Challenge Supreme Court (Questions Answered Here!)

In reply to Tom Suddard:

Wow! Where was this thread last year when I was trying to figure out if I was in budget. Thanks for all the clarification. This is great stuff.

Thank you, Tom!

Dusterbd13 wrote: stock replacement brake parts I can go either way on this.. We are swapping in an 8.8 rear to the amc. This 8.8 id disc brake equipped. The rear end swap is for gears and posi, but the rear discs could be seen as a brake upgrade since we originally had drums back there. Id like to replace the hoses. Pads and rotors are fine, but hoses are past due for changing. Are stock rubber explorer hoses budget exempt in this scenario?

Tom Suddard wrote: Ok, I think I'm caught up. Let me know if I missed anything.

442 Locost using Miata subframes?

Oh dear...

Here it goes:

This is an event for production-based cars. However, over the years certain builds, like Andrew's Beetles or Stan Dorsey's truck or that Rotary Isetta have mostly been built-from-scratch custom stuff that look like production cars. This is a good thing–they're super cool, and we want to see innovation of all sorts.

So, where do we go from here? I'd still like to see a production-based car, but you're welcome to bend that definition a bit. Something like the Roadkill NASCARLO that is a tube frame underneath with a production body on it? Fine, go for it with our permission beforehand. But a Locost? We'd rather not see that at the Challenge unless you put a Miata (or something else) body on it. It's not fair to the other competitors that have to carry the extra weight around, and it's not great for the pages of the magazine if everything looks like a FSAE car. This goes back to that "finished appearance" rule.

I was just trying to level the field Tom, my car has to haul all MY weight around!

Thank you for the response!

In reply to QuasiMofo:

And he actually gave me a loophole I was thinking about earlier today.

In reply to Tom Suddard:

I was just going to say that I really dig that there are folks that build those kinds of cars, but that for me (and probably a lot of others), it's neither reasonable or realistic to do so. But then I had to concede that I dream of one day hand building an early style open wheel car from scratch, though realistically, I might start with something like an aftermarket 32 Ford frame. That said, while it's neat to see that kinda "fabricated" build, putting production car builds at the heart of the challenge is the only thing that makes it even possible for me to compete at all, because, in the end, what I want from my Challenge car(s) is for them to be cars I want to own after the Challenge is over.

In reply to QuasiMofo:

All I heard was make sure it looks like a production car in example Ariel atom, lotus 7 or just put body panels over the tube frame.

Andy Neuman wrote: In reply to QuasiMofo: All I heard was make sure it looks like a production car in example Ariel atom, lotus 7 or just put body panels over the tube frame.

While I see that side of the interpretation I think that Tom REALLY wants me to A: finish a Locost frame 2: put a 1985 Cadillac Cimmaron body on it and £: blow it up!

My intent all along was a "442 book car using Miata subfames and crossmembers" just the way Joey started the car. To fit the chassis under a body will require a little imagination but I have a few ideas. This was a 2018 car regardless.

My plan was dial in the CaMofo drivetrain (5.7 L98 T5 3.45 locker) and run it in $2017 then focus on the Mofocost by building the car around the spare 5.0L. Once the frame and suspension is complete then I swap in the Camaro drivetrain and essentially add lightness.

This only adds another obstacle

In reply to GTXVette:

I think you missed something:

Tom Suddard wrote: ... but you're welcome to bend that definition a bit. ... Fine, go for it with our permission beforehand.

You are looking for hard and fast rules. Tom is trying to keep it open to interpretation.

Just don't blind-side him with something really far out at the event without prior communication.

Can i get a brake part ruling?

In reply to Ovid_and_Flem:

I agree, but the staff has previously ruled you can't take a credit for the difference between performance brake parts and stock ones. Performance brake components go in the budget 100%.

Brake Components

Sorry, missed that brake question.

Yes, replace your rubber hoses without budget impact, as long as they're the same sort of hoses you'd buy if it was a drum brake rear end. If it's somehow a $700 custom rubber hose that makes the rear end swap possible, you'll need to budget that.

Cool. Thanks. Just a standard rubber hose.

broke E36 M3 because im stupid

Syarter solenoid from donor was fine. Until I dropped it. And broke it. Replacement exempt or not?

In reply to Dusterbd13:

That's not exempt. The exemption rule was for stuff that broken after lots of use. Assembling incorrectly might mean you were too ambitious with your meager budget and skillset.

Ok

Stupidity should be painful. This is a $12 pain until I can get a cheaper one.

Just to clarify: Am I understanding correctly that any part may be replaced (assuming it was originally functional and saw some actual usage for some period of time) with a functional, non-performance improving replacement without hitting the budget? I.e., if an alternator stops charging, or a strut blows a seal, or carb gets a crack in the body, it may be replaced with a functional part without impacting the budget? I ask because the only things I saw in the rules explicitly related to replacements not hitting the budget was brake stuff.

Another question:

I know pull-a-part price lists are generally frowned upon as points of reference for FMV, but what should we do when using eBay auctions for FMV is berkeleying bat E36 M3 crazy compared to what we actually paid for it out of a pull-a-part yard or from Craigslist, but we don't have a receipt? Would pull-a-part price lists be acceptable at that point?

In reply to darkbuddha:

I understand your question, but I think it ventures beyond the spirit of the event.

The intent is to say, if you bought a car in a particular condition and damaged something through normal use or wear and tear, you will not be prohibited from competing because you blew the budget replacing the part that was in good working order when you bought it.

However, the way you worded your question opens the door wide open to essentially replacing virtually every part on a car, as long as its an OEM equivalent.

The problem is that you didn't buy a car with OEM equivalents. You bought a turd with everything worn out and tons of broken E36 M3. That's why it sold for next to nothing.

A new OEM alternator probably outperforms whatever used one was on it when you bought it. A new OEM strut probably is a performance improvement over the crap that was on the car when you bought it.

This needs to remain a grey area, and a judgement call. It can't become an all-encompassing black and white response, or we will have cars show up that are in BRAND NEW condition, purchased for $500 (with thousands of dollars worth of parts swapped).

Don't be a dick, and be prepared to be judged by a jury of your peers.

In reply to SVreX:

That's exactly what I was thinking until a couple of these kinds of questions popped up. I can understand exempting safety stuff, as stated in the rules, but beyond that seems like it could snowball. Being my first challenge, I'm not sure what are accepted loopholes and what is frowned upon rules manipulation.

Yeah, SVreX has it right here. The point of that rule is to not DQ the guy whose alternator randomly breaks on his way to the event, not to allow you to swap everything on your POS car for free.

patgizz wrote: budgeting a trade effecting multiple challenge builds Traded part A (one pair of cylinder heads in this case)for: $2017 car body panels AND wheels for $2018 car. 2 completely different projects. How to work price of part A into each year's budget? Full price of A, then "recoup" wheels this year and body panels next year? Split cost of part A in half? Write 2 receipts so Part A is split and one head is traded for panels and one head is traded for wheels?

There is no cost to the aquistion of EITHER the $2017 body parts OR the $2018 wheels. It's a TRADE.

The acquisition of the heads, however, must be accounted for in both budgets. It you bought them for $50, fine. Put $50 in both budgets. If you bought them as part of a complete parts car, you should be including the parts car purchase and the total recoup. If they were already in your garage, they get a FMV.

Depending on how you acquired the heads, this might not work in your favor.

GTXVette wrote: Say what........The world May end before Next year, If that can Happen the way you Have presented it, I will use the same ENGINE for the Next 3 Years And It will only be worth 267.00 each year,I am buying a BB posted on CL At 800.00 bucks I'll Go as High As 300 for the next 2 years and 200.00 the 3rd. or 266.6666667 each year. You Pick. You want it in different Body's each year Hell ya I got that covered Too,and they get better each year,but that was a plan anyway,Body wise. And NO I wasn't going to put a BBC in the Fiero. Oh wait How 'Bout I use the engine this year At 800.00 then NO Cost for the Next 2 I like that Mo better.

Not sure if joke. Definitely incorrect.

In reply to SVreX:

Sometimes I just shake my head.