Sorry Robbie, post updated to remove the brake factor.
Core charges aren't a part of recoup.
Sorry Robbie, post updated to remove the brake factor.
Core charges aren't a part of recoup.
And to clarify the past few decisions, every decision in this thread has the following goals:
1. Keep everybody safe.
2. Keep the competition fair to competitors old and new.
3. Keep the car's budget as similar to a car's actual cost to the team as possible in a measurable, enforceable way.
4. Keep the competition fun and encourage future participation.
Tom Suddard said:And to clarify the past few decisions, every decision in this thread has the following goals:
1. Keep everybody safe.
2. Keep the competition fair to competitors old and new.
3. Keep the car's budget as similar to a car's actual cost to the team as possible in a measurable, enforceable way.
4. Keep the competition fun and encourage future participation.
I approve of your new year's resolutions Tom.
If I have a few too many drinks on new years, I may even let you all vote on a single competitor to single out with future decisions.
I'll be accepting nominations via snail mail, so it's more special.
Tom Suddard said:mtbgael said:Hey there eveyone,
Planning to do $2018.
I bought a '91 miata before I even had the thought to do the challenge for $2700 with hardtop and a trunk full of spares. Ok, over the limit.
I sold the hardtop and some latch hardware that came with the car for $950. That gets us to $1750 and under the limit.
I have also sold some of the spares off, and plan to sell what else I can. I have an honest $1450 in the car right now- I haven't even changed the oil or registered the car...hah. I know the purchase price has to be less than $2018 but the hardtops trade at what I sold it for all the time.
What do the judges say? Can I start at $1750 as my "purchase price" and deduct whatever I wind up getting out of the spares package? Should I incur a penalty? Do I need to light a Nissan leaf on fire as penance?
Thanks for the time.
Justin Rest
Sorry, but this is specifically not allowed in the current rules. You'll need to rethink the receipts, or start with a different car. Sorry!
Thank you for the response, I assumed this but it doesn't hurt to ask.
Tom Suddard said:A dyno is a tool, and renting it is no different from renting a screwdriver to install your nitrous. Not included in budget.
Thank you for the clarification. Now to fix the car and find a Dyno....
Tom Suddard said:A dyno is a tool, and renting it is no different from renting a screwdriver to install your nitrous. Not included in budget.
can't say i've ever been to a dyno shop that let me run the dyno...
but along the lines of your ruling quoted above, a tire machine is a tool. if i pay someone to mount my tires, does that hit my budget?
AngryCorvair said:Tom Suddard said:A dyno is a tool, and renting it is no different from renting a screwdriver to install your nitrous. Not included in budget.
can't say i've ever been to a dyno shop that let me run the dyno...
but along the lines of your ruling quoted above, a tire machine is a tool. if i pay someone to mount my tires, does that hit my budget?
I think the ruling on the Dyno was because if you have the car run on a dyno, it just tells you information it doesn't add anything to the car. Then if you tune and have it run again, it again is only telling you information, not making any changes to the car.
If the Dyno shop did the tuning for you too, then you should have to pay.
I believe tire mounting and balancing DOES count towards budget.
In reply to AWSX1686 :
i knew the existing answer before i asked. i asked only to highlight the inconsistency. i can't load or tie down the vehicle nor operate the dyno at the performance shop, their technician does all that while he's on the clock, and i pay him to do so. similarly, i can't break down, install, or balance tires at Belle Tire, their technician does all that while he's on the clock, and i pay him to do so. maybe i should get the dyno guy to do my tire work. 
I get what you're saying, I do, but it's actually not inconsistent.
The Dyno, you get a sheet of paper, no work actually done to the car.
The tire shop, those tires go on the car, thus the work was to the car and in budget.
Perhaps it's beating a dead horse since the answer was already given, I was just attempting to show how I see that the rules aren't inconsistent in this case.
AWSX1686 said:The Dyno, you get a sheet of paper, no work actually done to the car.
That's not necessarily the case. Wreck Racing has tuned on a steady-state dyno before. Sitting in the car on the dyno for an hour or two, tuning fuel and ignition.
The shop showed us how to use the dyno, then let us do our thing (apparently they thought we know what we're doing?).
Matthew Kennedy said:AWSX1686 said:The Dyno, you get a sheet of paper, no work actually done to the car.
That's not necessarily the case. Wreck Racing has tuned on a steady-state dyno before. Sitting in the car on the dyno for an hour or two, tuning fuel and ignition.
The shop showed us how to use the dyno, then let us do our thing (apparently they thought we know what we're doing?).
But that's ok, because you were the one doing the tuning. ;) Thus, tool, not service.
Yes, the past few posts are correct. Different than tire mounting.
I haven't been checking this thread regularly, but I'm pretty sure I asked the same question several pages back about a Dyno being a tool and the rental fee being exempt from budget. When I asked the question I was given a different answer. As I recall the answer was "you are paying for a service so it is in budget."
So which ruling is going to stand?
I Understood the GT deal being Free to use, and you are saying Pay to use.
In reply to bigben :
As I understand it, a dyno as it is usually used is a paid-for service. They assist with tuning, etc.
If you can find someone who will just lease you the machine and YOU do all the tuning, its a tool.
I think...
There's a significant difference between tire mounting/balancing and dyno time. Tire mounting/balancing directly relates to a physical part on the car that contributes to that car's performance. Dyno time is ephemeral and contributes nothing physical to the car (unless the dyno time results in the car breaking). As I suggested before, dyno time is a direct parallel to test and tune time at an auto-x or quarter mile tracks, not a service that NECESSARILY contributes to the performance or existence of some part on the car.
Of course from the stand point of "you can build a race car on a $2000 budget" it seems much more reasonable/realistic to me to make an allowance for tire mounting, but not for the Dyno rental.
"Look, I built this 10 sec car on a $2000 budget. Oh, yeah and I spent another $800 on Dyno rental so I could tune for the big camshafts and 20 lbs of boost."
Vs.
"Hey, I built this 12 sec car for $2000. Oh, and it cost me an extra $60 at Walmart to mount my tires."
Which one are readers going to find more legitimate and which one are they going to call BS when they see it in the magazine?
I'd love to be able to rent a Dyno and tune my car myself till the setup is optimal, but really think that is stretching the rules too far and is not representative of what someone who is truly on a tight budget could do.
bigben said:I'd love to be able to rent a Dyno and tune my car myself till the setup is optimal, but really think that is stretching the rules too far and is not representative of what someone who is truly on a tight budget could do.
Someone on a tight budget could just find an empty, straight open road, and bring a co-driver along and tune from there. The Dyno is just safer, and legal (vs. if your car isn't street legal).
I'm not trying to get my license taken because of trying to tune my car's top end on the street, so... Dyno.
AWSX1686 said:bigben said:I'd love to be able to rent a Dyno and tune my car myself till the setup is optimal, but really think that is stretching the rules too far and is not representative of what someone who is truly on a tight budget could do.
Someone on a tight budget could just find an empty, straight open road, and bring a co-driver along and tune from there. The Dyno is just safer, and legal (vs. if your car isn't street legal).
I'm not trying to get my license taken because of trying to tune my car's top end on the street, so... Dyno.
Or, spend $5 on a test and tune night at the local 1/8 or 1/4 mile track. A guy like me could also use some practice at launching and using drag slicks, both of which would very likely net me big gains.
Do we know if a top car has used and abused the 'dyno-rule' yet? Something tells me that the winners aren't currently using dynos.
Robbie said:AWSX1686 said:bigben said:I'd love to be able to rent a Dyno and tune my car myself till the setup is optimal, but really think that is stretching the rules too far and is not representative of what someone who is truly on a tight budget could do.
Someone on a tight budget could just find an empty, straight open road, and bring a co-driver along and tune from there. The Dyno is just safer, and legal (vs. if your car isn't street legal).
I'm not trying to get my license taken because of trying to tune my car's top end on the street, so... Dyno.
Or, spend $5 on a test and tune night at the local 1/8 or 1/4 mile track. A guy like me could also use some practice at launching and using drag slicks, both of which would very likely net me big gains.
Do we know if a top car has used and abused the 'dyno-rule' yet? Something tells me that the winners aren't currently using dynos.
But that $5 isn't in budget, so why would a dyno be? ;)
I'm not really anywhere close to ready to use the dyno yet, but I would certainly like to, and I want to make sure I am 100% within the rules (which Dynos are already approved.)
There are no dynos in rural areas like where I live.
In reply to SVreX :
Closest one to me is probably 45 minutes away. I think.
bigben said:Of course from the stand point of "you can build a race car on a $2000 budget" it seems much more reasonable/realistic to me to make an allowance for tire mounting, but not for the Dyno rental.
"Look, I built this 10 sec car on a $2000 budget. Oh, yeah and I spent another $800 on Dyno rental so I could tune for the big camshafts and 20 lbs of boost."
Vs.
"Hey, I built this 12 sec car for $2000. Oh, and it cost me an extra $60 at Walmart to mount my tires."
Which one are readers going to find more legitimate and which one are they going to call BS when they see it in the magazine?
I'd love to be able to rent a Dyno and tune my car myself till the setup is optimal, but really think that is stretching the rules too far and is not representative of what someone who is truly on a tight budget could do.
Given that tools aren't part of budget, you could just buy a tire mounting machine and mount them yourself, and it'd cost nothing, and readers of the magazine would probably like to hear that. Especially if you did it with one of those $45 Chinese tire changers and a cheap used bubble balancer. Or if it lead to a review of one of those budget Ebay changer/balancer combos that are like $1200 shipped. Besides, there are lots of videos on YouTube about how to unmount and mount tires at home without a machine. Hit to budget? $ZIP.
And this kind of thinking could lead to penalizing competitors that are pro mechanics, or fabricators, or welders, or machinists, or engineers, or dyno operators, or whatever that gives them an advantage in building their car, and that doesn't seem right, or fair honestly. Admittedly, I think we all know those folks may have an edge, if not an outright huge advantage, but that advantage is theirs because they choose to compete at something they have an advantage at. It's no different than if a pro photographer enters an photography contest, or a surfer enters a surfing contest. It's not like it's their fault if you choose to compete too.
New topic: if i order $75 worth of steel, use some to make a part that sells for 75 and use the rest on the challenge car, does that mean i zero out the steel?
You'll need to log in to post.
