I agree on what everyone on this thread has said. 6 weeks is plenty, if not the perfect ammount of time to do what we all have to do. If we all had 8-9 weekls, we could make a lot more complicated machines. Is this good? Not necessarily. You'll notice that in most competitions, the people who seem to do the best, ahve the simplest designs. Complexed machines only add to possible break downs and fixing between competitions.
Not only that, but I believe that 5 weeks seems to be the stress point for a lot of teams. It seems like no matter who you are, after 5 weeks, you start argueing and stressing with everyone on your team. It's innevitable. You see the same people for hours on end, sparks are gonna tend to fly (sometimes literally, gotta love dremels

).
To me, 6 weeks seems like the optimum ammount of time. It's known rookie teams feel like this is not a lot of time, but then again, they're rookies and we all get through it. As time goes on, you figure out ways to manage the 6 weeks more efficiently, and some teams might even be completed before the 6 weeks is up.
__________________
'02 SBPLI Rookie of the Year
'03 UTC Johnson & Johnson Award Winners
'03 SBPLI Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers Entrepreneurship Award Winners
'03 SBPLI Regional Winners
'04 SBPLI Xerox Creativity Award Winners