I see - so an are dry sump pan. Gotcha.
Btw, i was looking at ARE's site and came upon this. WTF - doesn't Cali have speedbumps, lol??
Anyone got an RCR SL-C race car?
- Thread starter nr41
- Start date
I see - so an are dry sump pan. Gotcha.
Btw, i was looking at ARE's site and came upon this. WTF - doesn't Cali have speedbumps, lol??
It looks likes it's carrying a load in it's diaper.
:grinf: GOOD one!
Come on now guys, I never said that it would cost someone $300k to build an SLC-R. Quite the opposite. I said I was quite sure that a nice and very potent SLC-R could be built for under $100k. I prefaced just about every statement about Bob's SLC-R with that language. All I said about a $300k build is that BOB'S effort for the 25 of TH had to have cost nearly that much and that is what someone would have to spend to have the equivalent.
I am 100% sure that a "budget" SLC or GTM race car can be built for less than $100k and will beat just about anything that might show up to a race track...especially in that price range.
BTW- Over 350 GTMs have been sold so far.
I am 100% sure that a "budget" SLC or GTM race car can be built for less than $100k and will beat just about anything that might show up to a race track...especially in that price range.
BTW- Over 350 GTMs have been sold so far.
I agree...had the engine meeting today...looking good.
GTM....And how many are being raced....:shocked2:
GTM....And how many are being raced....:shocked2:
As far as I know, there are three that have seen sanctioned events.
But you and I are both trying to change that, for both brands, aren't we?
:lipsrsealed:Hell yes....
No, that is not what you said:
In subsequent posts you then shifted from talking about a $300,000 build cost to $300,000 to run the complete racing effort. The fact remains that it would not cost $300,000 to build an SLC equivalent to that which raced at Thunder Hill.
Last edited:
Now now Mark.....no fighting....
Done.
wink....
Mr.Crash has started to come around to the dark side so lets be nice to him....for a while at least...
Mr.Crash has started to come around to the dark side so lets be nice to him....for a while at least...
Thanks for that Fran. As you probably recall, I have never had anything bad to say about the SLC except for the fact that I would have preferred that the SLC not be sold as an "all or nothing" kit.
You have done that in your offering of "stages" and I applaud you for that.
Still interested in the idea of a race SLC, but the amount of support that the GTM is getting from people WORLDWIDE is just down right amazing.
Mark. I really don't need to get into this again "over here" but if you cared to read the post "over there" where I pieced it out they way YOU were talking about, the build cost came to ~$200k. The fact is that if you want to talk just build cost, I believe that the $200k is a reasonable number, but remember that that will give you ONE tank of gas, ONE set of tires, NO spares, no way to use the air jacks, no way to interface into the onboard computers, etc. etc.
I stated that to build THAT SLC to show up for THAT race it would cost the average guy ~$300k. I stand by that number.
I have been "in the business" of high end racing for a long time, and I think I know what I am talking about. Beyond this, Fran himself agreed with the numbers, so why is it so hard for you to accept the fact that a TON of money was spent on that car? I just don't get it. That was my only point, that a LOT of money was spent on that car for that race, until you and a couple others called me and said, basically, "no way".
You can not like what things cost, you can think you will build an SLC to compete with Bob's for less than $100k, but, for all out speed, I happen to think that you are wrong about that.
Doesn't mean that an EXCELLENT SLC or GTM can't be built for that money that is VERY fast and may even beat Bob's car in an endurance race, but the fact is that speed costs money, and Bob's SLC obviously has both in it.
Oh yeah, almost forgot the other reason I moved away from the RCR products...the attitudes of some of the posters on this forum!
You have done that in your offering of "stages" and I applaud you for that.
Still interested in the idea of a race SLC, but the amount of support that the GTM is getting from people WORLDWIDE is just down right amazing.
Mark. I really don't need to get into this again "over here" but if you cared to read the post "over there" where I pieced it out they way YOU were talking about, the build cost came to ~$200k. The fact is that if you want to talk just build cost, I believe that the $200k is a reasonable number, but remember that that will give you ONE tank of gas, ONE set of tires, NO spares, no way to use the air jacks, no way to interface into the onboard computers, etc. etc.
I stated that to build THAT SLC to show up for THAT race it would cost the average guy ~$300k. I stand by that number.
I have been "in the business" of high end racing for a long time, and I think I know what I am talking about. Beyond this, Fran himself agreed with the numbers, so why is it so hard for you to accept the fact that a TON of money was spent on that car? I just don't get it. That was my only point, that a LOT of money was spent on that car for that race, until you and a couple others called me and said, basically, "no way".
You can not like what things cost, you can think you will build an SLC to compete with Bob's for less than $100k, but, for all out speed, I happen to think that you are wrong about that.
Doesn't mean that an EXCELLENT SLC or GTM can't be built for that money that is VERY fast and may even beat Bob's car in an endurance race, but the fact is that speed costs money, and Bob's SLC obviously has both in it.
Oh yeah, almost forgot the other reason I moved away from the RCR products...the attitudes of some of the posters on this forum!
Mike,
I have to agree with your explanation. All of the discussion concerning cost will boil down to "how far do you want to go" with your track build. I don't think my build will end up on the minus-side of $100K, but that's the price I want to pay for speed and track worthiness for my personal build. I'm sure I can be embarrased on the track by someone in a GTM or SL-C that costs less, to their credit.
I would be interested in more "trickle-down" information about the 25-hr SL-C's setup and the proposed SL-C Spec Racer, regardless of their costs. It's the technology, rather than price, that interests me.
I have to agree with your explanation. All of the discussion concerning cost will boil down to "how far do you want to go" with your track build. I don't think my build will end up on the minus-side of $100K, but that's the price I want to pay for speed and track worthiness for my personal build. I'm sure I can be embarrased on the track by someone in a GTM or SL-C that costs less, to their credit.
I would be interested in more "trickle-down" information about the 25-hr SL-C's setup and the proposed SL-C Spec Racer, regardless of their costs. It's the technology, rather than price, that interests me.
I love our Factory Five roadster. Such fun.
The GTM and the SLC and the Ultima get compared because there are very few cars of the style (non-replica builds).
But the philosophy in the creation are not the same, the company philosophies are not the same. Factory Five began as attempt to produce a fun car at the lowest price point. Period. The GTM continues the same idea - a "supercar" at the lowest cost. There is nothing wrong with that, and it doesn't mean you can't spend more time and effort (and money) to build a car at whatever standard you have. Or that a basic car will not be a ton of car for the money spent.
But that philosophy tends to get carried on, so that if there is a better car, it must cost more, and that's the only reason it is better. It just gets ridiculous. If an SLC is faster than a GTM, it must have more money in it. Is a GTM better than a used Porsche GT3? I don't know. I don't think it matters.
It all comes down to WHAT YOU LIKE. You can waste money for sure, but you don't get something for nothing. A well sorted ANYTHING for racing is going to cost you money and time. And not too many of us here are getting paid for our efforts. So why not drive what you like? Isn't that what it is about?
I know that our Roadster is a helluva car now, but I don't like to add up how much we have spent on it in 4 years SINCE it has been on the road.
My RCR40... I certainly don't want to add it up. I am sure I could have built a GTM for less. I KNOW I could have built an SLC for less with more performance (and already been driving). But that's not what I want. And I get to borrow the old man's on occasion
So the bottom line is buy what you like.
The GTM and the SLC and the Ultima get compared because there are very few cars of the style (non-replica builds).
But the philosophy in the creation are not the same, the company philosophies are not the same. Factory Five began as attempt to produce a fun car at the lowest price point. Period. The GTM continues the same idea - a "supercar" at the lowest cost. There is nothing wrong with that, and it doesn't mean you can't spend more time and effort (and money) to build a car at whatever standard you have. Or that a basic car will not be a ton of car for the money spent.
But that philosophy tends to get carried on, so that if there is a better car, it must cost more, and that's the only reason it is better. It just gets ridiculous. If an SLC is faster than a GTM, it must have more money in it. Is a GTM better than a used Porsche GT3? I don't know. I don't think it matters.
It all comes down to WHAT YOU LIKE. You can waste money for sure, but you don't get something for nothing. A well sorted ANYTHING for racing is going to cost you money and time. And not too many of us here are getting paid for our efforts. So why not drive what you like? Isn't that what it is about?
I know that our Roadster is a helluva car now, but I don't like to add up how much we have spent on it in 4 years SINCE it has been on the road.
My RCR40... I certainly don't want to add it up. I am sure I could have built a GTM for less. I KNOW I could have built an SLC for less with more performance (and already been driving). But that's not what I want. And I get to borrow the old man's on occasion
So the bottom line is buy what you like.
Couldn't agree with you more, JS. The GTM is flat out about "bang for the buck". While most builders get "carried away" and end up spending what a nice SLC will cost, there is no doubt in my mind that a nice GTM can be built for WAY less than an SLC.
As you said though, there is really two different philosiphies at work here. Fran is offering a truly no holds barred high performance car while trying to keep the cost "reasonable" and down, while Dave Smith is offering the best car he can come up with, performance and looks wise, at a specified price point.
Is one better than the other? All depends on what you are going to use it for, as you said.
The fact is that other than the issue of selling it as a kit, the two companies come at the product from two polar opposite positions. One is willing to sacrifice $$ to have higher performance, and the other is willing to sacrifice a little performance to save $$. With both the products trying to acheive largely the same couple of goals, it is no wonder that there will be crossover where a GTM builder is willing to spend more money.
I think that is really the greatest thing about these cars. All of them. The fact that when you are indeed driving one down the road, or freeway, or racetrack, it has become YOUR car, and not just another production car. They really aren't offered in "standard" and each one is unique and an expression of what the BUILDER wants it to be.
As you said though, there is really two different philosiphies at work here. Fran is offering a truly no holds barred high performance car while trying to keep the cost "reasonable" and down, while Dave Smith is offering the best car he can come up with, performance and looks wise, at a specified price point.
Is one better than the other? All depends on what you are going to use it for, as you said.
The fact is that other than the issue of selling it as a kit, the two companies come at the product from two polar opposite positions. One is willing to sacrifice $$ to have higher performance, and the other is willing to sacrifice a little performance to save $$. With both the products trying to acheive largely the same couple of goals, it is no wonder that there will be crossover where a GTM builder is willing to spend more money.
I think that is really the greatest thing about these cars. All of them. The fact that when you are indeed driving one down the road, or freeway, or racetrack, it has become YOUR car, and not just another production car. They really aren't offered in "standard" and each one is unique and an expression of what the BUILDER wants it to be.
I will not here debate the issue with you further, Mike, as Fran has requested. I will only respond to this:
That is simply not true. I have never once said that a ton of money was not spent on the car. What I have done is pointed out that accounting for $300,000 needing to be spent on an equivalent total racing effort does not support the claim that building an equivalent SLC would cost $300,000.
Never has a more true statement been uttered...
Q "How much have you spent racing this year?"
A "I don't know.... because if I thought about it too much, I wouldn't do it"
Short memory syndrome has it's advantages.
Q "How much have you spent racing this year?"
A "I don't know.... because if I thought about it too much, I wouldn't do it"
Short memory syndrome has it's advantages.
Well, like I said above, there are roughly 350 kits that have been sold.
How many of them have been completed?
Probably, just rough estimate here from watching the forum, 1/2 to 2/3 of them, maybe. I would think that 200 kits complete enough to be registered would not be out of the question at this point.
I doubt that many in reality...many people enjoy the journey as much or more than the destination...
