Forgot to mention this, but I am now accepting entries.
How do I submit?? I am new to all this sorry for bothering you.
PM the .car file to the host (@titleguy1 this round) and post screen of your car down here.
OLD MY BEER
When you say the wheelbase must be under 2.65m, is 2.65m ok or it must be 2.64m maximum?
2.65m is okay.
Quick notice that there are 2 more days until I close entries! Currently there are only 4 entries!
oh shoot, I’ll whip something up. Can’t leave my boring sedan bros alone here
Entry coming post haste!
Entires will be closing tonight! Any last-minute scragglers can get in, since I won’t be verifying entrants until tomorrow.
Edit: entries are closed. Results will be out asap! I’m unexpectedly busy so I’ll try my best.
If I did not mention you, please let me know ASAP.
I know, I know, an unexpected life issue came up - I promise results will be out by the weekend!
Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan - 13:30, 20 April 1984 - Iwashima-san requests the design sector to have a meeting in order to discuss the design of the next-generation Auriga. Kimura’s Head of Design, Daichi Hirabayashi, leads the meeting along with Associate Design Directors George Leclercq from Europe and Mariya Yamasaki representing the U.S. These are the post-discussion summaries presented to the design teams in order to curate and finalize a design for the Auriga.
Entries and their judgements, in alphabetical order.
Here are the comments that were made considering specific criteria, along with the radar charts created for each vehicle. Please note that the results may not be the same as you may expect since each category is given its own separate weight.
Cohesion - 8/10 - The car had a good visual flow from the front to the rear, although we found the horizontal slats in the front end to clash somewhat with the blockier style of the rear.
Innovation - 7/10 - For 1986, this car does take a few risks in its design that some other vehicles don’t; for example, the pop-up headlamps and seemingly aviation-inspired front end. It still remains grounded in its era, however.
Heritage - 3.5/10 - The Studio Berelli entrant had one major flaw - despite it’s sophisticated style, the design was deemed to have a strong European influence in the design. Whilst this wasn’t a bad thing by any means, we wanted to see a more pure Japanese identity, even if it meant sacrificing some of its elegance.
Era-Correctness - 10/10 - A thoroughly of-the-time design, there were no elements that were glaringly out-of-place, including the asymmetrical front and rear.
Sportiness - 5.5/10 - Although pop-up headlights and a sleek overall design contributed to an athletic style, we still found the car to err more on the elegant side rather than sporty - not necessarily a bad thing, but in this regard it scores lower on the scale.
Elegance - 8/10 - The design overall has a sumptuous aura, with large rear taillights that seem to recall large American cars. However, we found the body-colored badges to be an odd choice.
Detailing - 4.5/10 - Even though the rear design was created with lots of care and there were many elements of the design that appear to have lots of time and effort put into it, the car didn’t have some of the same visual panache that some other entrants may have had.
The Berelli entry is decent in most respects, and marks a good start to the entries. For the application, however, it isn’t perfect - everything flows rather well, but we would have liked to see a car with a more sporting nature. Yamasaki was particularly not fond of the rear bumper brake light, which spoiled some of the elegance that the car could have had.
Cohesion - 4.5/10 - Everything about the car is squared-off, so it’s difficult to mess up the alignment of the pieces. This car still has misaligned headlights that don’t seem to properly fit the body as well as a strange rear 3-quarter side vent that slopes downward and breaks the side of the body.
Innovation - 4/10 - Although the body shape is doing it no favors - an issue that plagued every other vehicle that had a similar status - the design itself didn’t seem to scream anything too ground-breaking, with squared off edges on most of surfaces.
Heritage - 8/10 - Well, the prototype certainly looks Japanese, maybe with some German or Italian influence in the rear. We still wish it were a bit more… More.
Era-Correctness - 6.5/10 - BF9’s design makes a few odd choices; specifically, the lower rear bumper has an odd trim piece that simply looks out of place. We can’t quite identify what it would be, or who would make it…
Sportiness - 9.5/10 - A low-slung design with long, horizontal trim and grille pieces, along with predominantly black trim, make this design look very sporty.
Elegance - 4.5/10 - If anything, the prototype has a short wheelbase that cheapens the overall look of the model. The lack of chrome trims and the general “aura” generated by the abundance of grilles without any real height or substance subtracts from the car’s elegance.
Detailing - 6/10 - The design did consider practical factors such as windshield wipers and window washers, and there was a deep level of complexity in the vehicle. However, because our other entries had been such completed, style-laden models, the BF9 Auto-Haus paled in comparison.
Frankly, the BF9 design was just a few years too late. In addition to a few visual oddities that broke the cohesion - for example, the rear ¾ panel vent that didn’t quite fit - the hard, square edges and overall design wasn’t polarizing or modern enough to bring the Auriga - and the Kimura company - into a new era. The design itself isn’t inherently poor, but for another car and another time, it might be better.
Cohesion - 8.5/10 - The horizontal theme permeates the car all around. From the front to the rear, one can clearly see how surfaces are all connected. Because a little adjustment in order to more tightly fit the design around the body would be preferred as well as a few of the other machines perfected the art of proportions, we couldn’t give this an even higher score.
Innovation - 8/10 - Futurism is the name of the game for this model. Projector headlights, integrated trim and grille pieces, split headlights, blacked-out A and C pillars, and an asymmetrical front end all create a very interesting car to look at and one that we believe will hold up for a while.
Heritage - 8.5/10 - Japanese DNA is clearly coursing through the veins of this car. The tall rear taillights could be mistaken for something American, and the overall body shape may be somewhat teutonic, but otherwise an extremely good effort.
Era-Correctness - 9.5/10 - This vehicle is a thoroughly contemporary design; maybe a bit too much so with some of the light choices, but these are only minor naggles.
Sportiness - 8/10 - Svelte and light, the Auriga prototype looks like a true sports saloon. The long body, asymmetrical front end, and FR proportions (that will end up clashing with the car’s FF platform) definitely give the vehicle an athletic stature.
Elegance - 8.5/10 - Despite it’s sporty appearance, the car still has a sophisticated Japanese luxury feeling to the design. As a result, the car is able to stand up to almost any other design that’s thrown at it - even luxury ones.
Detailing - 10/10 - The amount of effort to perfect this design is amazing, to say at the least. The board was left pretty speechless because of the time and work in order to curate it.
One of the most well-rounded designs here, the chic square style lends to a timeless appearance. It could do with a somewhat sportier look, and it would have been nice to see an even more wild design. However, it’s the favorite of Leclerq’s, and Hirabayashi also signed off on it. Let’s see how far it goes…
Cohesion - 10/10 - No matter which angle you look at this entrant from, it’s clear that every single choice was deliberately created in order to help the visual flow. The body line starts from the top of the headlight and ends at the top of the taillights, making the body appear more athletic in the process.
Innovation - 10/10 - This extremely unique design appears to blend the attributes of a coupe, saloon, and hatchback all into one - and it does it seamlessly. The design head-on has a low-slung silhouette, and from the sides through to the back we were treated with design elements that we have never seen before. A truly intriguing vehicle, this one.
Heritage - 8/10 - The Gotti Escuti entrant seems to be able to understand Japanese design well, with an almost robotic appearance to the Auriga. That being said, the Italian influence is still fairly strong, especially in the front end that echoes some European sports cars.
Era-Correctness - 9/10 - The design definitely suits the late-1980s, although there are a few choices that could be polarizing to look at. We may choose to postpone those design choices for later on in the car’s lifetime just to see how the initial design is received.
Sportiness - 9/10 - This design marks one of the most energetic entries we’ve received - with a rounded body style,
Elegance - 7/10 - Sacrifices were made for the car’s stunning appearance, and this includes the refined look that the other entrants had. It still has a long body, daunting stance, and clean details, but it doesn’t exude the same aura as a true luxury saloon.
Detailing - 10/10 - This design is complete from the start. Every surface, trim piece, light, badge, and whatnot are all clearly created with extreme care.
Even though the overall aesthetic can best be described as utterly unique, the amount of work put in to get it to that spot is admirable, if slightly terrifying. It might be an esoteric prototype, but Hirabayashi expressed great eagerness in order to green-light its smooth bodywork.
Cohesion - 2/10 - The rounded headlights and side trim clash considerably with the boxy style of the rear and the body. The taillights of the rear fascia seem misaligned, and overall the design simply isn’t very carefully put together.
Innovation - 2/10 - We don’t really see any new ideas being thrown around for this car, maybe bar the wheels and headlights.
Heritage - 7/10 - Well, it looks Japanese… but that’s about it. If anything, it looks much like a recreation of the previous-generation Auriga, which is not what we are looking for.
Era-Correctness - 5/10 - Although the headlights themselves are pretty modern, the rest of the car looks a bit too dated for a show-stopping futuristic saloon.
Sportiness - 5/10 - The front lip and rear spoiler adds some aggressiveness to an otherwise bland design.
Elegance - 1/10 - To put it nicely, this design doesn’t suit the demographic we’re shooting for. The design is far too basic for a midsize sedan.
Detailing - 3/10 - It’s clear that the design is more of a rudimentary study as opposed to a fully fleshed-out prototype. It lacks some of the features the other cars have, like a fuel filler cap or a front badge.
Well… This wasn’t exactly a prime contender for design, was it? It had a few issues, beginning with a general lack of detail. The rear end had some odd alignment issues, the front end was simply not that detailed and lacked panache, and overall we unfortunately aren’t prepared to send something like this to production.
Cohesion - 8.5/10 - Overall, we are very pleased with the way this prototype carries itself. Although the boxy design is put onto a more curvaceous body, the design still manages to work well, even if not everything lines up perfectly.
Innovation - 7/10 - A contemporary style is present with this car, of which is greatly appreciated. The boxiness is made in a funky, unique fashion, and
Heritage - 9/10 - It would be hard to mistake this vehicle for anything other than something Japanese, much of which has to do with a similarity to make silhouette racers in terms of overall design with short overhangs and upright fixtures.
Era-Correctness - 9/10 - A bit contemporary, but the design has most of the attributes that we are looking for in a new-generation saloon.
Sportiness - 9/10 - The overall body shape, long and low bonnet, aggressive fascias, and high rear all contribute to a sporty presence that surely would make a statement to anyone who’s considering a new Auriga.
Elegance - 6/10 - Brown might have been the colour we received the model in, but that certainly doesn’t make the Propeller-designed Auriga much more sophisticated. Even with a long body shape, the harsh edges don’t help make the design much more intuitive, and it lacks a bit of visual polish.
Detailing - 6.5/10 - Detail is present, with the alignment of objects and different materials, but otherwise it could be improved in a few spots.
In full honesty, it seems that the room doesn’t know why they are attracted to the Propeller design; it seems somewhat outdated in the details, and it isn’t the most well-polished example. However, it’s simple charm helps it gain traction, with a design that would likely look good in over a decade.
Cohesion - 8/10 - We can tell that the front and rear utilize much of the same forms, and the overall design is very consistent. There are some pieces that fit in oddly, such as the C-pillar trim and grille slats that have alternating widths, but otherwise - or, perhaps, even better - the design has a few quirks.
Innovation - 4/10 - Even with the oddities in the details, Rosker’s entrant remained a stoic-looking vehicle that wouldn’t set too many cool-alarms. Maybe in 30 years, when all Aurigas have become a bit old in the tooth, would this design somehow be cool because of weird young people.
Heritage - 3.5/10 - Rosker’s entry, when first displayed, caused Leclerq immediately to respond “oh, Sweden?” That ended up being the consensus for this car: it was an odd, Swedish-looking car. Attractive, yes, but not very Japanese with a tall front end and angled lights around the prototype.
Era-Correctness - 9/10 - The Rosker is definitely set in the right place at the right time, although some of the balance was towards the more modern side of things.
Sportiness - 3/10 - Sportiness was not the goal for this vehicle’s design, and that’s okay. It has a tall front end that is imposing, but in a way that seems to appeal to the daily businessman as opposed to the weekend driver. Certainly not a bad thing, but we would like to see a little more energy in the design.
Elegance - 8.5/10 - As for the car’s premium feel, the aura was definitely nailed in the head. The model has the previously mentioned tall front end, specially made dragon badges line the car, and many 3D forms help to give the car its European luxury saloon vibe.
Detailing - 9/10 - It doesn’t quite match the best of the best, but the nuance in Rosker’s design is appreciated. The pinstripe that runs from the head to the tail is a nice touch, albeit one that would probably not be on every single vehicle.
The Rosker-submitted entry looks a bit lazy, but not in the way one might expect: it appears to be a long-haul cruiser, designed for the highways of Europe. On the twisty mountain roads of Japan, though, we expect that another design is what’s going to be required compared to this. Even with it’s impressive detailing, the large head and taillights along with generally so-so attractiveness bring this prototype down a notch.
Cohesion - 7/10 - Around the car, we see matching grille textures and designs, as well as similarly designed front and rear fascias. The car looks to be matching from most angles, although some of the mixes of rounded and sharper elements don’t work perfectly.
Innovation - 2/10 - Even as the most interesting design on this style of body, the car remains to be disappointing at best.
Heritage - 3/10 - This design sounds and looks French, no matter how you put it. The Japanese roots are mostly lost, which is a shame.
Era-Correctness - 6.5/10 - While the prototype does look like a mid-1980s compact saloon, it unfortunately still is comparatively dated when contrasted with the other vehicles entered.
Sportiness - 8.5/10 - The bright blue hue, front lip, rear spoiler, and overall slim design gives a European-style sportiness to the car.
Elegance - 4/10 - Sadly, the car’s other main downfall was the lack of elegance. It errs more on the side of cheap French as opposed to a midsize saloon for the new generation.
Detailing - 6/10 - The detailing was a solid effort that we commend, but again it is washed out in a sea of cars where the grilles are meticulously handcrafted to perfectly fit the car’s shape. We appreciate the bulging metal for the lower grille in the front, but otherwise it still pales in comparison to some other cars. In addition, British plates on a Japanese cars is… an odd offering.
We understand that the design is from a French company and emulates French cars, but this car is very French. It doesn’t have the grace and dignity that Yamasaki claimed would be “essential” for the car to do well in America, even with its sporting pretenses, and pushing the envelope isn’t really in the purpose of the car either.
The board had their meeting. These top 3 designs were chosen to have the most influence over the final car, and were considered the most well-balanced of the group.
3rd place - Propeller (@Mikonp7) - Weighted score 79.76
The design errs on the side of odd, but it’s athletic stance and clean overall design lands the Propeller-designed Auriga in a very respectable third.
2nd place - @CorsicaUnknown - Weighted score 87.04
Impressively detailed and a simplistically elegant design, the only issues that our team had was how well the design would last throughout the years. This will for sure have a great impact on the final production Auriga.
1st place - Gotti Escuti S.p.A (@Rk38) - Weighted score 89.51
What can we say about this? Even with its Italian roots, it manages to be Japanese through and through. Crafted with love, the sleek and graceful artistry blends seamlessly with practicality. Even though some changes will have to be made, the final vehicle will definitely be reminiscent of this piece of design.
If you have any additional questions or would like advice/a more in-depth analysis of why your car landed where it is, please let me know.
4th - Conan - 68.37
5th - MG_99 - 64.24
6th - Bf94387 - 61.91
7th - MasterDoggo - 52.88
8th - Kyuu77 - 37.08