to compete. If Johnny Law saw your headlights in the trunk, he might interpret "roadworthy" a little different than some autocrossing clown would. Spirit of the rules and all that, obviously open to interpretation. Just reading rule 1 and 2 will yield very different interpretations depending on the person.
The roadworthy thing is something that was particularly important for my build because I went into it specifically wanting to make something (a DIY hybrid) that was NOT a trailer queen, and stuck to it. It also happened to be in the rules. If being roadworthy wasn't a priority, obviously that changes things in the build quite a bit. Even if cars meet the rules to a tee, they could still not be "roadworthy"...that's what makes the interpretation and project goals trump the rule wording in the end (for some people, the goal IS to find a loophole in the rules). For example, if you had to remove your hood and spray your radiator with water every time you stopped driving, would you consider that roadworthy? I wouldn't, but I have a lot higher standards of roadworthiness than others. Nothing in the rules specifies that you have to have adequate cooling (and other roadworthy features), fortunate for many past competitors! 
Bryce
I'm driving my Challenge car to the Challenge. It's roadworthy. It'll do it's fair share to melt polar bear homes on the way there, but it's roadworthy.
As far as I know, the Batvan WOULD have been allowed to compete. It wasn't ABLE to compete. Actually, it DID compete. It was pushed through the concourse and earned real concourse points. It did NOT score a zero.
A lot of the cars aren't even track legal, no less road legal.
Yes, Bryce, I am very aware of the exact wording of the rules. I am also, however, aware of the extensive discussions that have taken place on this subject, and the perspective that Per and GRM have articulated defining the difference between road legal and road worthy, editorial content, spirit of the event, etc. etc.
I also know I started having a lot more fun when I stopped arguing about that stuff. 
Yeah. Everything svrex and the clown have said are pretty much spot-on. With a budget cap, creativity counts. "But the fenders ARE present" comes to mind. That was freaking awesome; as was the clown's placement of functioning lights. Smokey would be proud. You're going to get a lot more "AWESOME" 's and thumbs-up from your fellow competitors by using some creative thinking skills than you will by doing the "I'm the only one playing by the rules, because my car is 'roadworthy.'" thing.
I've often said when talking with people about the challenge: "I can't believe that at least half the field doesn't have the headlights and wiper motors in the trunk, as well as a giant 'sucker' device under the car."
Seriously.
Something I think I have noticed: cheaters/lazy people who do well in the performance portions get smashed in the concours judging for their rule breaking. If you plan to be in the top 10 overall you had better understand the rules and follow them, or at least have a creative reason that you think your car really does meet the rules.
This creativity thing keeps coming up...is it less creative to figure out how to build X and be "roadworthy" than it is to build X and not be "roadworthy"??? They're both creative, pick your poison. Why are we putting quotations on "roadworthy" anyway...it is a real word that's in the dictionary and stuff, right?
Sheesh, Pat and I just said we aren't fans of people putting headlights in a trunk (etc.) because it seems half assed. Tough crowd!
Bryce
Here's a creative idea. Someone mail Bryce a trophy. He whined before the Challenge. He whined at the Challenge. He is whining after the Challenge. He whines on other posts. He is the 2010 "that guy".
Volvo122 wrote: Here's a creative idea. Someone mail Bryce a trophy. He whined before the Challenge. He whined at the Challenge. He is whining after the Challenge. He whines on other posts. He is the 2010 "that guy".
Heck of a 4th post.
dyintorace wrote:Volvo122 wrote: Here's a creative idea. Someone mail Bryce a trophy. He whined before the Challenge. He whined at the Challenge. He is whining after the Challenge. He whines on other posts. He is the 2010 "that guy".Heck of a 4th post.
New car, new name, same opinion
Wow...
Let me clarify a bit since I think I was taken a bit out of context. Creativity is an absolute necessity. I completely dig the crazy stuff that people come up with to make their car cooler or perform better while still being within budget. I think it's great to hear about how someone squeaked through a rule to get a slight edge on the competition That's why I like this event...and it's what makes the challenge cool. For me though, that creativity should be geared towards the cooler or perform better part.
My half assed comment was geared towards clever ways to avoid taking the time to make something work. If we're supposed to have functioning lights, then have functioning lights. It's not going to slow you down.
Road worthy? That's a slipperly slope. These things are race cars, not street cars. My car could have driven and functioned on the street fine, but with the roll bar, the aluminum seat, no exhaust system and abusive suspension I would never say it's road worthy. Whether or not others will admit it, I'm sure that's the case for most!
Volvo122 wrote:dyintorace wrote:New car, new name, same opinionVolvo122 wrote: Here's a creative idea. Someone mail Bryce a trophy. He whined before the Challenge. He whined at the Challenge. He is whining after the Challenge. He whines on other posts. He is the 2010 "that guy".Heck of a 4th post.
As a fellow Volvo 122 owner, I am going to have to state my disagreement for fear of guilt by association. The rest of you seem to know this guy from previous arrangements, warn me ok? BRIAN
Volvo122 wrote: Here's a creative idea. Someone mail Bryce a trophy. He whined before the Challenge. He whined at the Challenge. He is whining after the Challenge. He whines on other posts. He is the 2010 "that guy".
Were do we submit our favorite 2010 posts?
in regards to headlights in the trunk (and similar situations), the difference between it being clever and creative or half-assed is if it's a)a new interpretation no one has thought of yet, or b)necessary to achieve some other cool mod. a bogus ex. would be someone moving the headlights to the passenger seat of a miata so they could put a radiator in the space of one and an IC in the space of the other so they could cram a TT V12 in there.
Volvo122 wrote:dyintorace wrote:New car, new name, same opinionVolvo122 wrote: Here's a creative idea. Someone mail Bryce a trophy. He whined before the Challenge. He whined at the Challenge. He is whining after the Challenge. He whines on other posts. He is the 2010 "that guy".Heck of a 4th post.
New car, new name, still a dickhead? I don't even know who you are, but I can say I wish your user name wasn't one of the cars I own...never thought I'd be embarrassed to own a 122. 
Let me know if you want my address for the trophy, I'll put it on my wall of shame. Sorry you're so sore...you must have put your headlights in the trunk. I bet you weren't spraying your radiator with a water bottle, the guys doing that this year were actually fun to hang out with and not dickheads.
Bryce
You'll need to log in to post.
