Challenge Rule-Change Proposal

SVreX wrote: The Kumhos are not a similar exemption as the safety gear. It was a response to what was seen as an abuse, and a nod to a faithful sponsor. Which I support. But they are similar in the fact that they contribute to "rules creep", and have collectively changed the nature of what the Challenge is supposed to be.

Pardon me for being a bit thick, but what was the abuse part? This isn't a flounder or a troll or anything, I honestly missed the part where it was anything beyond a nod to Kumho for bein' nice fellas.

In reply to mndsm:

Per felt people were showing up with brand new race-ready tires and claiming insufficient amounts in their budgets.

"I got these brand new Hoosiers out of a dumpster", etc.

I'm not taking sides or making accusations, but this perspective was clearly stated.

I think the only exemptions should be for mandated safety equipment. IE cages for cars faster than 11.99. At this point in the game you need to be running that fast in the 1/4 to compete for overall, so any advantage in the auto-x would be mute. The tires thing is cool, but I'd say if you take advantage then you have to run the same set for the entire event. No swapping for the drags.

As for brakes; I see the point from the safety aspect, but would hope any competitor isn't going to put a performance mod above a safety item. Really in truly, you could easily say anything should be "free" because of safety. Tie rod ends if they fail could cause way more damage than worn brakes.

I wouldn't even have the budget exemption for a cage for a 11.98 car.

No one has ever done the 1/4 faster than Andy Nelson at the Challenge. He has always had a fully legal NHRA car, including in 2004 when he brought the 10 second Nova for his first showing.

After his first pass, they made him go back through tech to insure the car was legal. It was, and it had all the necessary safety gear included in the budget.

But nobody has to run 11's to win the Challenge. There are different formulas. If you can't build a cage for the budget amount, accept an 11.99 time on the dragstrip. This plus a top 3 finish in both the autocross and the concourse will guarantee you a podium finish, and probably first place.

Other than Andy, there are very few that have ever run 11's at the Challenge.

SVreX wrote: In reply to mndsm: Per felt people were showing up with brand new race-ready tires and claiming insufficient amounts in their budgets. "I got these brand new Hoosiers out of a dumpster", etc. I'm not taking sides or making accusations, but this perspective was clearly stated.

Ahhh yes. That old gem.

mndsm wrote:

SVreX wrote: In reply to mndsm: Per felt people were showing up with brand new race-ready tires and claiming insufficient amounts in their budgets. "I got these brand new Hoosiers out of a dumpster", etc. I'm not taking sides or making accusations, but this perspective was clearly stated.

Ahhh yes. That old gem.

I always thought full price with receipt for new or FMV for all used would have fixed most of that issue.

SVreX wrote: I wouldn't even have the budget exemption for a cage for a 11.98 car. No one has ever done the 1/4 faster than Andy Nelson at the Challenge. He has always had a fully legal NHRA car, including in 2004 when he brought the 10 second Nova for his first showing. After his first pass, they made him go back through tech to insure the car was legal. It was, and it had all the necessary safety gear included in the budget. But nobody has to run 11's to win the Challenge. There are different formulas. If you can't build a cage for the budget amount, accept an 11.99 time on the dragstrip. This plus a top 3 finish in both the autocross and the concourse will guarantee you a podium finish, and probably first place. Other than Andy, there are very few that have ever run 11's at the Challenge.

Quoted because it needs to be repeated.

16vCorey wrote:

SVreX wrote: I wouldn't even have the budget exemption for a cage for a 11.98 car. No one has ever done the 1/4 faster than Andy Nelson at the Challenge. He has always had a fully legal NHRA car, including in 2004 when he brought the 10 second Nova for his first showing. After his first pass, they made him go back through tech to insure the car was legal. It was, and it had all the necessary safety gear included in the budget. But nobody has to run 11's to win the Challenge. There are different formulas. If you can't build a cage for the budget amount, accept an 11.99 time on the dragstrip. This plus a top 3 finish in both the autocross and the concourse will guarantee you a podium finish, and probably first place. Other than Andy, there are very few that have ever run 11's at the Challenge.

Quoted because it needs to be repeated.

So, in the history of the Challenge, how many cars have been quick enough in the drags to require rollover protection? ie hardtops quicker than 11.50 or convertibles quicker than 13.50?

and of that population of cars, how many did well enough in the autocross to say that their rollover protection (cage / bar / weld-in / bolt-in / whatever) was really a performance benefit?

what i'm getting at is: if your budget doesn't allow going sub-11.50 (13.50 for convertibles) and installing the required rollover protection, then you either slow the car down or you take money out of other areas to make it work. i admire what aussie is doing with his "bolt-in" cage in the mustang, because it exploits the "bolt-in is free, but weld-in is budgeted" rule, and it's exactly what i would've done under the current rule-set if i had a car quick enough to require rollover protection.

cast my vote for "if it's on the car it's in the budget, no exceptions!"

AngryCorvair wrote: cast my vote for "if it's on the car it's in the budget, no exceptions!"

You should really quit helping my cause of actually making the ti potentially dominant. As it sits, I don't have full reciepts(say for the engine/wiring/ecu/turbo/etc), but all of those were purchased for GRM'ers and will be in the budget. At least I haven't sold off the coilovers that were on the car when I bought it and tried to negate a $3k engine

I will have a reciept for my hoho's though that will hit the budget I snagged a set of scuffed r6's for $50/ea.

SVreX wrote: Per felt people were showing up with brand new race-ready tires and claiming insufficient amounts in their budgets.

In my opinion there are better ways to fight budget cheating than to specifically allow even more direct cheating of the budget, and subsequently further drive up the true cost of the cars.

Driven5 wrote:

SVreX wrote: Per felt people were showing up with brand new race-ready tires and claiming insufficient amounts in their budgets.

In my opinion there are better ways to fight budget cheating than to specifically allow even more direct cheating of the budget, and subsequently further drive up the true cost of the cars.

QFT. There already exist provisions to DQ entries for budget items that the judges (or other competitors in the case of contesting an entry...) feel aren't believable or properly documented... but at the same time, I don't know how much real scrutiny the entries are all given, and perhaps it was easier to just do this than to give them all more attention to try and weed out the really unbelievable stuff while giving a sponsor a boost at the same time.

It definitely changed things from what I had always heard from the friends who got me into the Challenge, about how the hunt for a budget-friendly set of race tires was one of the biggest challenges, and how doing your homework and finding a used set of R-comps that fit in the budget would really pay off.

And I'm arguing from the standpoint of someone who would definitely BENEFIT from making a race seat free- it would mean I wouldn't have the $30 or so for the Summit race seat I found at the salvage yard in my budget so I wouldn't be trying to race on a massive bench seat. If you're building a car that is that fast, you sould be taking into consideration all the costs associated with being SAFE while going that fast...

...Although I suppose I would understand products from event sponsors being budgeted at $0 if that is the actual price being offered by the sponsor to all of the participants in the competition.

In reply to Ashyukun:

Heck, I'm going to see hopefully by july what my final budget is at so I can decide if I want to try to find a used/cheap pair of drag tires for the car or if I want to spend more of it on other things like lexan door windows.

I want to make it clear I publicly asked about roll cages prior to going ahead and having it installed, a rule change now would be devastating to my ability to compete.

The thread was posted on GRM on March 21st.

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/challenge-roll-cage/61979/page1/

Any changes now would be very difficult to accept.

I even repeated the question later in the thread.

Steve

To add to Steves concern; I do wish the rules for $2013 are set in stone, pronto!

I just shelled out big bucks $$$ for a set of V710's expecting that Kumho's are budget $0 again.

aussiesmg wrote: I even repeated the question later in the thread. Steve

Being repeatedly ignored doesn't mean your interpretation/question is any more realistic. Everybody has said the "bolt in" rule was a silly loophole, but that's the way it was written and it's an easy one to exploit if you go to the trouble to make all the extra flanges required.

Seriously though, I'm not doing anything with my N600 until the rules are published. It's a gamble to start work in advance that I don't really need to take...yet. The tire budget thing, for example, has a massive impact on my ability to spend money or not...that's a new rule since I brought it in $2011. Of course, Kumho makes about zero tires that are easy to fit on an N600, but that's my challenge...building to the rules has become part of the game (for better or worse).

Bryce

Nashco wrote: Of course, Kumho makes about zero tires that are easy to fit on an N600, but that's my challenge...building to the rules has become part of the game (for better or worse). Bryce

I feel your pain.

I am running 13" wheels in a 10" width. The Kumho rule is a very big disadvantage for me.

Probably much worse for an N600.

Ashyukun wrote: QFT. There already exist provisions to DQ entries for budget items that the judges (or other competitors in the case of contesting an entry...) feel aren't believable or properly documented... but at the same time, I don't know how much real scrutiny the entries are all given...

I was part of that process one year. Basically we double-checked everyone's math that didn't use an excel spreadsheet, and said each item and price aloud. If any of the items seemed unbelievable to me or the two other people involved the documentation was looked over, and if the documentation was sketchy the owner was tracked down to give an explanation. We did find one car that listed the purchase price, but "forgot" to include it in the budget sheet and was over budget, and several people were talked to about certain parts, but I don't know if anything came of that. I also don't know if the same procedure is used every year.

16vCorey wrote: I was part of that process one year. Basically we double-checked everyone's math that didn't use an excel spreadsheet, and said each item and price aloud. If any of the items seemed unbelievable to me or the two other people involved the documentation was looked over, and if the documentation was sketchy the owner was tracked down to give an explanation. We did find one car that listed the purchase price, but "forgot" to include it in the budget sheet and was over budget, and several people were talked to about certain parts, but I don't know if anything came of that. I also don't know if the same procedure is used every year.

Interesting, thanks for that insight into the process. Of course, the first thing that stood out to me was that it would be very easy to accidentally do the math wrong on a spreadsheet (either intentionally or truly accidentally- i.e., adding a few rows but not updating a sum() to include them...). I was quite curious, because just between myself and the friend who I went down with, we had very different levels of info and documentation- mine was fairly basic, largely just a stack of receipts/invoices and the spreadsheet while his was much more involved, with a PowerPoint detailing some of the more involved work done and a LOT more receipts as he'd done a lot more in the way of selling off parts than I had (I've done a lot more on my current project though).

Some time when I can't field a car myself I think it would be neat to be part of going over all the entries...

Okay, here's my $.02 for those who care.

I think seats should be a budget hit. Period. The seat in my Trans Am cost me $30. I could easily duplicate that purchase again. I could've also used the stock seat at no budget hit. Neither seat is what I'd consider reassuring in an accident so I decided to leave the door impact beams in at the cost of added weight.

If your car is equipped with a bench seat how about some creativity? Pull the cover off of it. Use an electric knife to cut a valley in the foam for your butt and back. Use the excess foam to make bolsters. Re-upholster the seat. Your budget will get hit for some hog rings at worst. Buy a five point harness and strap in tight. Point it out to the concours judges how clever I am, I mean, you are.