$2017 Challenge Rules and Date Announced

Stampie wrote: In reply to patgizz: I actually found $44.42 in it and sold the wheels for $20. So the argument is did I pay $50 and recover $50 in recoup or did I pay $5.58 and recover $5.58 in recoup? Btw the dash will come apart this year so more chance to recover more cash and crack.

No argument. Your receipts show you paid $50, not $5.58.

Plus, the car was advertised on this forum for $50, and you beat me by about 15 minutes in buying it.

Yes, we understand in your case it's only $50. But the math works the same for everyone.

Love 'ya, but it's pretty straight forward.

In reply to SVreX:

Good cause the other side of the argument is if I find another $5.58 in cash it becomes a free car and goes to FMV. Yes I have a sick mind because I've actually spent time arguing both sides in my mind.

In reply to Stampie:

Still not FMV. It's a $50 expense, with $50 of recoup.

Why would you want to call it FMV? It would be much more expensive.

In reply to SVreX:

I wouldn't. I just like arguing with myself.

In reply to Stampie:

OK, well you are confusing a lot of people. Tell your alter ego to try to use examples that help newbies understand how this works.

FMV definition:

The Rules said: You may not list fair market value instead of purchase price on your budget unless you do not have a receipt from the purchase, or depreciation/appreciation has drastically affected the car or part’s value.

I zeroed the cost of the vette selling the eng tran. And did better than O&F selling C-4 parts. The real question is the FMV vs. Cost, I have been using 30 and more year old Junk Leftovers reconditioned by me,Yes bearings rings and machine work added up, Swapped some stuff for stuff I needed, cash was sometime involved both ways. I have 25 bucks in 6 A6 Hoosirs Lol,Wheels were paid by sale of wheels that came with car, If what I just read was interpeted by me Correctly I coming with the engine I Built In the car I built with BS&T and will only have to wait till after the Show to get it street legal, I could be wrong.

Can you tell I'm Confused. For instance....the trans I'm using,the 700r4 was sold W/ eng. I had a powerglide Been sitting Here for at least 20 years, Swap meet shift kit and rebuild kit 40.00 bucks and about a week of labor,I might sell it for 300, but not today. so how I assing Value to parts, Cost or FMV, is messing with me, I was afraid I could show cost and come on Down and then be busted for FMV,You Sirs, Seem to know the differance 'tween Money And Labor Thus renewing my faith I can come play. PS It's going to get Caged FOR Safetey I showed the tubing In My First Build photos Some from a Capri Some From a camaro some leftovers,but no real outlay of cash,How's that play into the scheme of things as a Fair Cage can cost A Grand or more, I will have only Labor.

FMV has been abused the last few years. That's what is causing your confusion.

FMV is supposed to be for one thing- if you happen to have some stuff laying around your garage you want to use, but don't have a purchase receipt.

You won't ever get DQed for using the actual costs. FMV shouldn't be randomly swapped with actual costs.

Your labor does NOT count. Doesn't matter whether you spent the labor 20 years ago or today. That's what makes the car worth so much more than the cost of the parts, and why a claimer rule will never work.

Labor you paid for DOES count.

Claimer rules are great for "stock" racing, ie everybody is supposed to bring a showroom stock liter bike or whatever else. The claimer rule actually prevents people from modifying their vehicle, because if you are significantly faster, someone else gets all your hard work and ingenuity for free.

Opposite of what the challenge wants.

Robbie wrote: Claimer rules are great for "stock" racing, ie everybody is supposed to bring a showroom stock liter bike or whatever else. The claimer rule actually prevents people from modifying their vehicle, because if you are significantly faster, someone else gets all your hard work and ingenuity for free. Opposite of what the challenge wants.

Exactly. I'd have claimed the yellow bug, then andrew would have turned right around and claimed my datsun and kicked my butt with my own car.

OK, so I tally up machine work, parts, and stuff I bought Just For THIS Project,and if i show cost of reconditioning parts, Then leftover parts that were damaged to some degree that I repaired to Use in this Project won't be counted other than cost of repair?. Now this car is a plastic and glass body C-4 and I chopped it up a bit,Do I have to show Resin/glass mat costs.

In reply to GTXVette:

Yep. I think you've got it.

Resin and mat that is on the car when it shows up at the track counts. If you use materials to make a mold, release agent, sandpaper, etc. it would not count against your budget.

This I Can Live with, Mat is sorta cheap,But doggone the resin price.! Man I just got a tingle.

Hey all, just want to let you know that the $2017 Challenge is still a top priority. At this point, here's what's up:

We're waiting on input from the track as far as what rules we can and cannot exempt Challenge cars from. We'll let you know once we have a final list and policy for that. At this point, we're leaning towards holding cars that run faster than 10.99 to strict NHRA rules–after all, a 10-second quarter is very, very serious.

We're finalizing the budget spreadsheet template we'll require all teams to use. It's in the hands of the village elders now, and should be out to you all soon.

Thanksgiving is coming up, so I'll be in and out of the office (and hopefully spending a lot of time working on cars, too) over the next few days. If I don't respond here, just email me at Tom@grassrootsmotorsports.com if you have any more questions.

Thanks, everyone.

In reply to Tom Suddard:

Only problem I can come up with off hand on strict 10.99 rules is IRS not being allowed.

Stampie wrote: In reply to Tom Suddard: Only problem I can come up with off hand on strict 10.99 rules is IRS not being allowed and I heard that there will be an RX8 breathing a lot of nitrous on it's only drag pass...

Wait... what?

In reply to John Brown:

That can NOT be true, Proline Racing and Jerry Bell Race cars Have Built more than one IRS Vette that run in the 6's And one,vette that runs Outlaw that runs 4's but it has a solid rear. these cars are right down the street so I know it's true,They may be Faster by Now.

I'm not sure i want to bother shooting for the moon this year. My heart isn't in it like it was when i was thrashing to build everything required for the LS swap for '16. Deflated like tom brady's balls one could call my desire to put forth the max effort of the last 2 years. I hope that desire comes back, but i have some trust issues right now that I need to deal with.

GTXVette wrote: That can NOT be true, Proline Racing and Jerry Bell Race cars Have Built more than one IRS Vette that run in the 6's And one,vette that runs Outlaw that runs 4's but it has a solid rear. these cars are right down the street so I know it's true,They may be Faster by Now.

The rulebook gives the 63-82 vette a pass, and vehicles with upper and lower control arms. I've got a lower arm and a strut.

In reply to patgizz:

Why would the C2 and C3 Vettes get a pass? Bias or is there something about their suspension that makes them safer?

Edited to remove my incorrect rulebook interpretation so as not to confuse anyone.

Here is the rulebook section on rear axle:

REAR END Aftermarket axles and axle-retention device mandatory on any car running 10.99 (6.99) or quicker or any car with locked differential. Cars running 10.99 (6.99) or quicker that weigh more than 2,000 pounds with independent rear suspension without upper and lower (both) control arms must replace swing axle differential with conventional differential housing assembly. (Example: 1963-1982 Corvette). Cars with independent rear suspension using upper and lower (both) control arms may retain swing axle assembly regardless of weight or e.t. Must have 360- degree, minimum 1-inch-wide by 1/4-inch-thick axle retention loop on each axle. See General Regulations 2:11

Those rule PROHIBIT the early vette due to the axle being the upper arm. Axle break=losing the upper arm of the suspension and likely crash. Your car has a rear strut suspension so that rule doesn't apply because your suspension stays intact without the axle. The other rules just state that because an IRS has axles going out to the wheels that can flop around if you break a CV or universal joint that you must have loops around them to restrain them unless you have upper and lower A-arms that act as loops.

Ahh. I was interpreting that completely the opposite. The stupid thing is i've read that rule over and over, for years, and always thought the opposite.

I swear I saw something in another section but now I can't find it. But I've been reading rules so much lately I've been having dreams about them. Maybe that was a nightmare. Did learn something else going over them tonight.