Jump to content
hotchkis23

Swap Calculator is Live!

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Jer said:

I think we need to use the correct weights for all the cars, not just single out the MR2.  Nothing was presented to the Board on that.  Now I understand that it could have been changed, a lot of stuff was changed.  But my understanding is we (Mike) tabled more changes until 2020.  As I noted, there are a number of marquees that need changes.  That means perhaps the M50 swap could be a lap in 2020.  The MR2 will get likely (if reports are true) a weight reduction.  It's going to be time consuming to go through it all, and I don't have that kind of time, but I will start with the hot spots and take it to the Board later in the year.  Work is still crushing me and will for another 4-6 weeks.  sorry.

It's a problem right now because people who are building or about to build a car are depending on the swap calculator and formula, etc. to be accurate for the next few years. 

 

Get the swap weight list re-posted and you'll have lots of help in finding the errors. Like this:

Heaviest MR2 NA Edmunds curb weight of 2657 lbs = 2392 lbs swap weight and 200 VPi

Heaviest MR2 FI Edmunds curb weight of 2888 lbs = 2599 lbs swap weight and 400 VPi

https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mr2/1995/features-specs/

 

Not 2504 lbs swap weight for both.

 

Stop working so hard! Let us help! :)

 

Edited by mender
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, mender said:

It's a problem right now because people who are building or about to build a car are depending on the swap calculator and formula, etc. to be accurate for the next few years. 

 

Get the swap weight list re-posted and you'll have lots of help in finding the errors. Like this:

Heaviest MR2 NA Edmunds curb weight of 2657 lbs = 2392 lbs swap weight and 200 VPi

Heaviest MR2 FI Edmunds curb weight of 2888 lbs = 2599 lbs swap weight and 400 VPi

 

Not 2504 lbs swap weight for both.

 

Stop working so hard! Let us help! :)

Is there an easy way to navigate the edmunds website for car specs? Perhaps I'm using the wrong "section" of the website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, enginerd said:

Is there an easy way to navigate the edmunds website for car specs? Perhaps I'm using the wrong "section" of the website.

 

Select "Car Reviews" at the top of the page

Enter the Make/Model/Year you want in the drop down boxes

Find the link part way down the page that says "See all Used 1991 Toyota MR2 features & specs"

 

The URL format is at least somewhat user friendly if you want to jump around without going back to the beginning

https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mr2/1991/features-specs/

 

 

 

Edited by ABR-Glen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ABR-Glen said:

Select "Car Reviews" at the top of the page

Enter the Make/Model/Year you want in the drop down boxes

Find the link part way down the page that says "See all Used 1991 Toyota MR2 features & specs"

 

The URL format is at least somewhat user friendly if you want to jump around without going back to the beginning

https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mr2/1991/features-specs/

Ok, I got that far... kinda clunky but workable. Where I got stuck was finding specs for a 1988 BMW 325i. If you can show me that... I'll buy you a beer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, enginerd said:

Ok, I got that far... kinda clunky but workable. Where I got stuck was finding specs for a 1988 BMW 325i. If you can show me that... I'll buy you a beer.

Edmunds data only goes back to 1990 for BMW 3-series

https://www.edmunds.com/bmw/3-series/1990/features-specs/

 

data for 1991 3-series at least includes the 318 

https://www.edmunds.com/bmw/3-series/1991/features-specs/

 

EDIT: I don't see data before 1990 for any car after trying a few popular choices. 

Edited by ABR-Glen
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mender said:

It's a problem right now because people who are building or about to build a car are depending on the swap calculator and formula, etc. to be accurate for the next few years. 

 

Ditto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, ABR-Glen said:

Edmunds data only goes back to 1990 for BMW 3-series

https://www.edmunds.com/bmw/3-series/1990/features-specs/

 

data for 1991 3-series at least includes the 318 

https://www.edmunds.com/bmw/3-series/1991/features-specs/

 

EDIT: I don't see data before 1990 for any car after trying a few popular choices. 

This works:

https://www.automobile-catalog.com/model/bmw/3-series_e30.html

 

I've found that automobile-catalog is great for euro cars but horrible for a Fiero. They claim that there is only one configuration for 1988 despite base, SE, GT and Formula models with 4 and 6 cylinder engines and manual and automatic transmissions. :rolleyes:

Edited by mender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jer said:

The only thing I know about the VPI increase on the MR2 is that it was never supposed to be increased in the first place.  That was an error on Bill's part, then he also jumped the gun and posted it.  I don't want to debate the merits of the base MR2, the best thing that can be done to it is fix the weight in the swap formula, assuming it's way too high.  In that way the car doesn't unfairly get an increase at the base level, but does get one in swapped MR2s where the problem arises.  

 

As for performance, yes it does put down some fast laps, but certainly not much if any faster than many other strong cars (SC300, e30s, 204s etc) but it also is hamstrung by a smaller gas tank.  It's not just fastest lap, it's the cars ability to win races.  As for me, I do not want an unfair situation even though I do occasionally drive Troy's car.  I've never driven the other fast MR2s.  I accepted an increase in my swapped Miata without complaint, and would do so for the MR2 as well.  I think if the MR2 was winning lots of races, Mike would have put more of an emphasis on it like some of you do.  But sticking to the facts, Biohazard did not win a race last year, and the Ludicrous Speed did finally win it's first race at Road America in October.   So please put down the pitchforks for a few minutes.  If you want to worry about something, worry about some of the teams in the south.  There are cars that are already winning and will win more and more as they lose weight and improve the cars. 

 

Trust me, we've all told Troy to put his hard work into something easier to drive with a bigger gas tank.  But these MR2 guys are stuck to the stupid cars like glue and so they live on.  

It seems to me that this is a really easy fix, that does not need to take yet another year to complete.   Its been pointed out time after time that its not correct.  I personally put together a fair amount of data and sent to the top about how the swapped MR2 is being allowed a much higher power to weight ratio at much lower point value than any other top common car swapped or not.  This was over a year ago.  I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that did this sort of thing.   

 

Its interesting to me how the idea of waiting for the platform to win a bunch of races in a single  year is being used for an excuse to leave the MR2 alone, but has not been used in other cases.  The Thunderbird comes to mind.   To me, a sensible adjustment was made there, as it came to light that it could very well be a dominate car with too low of a point value.  In the case of the MR2,  we have a proven winner, a proven track record setter, and a platform that has been talked about being under valued for years and still no adjustment.   I certainly don't want to eliminate the platform, I just want it on fair ground and working from the same philosophy as the rest of the field.

 

It only takes a couple key strokes to fix it.   Its not a hard issue, the numbers have been provided by various members numerous times.  It only affects a couple teams.  A change would make many teams feel like there is a sense of fairness and consistency.   

 

It should not take another year to fix. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, according to Mike and the TAC, the first source and primary source is https://www.automobile-catalog.com/   If it is not there, then Edmunds.com is second.  

 

That's great on getting the correct weights, perhaps we can start a table and note the source and model and start going down the list.  We can have the table be a living and breathing copy down and get it more complete over the next few months.  Then I take that table to the TAC for blessing, and then to the Board.  If we get it done by June, we can give all affected teams 6 months notice so they can plan ahead.  JDC, I think I saw the start of the table that you did.  I want that, only use the sources above.  Let's get it rolling.  

 

One more possibility is to create a VPI section for commonly swapped cars.  In that manner we COULD set value wherever we want on common swaps, like M50 e30, Ecotec 2.4 Miata, whatever the commonly swapped MR2 platform is, as examples.  I don't know if that will grow legs or not but it has been brought up.  

 

Changing the value on any swap through a weight reduction will affect all the teams that have done that swap.  To say it's going to impact teams building cars is accurate.  It also is going to affect teams that have already built cars.  So do we want it right for everyone, or is it okay to cherry pick and single out one marquee?  I think we all know the answer to that question.  Changing the weight mid-year is the same to swapped teams as changing the VPI mid-year to stock teams.  We are not doing it, like it or not.  We can announce the changes and give teams time to prepare and react.  I was not happy to find my car suddenly had more points attached to it than a month ago.  I understood it and agreed, but notice would have been better.   I don't think that is how we should do business as an organization; we should give notice..  

Edited by Jer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jer said:

create a VPI section for commonly swapped cars.  In that manner we COULD set value wherever we want on common swaps, like M50 e30, Ecotec 2.4 Miata, whatever the commonly swapped MR2 platform is, as examples.  I don't know if that will grow legs or not but it has been brought up.  

This angle is something that needs legs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Jer said:

Changing the value on any swap through a weight reduction will affect all the teams that have done that swap.  To say it's going to impact teams building cars is accurate.  It also is going to affect teams that have already built cars.  So do we want it right for everyone, or is it okay to cherry pick and single out one marquee?  I think we all know the answer to that question.  

Except that the MR2 has been on the radar for quite a while and the present weights are incorrect according to Champcar's rules. Champcar is the one that is singling out one car for special treatment and causing the problem themselves. There have been lots of changes made to other cars on the list, so leaving out the MR2 is the issue and one that has been brought up many times in the past.

 

Champcar should do it right, which means abiding by their own rules whether it's convenient at the moment or not. "All" the MR2 teams that will be affected (2? 3?) have known about this issue a long time, so that's not a reasonable excuse to drag this out further.

 

I absolutely cannot understand all the opposition to getting this done.

Edited by mender
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mender, no weights have been changed on any marquee in the last year or close to it.  It's been pointed out that many cars have the incorrect weights.  We will address the list as a group.  Help me make the list.  Maybe the TAC can make the list.  I would suggest that the inconsistencies be reported to all the Board so we can get them fixed.  The Board was not presented with any weight changes ever, to date.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jer said:

Mender, no weights have been changed on any marquee in the last year or close to it.  It's been pointed out that many cars have the incorrect weights.  We will address the list as a group.  Help me make the list.  Maybe the TAC can make the list.  I would suggest that the inconsistencies be reported to all the Board so we can get them fixed.  The Board was not presented with any weight changes ever, to date.  

 

Who presented the weights for the E30 change?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, shutupracing said:

 

Who presented the weights for the E30 change?

No idea, but remember, staff has the ability to make changes without a proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jer said:

Guys, according to Mike and the TAC, the first source and primary source is https://www.automobile-catalog.com/   If it is not there, then Edmunds.com is second.  

 

That's great on getting the correct weights, perhaps we can start a table and note the source and model and start going down the list.  We can have the table be a living and breathing copy down and get it more complete over the next few months.  Then I take that table to the TAC for blessing, and then to the Board.  If we get it done by June, we can give all affected teams 6 months notice so they can plan ahead.  JDC, I think I saw the start of the table that you did.  I want that, only use the sources above.  Let's get it rolling.  

 

One more possibility is to create a VPI section for commonly swapped cars.  In that manner we COULD set value wherever we want on common swaps, like M50 e30, Ecotec 2.4 Miata, whatever the commonly swapped MR2 platform is, as examples.  I don't know if that will grow legs or not but it has been brought up.  

 

Changing the value on any swap through a weight reduction will affect all the teams that have done that swap.  To say it's going to impact teams building cars is accurate.  It also is going to affect teams that have already built cars.  So do we want it right for everyone, or is it okay to cherry pick and single out one marquee?  I think we all know the answer to that question.  Changing the weight mid-year is the same to swapped teams as changing the VPI mid-year to stock teams.  We are not doing it, like it or not.  We can announce the changes and give teams time to prepare and react.  I was not happy to find my car suddenly had more points attached to it than a month ago.  I understood it and agreed, but notice would have been better.   I don't think that is how we should do business as an organization; we should give notice..  

 

Two 944 teams were given all of three weeks notice of their change in swap numbers before the Atlanta race.  Actually we weren't given any notice, if it weren't for a member posting that they had changed I never would have known. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Jer said:

Mender, no weights have been changed on any marquee in the last year or close to it.  It's been pointed out that many cars have the incorrect weights.  We will address the list as a group.  Help me make the list.  Maybe the TAC can make the list.  I would suggest that the inconsistencies be reported to all the Board so we can get them fixed.  The Board was not presented with any weight changes ever, to date.  

 

What weights are being used for making it though?  Heaviest weight? Lightest?  Average?  2 door/4 door/convertable?  Winter package?  I agree that a proper list should be made, but it's all a waste if we don't fix which wait the calculator uses in the formula.  Right now it's heaviest weight, but that is about as far apossible from the ideal scenario, and makes less than 0 sense.  I think most of us, including you, can probably understand why it's a major flaw in the swap math.

 

How many cars are raced with power windows?  Power folding tops?  9 speaker Harmon Kardon sound systems?  Heated, electric massaging seats?

 

Heaviest weight gives an allowance to cars with heavy option packages, and luxury items, but penalizes lightweight economy platforms.  I've submitted a petition saying as much, and I encourage others to do the same.  Lightest weight for model raced only makes sense, and the weight list should be built around that.  But until the petition gets go/nogo.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, shutupracing said:

 

Who presented the weights for the E30 change?

This is what started us getting visibility in the first place.  If you remember the swap, you should also remember the fall out and now you are just piling on.  Try to add value please.  

44 minutes ago, Ronh911 said:

 

Two 944 teams were given all of three weeks notice of their change in swap numbers before the Atlanta race.  Actually we weren't given any notice, if it weren't for a member posting that they had changed I never would have known. 

Yeah well I got the same treatment in the Miata.  It's not good, and more wrongs do not make a right.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jer said:

This is what started us getting visibility in the first place.  If you remember the swap, you should also remember the fall out and now you are just piling on.  Try to add value please.  

It was just an honest question, calm down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SonsOfIrony said:

 

What weights are being used for making it though?  Heaviest weight? Lightest?  Average?  2 door/4 door/convertable?  Winter package?  I agree that a proper list should be made, but it's all a waste if we don't fix which wait the calculator uses in the formula.  Right now it's heaviest weight, but that is about as far apossible from the ideal scenario, and makes less than 0 sense.  I think most of us, including you, can probably understand why it's a major flaw in the swap math.

 

How many cars are raced with power windows?  Power folding tops?  9 speaker Harmon Kardon sound systems?  Heated, electric massaging seats?

 

Heaviest weight gives an allowance to cars with heavy option packages, and luxury items, but penalizes lightweight economy platforms.  I've submitted a petition saying as much, and I encourage others to do the same.  Lightest weight for model raced only makes sense, and the weight list should be built around that.  But until the petition gets go/nogo.

Great questions.  I would suggest using the heaviest weight, which then gets a reduction.  Why?  Because in that manner we piss off the fewest teams and still apply consistent rules.  Many people have built cars to the rules as presented to them.  I do not want to alienate them as a Board member that is looking out for the overall health of the organization.  This will be the discussion in a Board meeting, not the feelings on stock car owners who want an advantage.  Trying to think of the big picture.  Maybe my fellow Board members don't agree, this is my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I need to step away from this conversation.  Carry on without me for a while. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still dont understand why the emphasis (Time, attention, etc) is so focused on the weight.

 

The weight doesnt matter if the racing is close.  

 

If you want the tunaslapper swap A banned, just say it? 

If you decrease the swap weight on any car, thats exactly what you are effectively doing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jer said:

Great questions.  I would suggest using the heaviest weight, which then gets a reduction.  Why?  Because in that manner we piss off the fewest teams and still apply consistent rules.  Many people have built cars to the rules as presented to them.  I do not want to alienate them as a Board member that is looking out for the overall health of the organization.  This will be the discussion in a Board meeting, not the feelings on stock car owners who want an advantage.  Trying to think of the big picture.  Maybe my fellow Board members don't agree, this is my opinion.

It is very unlikely that the heaviest trim is actually being raced (how many are running convertible AWD cars?).

 

Many of the weight changes between trims come from things like air bags / leather seats / infotainment options / sunroofs / extra doors / etc. and once a car is properly stripped to race it will weigh about the same regardless of starting trim. (Except of course for big things like AWD and such)

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Huggy said:

I still dont understand why the emphasis (Time, attention, etc) is so focused on the weight.

 

The weight doesnt matter if the racing is close.  

 

If you want the tunaslapper swap A banned, just say it? 

If you decrease the swap weight on any car, thats exactly what you are effectively doing.  

 

1 lap penalty does not a banned car make.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Huggy.  The weight numbers are loosely based on curb weight as sold from the dealer (in some trim package that might or might not have ever existed).  Power is based on advertised flywheel HP.  Both of these values are not real values for almost any car racing in Champcar.  So just adjust one of them (or MPV) as needed by marque to keep competition close. 

 

The good new is that no matter what TAC/BOD does, we are going to complain about it (which is the right thing to do, BTW).  After all it's cold outside and cold in my unheated garage.

Edited by zack_280
Added MPV reference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SonsOfIrony said:

 

1 lap penalty does not a banned car make.

Good, you don't mind starting 1 lap down from now on?  Great, thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×