Another budget question.

That works if the mega squirt is brand new in an unopened box. Is it, or is it used?

In reply to Tom Suddard :

There is no box for either system.

They are both in opened but never powered on condition.

If the MS was actually in the box I would say that it would have a greater value and would not be a fair trade.

In reply to Crazier :

Any trades that two willing parties agree upon without coercion is by definition a fair trade. 

Ok, then listings of a new system from the manufacturer probably aren't a good FMV. I would find an open-box/used transaction. 

captdownshift (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to AAZCD (Forum Supporter) :

I'm thinking calling it the shift knob and oil cap rule. As some shift knobs and oil caps go for north of $200 for some unknown reason and yet with the right waiting hunting searching and some luck, you can score them at the junkyard for between 3 and $12. I could buy one say that I'm going to put it on my car and then decide no and trade it for something that's fair market value and get something that's worth $200 for $3. That's not within the spirit of the rules. 

My rule proposal would be if you purchase something for your build and it's never been on the vehicle during a challenge, then it's ineligible for horse trading (unless it was part of a parts lot that you purchased that is part of your challenge budget and your recouping off of selling certain things from that parts lot and some of the items from that parts lot are on the car) but basically the rule would be if something has never been on the vehicle and nothing regarding and purchase of it is on the vehicle, that it's ineligible for recoup. Intent to possibly or potentially use on the vehicle at some point in time be damned. 

 

My thought regarding intent versus actually going on and recoup is congratulations you just covered your hotel cost and or entry into the event. 

I'll disagree and give my real life example. I bought two sets of aluminum wheels in two separate transactions( $50 and $80), with receipts. Both sets were 15x7 and neither has been on my current Challenge build. One set was used on my previous entry.

I traded the $80 set for 4 steel wheels,2 drag slicks ,2 front tires and $100 cash. I traded the $50 set for a set of 5 15x10 steel wheels. 

As far as I interpret the rules I've got a $50 budget hit , a $80 budget hit and $80 in recoup, so overall a $50 hit. Your proposal would negate that because the parts weren't on the original car, although I have sold the originals to get the cost of the car down.

As long as there are real parts being purchased and traded I have no issue with the practice. If you can trade a junkyard $3 shift knob for an LS engine I would argue that IS within the spirit of the event.

In reply to DeadSkunk (Warren) :

My feel is that is just an example of you buying and selling parts, like a job. I don't think starting with a solo part never even intended for the challenge car is what the trade rule was intended for. 

In reply to MrJoshua :

There has already been a previous discussion about trading your way up to better parts/cars and the outcome of that discussion was that it's a perfectly legitimate way to get a better entry and stay under budget, the old example of starting with a paper clip and trading your way up to a Ferrari.

Edit: and I'll be rereading the rules to be sure I haven't got this screwed up........because if I do I has a problem.

You traded aluminum wheels for steel wheels with better tires. Tires are free from budget. Trading aluminum wheels for steel wheels, even if different sizes and larger steel wheels is never going to raise a flag or inquiry. 

In reply to captdownshift (Forum Supporter) :

I agree, other competitors likely wouldn't have an issue, but I'll throw out another real example. Remember Adrian's (EchoEchoEcho) Toyota Echo from a few years ago? It was received in trade for a BMX bike. The bike was never part of a Challenge car or parts purchase. It had nothing to do with anything, aside from the fact that he traded it to get a Challenge car to build. The magazine staff loved that transaction, yet it wouldn't meet your proposed rule wording " if you purchase something for your build and it's never been on the vehicle during a challenge, then it's ineligible for horse trading ". I feel that I should be able to trade anything to get the parts I need if the guy selling is willing to accept what I have to offer, even if I have to seek out and buy what he's asking for. Had the kid who traded me the wheels and slicks wanted 17" road wheels instead of the 15s I already had, I would have purchased some 17s just to trade him and put the purchase price of those 17s in my budget. If he had wanted 13 Barbie dolls, same thing.

In reply to DeadSkunk (Warren) :

Right. 
 

But the event shifts when unlimited trading of unrelated items for profit is introduced. It's just another form of cash.

If I swap a bunch of vacuum cleaners I pick up on junk day for $5000 worth of performance parts I put into my build and add to my budget, I am no longer building a car for $2000

I know it's been done. I just think it is poorly defined and can potentially push outside the spirit of the event. 

In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :

I'd let you have and use $5000 worth of performance parts if you can get them by trading $1000 worth of vacuum cleaners. It's not "unlimited trading of unrelated parts" since there is a limit on how much you can do as long as the recoup is in the rules. And there is a difference between trading those vacuums for car parts versus selling the vacuums for a profit and simply buying the parts. We can all agree to disagree on any of these rules. They are what they are and I'll play to them. I'd like to see some of them changed,too, but I'll leave that to others. I'm not comfortable with the FMV rules where it just takes 5 forum members to agree to a value , for example. We all have a friend who seems to always seems to find the golf ball he slices way right. None of the Challenge competitors wants to be that guy. We're on an honour system to some extent when building our cars.

In reply to DeadSkunk (Warren) :

I'm in complete agreement with you. It's currently in the rules, and I have no issue with the ways you have interpreted.   I'd like to see the rules modified a bit. 
 

Note: trading is not limited by recoup.  Recoup is limited to $1000. Trading is unlimited.
 

In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :

Agreed. I had misread your post about the vacuums and missed the bit about them being junk. The unlimited trading is the paper clip to Ferrari thing which would make an interesting story in the magazine and that's why we're all here.

I got turned around in this conversation by thinking about "trading" the way I always have thought about it for the challenge. Stuff traded from either the challenge car or a parts lot that exists outside of the budget. Ex: my car has a mint drivers seat but I already put in a race seat. I want a turbo. If someone will do it I can trade my mint seat for a turbo without adjusting my challenge budget at all. I spent no recoup, no budget, nothing. 

This OP's situation is basically purchasing through barter. Establish the price of the first item through the challenge rules, make the deal and exchange for the different part, and put the different part in the budget at the first item price.

This rule could be heavily exploited by trading a thousand times and eventually having thousands of dollars of parts in your car, but so far nobody has (or at least nobody has to the point of winning the challenge so it's irrelevant). 

So I changed my mind from my first post in this thread. Hopefully I thought it through clearly this time and don't change it again. 

MrJoshua said:

 Hopefully I thought it through clearly this time and don't change it again. 

Wanna bet ? I go back and forth on what I'd like the rules to be and I have to remind myself that it's not my show and it doesn't exist for my benefit. It's magazine content that I enjoy being involved in, and most importantly, it's become an annual vacation with some gearhead friends. It's just a better vacation if you bring a toy to play with the other folks.

There seems to be some confusion.

Megasquirt is not some giant upgrade from the stock unit with a stand alone harness.

Not by performance potential.

And not by price.

I only wanted to switch to it because of the odd year trans I'm forced to use. But with an adapter I am no longer forced to use that odd year trans.

If anything... The megasquirt was going to be a handicap, because all of the connectors would need to be purchased and pinned seperately.

This is not a case of finding a $3 oil cap at a junkyard and tradeing it for a $2000 LS motor for a huge performance advantage.

This is tradeing a 350 TBI motor for a 350 TPI motor because you like the compresion better.

They do the same thing, they cost the same. But they have different adavanteges and disadvantages.

And the item Im wanting to trade was not some sort of esoteric or sweetheart deal. Or dug up burried treasure.

It was a bankruptcy sale. Multiple of the same items were put up for bid at the same time on a national auction sight.

Some were sold buy it now, some sold best offer... And the one I got was won for the minimum bid at the end of the auction.

They flooded the market.... Prices went down.

2.5 years later the prices are back up.

In reply to Crazier :

If you think mega squirt isn't upgrade you don't understand how it works and don't belittle the people on this forum that know how it works and can tune it. 

Also, in your MS price comparison for FMV you show a MS3 with MS3X expansion, is that the verison that you even have? I'd really like pictures of this MS unit with the cover off for class to see. We'll be able to inform you of what you have, it's values and capabilities. 

If it's a MS3X short of a haltec there's not a whole lot more capable EM systems that you'll find under $2500. But I want to see what you're ACTUALLY working with instead of what you're projecting. 

I'll also commence talking trash, as there's enough that alreasy potentially smells like a soiled diaper. I'd consider starting to set aside protest money, but it wouldn't be worth protesting a car that won't crack the top 20. 

In reply to captdownshift (Forum Supporter) :

It isn't about if "its an upgrade"

Its about you comparing an aftermarket stand alone harness to a junkyard $3 oil cap.

And repratedly suggesting I am trying to pull some kind of "fast one."

You feel belittled? I've felt insulted all day and have managed to not say a word.

Not once have you or anyone else presented any evidence that my fair market calculation for an unboxed, unused stand alone painless wire harness for a 3800 part# wh37606025 was inaccurate at between $500 and $600.

Nor has anyone suggested any reason that my FMV calculation for an unboxed unused Megasquirt mx3  was also between $500 and $600.

Now... My idea of how to calculate FMV may be comlletely off base.

It may be that all three of the ways I suggested I would budget the parts that end up on my car (that arent the megasquirt) are wrong... That is why I'm asking.

A tbi engine can be had for $250 to $500, a TPI engine can be had for $250 to $500 an lt1 engine can be had for $250 to $500 even a 4.8 lsx engine could be had for between $250 and $500.

As long as I can show enough evidence that they all had a FMV of $250 to $500 then its a fair trade. The question of one being an upgrade over the other is not in queation.

To me... And to most, a plug and play stand alone harness is worth more than a universal harness with a bunch of features thay we don't understand and cant use.

That is why a stand alone PNP harness is 500 to 1000

A "universal" stand alone computer is 500 to 1000

And a PNP stand alone computer is 1000 to 2500

In reply to captdownshift (Forum Supporter) :

And there we have it folks.

At least his attitude is no longer veiled.

Not that it matters what this units actual capabilities are... As its no longer on the car... But there ya go.

PNP standalones don't need harnesses, it's why they're PNP.

I look forward to pictures of your actual MS unit without the cover on it. I'll venmo Tom $50 as soon as you register. 

In reply to captdownshift (Forum Supporter) :

Yeah. I think I'm done responding to you now.

Have a good day sir.

In reply to Crazier :

No one questioned your valuation because you didn't ask us to. 
 

You asked whether you were using FMV and trades appropriately. That's what we are responding to.

And you showed that you are trading items for the purpose of adding money into your budget. Several of us are not too sure about that approach, and have expressed it.  GRM gets the final call, and I'm ok with that.

Please don't suggest that the trades are not an upgrade. They are, or you wouldn't do them.

I'm being patient. I'm prepared to let Tom rule, and if he agrees with you, then I will call you a genius of horse trading.  Good for you!  
 

I will also be every bit as creative as you have been with trading if that door is kicked wide open. So, be ready! 

In reply to Crazier :

Actually, I need to correct my last statement...

One person did question your evaluation. It was Tom. He said a new manufacturer's listing was not an appropriate way to price your item, that you should use open box pricing.

Your question is a good one.  It might take a little time to get our brains around it.   Please try not to get defensive while we all come to a new understanding of this. 

In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :

No sir. Respectfully:

I provided three possible ways that I thought were within the rules.

And I asked for guidance on how to procede.

I could self trade.

I could pro rate the parts lot.

I could get a recepit from Dustin documenting that he purchased the intake and I purchased the megasquirt.

The purchases of the items in question were far apart, and documented.

The descisions made to make the trades were based... In each case, on my ability to program EFI computers, or should I say my inability.

I cannot make the computer with the painless harness control the trans I have.

Because of the need to use a 4 bolt tailshaft to match the corvette C beam and a 27 spline input shaft to match the 3800 I am stuck using a 96 Camaro transmision. It uses a non PWM lockup. And I was unable to figure out a way to make it work. You and others probably could. I cannot.

I needed an adapter or a custom converter to avoid this. Those put me over budget, and I had decided that I would coninue with the project but not participate in the challenge.

You could probably build the adapter. Or could weld the front of a 3800 converter to the rear piece of a 700r4 (its been donep and it works) and ballance it l, I however cannot.

I bought the megasquirt to resell. But found out it could run the old style transmision and I thought I had found a way back into the challenge without giving up torque converter lockup

But instaling and tuning the megasquirt was going to be a massive project (for me, maybe not for you) setting me back months and months.

When the option of getting the adapter that I wanted in the first place came up... I jumped on it!

This is, and has been about nothing but the fact that a 3800 torque converter is 27 splines, a 700r4 torgue converter will not bolt to a 3800 flywheel (the bolts are in direct interfearence with the ring gear) and the corvette tailshaft requires an older 4 bolt pattern.

I now understand that if the self trade rules were to be interpreted the way I was trying to use them, that it could effect a lot of things...

But that had nothing to do with my intent, and it was after all only one of three ways I suggested I could budget it.

There was no reason to jump on me that way.

I simply want to bolt a trans to my engine and have the lockup function work