Home | Wiki | Discord | Dev Stream | YouTube | Archived Forums | Contact

Automation + BeamNG: First Impression Car Reviews


Ok you seem new to the game. I’m going to be a bit rude and butt in to save km some time here:

Around here, (just like anywhere else), phrases like “fastest car in the world” attracts attention but also immediate scrutiny from people who, you know, like fast cars like me. I took the liberty of looking at your file. There’s a few things that should be said:

  • I assume by real life records your “fastest car in the world” claim comes from the fact that the Maclaren F1 only recorded a speed of 386km/h with the rev limiter off, whereas with it on the estimated top speed was 355km/h, and wasn’t bested until the Koenigsegg CCR did it unmodified in 2002.
  • You say it was created in 1994. This is actually impossible: The chassis and trim come and 1996 but the engine comes from 2002, therefore the earliest year this car can exist by sandbox standards is 2002. The “market” tab goes by the trim but clearly you can’t put an engine from the future into a working car.
  • Your tuning could do with some work. There are actually too many problems for me to list in complete detail, but suffice to say, the statistics are quite important and as far as the game is concerned, numbers don’t lie.

A drivability of 37 actually means that the average person will find it nearly impossible to drive this car normally, let alone quickly. In terms of exporting the car to Beam, the car is guaranteed to be undrivable for other reasons.

An engine noise rating of 88dB is unlikely to be road legal.

An engine reliability rating of 41 is the kind of rating you get from a twin DCOE carbed racing engine from the 70s. Also I’ll add your stroke is far too long (causing a lot of limitations to your tuning) and your turbos are actually not doing anything. Look up some real dyno charts to see what they should be doing.

A Production Units rating of over 5200 and an Engineering Time number of over 2000 means this car would take somewhere until the end of the next century to actually go from conception to production. Forget your bogus figure of 1994, 1996 or even 2002. It’d be more like 2182. The main culprit is your use of +15 slider everywhere, particularly the “Chassis Quality”. Sometimes we do use that slider to simulate one-off or super specialised vehicles that aren’t production line but that’s a special case. Your claim earlier suggests that this was not your intention.

Hitting the “race” preset on suspension tuning is by and large a bad idea for mid-engined vehicles because they will invariably cause horrendous oversteer, which is what your graph is showing. You want that yellow line to be ultimately pointing down, not up. It doesn’t help that you’re using 305mm wide front tyres. This will actually break the car if you try to drive it in Beam, because the amount of friction will overwhelm the physics model and the wheels will shake so much they’ll probably fall off. In real life that probably wouldn’t happen, but it’d still cause awful handling problems. I’d recommend reducing that to 245 at most.

As it stands I’d be waving a big fat sign at km to not attempt to drive this because there’s no point spending several hours making a video for a car that won’t work or works badly. Look at the tutorials, do some research, and figure out exactly what it is you actually want the car to be and to do, then practice!


I wouldn’t take production and engineering time quite so literal as they never match up to what a real life car would, since they are quite unrealistic and silly and one of the reasons why Campaign pisses me off.

But I’m glad you brought this up because I’ve reviewed cars like this in the past (On paper, not in BeamNG) and they are a pain and to be honest insulting if they had no effort put into them. I’m not saying that this car didn’t have any effort put into it but you get my point.

Why should a person spend hours, potentially days, scrutinizing something if that person only spent two handful of minutes on it full well KNOWING that they could do much better? It’s personally been so bad for me that just changing small GENERAL settings that anyone can access and learn how to use in a few minutes improved the car profusely, and that is just wrong. Something like the Vienna CR is an obvious car that had some effort put into it but falls short because of the lack of knowing how to perfect it, which you need to learn before you can do such.

Sorry about the rant.


And this car is one of your first car right? you should begin with more modest cars, optimising a mass production econobox is a good way to learn how to tune a car. Imo, supercars and hypercars are really (if not the most) difficult kind of vehicle to do well.


Ok I came up with something more reasonable.

This is the 2018 QQ Egiptian, Made in Tokyo, Japan, it has a peppy 1.5 liter I4 making 135 HP

QQ - Egiptian.car (19.4 KB)


Currently yes it’s a big problem since especially in sandbox those values are taken at face value with no context of the company that built them. There are a number of mitigating factors planned like dumping more money on the project and existing engineering expertise but it seems those factors are weighted pretty lightly currently.

One thing those numbers do help is explain what the real markup is for cars with superlative performance or parts etc. It’s not like a small company making hypercars like Koenigsegg would have an easy time turning a profit making 20 cars a year given just how expensive the development process might be. I just don’t know if the game actually allows that mechanic to be realistically explored.


Ok what do you think about the QQ Egiptian.


Yes. And sorry this is on me. I need to get better about responding to people so they know they’ve been heard.

Its weird being the spotlight; this isn’t a place I’ve really been before. :stuck_out_tongue:

Thanks, buddy!

While I do appreciate a good meme, on the flip side of that coin, I also do NOT appreciate a BAD meme. Terrain Navigator XD – taking offroader to ludicrous speed and beyond when they normally aren’t even taken to light speed – GOOD meme; most of us wouldn’t usually think to do something like that. +15 quality spam hypercar – BAD meme. Because hell lets be honest: that is the first thing every single one of us did when we first got this game.

Coooooooome on! Beeeee honest! :smile:

*gives golf clap*

Yes. The whole point of reviews is to get feedback on a design, hence why I have Submission Rule 1: don’t submit if you only want praise. I saw exactly what CorsicaUnknown was attempting with the design and had it been portrayed to me differently, i.e. a luxury or muscle car, I probably would have given it a far more favorable review. But because it fell short of its target in spite of clear concerted effort, I decided to go the extra mile with my own assessments.

As I’ve had more time to think about it, I was probably pushing a little to hard with it. So don’t feel the need to go balls-to-the-wall hypercar type tuning with the suspension :joy:. By my estimates though, it feels like its sitting somewhere around the 1.3 - 1.4hz region on the spring tuning + I don’t know… about 0.35 damping coefficient? Somewhere around in the 1.6 - 2.0 hz range with 0.4 - 0.6 damping would be :ok_hand:. Also, If you increase the spring stiffness, much of the body roll problem will solve itself and then you can relax the sway bars.

And maybe a more rearward bias on the AWD :smirk:. Would help it dance around corners.

Now I am going to have to be a brutally honest. It smells insincere. Clues:

  1. @strop puts you on blast and within only a few hours you’re ready with a different submission that is not just in the spirit of but exactly the thing he suggested you do? :thinking:

  2. “Egyptian” is spelled wrong. And “QQ” is the emoticon for :cry:.

  3. There isn’t much description. Most people who have sent me something want to tell me the history of their entire lineup. So, it feels like you don’t really know what this car is besides “an econobox”.

  4. We have a saying about cars that look like that: “It looks like a three fixture wonder”. That is, you grabbed the bare minmum fixtures (usually three: a grill, headlights, and tailights) to make it look like a car and called it good. I recognize not everyone is created equal in their ability to style their cars. Some like @Deponte prefer to work with strictly technical details while letting someone else style them :wink:. But… that still looks pretty “Ehh”.

    • If you really do just suck at styling, make a note of that. Just say: “Hey I suck at styling.” And I’ll be cool with that. Of the cars I have received so far, almost everybody has given me some caveats about it. Its okay to suck and own up to it. We all started somewhere, most of the time sucking. Hell, go look at my earliest designs for Fenton Holdings Limited.

Look, I am trying to really hard to not sound elitist and unwelcoming right now. I absolutely appreciate your patronage and I want you to feel welcomed here. But to quote what a beloved modern car reviewer said for Elon Musk to hopefully and eventually here:

– Mr Regular – 2018 Tesla Model 3: Regular Car Reviews

The best way to learn something is not trial by fire but to shadow and watch and listen. If you want, I can give you a review. From what I’ve seen, its probably going to be brutal. So are you really really REALLY sure this is your best effort?


Ehh, I wouldn’t call that undriveable by a normal person. A lot of my old faithful 60s and 70s American land yacths rarely broach 40 driveabilty and they’re perfectly driveable.

But yes they are still hard to drive near the edge. And 37 is a piss poor score for the 90s. That I do agree with.


You don’t stop impressing me, km! Another fellow Regular over here :wink:


Does the KMBlaine wish to enhance himself with a Full Spec WRC car? And if so, which spec would he prefer, gravel, or Tarmac? Cause I’m willing to send you both but we both know you don’t have the time for that XD


Belated Christmas Review: Meijer-NSU Prinz F4-1000 TT-P

Thanks to @TheAlmightyTwingo

Merry Christmas! Happy New Year!

Yeah all that stuff. I had meant to get this out Christmas Eve but the time I had set aside got eaten up when I shattered my phone screen and then also at the last minute had to return and exchange a gift. Oh well! :man_shrugging:


That ending was extra satisfying, with the music and slow-motion oversteer.



This video is honestly the first where I am extremely satisfied with the final cut. The time and content quality is finally where I want it (15 minutes or so not including the bonus at the end). I backed off on the rapid fire editing and I am liking this thing where I include a little something special at the end of the video. Thinking it may become a regular thing :wink: .

It is more effort but it was honestly the best part about making the video because I could keep rewatching it and not have to relisten to the same joke for the 20th time – and yes that is sometimes not an exaggeration.


That video made me want to buy a real one…


How many pending do you have? I’m waiting for a response on the dodgy TCS issue but after that I’d like to send something in…


Check the first post.


Another issue: the Andromeda looks unfinished, to say the least, and the headlight fixtures are too futuristic for 2002, let alone 1996.


I think he stopped reading the forums.


New Review: Bridgell Supergrass 13 hp

Thanks to @Marcus_gt500 for taking things too seriously on more counts than just one :wink:; its what made what follows possible.



That was awesome. Just finished watching it, won’t spoil it for anyone else, but I was laughing most of the way through it.


And I concur. This episode was an oddball simply because lawnmower, and to be fair I wasn’t expecting much out of it. Yet it kept me on its toes from the get-go. Despite the self-imposed… shall we say, “gimmicks”, it almost ended on a semi-serious informative note.

Which was then turned into an BeamNG Vaudeville act of epic comedy proportions. A top job for sure! :joy: