How were or are VPI's arrived at

[gundy]

I know that way in the past VPI's were based on an average of what teams actually paid for cars and that set values for the cars. Later $'s became points and now ? .Who picks the VPI for a new car added to the list, and how is it arrived at? There has to be some sort of formula that can be applied across the board to help equalize the starting point.

[wvumtnbkr]

I know that comparable cars are looked at and horsepower, weight, and fuel all go into a "stew" that allows a best guess.  

 

I know several people have tried to come up with a formula.  I don't think there is a set formula.

 

I believe it is discussed with input from the TAC and they make a suggestion.

 

In other words, decision by committee.  Not a bad way to do it for the initial value imho.  The people on the TAC are all knowledgeable and technical.

[enginerd]

3 hours ago, gundy said:

I know that way in the past VPI's were based on an average of what teams actually paid for cars and that set values for the cars. Later $'s became points and now ? .Who picks the VPI for a new car added to the list, and how is it arrived at? There has to be some sort of formula that can be applied across the board to help equalize the starting point.

No fixed “formula”.

No basis in vehicle prices.

The gist is that a 500 pt car is better (in an endurance race of 7 to 24 hours) than a 300, but the 300 can be made as good as the 500 pt car with intelligently applied upgrades.

Comparing two cars, better handling = higher pts. More power = higher points. More fuel = higher points (in before Mender says “show me the evidence!!”)

Tech / TAC / CEO determines VPI. 

Edited May 2, 2021 by enginerd

[mender]

19 minutes ago, enginerd said:

 More fuel = higher points (in before Mender says “show me the evidence!!”)

Show me the...

 

Dang it!

 

Champcar has a dilemma when it comes to valuing fuel for new car VPi evaluations: they don't dare acknowledge (for now!) that a gallon is worth x points. 

 

[enginerd]

17 minutes ago, mender said:

Show me the...

 

Dang it!

 

Champcar has a dilemma when it comes to valuing fuel for new car VPi evaluations: they don't dare acknowledge (for now!) that a gallon is worth x points. 

 

Can’t say that because it depends on the current capacity, current VPI, and size of the car.  

[mhr650]

Going forward with newer cars fuel capacity will become more or less of an issue depending on how you look at it. With higher fuel efficiency newer cars mostly have smaller fuel tanks, 13 gallons is becoming very common. The days of a 2300lb car with a 20+ gallon tank are in the past.

[Black Magic]

 

22 hours ago, gundy said:

Who picks the VPI for a new car added to the list, and how is it arrived

 

Via the same process Family Guy episodes are written (according to South Park). 

 

 

We get the manatees to draw balls with VPI #s written on them......

 

Edited May 3, 2021 by Black Magic

[enginerd]

26 minutes ago, Black Magic said:

Via the same process Family Guy episodes are written (according to South Park). 

 

 

We get the manatees to draw balls with VPI #s written on them......

 

This may be accurate too:

 

Edited May 3, 2021 by enginerd

[Andrew D Johnson]

1 hour ago, Black Magic said:

 

 

 

I was going to post this myself, but then thought .......I really shouldn't. Way to save the day Drew. 

[turbogrill]

3 hours ago, mhr650 said:

Going forward with newer cars fuel capacity will become more or less of an issue depending on how you look at it. With higher fuel efficiency newer cars mostly have smaller fuel tanks, 13 gallons is becoming very common. The days of a 2300lb car with a 20+ gallon tank are in the past.

 

I thought fuel was already added in the VPI? The turbo Mini is 200+ hp and 350 pts, I don't think it would be that if it would have a 17gallon tank instead of 12 gallons.

 

(Same weight as a E46 but with much more power)

 

[Andrew D Johnson]

7 minutes ago, turbogrill said:

 

I thought fuel was already added in the VPI? The turbo Mini is 200+ hp and 350 pts, I don't think it would be that if it would have a 17gallon tank instead of 12 gallons.

 

Fuel is part of the VPI, and yes the supercharged mini is valued the way it is in large part because of its VERY limited fuel capacity. 

[hcsi99]

I believe they use one of these. 

 

[Bandit]

"Hey CC. When are C5's going to be given a VPI?"

 

Magic 8 ball sez;

 

Edited May 4, 2021 by Bandit

[Ronh911]

2 hours ago, Bandit said:

"Hey CC. When are C5's going to be given a VPI?"

 

Right before or after 911 GT3's or Cayman GT4's?? lol

[Jamie]

On 5/2/2021 at 9:54 AM, gundy said:

I know that way in the past VPI's were based on an average of what teams actually paid for cars and that set values for the cars. Later $'s became points and now ? .Who picks the VPI for a new car added to the list, and how is it arrived at? There has to be some sort of formula that can be applied across the board to help equalize the starting point.

 

Lobbying, bull cookies, and forum troll mafia consulting. I used some bull cookies napkin math and laptimes with me driving a NA and NB to help get the NB Miata VPI down. Chisek openely admitted to making older american muscle v8's have a lower VPI just to get more in the series. 

 

[turbogrill]

So what cars are under/over valued?

 

I think the biggest mistake with the VPI is that they killed engine swaps for BMWs. 

And E46s seems very over valued. (I have a Miata so no bias).

 

[wvumtnbkr]

59 minutes ago, turbogrill said:

So what cars are under/over valued?

 

I think the biggest mistake with the VPI is that they killed engine swaps for BMWs. 

And E46s seems very over valued. (I have a Miata so no bias).

 

A stockish e46 won the championship in 2019.

 

E30 can swap engines and several have won races.

 

E36 cant really swap, but I know at least 1 that has won in the last year.

 

I'm not sure I see an issue with BMW values.

[Bandit]

Overvalued? Off the top of my head; All C4 Vettes. 3rd and 4th gen F bodies, 82-88 Monte Carlo's (and all other G bodies along with them)

 

The G bodies are interesting and a holdover from the previous regime. Apparently whoever, Condren I assume, did the VPI list did not know that GM changed the internal code for those cars from A body to G body for the 1982 model year. The A body became the infamous Celebrity and clones. The 1978-81 cars are commonly considered G bodies as they are in fact the same cars, although GM called them A's. Get the impression someone was just looking up body codes online and went with it versus actually knowing what they were looking at. For those that do not know and to save looking up the VPI's, a 78-81 Monte is 150 points. 1982 and up is 250. Same car other than styling. None of the G's, other than the Grand National which would be 100 points more for turbo, have engines capable of competing without serious work or a swap. Note-All 82-88 are auto only, so they are actually 275 points unless you are Ed. 

 

1981 Monte-150 points

1988 Monte-250 points

 

Undervalued? Boxsters? Dunno, but apparently they are cage and play.

Edited May 4, 2021 by Bandit

[oddcarnut]

8 hours ago, turbogrill said:

 

I thought fuel was already added in the VPI? The turbo Mini is 200+ hp and 350 pts, I don't think it would be that if it would have a 17gallon tank instead of 12 gallons.

 

(Same weight as a E46 but with much more power)

 

The Mini gets hit with a 200 point bump for the forced induction versions rather than the normal 100 additional points for the boosted version.  Quite a point hit, particularly when the Cooper S in R53 gen 1 form is actually 163-168 hp.  You only get to 200 with the full John Cooper Works package, which was a series of dealer installed option bits on the R53, not factory installed.  The Gen 2 cars are also well short of 200 hp unless fitted with the JCW stuff...IMHO, the VPI for the R53 is 100 points more than it should be...

 

[turbogrill]

1 hour ago, oddcarnut said:

The Mini gets hit with a 200 point bump for the forced induction versions rather than the normal 100 additional points for the boosted version.  Quite a point hit, particularly when the Cooper S in R53 gen 1 form is actually 163-168 hp.  You only get to 200 with the full John Cooper Works package, which was a series of dealer installed option bits on the R53, not factory installed.  The Gen 2 cars are also well short of 200 hp unless fitted with the JCW stuff...IMHO, the VPI for the R53 is 100 points more than it should be...

 

No other differences? 150pts!! Lots of room for mods?

 

 

3 hours ago, wvumtnbkr said:

A stockish e46 won the championship in 2019.

 

E30 can swap engines and several have won races.

 

E36 cant really swap, but I know at least 1 that has won in the last year.

 

I'm not sure I see an issue with BMW values.

 

Maybe not!

[TiredBirds]

The "parts points" structure is more concerning to me. As they keep dropping it makes it more expensive to compete.  If you run an old enough car starting at 150, you have a lot of room for go fast parts, and since those cars came with 20+ gallon tanks and you get 2 more with cell you could easily build a 400hp+ beast that can make a 2 hour run. The problem with all of that is cost. 

[MR2 Biohazard]

A quick history, from my perspective.

 

2009 series starts and offshoot of Lemons. $500 value car.  You found craigslist or other adds, 10 of them, and average the values. Finding 10 adds below $500 was like a full time job. When I got up in the morning I would search regions, then found searchallofcraigslist.com and would do a search there. I would search before breakfast, before lunch, after lunch, before dinner, after dinner. You needed to look multiple times to try to find them.  You brought your 10 average and then had money to spend on upgrades. CC kept a database of these. Who knows how many of the adds were fake.

 

Then comes the VPI era and $ to points and swap value. They took all the values, from different teams, and put them into the VPI database. They used judgement on most and looked at swaps and be fair. Some people complained, well they still do, but it worked.

 

Over time some things were adjusted up or down as needed. American muscle was given lower VPI to encourage the platforms and the older American cars, with solid axles, were usually not as good so no one really cared.

 

I did create a VPI calculator, in which you input 9 variables with different weights for each(hp, weight, capacity, drivetrain, age, brake type, lsd, rear end, reliability)  and it will give you a VPI. I did put that up to a bunch of cars on the VPI list and swapped cars and the values are very close and shows the VPI values are pretty good, some a little low and some too high, but overall pretty good.  I think TAC has something similar to use as needed for new vehicles.

Edited May 4, 2021 by MR2 Biohazard
remove E36 VPI base value since Enginerd corrected me

[MR2 Biohazard]

31 minutes ago, TiredBirds said:

The "parts points" structure is more concerning to me. As they keep dropping it makes it more expensive to compete.  If you run an old enough car starting at 150, you have a lot of room for go fast parts, and since those cars came with 20+ gallon tanks and you get 2 more with cell you could easily build a 400hp+ beast that can make a 2 hour run. The problem with all of that is cost. 

What car? example? Would it handle well? Would it be so heavy the extra hp only does so much? I would think limiting max hp would solve it.

[Bandit]

1 hour ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

2 hours ago, TiredBirds said:

The "parts points" structure is more concerning to me. As they keep dropping it makes it more expensive to compete.  If you run an old enough car starting at 150, you have a lot of room for go fast parts, and since those cars came with 20+ gallon tanks and you get 2 more with cell you could easily build a 400hp+ beast that can make a 2 hour run. The problem with all of that is cost. 

What car? example? Would it handle well? Would it be so heavy the extra hp only does so much? I would think limiting max hp would solve it.

A 400hp car won't make anywhere near 2 hours on 22 gallons. I've done the calcs and research.

 

Examples-Mark Donohue's Trans Am Camaro with 450hp got 3.8mpg. Less than 1 lap at RA. They pitted twice in a 2.5 to 3 hour race. (22 gallon cell)  Also, the 260hp Altima with 22 gals won't go 2 hours at Road America when run hard. Paul said as much here on the forum after the fall race. If a 260hp Altima can't make it on 22 gallons why would something with more power and weight do so?

 

A max horsepower rule only penalizes the bigger heavier cars. There is no need for one.

 

Again, looking to solve a problem that does not exist. There are zero examples of old and heavy 150pt cars made into 400+hp monsters in CC. Perhaps because it isn't such a great idea.

 

eta-And people need to quit assuming all old cars have big fuel tank. A first gen Camaro? 18 gallons. Corvette up to 1977? 18 gallons. 1970-1973 F bodies? 18 gallons. Pretty sure old Mustangs are the same. A number of which are out there running. Never seen one win so why all the concern?

 

 

Edited May 4, 2021 by Bandit

[hcsi99]

We can't comment on the post that bill made regarding the VPI update so I'll ask it here.  @Bill Strong, what were the changes to the VPI list this time around?  Could we maybe get a red copy with the changes?  Thanks!