gumby (Forum Supporter) said:SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:It's not a fine line if Tom has already ruled on it.
The fine line I am indicating is not what Tom said, or FMV trades. The fine line is between what the rules currently allow and "don't be a dick."
Plenty of people have proven to have no compass when it comes to that rule 
Catch22 - welcome back. I think i recall your screen name from way back
Here's a question - has one competitor's abuse of FMV or self-trade significantly changed the outcome yet?
If not, I think I'm going to suggest that we keep it simple (and the same) until there is a problem.
I've said on the other thread, I actually think enforcement of safety rules and sales of entire challenge cars that walk the line of 'inside deals' are higher priorities in my mind.
gumby (Forum Supporter) said:SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:It's not a fine line if Tom has already ruled on it.
The line I am indicating is not about what Tom said, or FMV trades. The fine line is between what the rules currently allow and "don't be a dick."
Gotcha. Well put.
I'll take one more attempt at clarifying the way I read the rules as currently written:
There's a loophole in the rules that I missed when writing: You could call anything a parts lot. Heck, you could technically buy a steel radiator fan at the junkyard, declare it as a parts lot, then drill the rivets out and use a single fan blade at its relative retail value in your build. My point is there's no line at which you can't call a purchase a parts lot.
So, with this interpretation, you suddenly have the ability to declare every engine purchase as a heterogeneous parts lot. Suddenly buying an engine at the junkyard isn't buying an engine, it's buying a collection of a few hundred parts. If you're willing to do the work assigning each one a relative retail value, you can indeed buy three engines, use the best parts, and declare the sum of those parts' relative retail value on your (very, very long at this point) budget sheet.
So, what happens when a competitor protests this technique? We'll crack open your build book and start picking apart your methodology for assigning relative retail value.
From the rules:
All fair market values used must be proved in your build book with supporting documentation. Ways to prove fair market value include:
Copies of corporate listings of similar items for sale.
Copies of at least three comparable listings from a peer-to-peer selling website (eBay, Facebook Marketplace, Craigslist, etc.)
A copy of a GRM message board thread where at least 5 users with more than 50 posts have agreed with a proposed fair market value for your item.
So, next question: Can you just use the junkyard's price list when calculating relative retail value? That's a grey area, but I'd submit the fact that you can't bring me a corporate listing from a junkyard for your K24. It'll just say "four-cylinder engine," which could be anything and doesn't prove what your K24 is worth. They aren't promising to sell you a K24, just a random four-cylinder. Find that junkyard's listing on car-part.com for your engine, though, and that would be a corporate listing of a similar item for sale. You'll notice the price varies based on how exploded the engines are and what they came out of.
Whew. That's complicated. Makes me tired reading it! Haha!
In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
It's remarkably hard to write a ruleset that both encourages a field that ranges from a hacked up Toyota Avalon to a V8-swapped Beetle hot rod AND requires every single zip tie to be documented.
In reply to Tom Suddard :
That is a solid subjective clarification on junkyard FMV. I well understand the balance of regulating morality, and including subjective definitions, but not ending up with a 35pg ruleset!
I also agree that major rule changes should be avoided for 2021 all things considered, but a possible path forward without completely decimating FMV in the future might be to combine a couple of the current valuation options.
Yes, this will make setting an appropriate FMV more tedious, but I doubt that would be a bad thing overall. As Robbie said too, there are bigger fish to fry at the moment. I know you are working on all of it, and it is good to see you addressing things publicly here, so thanks!
I use car-part.com or ebay sold listings for all of my FMV calculations. Find 3 of the cheapest ones and calculate the average price.
Breaking the entire engine lot down on FMV seems like a lot of work.
Would definitely be interesting since my local yard was selling truck engines for $400 each no matter the style.
Holy E36 M3! Thank you all for the input and I now feel like I opened a can of worms here! I figured I would give it a couple days and check back in?
First off I want to make it clear that I, in no way, want to "be a dick" at all! The opposite is more accurate! I wanted to do everything on this build by the rules. I wanted to be able to do the K swap within budget and verify that fact all the way thru. I was told repeatedly that a K swap plus the purchase of a car for under $2000 was not feasible. So the questions were to see if I could find ways, within the rules, to get the max out of every penny. This is why I had a number of these long winded, very specific, questions for Tom on this years build. Plus it's why I'm now asking you guys, with all the challenge experience in this group! I have great respect for you guys input and builds! I do like thinking outside the box, in general, and I'm still figuring things out.
Patrick...thank you for the welcome back!
I do have documentation and pics of everything I've pulled from the junkyards, that may end up on a challenge build. The multiple LKQ locations within a couple hours from my home all have the same pricing. All gas engines (no accessories) are priced at $280.00 + a $75.00 core. So it could be a Geo 3 cyl, Honda 4 cly, Audi 5 cyl, Dodge 6 cyl, LS V8, or Ford 10 cyl = same price. Diesel engines are listed separately, but at the same price and core amount. This is why the engines end up being purchased at the same price. Except for that 50% off sale situ! Which made me wounder about the budgetary question.
But like Patrick said...the early bird gets the premium parts worms, I am well aware!!! The really good K series engines/parts are just like the really good LS engines/parts, with a similar demand. I unexpectedly ended up with about 5 months "off" this summer and I think I've spent somewhere over 100 days in the junkyards this year. I also started to pull parts out of the yards just to sell on Ebay and FBMP to replace some of my income. This was my first K swap.
The engine that ended up in this years challenge car was engine #5 that I pulled from LKQ Daytona Florida. I kept successfully acquiring better versions of the K series engines as better options came in, since we can't control what cars get released into general population at the junkyard! So for engine #5 I arrived at LKQ Daytona at 5:45 AM, LKQ Daytona opens at 9:00AM. I was not the first one waiting at the pre spot, but I was the first one there for that engine. I arrived at 11:30 the night before LKQ Daytona opened to be the second one through the gate, first one headed to that specific car, to grab the trans that was in this years challenge car. I almost didn't get to the car first even being the second one in the gate! Runners...am I right!!! This was trans #4 that I picked from the junkyards this year.
Jebus, I wrote a book again...sorry, I'll cut it here.
Jason
gumby (Forum Supporter) said:Tom Suddard said:Yeah, I said the same parts could be swapped due to the recoup/self-trade FMV rule. Two identical parts would have the same FMV, so trading would be legal.
To clarify how I understand this, equal FMV requires that the identical parts are also in reasonably comparable condition. While I agree that swapping a busted intake from one engine to another in the yard before hauling it out to purchase is legit, buying both engines and doing so at home would not qualify.
Gumby, I often do the engine build/parts swapping in the yards, before paying, like you said.
I hadn't thought of it as a FMV question but more or a parts lot valuation and if it is an option, then would the equal values be budget nitrile?
I ended up not needing to go this route because I was able to successfully pull the better engine later this year from the junkyard and didn't need to do any of this. But I'm still curious and thought you guys might be also?
So the following is possibly a waste of storage on this forum? If so...sorry.
I was thinking more about a parts lot valuation option, if it was a option that fit the rules. To be more clear about the specifics that I was wanting to verify. I'll pick the least desirable K20 and tied for least desirable K24 engines as my examples, since these were the 2 engines that I had pulled at the time of the question.
K20A3 = $224.00 with 20% off rewards
K24A1 = $224.00 with 20% off rewards
Please correct my logic if I'm wrong or off in my line of thinking! Or tell me if it's not in the spirit of the rules? I also know there would be lots of additional bookkeeping if this is an allowable!
My maths = a parts lot breakdown of the 2 engines listed above, they both have the same number of components that make up each engine so each of those parts would receive a % of it's purchase price...correct? If so both engines have 1 intake manifold that would be valued the same for both engines, as a % of the purchase price, since both engines were purchased at the same price. Even though not the exact same part/part number, the A3 one makes more hp but less tq than the A1 and the reason for the desired swapping. But in this parts lot breakdown scenario, would they not be valued exactly the same?
Then there's the 50% off engine question, it's also a K24A1. Or is it out altogether? Would it end up having it's parts valued at half of each of the parts prices from the previous 2 engines listed above?
Or should I just stop asking about this scenario? Be honest!
Ok, I should sleep.
Jason
Jason
Stampie (FS) said:gumby (Forum Supporter) said:Tom Suddard said:Yeah, I said the same parts could be swapped due to the recoup/self-trade FMV rule. Two identical parts would have the same FMV, so trading would be legal.
To clarify how I understand this, equal FMV requires that the identical parts are also in reasonably comparable condition. While I agree that swapping a busted intake from one engine to another in the yard before hauling it out to purchase is legit, buying both engines and doing so at home would not qualify.
And to further this line of questioning, above it is implied that he's picking the best parts between the engines. Best comparison I can come up with is I grab a 73 Cadillac 472 and a 70 Cadillac 472 from the yard. I swap the 70 heads onto the 74 (edit 73 not awake yet) long block and I get a nice healthy 12:1 compression ratio. So yes I paid the same for the two engines but the parts off them aren't the same.
Stampie...That's a great example! if parts lotting an engine is allowed than your Jonny Cash Caddy engine setup would be doable? This is the quandary I'm asking about. I want to know so if it is not a thing, then I know! Then we all know!
Stampie (FS) said:In reply to Mr_Asa :
More important is form a gasket a liquid and therefore budget exempt?
I'd like to know this as well! as Robbie's question about threadlocker? Luckily for my budget, I didn't use either of these!!!
As Tom stated, there is a path to accomplishing your goal by setting RRV's for each of your engine-shaped heterogeneous parts lots.
2000challenge.com/rules said:
A part’s cost may be pro-rated by weight or quantity if from a homogeneous parts lot (example: zip ties, nuts and bolts, a box of 20 identical axle shafts, etc.), or relative retail value if it was purchased as part of a heterogeneous parts lot (all-you-can-carry sales, storage unit buyouts, garage cleanouts, etc.) Relative retail value is calculated as follows:
- Assign and prove a fair market value to every part in the lot.
- Add those fair market values together to calculate the total fair market value of the lot.
- Express the fair market value of the part you are pro-rating as a percentage of the lot’s total fair market value.
- Multiply the actual price paid for the lot by that percentage in order to determine the part’s relative retail value.
I think what threw me toward thinking about FMV self-trade was the "budget neutral" language in the original question. Your parts swaps may coincidentally be budget neutral based on assigned FMV's and resulting RRV's, but that is not why they are budget swappable. They are swappable because they are individual pieces from parts lots and the budget hit for the Frankenstein motor will be the combined total of RRV's, not the LKQ price of an engine.
Catch22 said:
My maths = a parts lot breakdown of the 2 engines listed above, they both have the same number of components that make up each engine so each of those parts would receive a % of it's purchase price...correct? If so both engines have 1 intake manifold that would be valued the same for both engines, as a % of the purchase price, since both engines were purchased at the same price. Even though not the exact same part/part number, the A3 one makes more hp but less tq than the A1 and the reason for the desired swapping. But in this parts lot breakdown scenario, would they not be valued exactly the same?
The two intakes in your example are the same % of the lot and purchase price, but have different FMV's because one is more desirable than the other. Based on the math in the rules, those two intakes will not have an equal RRV due to the differing FMV that should be assigned while breaking down the parts lot(step 1).
The parts from the 50% engine will have very different RRV's because the actual price paid for the lot was lower(step 4).
This route will be a ton of work, but the ingenuity is solid. Carry on!
In reply to Catch22 :
Honestly with the documentation requirements set above by Tom you might be better off selling the unused parts and just get a free engine through recoup. The way Tom puts it you’re going to spend more time documenting it than building it.
Here's how I see it:
One of those engines you bought for the challenge car. Maybe it was the 50% off engine.
The other two are unrelated purchases, which went directly to your personal parts stash.
Then you self-traded parts of equal FMV from your challenge engine to/from your parts stash engines.
por que no?
In reply to AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) :
Because he's already said that all 3 are related purchases. Don't get a Angry Rule made about FMV.
Honestly, mixing and matching the best bits from each version from within a family of engines to make the best one is exactly the type of thing the challenge is about.
The answer on how to do it is to assemble a K series out of the bits you WON'T be using and sell it to a normie who just needs a replacement motor for their CR-V and doesn't care about revs, camshaft crossover or intake CFM for more than your $224 and recoup it. Heck if you're able sell the "dog" motor for $448 or higher, you could open up a fun can of worms for discussion.
You'll need to log in to post.
