Challenge Town Hall extended - Concour feedback

pimpm3 said:

Thank you for the well thought out explanation!  Do you happen to have the score break down for the c4 wagon?

Jeremy, My scores for your car were: 8 for innovation, because how can you not appreciate the planning that goes into making a C4 look really good as a Canestoga wagon complete with top and wagon wheels and arrows sticking out of the sides along with other props. I had a 7 for execution because the complete facade was preapred for easily removal and resetting to original (you don't plan to drive it aroud town with the wagon shell?) Finally I gave a 3 for presentation since I did not see any over the top flair in the presentation itself (no costumes this year...).

I have asked the Georgia Tech team to post a short write up on how they approach the Concour as far as making sure the highlights are discussed and pointed out. Since they are a regular high Concour point recipient it may be useful to the other teams to see the effort they put forth for the presentation.

Thanks for the kind words on the Tercel, this was my 5th time doing the challenge with 3 different cars. every year I get better in the concours but I still feel its our weakest portion.  I also think the concours is getting better/fairer every year since I started.

One thing that I learned that help me a lot, the judges most likely dont know how well your car did in the dynamic portion.

example when you look at my FSP Tercel its "just" a econobox with some mods, but as soon as you know it got 4th in the autox(3rd last time it was at the challenge) it becomes something special because with ~110hp and 4 year old used sm7 that is very hard to do.

Thank you to all the judges, staff, old and new friends, this was a very fun challenge, I missed 3rd place overall by .07 of a point and I cant stop thinking of all things I didnt do that could have put me over the edge.

Thank you, Steve, for your detailed explanation of the judging process. As the other competitor judge, I concur with everything you wrote. I will also commit to helping competitors understand their score as much as possible and what I thought they could do to improve. I gave no competitor a perfect 25 point score nor did I give anyone under a 12 (I think). I forgot to take a photo of my final score sheet.

The important thing for all competitors to understand is that there is no one way to obtain a decent Concours score. To receive a high Concours score requires a lot of work building a well prepared and functioning car that not only performs but looks good and is presented in a manner that clearly explains what you did and why. For a perfect Concours score your car would have to be over the top in Form, Fit and Function. Past cars that come to mind are the Team Gutty (?) Civic, The Honda/Subaru Rally tribute or the Red/White/Blue Turbo Cherokee.

Thank you guys for your patient and thorough explainatons. Steve, I'd appreciate if you'd share your scores and reasoning for my race van. I (think) that I know a couple areas in which I could have improved, but I'd value your perspective.

Thanks.

-Sean

Tom Suddard said:

Instead, we're discussing a calibration car for the judges. This would be a neutral car (probably something from one of our garages) that would be parked in front of the judges during their morning meeting. We would say "this is a 12-point car, and here is why," which should keep their scoring lower throughout the day.

Rather than use a calibration car, I can tell you most of the cars I owned were a solid 12.  I still have pics of them all so I'll send them to you.

Hey guys, I have been lead engineer of Wreck Racing this past year and someone suggested I post about how we go about presenting our car. We usually have a few leaders present, ensuring someone knows at least a little about each of the major projects and components in the build. We started off kind of outlining the direction of our build, which this year was to build a predominantly drag-oriented car that also handles respectably in autocross. We pretty much wing the rest, making sure we go over everything of interest as much as we can in the time allotted. We try and keep things fun, which is the reason for things like our bumper-exit exhaust and the couch we've brought the past few years for the judges to sit on.

As far as getting a good score in Concours goes, we always try and build something that both performs well and is innovative. That was definitely the case with the Insight, where we used an extremely unlikely candidate for a body as well as an odd powertrain setup. While an LS-swapped E28 isn't the most out-of-the-box idea, we focused a lot on increasing build quality and aesthetics, which resulted in a car that looked decent and performed with minimal issues, and we also have some more interesting plans for next year!

Im adding this thread to my watchlist so i can find it next fall.

The discussion, though painful in some regards, is enlightening. We sucked HARD at the concourse with the amc, but we threw the shy guy in at the last minute to make a off the cuff presentation. Not my wisest moment. The problem with my current build is that its going to look essentially like a stock miata. So ill have to work extra hard to point out the fact that every single piece has been modified or messed with in some way.

OT but how do you add a thread to a watchlist?

In reply to P3PPY :

The little eyeball next to the social media buttons at the top of the thread. 

ShawneeCreek said:

Thank you guys for your patient and thorough explainatons. Steve, I'd appreciate if you'd share your scores and reasoning for my race van. I (think) that I know a couple areas in which I could have improved, but I'd value your perspective.

Thanks.

-Sean

Sean,

Here are my scores and recollections of the judging: Innovation 9 - There are not many folks that would consider cutting a car to re-body it with a van, The planning for something like this is truly mind-boggling. Execution 8 - From the outside the merging of the car and van was spectacular, but as I looked a little deeper there were some areas that could be made a little nicer (basically the interface of the car to van) but the body work (paint) was amazing and the stance of the van was spot on. Presentation 5 - the way you presented the build along with its history at previous challenges showed the effort and skill required for the project, while making it all easy to see; the display board helped cover the build history and summarized the complete project and the banana bread (in three varieties) tied in nicely with the subtext of the grocery getter "sponsors".

I hope that helps.

Steve

Hey look at that!  Steve gave a “5” for Presentation!! 

SVreX said:

Hey look at that!  Steve gave a “5” for Presentation!! 

There werent many, but they were memorable...

In reply to Dusterbd13 :

Do what I did with Datsaniti and take a fender off to show your fabrication. Maybe get some floor mirrors for your undercarriage brace. You've done some amazing things with that Miata and should be scored almost every bit as "innovative" as some of the crazier builds. 

In reply to maschinenbau :

Thanks!

I honestly look at it and think that its just a hacked up engine swap car with some scabbing together of the unibody for stiffness. Nothing radical or very innovative. But i may be jaded at this point in my life.

Floor mirrors and removed body panels: not a bad idea! Ill have to think hard when i build the flat floor and splitters to make it not a total pita to implement for the concourse. 

I thought about a build PowerPoint presentation, but with only 3 minutes the computer lag would kill it.

You can also put the whole car on some sort of tire pylons so your mirrors will show more

Dusterbd13 said:

In reply to maschinenbau :

I honestly look at it and think that its just a hacked up engine swap car with some scabbing together of the unibody for stiffness. Nothing radical or very innovative. But i may be jaded at this point in my life.

I thought about a build PowerPoint presentation, but with only 3 minutes the computer lag would kill it.

The materials are the innovation.  You could buy from keith, but that'd blow the budget... so you up-cycled a bed-frame.

Also, I wouldn't use something that controls the judges eyes (ala PowerPoint), demands their visual focus.  You're going to do that to their ears... let their eyes do their own thing and make connections with the words you're speaking.  Besides... "static displays" like the removed fender / poster board / floor mirrors allow you to take advantage of the judge's attention as soon as they see the car... so you're effectively increasing your 3min time to anytime they're looking at the car.

I sometimes think that Challengers should go to an academic conference that has seniors and grad students doing poster presentations on their work. It's about being knowledgeable and passionate and getting people interested in something that  you're the expert in. The Wreck crew knows what's up with this because of their school work and FSAE. I'm half tempted to try and corral them into giving a class on "How to present automotive projects" sometime during the weekend. 

In reply to Dusterbd13 :

I put the car on jack stands, removed the wheels and used mirrors for the Mumpkin. 

I also had 2 computers sitting on the roof of the car running a PowerPoint presentation. I’m pretty sure I’m the only one who has ever done this. This let any participant watch whenever they wanted throughout the day. The judges watched it some too. 

My “3 cue cards” idea has been implemented in several ways described right in this thread. 

- Cue cards

- The fandoms presentation board idea

- Several teams (like Wreck Racing) have a separate team member talk about each component. 

- Stampie’s string idea. 

- PowerPoint

- Calvin Nelson even decided it was worth sacrificing some presentation time to show how he uncapped and flow tested injectors. 

There are a LOT of ways to do it. The point is, TELL the judges “This was innovative”, or “That was executed uniquely”. 

It doesn’t have to be high engineering. Wreck Racing custom manufactured their own suspension components. But pimpn3 got nearly the same innovation score for mounting his Conestoga wagon to the car in a manner that preserved the car. Both of them TOLD the judges. 

In reply to mazdeuce - Seth :

Seth,

Check out the post up-thread a few entries for Carrera32's post...

I forgot to mention that we were competing in the Under $1,000 class.  We took the 12 to try to be team players and help out the judges expecting a mid pack-ish score.  If instead we had gotten scored and finished in last place we would have won the Under $1,000 trophy. 

It kills me that we were sitting with a 5th place in dynamic scoring with an Under $1,000 car, and found out we got berked in the concours after the event.  It's over now so I'll let it go, but people that took the 12 got butt berked (and had to pay for their own dinner).  I'm gonna go eat a Snickers.   

Robbie, Thank you for starting this thread.

P.S.  For those who have not been to The Challenge it's not easy to top 5 dynamic in a half budget car.  

stafford1500 said:

In reply to mazdeuce - Seth :

Seth,

Check out the post up-thread a few entries for Carrera32's post...

Sent him a message. Hoping that college hasn't changed much in the past two decades and that pizza is still an acceptable barter tool for knowledge. 

In reply to spin_out :

Take this with a grain of salt, as I personally have not made the pilgrimage to FL for the Challenge, but I am also no stranger to competition...Including competitive failures.  From an unbiased third party perspective, I see taking the non-judged default score to ease the load on the judges as being aimed at (and the responsibility of) the less 'competitive' teams who are not realistically in competition, or contention, for anything of greater importance to them at that point than the comradery and spirit of the event.

As you said, it's not easy building a top 5 dynamic car for half budget, and as such I would expect your car easily capable of scoring more than 12 in the concours, if presented properly. While I completely understand how frustrating it must feel, I also don't understand why any team looking to finish competitively (in anything, motorsports related or not) would willingly choose to just give up even a single well-deserved point to their competition.

In my opinion, how the judged vs non-judged cars scored this (or any other) year is largely irrelevant and not ultimately at fault here, even if it was less-than-ideal as admitted by the event organizers.  This seems much more like a simple a tactical error in being a competitive car (and participant) but choosing to not 'compete'...Much like the teams who were inevitably disappointed because they elected to be judged and compete in the concours for the efforts put into their car, but didn't take the event seriously enough to understand/learn that while the presentation portion of it is low in individual value, it's the only reliable way to convey that message and get a decent score in the other two categories.

In reply to Driven5 :

The point you are missing is that 'taking the 12' is not supposed to be giving anything up. It is supposed to be (and was last year), a respectable mid-pack concour score, and many miatas scored less than 12. So they decided to take the 12 as an actual strategic move, that also happens to help out the judges.

The point of 'taking the 12' was that it was offered at first to reduce load on the judges. Everyone wants to be judged, so in order to get someone to opt out you have to give them something good, you have to make it strategically beneficial to them. Last year the 12 was a good concour score. This year, the 12 was an effective 0, and we didn't know that until after the final results came out.