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

The Crowd Sourcing Competition [Round 19]


#449

If it’s not obvious yet entries have been closed. I’ll try to post results by tonight but no promises. :crossed_fingers:


#450

Reviews Batch 1

Manhattan, September 1979 - Rigore’s new lead designer Michael Thompson gathers a large group of exterior designers out to the Rigore office “Great Room” where all über-important meetings occur. His presentation is accompanied by lead exterior designer Joseph Hogan, and cars are given an average numerical score.

Entries are being presented in no particular order with some quoted lines from the meetings and their overall score. The factors that are considered during judgement include but are not exclusive to the use of fixtures, body choice and proportion, and overall design. Scores are out of 10, but a 5 is considered average or adequate with 10 being absolutely perfect.

Atera Automotives (@HybridTronny) - 5.38



Thompson: “Just because we’re competing with the Japanese doesn’t mean we have to copy them completely!”
Hogan: “A curiously clean design let down by intended purpose.”

Atera Automotive’s entry, although well executed, was ill-fitting for the challenge at hand - the chosen body was one of the real killing factors for the Angeles would need to compete against fierce American competition from companies such as Silver-York (who was creating opulent luxury vehicles), ACA (who had been injecting French design into their lineup), and Corsica (which landed in between the two). With this in mind, the small body wasn’t well received in the office, even with the fairly well-crafted design - other noted gripes were the minute size of the rear doors, garish front and rear aero, and pertinent lack of chrome around the car.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: Although the front shows a clear, concise design, we feel that this is relegated to a car that would not compete against the Angeles. The front lip is a bit excessive, and there’s a lack of visual punch.
Side view: The rear door is extremely small, and this contributes to the car’s odd proportions with short front and rear overhangs and a minuscule wheelbase.
Rear view: The rear is most similar to the overall appearance we’re trying to achieve, with wide taillights and an elegant overall atmosphere. However, the rear wing is rather hyperbolic.

Innovation Design (@Rise_Comics) - 4.14



Thompson: “Who the hell let John Byrne design a car?”
Hogan: “A few exaggerated choices made for this example.”

The rather comically designed entrant from Innovation Design has a few issues that are highlighted at most angles of the car - the lack of any real 5-mph bumpers, dearth of any unique identity of its own, and imperfectly detailed fixture use led this entry to fare poorly in this set of vehicles. It didn’t help that the car was presented in a vulgar metallic fuchsia and wheels that looked severely out of place. Even though cars were supposed to lean on the side of sporty, this unfortunately falls into the trap of being overtly so.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: The simple headlight solution, large grille, and misaligned fixtures contribute to a lack of any premiumness from the design. This is accentuated by a lack of any chrome, front lip, and no 5-MPH bumper.
Side view: The short front and rear overhangs prevent the design from appearing as American as it should. The trim pieces are placed rather haphazardly.
Rear view: Comically tall taillights and enormous exhaust tips brings the design of the car down further, whilst the split plastic trim piece appears to serve no purpose.

Kadett (@CorsicaUnknown) - 8.06



Thompson: “Wow, this one is fan-frickin’-tastic! More of this, please.”
Hogan: “It appears to be rather teutonic. Maybe a bit too much?”

As usual from Kadett, the exceptionally detailed prototype doesn’t skimp on the details. The overall focus on detail, in fact, makes up for certain issues such as the high-place door handles without locks and a rear license plate holder that wouldn’t allow for the Angeles to be sold in European markets. The aggressively molded sides also proved to be a bit excessive for a few execs in the meeting room, and it’s clear that the German influence was extremely strong with this design. Overall, the balance between luxurious design and sporty pretense was well played in this example.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: The subtle flashes of chrome were well placed, although it wouldn’t hurt to have just a little more in the design. The headlights are spaced a bit far apart, and consequently the grille is excessively wide and emphasizes the body’s width a bit too much. The 5-MPH bumpers are very well crafted.
Side view: Although the front and rear overhangs could have been played up a bit more, the exceptionally crafted details from the windows to the side vent deserve applause. However, it’s a bit overdone and could definitely help from being toned down a bit.
Rear view: The wide taillights merge well with the rear plate holder and are beautifully handled, but we wish that this part of the car could have been more suited for international use with a wider license plate mold.

Kenosha Design Studio (@GassTiresandOil) - 6.05



Thompson: “A weird-ass mix of chrome and European proportions.”
Hogan: “There’s quite a bit of mismatched design is going on here.”

Although this design isn’t Japanese, one might be inclined to believe it’s an odd Japanese take on an American tradition. The chrome bumpers are an interesting but ultimately hyperbolic ideal of American luxury cars; rather, the amount of chrome on the entirety of the car was appreciated but slightly overdone. The front end was classy, but the proportions weren’t as well-realized as some other entries, and slightly chunkier bumpers may have been helpful. An odd example for sure that could be more fine-tuned for the American market.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: A clearly American fascia, but as opposed to flashes of chrome we see the front end dominated by the shiny stuff. The lower lip is an odd allusion to the sporty pretense of the car.
Side view: There’s some subtle detailing on the lower flanks which give the car some pizzazz, although the door handles are a bit on the small side. The wheels are not suited for a car of this era, for they’re both too large and poorly chosen design-wise.
Rear view: The most sensibly styled part of the car, the layout of the rear is clean and clearly planned to maximize a premium feel.

Elwood (@MGR_99) - 7.54



Thompson: “‘Personal luxury car’ my ass, we should just sell this instead!”
Hogan: “A contemporary vision of a familiar scene.”

If any car that was entered could easily pass an American 80s car with no problems, it would be Elwood’s entry. An upright C-pillar, large bumpers, and angular shapes made this an assertively American creation. The Elwood proposition exudes understated class, with a highly attractive front profile and proportions. However, the “European” part of the influence seems to wane as you go further back in the car, where the 90-degree elements seem to stick out. There’s not quite as much stylistic flair as in the Kadett, but Elwood’s restraint can be commended if only barely miss-shot for the overall effect.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: A lovely balance between new and old design, although the headlights wouldn’t probably be very legal. Amber indicators would also have to be placed somewhere, but the flashes of chrome keep this design in the realm of sports-luxury. A sculpted hood adds to visual drama.
Side view: A well-executed side view marred slightly by the nearly vertical C-pillar. However, attention to detail is clear and - thankfully - rather restrained.
Rear view: An obvious homage to the opulence of Americana, but possibly the weakest portion when approaching the Angeles. Whilst it is stylish and well-formed, the fascia would benefit from less empty space between the taillights.
.
Monarch Motor Co. (@MONARCH) - 5.86



Thompson: “This looks fuckin’ weird.‘”
Hogan: “Erm, possibly a bit polarizing for the target market.”

One of the strangest and clearly the most daring entry to date, the Monarch Motor co. entry has a polarizing design from the from contrasted with a considerably more subdued rear treatment. The body is low-set with athletic pretense, but some of the details are oddly chosen for the final product. The futuristic front end had utilized many curvaceous shapes which might not be technically possible with the presses available for panels. Another issue is the seeming lack of much American influence - besides the NHTSA-compliant headlights, the rest of the car seems to be a generic Anglo-Saxon design with little to no American cues. This likely is going to diminish the appeal to the US market, and as such isn’t going to be the top choice out of the designs present.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: An odd choice of a grille, the extruded piece would largely be constructed with plastic. Although the headlights and grille integrate fairly seamlessly, they don’t really match with the time period we’re aiming for, along with a bit of an excess of amber.
Side view: The side view integrates fairly cohesively with the rest of the vehicle, although there are no true standout details.
Rear view: A more simplistic theme is shown here, and the European imagery is held to a higher degree with the shorter license plate. Nothing about the rear seems to have much influence from anything American at all.

At the end of the meeting, Thompson and Hogan both consolidated their materials along with the rest of the group. With their pace notes collected, they closed shop in preparation for the next day.

The other half of the reviews will be posted soon!


#451

I fully understand your critique of my car, except Kenosha isn’t in Japan… it’s in Wisconsin lol


#452

:man_facepalming: should’ve fact checked that, my bad. Will fix that now!


#453

No worries. I was going for Grand Marquis wheels too. But, yeah, too big, and I guess they just don’t look early eighties enough. Now that I look at them there’s another wheel I could’ve used instead


#454

I hate to do this to you guys but ya boy forgot about a 5 page paper that’s due in t-minus 29 hours!! So because of that the results (which btw are VERY close) will have to be delayed just for a day or two! Again hate to do this I know I have a habit of this already but ugh I’m not good at time management oop


#455

Reviews Batch 2

Manhattan, September 1979 - Rigore’s new lead designer Michael Thompson gathers a large group of exterior designers out to the Rigore office “Great Room” where all über-important meetings occur. His presentation is accompanied by lead exterior designer Joseph Hogan, and cars are given an average numerical score.

Entries are being presented in no particular order with some quoted lines from the meetings and their overall score. The factors that are considered during judgement include but are not exclusive to the use of fixtures, body choice and proportion, and overall design. Scores are out of 10, but a 5 is considered average or adequate with 10 being absolutely perfect.

@thecarlover - 7.73



Thompson: “Boring, but it works damn well.‘”
Hogan: “Stays true to the Rigore design language.”

Another entrant with a little more German influence, the clean overall aesthetic works well with the body of the car. Although there seems to be less pure detail in the overall car, the restraint helps to solidify its simplistic elegance; that being said, there are places in which the car could have been more complete or refined. And, indeed, this is elegant - the only car here that manages to maintain the Rigore “winged” headlight, the cohesion between surfaces visual flow is well thought out. It’s not completely unique, but it’s still a visually impressive and commendable design overall.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: Similar to Kadett’s design with a wide front fascia that could help from a more well-spaced layout, the front of this entrant is simple, boxy, and works fairly well with the body. We would’ve liked to see more variation in shape and proportion.
Side view: More small handles to be seen here! Otherwise, not much to be seen here. Subtle trim pieces are present but we feel that more could’ve been done to spice up the sides a little bit.
Rear view: We like the visual contrast here, especially with the thicker plastic piece below the taillights on the top fascia. This is a very well-proportioned design that’s simple and works well.

Propeller (@Mikonp7) - 6.75



Thompson: “Now this is a hot lookin’ sedan!‘”
Hogan: “It’s too athletic for our purposes.”

As if a supercar were stuffed into the body of a sedan, this exotic-looking 4-door sadly misses the mark when it comes down to the final aesthetic. There appears to be a combination between a minimalist and dynamic style - although this would look interesting on sporty coupe, the Angeles still has to appeal to the standard everyday American from all walks of life. The “masked” front end along with definitely-not-legal headlights look menacing and match the rear, but these would be toned down to insignificant status on the production vehicle.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: Even though there are no vents on the lower part of the car, the somewhat basic design still seems to work just fine. Without that large plastic fascia, it might not be as cohesive; we appreciate the way the grille slats integrate with the headlights.
Side view: Another fairly basic side view with some trim details, including short front and rear overhangs that would likely need to be extended to appeal to a broader market. Nothing to write home about.
Rear view: This stylish rear continues the black plastic panel theme, although we’d argue it’s more visually arresting with the contrast of the bodywork and the taillights blending everything together rather well. We’re not a fan of the quad exhaust pipes, since that’s completely excessive.

SBA (@z2bbgr) - 5.70



Thompson: “What’s with the funky-looking front end?‘”
Hogan: “Another participant where athleticism dominates elegance. Shame.”

Applying the coupe look to a sedan, this car has a few other flaws that prevent it from ascending the design ranking. The cab-rearward design, tight rear end, and shocking red color are polarizing for sure - however, the Angeles might play it a little bit safer upon release. As such, the wide-body appearance with the skirts that line the car wouldn’t be something we’re willing to explore for the final vehicle, along with the general dearth of any of the shiny stuff.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: The small headlights are clearly overshadowed by the wide upper and lower grilles, both of which don’t help in their total size to make the car needlessly aggressive.
Side view: The trim piece running from the headlights to the rear is nice, but we believe larger proportions in the rear and front in order to accommodate greater storage and more safety-deadzone area stuff would probably be utilized for the final car.
Rear view: The quad exhausts are again rather over-the-top, but the wide lights are well enough executed. We would’ve preferred a cleaner look as they wrap around to the side, but otherwise a solid design for the rear end.

@mart1n2005 - 5.77



Thompson: “It’s staring into my soul.”
Hogan: “It’s not fussy, but it is still somehow underwhelming.”

This entry manages to be one of the strangest here; it has nothing to do with the styling or even the approach, but rather the amount of work that has seemed to have gone into making a decidedly average-looking car. Each fixture seems to have been meticulously hand-placed in order to perfect suit the style and shape of the car. Despite all of this, the car is utterly boring - nothing bad about it per se, but nothing seems to stand out. The styling appears to be a cross between German and British design, and as such we would’ve liked to see a more American approach to the car, but alas the car is what it is and nothing more.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: If there is anything we can deduct from the car, the headlights are considerably too large (which contradicts most of the other entries we’ve seen, in which the headlights tend to err on the side of smaller). Otherwise, a decently well crafted front end begging for a splash of chrome. It’s worth noting that there are easily 20+ fixtures that constitute the front bumper trim alone.
Side view: Nothing to write home about, the side has a decent amount of trim that’s well placed and designed.
Rear view: The rear echoes all of the same shapes as the front and also uses an oddly high amount of fixtures for the taillights. This means it’s a rudimentary design with lots of effort pumped in but not much effect turned out.

Beneventi (@Rk38) - 6.64



Thompson: “Weird looking piece of shit.‘”
Hogan: “A complete avant-garde take on the household sedan.”

If any car could split opinions in the office to a point of hostility, it would be the Beneventi entrant to the challenge. Utilizing a body style that wasn’t used by any other competitor, the unique aerodynamic design had clear influence from French and Italian vehicles. The low front end, steeply rising belt line, partially covered rear wheel well, and spaceship styling all combine to make a car that half of the room believed to be innovative whilst the other half believed it to be garish. Highly sculpted sides, large 5-MPH bumpers, and the intricate approach to the design also add to the design’s accuracy to the market but continue to have an inconsistent impact on our judges. It’s completely different than any other car that we’ve seen today, but the polarization may end up being the car’s Achilles’ heel.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: A sloping hoodline is an innovative shape that loses out on the great imposing designs of the era. Thankfully, there is no shortage of chrome to be seen here. The combination of horizontal and vertical elements is truly unique, but likely not to make it onto the final vehicle.
Side view: The side view is easily the most radical part of the Beneventi-designed Angeles. Chiseled lines that wrap around the whole car, contoured shoulder lines, and a modest rear wheel cover all contribute to a creative approach to the premium sports sedan.
Rear view: As with the front, there’s quite a bit of layering happening - the taillights are separate pieces that all cohesively combine thanks to the liberal use of plastic, and the bumper itself also has a decent amount of sculpting. It feel premium, and that’s a good thing - although it’s the tamest part of the car it’s the one that’s most likely to influence the final design.

@randomtuner - 4.35



Thompson: “Someone just threw a bunch of parts together and called it a day, I guess.‘”
Hogan: “An incoherent melange of textures and shapes.”

There’s quite a few things this car attempts to capture, but unfortunately for it nothing quite comes together well enough. Mismatched frontal elements, shoddily placed side trim, an oddly tall ride height with overly thick tires, and a general feeling of chaos leads this car to land on the lower spectrum in the pack.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: There’s an interesting play with the “headlight cluster” for the indicator, vent, and dual-headlights to come together - however, different sized headlights would probably be a no-go in the states, and nothing seems to quite line up properly enough. This is true for the lower fascia as well, with odd vents clashing with bumps on the outer corner of the car.
Side view: The mirrors are most certainly out of place for this era, with indicators mounted on the mirrors themselves. The door handles as well are a bit too sculpted to be mass-produced as this time. Trim pieces appear to be placed in a slapstick manner.
Rear view: The rear, put simply, was not exactly carefully crafted. The taillights don’t really emulate those of any American sedan, the trim vents underneath are placed rather needlessly, and the plate holder is too small to fit any real plate in any direction.

Thierry Pelouse (@MasterDoggo) - 6.51



Thompson: “This one looks decent enough. But, you know, just barely.‘”
Hogan: “A crude European take on the American sedan.”

Thierry Pelouse’s concept for the Angeles was a pleasant blend of American and European design. Nothing is glaringly ugly or unattractive, although there are a few parts in which either the detail is lacking or there seems to have been less care into the work at hand. The front end is notably attractive, fusing German and American themes into one, but the proportions of the body (short front and rear overhangs) and general lack of detail on the side don’t help the curse of monotony.

Upon closer inspection:
Front view: One of the better ways to look at the car, there’s an aura of refinement from the large front grille and well-proportioned face. The bumper contributes the 5-MPH protection, but also a little bit of shape sculpting which complements the shape of the front end. The headlights might be a tad on the large side, and the outer units spill over onto the sides in a way that appears to be accidental and unattractive.
Side view: One thing that was noted with the lack of plastic trim, which would have been a nice way to add more cohesion and visual interest for the overall design. This made the side a bit bland, even compared to the other cars in the test.
Rear view: Even though the taillights again don’t leave much space at all for European plates, there is a pleasant theme that reflects the front end with matching bumpers and attractive chrome details. A decidedly solid look at a proposed Angeles rear.

Results
About three weeks later, these three designs were called back into the Rigore offices for further scrutinizing. They were analyzed from hundreds of angles, given respective scores, and - after much debate between Thompson and Hogan - finally given a hierarchy.

3rd place - Elwood (@MGR_99) - Weighted score 7.54

One of the only cars here to boast and embrace true American style loud and proud, the sophisticated yet athletic design from Elwood is sure to heavily influence the final product inside and out.

2nd place - @thecarlover - Weighted score 7.73

An impressively lore-accurate design that balances a luxury appearance with just a dash of dynamism throughout. It might not be the most detailed car, but it more than made up for it with its simplistic approach.

1st place - Kadett (@CorsicaUnknown) - Weighted score 8.06

Kadett’s entry was undoubtedly the most fixture-heavy, but this clearly didn’t hamper the results enough to kick it out of first - with clean, fresh lines that are sure to break the mould for 1981, a unique approach to the idea of a “sculpted” 1980s car, and the feeling that you’re about to drive something truly special, there couldn’t be another first-place finisher.


Thank you for your patience, and I hope that you’ve enjoyed these reviews!
If you have any additional questions, would like advice, or want a more in-depth analysis of your position, definitely let me know.


#456

I revamped the rear lights a bit to make it more European friendly, since that seemed to be one of the main issues given here :slight_smile:

Other than that, I’m suprised about my win since I thought there were better cars here cough thecarlover cough And thank you very much @titleguy1 for the excellent round! I really mean it when I say I really enjoyed making my car for this.

As for hosting, I’d kindly like to pass down to the second place finisher… not sure if I can tag them or not.


#457

I can handle hosting, I’ll figure something out and have it ready to go by the end of the day.


#458

The Crowd Sourcing Competition 16: A Fleeting Moment in Diesel City

City Fleet Co. is the largest specialised company of fleet cars in the region, with its headquarters in one of the many towering skyscrapers of Diesel City. In the executive board room overlooking the jumble of clogged and hazy streets, all the highest executives and engineers are gathered for a meeting on developing a new model for one of their most lucrative segments: the taxi.

The new 2020 Fleet Cab II should become the standard for taxis for years to come, and as such the executives have decided to contract out the design in order to increase their chances at the best car possible. They will still be getting their engineers to do some work after all, as they have a newly developed V6 engine specifically for taxi usage.

The brief is simple: City Fleet Co. will send out a crate by express shipment to any interested party. In the crate there will be an engine, suspension, and a list of specifications to abide by. The companies will then have to build functional prototypes using these parts and abiding by the outlined specifications and send them to City Fleet Co. for evaluation. They are looking for a car that will be attractive to taxi companies, so it has to be cheap to purchase and cheap to operate while also being well built for the job.


Requirements:

2020 Model/Trim year.

4 door sedans with body unlock year 1940-1955 only, with the exception of “BodyEditor_60sSedan05” (unlocks in 1955 and has huge tail fins).

Use all the chassis settings selected on the example car (corr. res., monocoque, corr. res., front-long, macpherson, and semi trailing arm) BUT DO NOT USE THE EXAMPLE AS A BASE FOR YOUR CAR.

Use the engine from the example car and do not edit anything in it.

Must be RWD with a 6-speed advanced automatic.

Must have 2 seats in front and 3 seats in back (no +2 or +3), ESC, and advanced 20s safety.

Make it look like a taxi. Doesn’t have to be anything very fancy, but a mock livery would be nice.

Realism, the aesthetic is dieselpunk but the engineering should be akin to a modern car.

Trim ET limited to 125 and PU limited to 95.

Scored stats:

Most important: price, fuel economy, service costs, reliability, drivability

Also important: comfort, practicality, safety

Not stats but also scored:

Design, engineering realism


For the dieselpunk design, it’s essentially car designs from the 1930s to the early 1950s. Since this is in 2020, assume that the car technology is current, it’s only the aesthetic that’s dieselpunk. So things like LED lights can still have a place as long as they’re used in a way that fits the style. Feel free to ask any questions if you’re unsure of the styling.

Dieselpunk Examples

The cars in CSR65 (especially the finalists):
The Car Shopping Round 65 - On the Case in Diesel City






Example car with engine here: CSC16 - Example - Do Not Use This Car.car (13.9 KB)

Model name: CSC16 – YourUsername
Trim name: [Optional company] Fleet Cab II
Family name: Unchanged from example
Variant name: Unchanged from example

Deadline: Sunday September 22, 12:00 PM EDT


#459

The Tucker: Now Dieselpunk.

In all seriousness, there’s one particular body style, that seems a bit more OP than the others; particularly in terms of reaching PU/ET limits. In my test mules, keeping all things equal, this particular body style, requires no touching of quality sliders to eek in under 95.0 PU. I could do without certain ‘niceities’, but then, all things would not be equal.


#460

The test car I made was below the limits I set. Always good to bump them up to allow more choices from the test car. That said, the main difference between bodies should be cost related to the amount of materials required for their size. Smaller cars will be cheaper but have lower practicality and comfort, while larger cars will be the reverse. There are many possible approaches to take even with the restrictions, and being CSC the design is still one of the top priorities.


#461

Propeller Überflieger

Ze perfect car to defeat ze competition
More Propaganda




#462

From Monarch of Frunia:

More of the All-Star:



#463

We’ll probably see a lot of the checkerboard in this one…:grinning:


#464
Elwood YellowJacket (YJ)

hey im walkin here


#465

Lansing Fleet Cab II


#466

Razor Fleet Cab II


#467

The Bodrianne Fleet Cab II. Engineered to be as practical as possible.

Summary



#468

Avantii Fleet Cab II. TAXI!!

Summary