"Final" swap VPI changed?

[Twist-Ease]

I have been gone since November or so...

 

Last I saw, the VPI calculator was finalized, and now that I come back I see the VPI calculator is giving wayyy higher values.  What happened?  I can't find any mention of this.

[karman1970]

 

I have been gone since November or so...

 

Last I saw, the VPI calculator was finalized, and now that I come back I see the VPI calculator is giving wayyy higher values.  What happened?  I can't find any mention of this.

Weight of your car used for the swap is now built into the calculator (and roughly 10% less than advertised curb weight).  The power to weight ratio where points begin accumulating rapidly went up from about 12:1 to 14:1 if I remember right.

[kiwiracer]

I have the same issue,  I waited until VPI was FINALIZED, I copied the results, back in early January to my notes,  I just inputted the exact same params and it's gone up.. WTF.. 

 

I was right at the limit, now +2 Laps sucks 

 

I get it, it's a new approach to swaps, but I just completed a swap and spent a lot of time making it clean, safe and really took my time to make it nice.. I would have taken a different path if I knew these rules could change during the season.   

 

 

[Twist-Ease]

 

I have the same issue,  I waited until VPI was FINALIZED, I copied the results, back in early January to my notes,  I just inputted the exact same params and it's gone up.. WTF.. 

 

I was right at the limit, now +2 Laps sucks 

 

I get it, it's a new approach to swaps, but I just completed a swap and spent a lot of time making it clean, safe and really took my time to make it nice.. I would have taken a different path if I knew these rules could change during the season.   

 

 

I don't even care any more.  With the pace of my life lately it takes far too much time to get a race car built.  It seems like a full time monitoring and adjusting to how this league changes.

 

I have known the details of the car I want to build for a long time.  I'm going to build that car, and when it's done, I am going to race it and not give a poop about how competitive it is.

Edited February 22, 2017 by Twist-Ease

[Ham Sammich]

Welcome to the "overwhelmed" club.  We gave up worrying about it as well.  If we fit, we fit.  managed to find other places we fit, that took some of the urgency out of it.

 

It is what it is.

[morganf]

 

I have the same issue,  I waited until VPI was FINALIZED, I copied the results, back in early January to my notes,  I just inputted the exact same params and it's gone up.. WTF.. 

 

I was right at the limit, now +2 Laps sucks 

 

I get it, it's a new approach to swaps, but I just completed a swap and spent a lot of time making it clean, safe and really took my time to make it nice.. I would have taken a different path if I knew these rules could change during the season.   

 

 

Be happy with two laps we went from 425 to 1100.

[FalkenIdiots]

It is a bit frustrating/exhausting trying to keep up with these (seemingly) week-to-week adjustments. This isn't IMSA or WEC with BoP and all I can see it doing is making Chumpcar cost more. Some people plan out their builds over the course of months, even years and then when things are changing within weeks, we end up with engines on an engine stand that are pointless, or piles of nice stock parts that have to be put on Craigslist. I don't even know if the swap I have been accumulating parts for 2 years ago will even be allowed in EC now because the points value is astronomical. I just want to race at this point.

[mender]

The fun part is that the VPI swap formula has a built-in bias towards BMWs and other fully loaded luxury cars, enough that my car ends up with 32 more additional points than a BMW with the same as-raced power-to-weight ratio. That's because of the assumed difference in curb weight to race weight of -10%; actuality is closer to -20% for the heavy luxury cars and as low as 0% for no-option econoboxes.

 

1987 Fiero, 196 hp, 83 points added; as-raced weight 2550 lbs.

1997 325i, 196 hp, 51 points added; as-raced weight, 2550-2600 lbs.

 

Just making sure that teams considering swaps are aware of the bias and not as surprised at the track.

 

 

[FalkenIdiots]

 

The fun part is that the VPI swap formula has a built-in bias towards BMWs and other fully loaded luxury cars, enough that my car ends up with 32 more additional points than a BMW with the same as-raced power-to-weight ratio. That's because of the assumed difference in curb weight to race weight of -10%; actuality is closer to -20% for the heavy luxury cars and as low as 0% for no-option econoboxes.

 

1987 Fiero, 196 hp, 83 points added; as-raced weight 2550 lbs.

1997 325i, 196 hp, 51 points added; as-raced weight, 2550-2600 lbs.

 

Just making sure that teams considering swaps are aware of the bias and not as surprised at the track.

 

 

It's even worse with a 914. We're already valued higher than a Fiero stock and start off with one of the most bare-bones, stripped out cars I can think of. Getting 10% off a stock would require titanium hardware.

[Ron_e]

 

It's even worse with a 914. We're already valued higher than a Fiero stock and start off with one of the most bare-bones, stripped out cars I can think of. Getting 10% off a stock would require titanium hardware.

 

If you find your car to be uncompetitive any which way you slice it, stock and various swaps, then state your case and send it in if less points will help.  It is hard to believe a 914 can't be somehow made competitive or is just too poor of a car like say the Yugo.  

[mender]

The numbers I quoted are just before the formula really starts to ramp up. Here are the numbers for the next step:

 

1997 325i, 218 hp, 82 points.

1987 Fiero, 218 hp, 308 points!

 

Yes, a 22 lap penalty just for attempting to match the PWR of a mildly swapped 325i.

[TiredBirds]

 

It's even worse with a 914. We're already valued higher than a Fiero stock and start off with one of the most bare-bones, stripped out cars I can think of. Getting 10% off a stock would require titanium hardware.

put a 70's SBC chevy in it. I saw a guy at a car show with one, looked like it belonged back there. said it was an easy swap. If you are going to swap...SWAP it BIG.

 

The numbers I quoted are just before the formula really starts to ramp up. Here are the numbers for the next step:

 

1997 325i, 218 hp, 82 points.

1987 Fiero, 218 hp, 308 points!

 

Yes, a 22 lap penalty just for attempting to match the PWR of a mildly swapped 325i.

could you just add a S/C for 100 points?

[Hi_Im_Will]

 

 

If you find your car to be uncompetitive any which way you slice it, stock and various swaps, then state your case and send it in if less points will help.  It is hard to believe a 914 can't be somehow made competitive or is just too poor of a car like say the Yugo.  

 

^^^ This.  Just because the swap weights are already in the calculator doesn't mean there aren't errors and they can't be adjusted up for small cars.  Curb minus 10% is a starting point, and was chosen to be representative for the most common cars in chump.  If you have an unusual car, like @FalkenIdiots 914 or @mender Fiero,  send an email to Phil and Mike with your evidence for why the swap weight for your car should be higher.  They'll either help you out, or explain the reasoning behind keeping your swap weight where it is.  Chump staff is here to work with you and get you on track, not screw you.

 

[mender]

 

could you just add a S/C for 100 points?

Yes; that's the way around the PWR swap formula. Pick an underpowered engine and throw some mods at it after the swap.

[mender]

 

 

^^^ This.  Just because the swap weights are already in the calculator doesn't mean there aren't errors and they can't be adjusted up for small cars.  Curb minus 10% is a starting point, and was chosen to be representative for the most common cars in chump.  If you have an unusual car, like @FalkenIdiots 914 or @mender Fiero,  send an email to Phil and Mike with your evidence for why the swap weight for your car should be higher.  They'll either help you out, or explain the reasoning behind keeping your swap weight where it is.  Chump staff is here to work with you and get you on track, not screw you.

 

Good to know, will check into that. Thanks for that sage advice!

 

Next question: can I also get some parity on fuel?

[TiredBirds]

 

Yes; that's the way around the PWR swap formula. Pick an underpowered engine and throw some mods at it after the swap.

what is wrong with the stock v6 from a GT w/ a S/C off of a 3.8 Buick? That would seem like a good upgrade. With a pulley change you'd make decent power and wouldn't get hit with the p/w thing or the swap hit. 100 point straight up boost hit....

[Hi_Im_Will]

 

Next question: can I also get some parity on fuel?

 

No!  You chose your car, you suffer the fuel range!  

 

In seriousness though, model year and platform swap conversions are in the rules now.  If it helps to claim your car is a different year from what it actually is, that's an option.  Just change over the non-body parts to match.

[thewheelerZ]

 

put a 70's SBC chevy in it. I saw a guy at a car show with one, looked like it belonged back there. said it was an easy swap. If you are going to swap...SWAP it BIG.

could you just add a S/C for 100 points?

To be fair, I think that is the swap he was thinking about!  At least I seem to recall reading a post about someone with a 914 doing something of the order and thought "holy cow, a light weight, mid engine, V8, big power, decent fuel tank car.... imagine what a top team could do with that car if it was under 500 points....".  Cool car? you bet!  500 points.... well, that needs some more thought!

[TiredBirds]

 

To be fair, I think that is the swap he was thinking about!  At least I seem to recall reading a post about someone with a 914 doing something of the order and thought "holy cow, a light weight, mid engine, V8, big power, decent fuel tank car.... imagine what a top team could do with that car if it was under 500 points....".  Cool car? you bet!  500 points.... well, that needs some more thought!

I don't know if it is true, but the guy told me the V8 was lighter than the Porsche driveline...I find that hard to believe. I'd think the car would not handle to well without some suspension modifications and those tend to drive up the points quickly.

[skierman64]

 

The fun part is that the VPI swap formula has a built-in bias towards BMWs and other fully loaded luxury cars, enough that my car ends up with 32 more additional points than a BMW with the same as-raced power-to-weight ratio. That's because of the assumed difference in curb weight to race weight of -10%; actuality is closer to -20% for the heavy luxury cars and as low as 0% for no-option econoboxes.

 

I suggested they buy scales for each region, but no. 

[FalkenIdiots]

 

To be fair, I think that is the swap he was thinking about!  At least I seem to recall reading a post about someone with a 914 doing something of the order and thought "holy cow, a light weight, mid engine, V8, big power, decent fuel tank car.... imagine what a top team could do with that car if it was under 500 points....".  Cool car? you bet!  500 points.... well, that needs some more thought!

Nope, I'll just spill the beans. A 914 is perfect for a flat-6, and it just so happens Subaru made a very Chumpy flat 6 in the early 90's SVX (mine cost me a little over $400, and under the old rules it would have been free) - 230 hp, and very reliable. Alas, this is what happens when you put it in the calculator..

 

Make: Porsche
Model: 914-4
Year: Pre-1980
MPV: 250
Car Weight: 2064
Original HP: 80
New HP: 230
Points Added to VPi: 3900
--->NEW VPI: 4150

 

Truly at this point, I'd just like to get it on track in EC. But I'm afraid the VPI alone would make the powers-that-be say "no way". I guess the bigger point is, there has got to be some kind of end in sight to changing the rules and/or we need some kind of guarantee that what is published is actually the way it's going to be. When I began planning my swap, I was told as were most of us that there was a 3 year freeze on the rules. We barely made it a year before they changed. I'm not asking anyone to shed a tear for me - but I'm simply presenting a case where changing the rules is increasing the cost of going racing with Chumpcar.

 

FYI, the SBC swap into a 914 is VERY common and it's a hoot to drive... in a straight line. But probably not the best decision for a track car. The LSx series motors are indeed within a few (30-50 lbs) of a Type 4 VW motor (what came in the 914/4 originally). But the transmission really doesn't do well with that much torque.

[thewheelerZ]

@FalkenIdiots No doubt I feel for you guys that are prepping swaps and have the rules change.  Maybe yours was the swap I was thinking about and not a V8.   For us normal people, its pretty hard to dedicate enough time to be changing with every little rule set. 

 

Id guess that the powers that be would have no issue with you coming to race in EC.  It would be pretty ripping fast at 2060 lbs with 230 hp!  But not any more than some of the other really fast stuff I wouldn't think.  I have actually been thinking about 914s too and have it on the list of cool cars to build if ours ever blows up and is unfixable.

[enginerd]

 

Truly at this point, I'd just like to get it on track in EC. But I'm afraid the VPI alone would make the powers-that-be say "no way".

You will be just fine, welcomed in EC. This is one of the problems that I highlighted with with the exponential formula when they proposed several iterations of it in the fall.. the car you describe is not going to be...(4150 - 500) / 10 = 365 laps better than the benchmark e36 325i. It's probably consistent with some of the 550-600 point cars on the list (5-10 laps better than an e36), so why is it 4150 points? Answer: the formula was only designed to return plausible point values in a range of PWR.. go beyond it and it's just sillyness. So, thankfully you did not look at your VPI and then take your business elsewhere (I was worried that VPIs in the thousands would be a deterrent to newcomers who would be right at home in EC).

 

When did you start planning your build? I think the last time anyone made the mistake of stating a 3 year rule freeze was the 2014 rulebook.. and that was scrapped a year later.

[TiredBirds]

 

Nope, I'll just spill the beans. A 914 is perfect for a flat-6, and it just so happens Subaru made a very Chumpy flat 6 in the early 90's SVX (mine cost me a little over $400, and under the old rules it would have been free) - 230 hp, and very reliable. Alas, this is what happens when you put it in the calculator..

 

Make: Porsche
Model: 914-4
Year: Pre-1980
MPV: 250
Car Weight: 2064
Original HP: 80
New HP: 230
Points Added to VPi: 3900
--->NEW VPI: 4150

 

Truly at this point, I'd just like to get it on track in EC. But I'm afraid the VPI alone would make the powers-that-be say "no way". I guess the bigger point is, there has got to be some kind of end in sight to changing the rules and/or we need some kind of guarantee that what is published is actually the way it's going to be. When I began planning my swap, I was told as were most of us that there was a 3 year freeze on the rules. We barely made it a year before they changed. I'm not asking anyone to shed a tear for me - but I'm simply presenting a case where changing the rules is increasing the cost of going racing with Chumpcar.

 

FYI, the SBC swap into a 914 is VERY common and it's a hoot to drive... in a straight line. But probably not the best decision for a track car. The LSx series motors are indeed within a few (30-50 lbs) of a Type 4 VW motor (what came in the 914/4 originally). But the transmission really doesn't do well with that much torque.

Perhaps the best way to solve this AND allow swaps is to up the total vehicle cost to $2000 and call it a day. Keep your receipts and go have fun. $ for $ no formulas, no VPI.

[enginerd]

 

Perhaps the best way to solve this AND allow swaps is to up the total vehicle cost to $2000 and call it a day. Keep your receipts and go have fun. $ for $ no formulas, no VPI.

Talk about barking up the wrong tree...