Challenge to the 2009 Challengers

How many would submit to a buy back rule where anyone and everyone could buy your challenge car for $2009?

Sure, some folks would show up with a $500 car and demand to be paid $2009, but still I think it would separate the true low buck efforts from those who claim to be.

I will.

As long as you are ALSO willing to pay me $25 per hour ADDITIONAL for the 1500 hours or so that go into a winning Challenge car.

Your question evidences that you have not been to the Challenge. Come, and you will learn.

These are NOT $2009 cars when they are finished. Every winning car for the past several years could have EASILY been sold for SIGNIFICANTLY more than that. I know of one that sold for $9000, another that was appraised professionally for $14,000.

I am also aware of one being built this year that could easily be worth $25,000 when complete, based solely on the effort and skill level that is going into the build.

A buy back rule will only prevent the truly great build from coming in the first place.

I have a follow-up question: Would a claim rule limit the creativity, time and effort put into your Challenge car?

Absolutely.

Why would I put 1000+ hours into something that somebody could then steal from me for $2009?

To be blunt, if there is a claim rule, I will come with a checkbook, but no car. I'll drink beer, shag cones, then claim me a winning car when it is all over.

The Cheaparral 'Vette sold for $13,201.

I also would not bring my car, I have heart and soul in it, not to mention blood, sweat and tears, dollars may be low but personal value is way higher.

Why would I risk a car I want to keep?

No way I'd sell my car for $2009 at the challenge, unless of course you were paying me for labor additionally, as mentioned above. While the car may only have two grand in parts, it's got time/labor/skill into it that far exceed that value.

To David's question...of course.

Bryce

There is no way I would sell for $2009 at the challenge, ask me again in 2 or 3 years after I got some use out of it and I might consider it. Just sold the Toyota GTP car from the 2006 and 2008 challenge after auto-xing it for 2 years, for more than $2008.

I can see it both ways, which certainly doesn't help this discussion. So I'll grow a pair and pick a side.

if there was a claim rule that called out a "reasonable hourly rate for labor", then yeah i'd still put just as much effort and creativity into it. But without that labor clause, I wouldn't even think about bringing a V8 corvair, or a V8 944, or even a decent corvair-powered corvair.

So far I have sold two Challenge cars, and I'm working on selling a third.

The first one was from the $2002 challenge my '65 corvair coupe, 4-carb corvair engine, 4-speed, big bars front and rear. Sold to a local, on street wheels and tires, for $2000, so i could finance the build of my '03 and '04 car.

After a pretty successful run with the '03 / '04 car, a '66 corvair convertible with a mid-mounted 327 SBC and a real set of American Torq-Thrusts, I sold it for $3600 on eBay.

The $2008 Porsche 1299 (944 + 355 = 1299) is currently for sale. Want $4k but will probably go a little lower to get 'er done.

Come to think of it, I'd like to see a labor tracking requirement similar to the budget. I think the Nelson Family tracks their labor pretty well, perhaps Andy would like to share an outline of what it took to build the bug?

plance1 wrote: How many would submit to a buy back rule where anyone and everyone could buy your challenge car for $2009? Sure, some folks would show up with a $500 car and demand to be paid $2009, but still I think it would separate the true low buck efforts from those who claim to be.

but what it really does is identify you as someone who doesn't get it, and i know you've been on this board for long enough to have seen this subject beaten to death over the years. please leave this subject alone until you build a car and compete.

You're right, I have not been to a challenge but really now, if the car is worth as much as you say they are (and I believe you that is the reason I posted) then why not get back to basics and keep the total, real investment to $2009? I would even go $5,000.00 but that would be about it.

You're watching Top Gear too much. I even know which episode you're inspired by. That's a fun series where they buy cheap cars and race them, this rule would be better suited to something like lemons, or BABE.

AngryCorvair wrote:

but what it *really* does is identify you as someone who doesn't get it, and i know you've been on this board for long enough to have seen this subject beaten to death over the years. please leave this subject alone until you build a car and compete.

I politely disagree, to say that only people who have built a challenge car can comment is like saying no one could talk about War unless they have been in one, or a person can't discusss economics unless they have a degree in economics... And saying that you want to start tallying up the labor proves that you miss the point, in fact I get it more than you do. What can you build for $2,009?

Then you have to price labor. It's got to be more expensive to have someone of Andy's caliber scratch-building 180* headers and a common garage mechanic like myself sanding primer. So what's a fair labor rate?

No claim rule. Let the labor stand.

plance1 wrote: You're right, I have not been to a challenge but really now, if the car is worth as much as you say they are (and I believe you that is the reason I posted) then why not get back to basics and keep the total, real investment to $2009? I would even go $5,000.00 but that would be about it.

I've spent 4 years reviewing the build sheets of the cars I doubted.

The REAL investment IS $2009.

Are you suggesting we should include a labor rate for our own labor?

Andy Nelson can build a roll cage in about 3 hours. I need twice that to build the main hoop. It would take me 3 weekends to build a roll cage.

Is my roll cage worth more than his?? That's pretty laughable.

Come to the event with $2009 and somebody will sell you a car. Most of us will not.

wherethefmi wrote: You're watching Top Gear too much. I even know which episode you're inspired by. That's a fun series where they buy cheap cars and race them, this rule would be better suited to something like lemons, or BABE.

Not even BABE, many of us go to much effort to theme cars and prep them for the rally. BABE only limits the purchase price not the amount going into repairs and honestly to make the trip safely (not reliably) you will invest quite a bit of money.

As for a claimer rule, Ive never participated in the challenge but I did build a car and I sold it at a challenge price, but the time, effort and all that went into it was worth much more to me. I only let it go because I couldnt take it to the challenge and I knew the new owner would and would continue to develop the car beyond my means.

I cant imagine 1/2 the amazing builds of the last few years would have ever happened with a claimer rule in place.

Maybe a claimer class if you feel the need, to get those true cheap cars, but there wont be the ingenuity or creativity, just beaters trying to go fast.

It's a double edged sword that doesn't need to be purchased. I think it would deter people who may cheat but it would also limit creativity. I wouldn't want to put any of my time into a car if I knew that someone would want to purchase it right away, I put my free time into the car....on the other hand if you were to go trade a car in and say you put 1000 hours of labor into the car it doesn't add on any additional value...

plance1 wrote: You're right, I have not been to a challenge but really now, if the car is worth as much as you say they are (and I believe you that is the reason I posted) then why not get back to basics and keep the total, real investment to $2009? I would even go $5,000.00 but that would be about it.

since you started this discussion, i'll ask you to define a labor rate for your "real investment" scenario. here's a really easy number to consider: at $20 per hour, 100.45 hours is the max labor and that's only workable if the car and every component of it was free.

then consider that it takes about 10 hours to properly wash, clay, clean, polish, and wax a car with decent but oxidized paint, and you'll see how quickly that 100.45 hours of labor is gone before any significant improvements are made to the car.

Then find me a shop that charges $20 per hour for automotive work of any kind. Even $20 is unrealistically low if you're looking for a "real investment".

Or look at it from a different angle: i sold a car for $3600 into which i had put $2000 plus about 400 hours of labor. assume 100% payback on materials, and we can say i made $1600 for 400 hours of labor, or $4/hr. this car placed 16th out of 79 in 2004, so you can see that 400 hours of labor doesn't even get you into the top ten.

Or take my '04 car and consider the labor at a more reasonable rate, say $20 per hour. that would be $8000 in "real" (lol) labor on top of a $2000 material cost, and now it's a $10k car? No, it isn't.

Would your $5k cap be $2k for parts and $3k for labor? Or would it be $5k to use however you want, given a fixed labor rate of xx per hour? Because in my '04 case of $2k material and 400 hours labor, the labor rate would have to be $7.50 per hour for that car to fit your $5k rule.

And of course there's the question of tools. Is hacksaw labor the same as sawzall labor the same as plasma cutter labor?

The answer is, of course, that the current rules are as close to perfect as any rule set can be, and until you build and compete, you won't have a clear understanding of what it takes to build and compete.

here's a link to a GRM archive search for ["challenge" AND "rule" and "claim"]

http://archive.grassrootsmotorsports.com/board/search.php?search_id=1047676882

When you sell a street car, labor is never factored into the purchase price....why would it be in our challengers

Oh but labor IS factored in. Nice, shiney, detailed paint makes a car worth more than 6 months of mud accumulation. A detailed engine compartment is worth more than an Exxon Valdez-like oil-soaked and dripping bay. A clean, fresh smelling interior is guaranteed (by Mythbusters!) to net you more than one that reeks of dead pig or rotting cow (as proved by J. Clarkson).

I used to make quite a bit on flipping cheap car by putting time and elbow grease into them. It's not unusual to bump a $1000 car into $2000 territory with a little TLC.

P71 wrote: I used to make quite a bit on flipping cheap car by putting time and elbow grease into them. It's not unusual to bump a $1000 car into $2000 territory with a little TLC.

+1. in my experience, the difference between a $1000 car and a $2500 car is about 20 hours of cleanup and maybe some brake pads and fresh fluid. and yes, sometimes a couple cans of Great Stuff and a gallon of Bondo and $200 at Maaco.

The bottom line is $2009 doesn't make a car competitive. It's the creativity, the hours and the hard work that make a $2009 cash investment competitive in the Challenge. My car is loaded with self made crap (wait till you see what I made this year to create budget money!) that functions. Would I let all that time, creativity, and labor go for nothing just to recoup my $2009 cash investment? Not a chance.

I totally agree that a claimer rule would destroy the Challenge as the whole point is to prove that time and hard can be a substitute for money, so a person of modest means can build a competitive vehicle if they are willing and able to work hard enough.

While it will never happen, an interesting variation of the claimer rule would be if GRM reserved the right to buy any car entered for the declared budget. The point isn't to punish people for their hard work, but ensure that the exceptional vehicles will be preserved for all time.

Who here would pay to go to a museum that had on display all the significant cars from Challenge history? Imagine seeing all in one place: the MGVC, the Bat Van, the Cheaparelle, anything built by the Mongrels, the Zamboni, the V8 CRX, .... Now add a few animotronic displays reenacting some choice moments of Challenge history - not that I was there but I'm thinking of a certain team's pyrotechnic displays in the hotel parking lot, or Marge talking to the memebers of the local constabulary after said pyrotechnic displays, we can all think of Challenge moments that should be preserved.

Okay, I just spent March break with my kids at Walt Disney World so I have Epcot center / Spaceship Earth on the brain, but you get the idea. No its not going to happen, but we can all dream.

I have never been to a challenge, but I'm gonna throw my .02 in anyway.

A claimer rule could have the effect of reducing the quality of cars presented. It could also have the effect of displaying a higher level of ingenuity. It will make the choices a lot tougher, and foster a different approach to cleverness.

Elbow grease goes a very long way; so can concerted effort in a constrained system.