Has this come up here yet?

Forgive me if this has already been discussed, I saw this on the LeMons mailing list:

http://www.sdgrandchallenge.com/

It's basically the 1/4 mile, autocross, and car show formula except the budget is $1000. There's a whole bunch of minor differences, like tires aren't in the budget but are limited in treadwear, fluids and such aren't counted, and there doesn't appear to be any safety exemptions or recoup/trading allowed. Oh yeah, and the car has to be inspected as-purchased before modifications, that was a weird one too.

I'm still anxious to hear if/when the $2009 is officially coming out west. I'm building for it, thank goodness I don't need to bring my car to Gainesville to get inspected before modifications start.

Bryce

Nobody? Weird...maybe I should have put a better title on the thread to catch more attention, but I figured the guys who are creating it probably hang out here.

Bryce

so it's a series of events put on by these people, rather than just a single event? or is it that you submit results from a series of events put on by someone else? i was a little unclear but too lazy to go read it again.

either way, it's a cool concept. i like that sponsored or donated stuff doesn't hurt the budget, but there's a $3k claim rule.

AngryCorvair wrote: so it's a series of events put on by these people, rather than just a single event? or is it that you submit results from a series of events put on by someone else? i was a little unclear but too lazy to go read it again. either way, it's a cool concept. i like that sponsored or donated stuff doesn't hurt the budget, but there's a $3k claim rule.

Sponsored/donated stuff gets FMV from the way I interpreted the rules, but tires are excluded altogether. It sounds like you submit results from a series of events so you can go to as many/few events as you want, but that makes autocrosses tough to compare IMO. It does, however, allow for cars that do better in the wet/dry more chances to shine I suppose and gives you a chance to redeem yourself if you had a catastrophic failure (without waiting a year). I thought the claim rule was a reasonable amount of dollars, but thought that would make the pre-build inspection unnecessary (since if you were cheating badly somebody would just buy your car). It's also odd that you have to have two drivers....I'm guessing that's to prevent a ringer of a driver that can put any car through cones fast?

Bryce

I must say, I didn't expect that this would become the GRM $2009 - West Coast edition. I'm going to go cry for a while. For those who haven't seen the news yet:

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/grand-challenge/

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/events/2009-challenge/

Lame!

Bryce

Well, this is useless. I can't go to San Diego 7 times next year. NorCal, maybe, but not deep SoCal, no matter how nice it is there. To be honest, I kind of feel like I've been slapped in the face, I guess I shouldn't have gotten my hopes up.

Stefan

Three SCCA Autocross races shall be run during the Grand Challenge Season. These time trial races are held at Qualcomm stadium, and require a car to negotiate a tight, technical course laid out with hazard cones in a large parking lot. Each driver shall have approximately three timed runs in which to score their best time, with the fastest adjusted time counted for each driver.

Guess I'll still wait till the actual Challenge time works for me. Would cost more to compete in this then going to Florida and back once.

fiat22turbo wrote: Well, this is useless. I can't go to San Diego 7 times next year. NorCal, maybe, but not deep SoCal, no matter how nice it is there. To be honest, I kind of feel like I've been slapped in the face, I guess I shouldn't have gotten my hopes up. Stefan

That's pretty much the feeling I had. Travel all the way down for a car show, then another time for drag racing and autocrossing. Rinse and repeat if you want to compete with the locals who will be running multiple events. If you do well, you have to travel down for the trophies or just let one show up in the mail months later. That's 1000 miles from here, to travel down just twice will cost about the same as travelling to Florida once (that is to say, LOTS).

Bryce

Nashco wrote: Sponsored/donated stuff gets FMV from the way I interpreted the rules, but tires are excluded altogether. It sounds like you submit results from a series of events so you can go to as many/few events as you want, but that makes autocrosses tough to compare IMO. It does, however, allow for cars that do better in the wet/dry more chances to shine I suppose and gives you a chance to redeem yourself if you had a catastrophic failure (without waiting a year). I thought the claim rule was a reasonable amount of dollars, but thought that would make the pre-build inspection unnecessary (since if you were cheating badly somebody would just buy your car). It's also odd that you have to have two drivers....I'm guessing that's to prevent a ringer of a driver that can put any car through cones fast? Bryce

David here, Competition Director for the GRM Grand Challenge. Just a few answers for you:

Tires are indeed "free," but you are limited to DOT legal tires with a treadwear rating of 200 or more. The autocross races are specific, individual events run in San Diego, and the finishes are based upon the top Grand Challenge times on each day. On the claiming rule, I loved it, but in order to open up participation we had to let it go. I cried.

The two-plus driver idea was to force teamwork (a ringer is still going to score you top points), and to effectively reduce the overall cost of competition even more. Additionally, adding more drivers makes each competition day more exciting than just waiting for your three-five runs.

David:

Any chance you could stage some of the events a bit more north to help some other folks participate?

SVreX wrote: David: Any chance you could stage some of the events a bit more north to help some other folks participate?

Rather than give you a glossed-over answer, I'll give you the real deal here. The local series and resulting local exposure results in attracting local marketing partners to help foot the production bill. Those San Diego marketing partners experience very little ROI on an event outside of their customer base. You can probably see where this is going...

That's straight- I appreciate that.

But if one of each of the race events was held in a more northern location, wouldn't that give you the opportunity to involve more local sponsors from a different locale?

Nashco wrote: I'm building for it, thank goodness I don't need to bring my car to Gainesville to get inspected before modifications start. Bryce

Well now that would be silly, wouldn't it? :)

We have just under a dozen teams so far in various stages of registration, and none of them have required a physical inspection. Rule 4.4 is pretty clear regarding the documentation required for initial approval, and it is not too hard to wrap your head around:

1) Take pics that show why this thing was less than $1000.

2) We're gonna assume it's stock since you got it for chump change.

3) If it wasn't stock, send pics of what isn't stock

4) If it's a 9 second car with a dented fender and you are going to claim "it just came that way when we bought it for $600, " you best ask us to agree with you before you put in 250 hours of labor on something that is going to be rejected by the judges.

While the verification rule may be fun for you to laugh at, it protects both the team in question and the other competitors. Getting the thumbs up at the project start helps ensure you and the judges are on the same page re/valuation. It protects everyone else by preventing a rash of "those coilovers came with the car" stories on race day.

In today's digital age, nothing we've seen yet has required a visit.

I'm thinking you never looked closely at the sub $1000 work of a particular clown we all know and love.

David_Chong wrote:

Nashco wrote: I'm building for it, thank goodness I don't need to bring my car to Gainesville to get inspected before modifications start. Bryce

Well now that would be silly, wouldn't it? :) We have just under a dozen teams so far in various stages of registration, and none of them have required a physical inspection. Rule 4.4 is pretty clear regarding the documentation required for initial approval, and it is not too hard to wrap your head around: 1) Take pics that show why this thing was less than $1000. 2) We're gonna assume it's stock since you got it for chump change. 3) If it wasn't stock, send pics of what isn't stock 4) If it's a 9 second car with a dented fender and you are going to claim "it just came that way when we bought it for $600, " you best ask us to agree with you before you put in 250 hours of labor on something that is going to be rejected by the judges. While the verification rule may be fun for you to laugh at, it protects both the team in question and the other competitors. Getting the thumbs up at the project start helps ensure you and the judges are on the same page re/valuation. It protects everyone else by preventing a rash of "those coilovers came with the car" stories on race day. In today's digital age, nothing we've seen yet has required a visit.

You guys have been massaging your rules since I first saw them. There has been little documentation on what changed, but it has come up on your forum several times. I don't know what you mean about laughing at the verification rule, I will say that the verification rule isn't really very funny at all. If only there was a clown around here who could do something funny.

Bryce

Nashco wrote: You guys have been massaging your rules since I first saw them. There has been little documentation on what changed, but it has come up on your forum several times.

Indeed we have. I think it is folly for a person or organization to think, "I wrote it, it's perfect, get on board or get lost." As new ideas come along, new partners are added that offer new opportunities to competitors in this inaugural season, and new revelations (especially legal ones) allow us to be more permissive and more inclusive, the rules have been altered slightly as we've progressed. None have fundamentally altered the spirit or nature of the event.

The only part where you're wrong here is claiming that there is little documentation. Perhaps you're confusing the public ranting of one of our competitors who is challenged in the reading comprehension department with factual statements (the competitor in question, by the way, has since rescinded his protest and apologized). Gosh, public rants and reading comprehension issues... I guess it happens everywhere!

I don't know what you mean about laughing at the verification rule, I will say that the verification rule isn't really very funny at all.

You don't know what I mean? Spelled out for you: when you said, "thank goodness I don't need to bring my car to Gainesville to get inspected," and then you slapped a smiley on it, that was a sarcastic jab at the verification rules (which you misinterpreted). I agree with you, it was a poor attempt at humor and I didn't laugh, either.

Okay, pissing match mode off. I don't generally respond directly to inflammatory posts but since these comments are the first exposure some people have had to the series, I didn't want our series to be so poorly portrayed. Thanks for your interest in the Grand Challenge.

Peace, David

SVreX wrote: I'm thinking you never looked closely at the sub $1000 work of a particular clown we all know and love.

Hey, we aren't supposed to bring up clown love on a fambly oriented website.

Seriously, what ever happens in Gainesville (between SVreX and the Clown), stays in Gainesville.

The multiple event idea is interesting, but it pretty much guarantees that the participants will only be very local.

aircooled wrote: The multiple event idea is interesting, but it pretty much guarantees that the participants will only be very local.

exactly...maybe well just have to put on a $2009 event ourselves....