Does anyone think that teams are honest with their manufacturing costs at the cost report.

Especially when the car is completelly carbon made?

I don´t think so.

The cost reports are usually not very honest in my opinion. Our team has been painfully honest and costed everything down to the last bolt and have been penalized by this every year as our car is more expensive on paper then our vehicles with extensive carbon, titanium and so on.

But that is just my opinion.

The cost report is ridiculous. Not even that theres gotta be a lot of number fudging going on, but even some of the base prices laid down are crazy.

What is it, $.75/kg for aluminum? I got 8 feet of 2x3" 7075-T7351, ASTM rated. 58lbs..26kg. I estimate its value at $600 (it was donated). $23/kg.

I can understand buying raw materials in bulk could save money.. but a 97% savings??

I plan on being accurate with manufacturing costs this year (beyond the materials). There are some things you can legitimately tweak.. like adjusting machining run time realistically to how fast you could run in a real shop rather than a student one. But other things are just straight up expensive.

We are asking ourselve the same question (about production costs) especially when it comes to CNC times.

We have made an excel sheet that calculates CNC machining time using a decent CNC that we found on the internet. but it gives us pretty low results.

For example it should take about 2 minutes (and about 5 of jig time) to machine each 1/4" thick disc brake (with the usual hole and lines pattern) out of a 1/4" steel plate.

Taking into account that the process should represent those of a production, we estimated that the CNC program and jigging was previously made (5 min).

overall, that would take a total of 7 minutes compared to the 60 it took to our machinists to do it

Does it seem wrong to you or are we right?

How much CNC time does your disc brake take ?

Thanks

quote:

Originally posted by EDU:
Does anyone think that teams are honest with their manufacturing costs at the cost report.

Especially when the car is completelly carbon made?

I don´t think so.

It brings into question the term honesty. If honesty means "working within the rules" then by all means these teams are completely within their rights to state these costs. This is providing that they can justify everything. It is simply how you interpret the rules and of course some pretty magical book work which enable you to build the car so cheaply.

Just remember, your cost report could be the difference between you winning or losing the competition. The competition isn't only won in the dynamic events, therefore smart business minds as well as smart Engineering minds are required.

Provided everything is above board and within the rules, I don't see why there would be any reason for a bad conscience on your own part.

Thats my two cents worth!

yeah, our team is plagued with honesty as well...we choose not to cheat, although seeing the cost of the some of the cars...you know the numbers are fudged

quote:

Originally posted by Homemade WRX:
we choose not to cheat

Is it cheating though? Pretty strong words, hence why I use the term "magical bookwork"

how are you guys costing the assembly to vehicle totals? in appendix a-4 example 4 (i believe) there is an example chart of the assembly cost, but is this supposed to be one line?
does each of the 8 sub systems just include a single figure (as in hours) to represent the total cost of assembling the "end items" to the car? or does it have to be broken down further?
in the past we broke it down much more but got penalized for not doing it "their way" last year so does anyone know what "their way" is?
thanks for any advice.

john
Queen's FSAE

The process sheets will contain the detailed labor (mill slots, drill holes, etc) to build an end item - a control arm for example. The line at the end of each subsection is for assembly of the end items to the vehicle. This would just be a total in hours (or fractions of an hour) and would be cost at $35.00/hr or $0.58/min.

At least that is how I understand it...

Our goal this year was to not BS the cost report.. make it as extensive and expensive as it should be. Wound up tacking on another $6-7000 compared to previous years, but I'm very happy with it.

Like I said before though, on the whole, I feel the cost report is plagued by BS.

You realize of course since all the points are based off the cheapest car, you just cost yourself points. Why do that? You don't have to lie, but deliberately bumping up your cost seems a little silly.

The cost report teaches you that machining custom parts is much cheaper than buying off-the-shelf items. Remember that when you get a real job. Your boss will love you for it.

The cost report is BS. Instead they should have the teams turn in a complete drawing package, BOM, and manufacturing plan and base the score on whether the car could be manufactured by an outside source based soley on this information. The first two items you are already doing anyways, the third wouldn't be too tough. To hell with cost, it's a prototype.

quote:

parts is much cheaper than buying off-the-shelf items

I will fully admit that when I was around I did quite a lot of fudging on my cost report.

Oddly enough the scores weren't even close to the Top 10. Teams with carbon tubs, Ohlins, MoTeCs, BBS wheels had better scores. And we recieve no appreciable penalties ...Go figure!?!

I just didn't play the "game" well enough. Although I learnd a few more tricks and the next year's score was better...

Only 30 points is (or at least was) actual cost. So you can have a very expensive car and still finish in the top 10 in the cost report, if you ace the other stuff.

To have an cost report that reflects an honest build in almost impossible. To get points in the cost report section of the competition, you have to use black magic to get the numbers right. If a team is in the low ten thousands, then they are either not pushing their limit on engineerng, or they are are fudging their cost report. No if ands or buts about it!!!!

We won the Cost event at FS in my final year. It was an exercise in fiction.

The cost report is BS. Having said that rather than moan, find someone with dubious morals and play the game...

Ben

I viewed parts of this years preliminary cost report. I was amazed at some of the times for production but once I got it explained to me it made sense. ...In a twisted way.

It's been a while since I've looked at the rules specifically, but when I did the cost report for three years, the cost report was supposed to be of the end 'product'. One of one-hundred race cars built by a fictional company.

~Adam

The cost judging is total BS, I was shocked by the results of it. Our team finished around 70th, and we built the entire car dirt cheap cutting as many corners as possible and doing EVERYTHING in-house due to the lack of school funding and hard to find sponsorships. No CNC, no trick parts, either bought used, on sale, or made with a bridgeport, lathe, or hammer and dolly. Next year we are just going to have to play the game, honesty is not rewarded in this segment of the competition.

Remember, price is only 30 points of the cost score. So, the lowest priced car doesn't necessarily win the cost competition. The other 70 points come from the manufacturing process discussion at the event, how well you did your process descriptions, etc.