Reviews Round 1:
Rulebreakers:
Leonardo Aperto 125
Bin for exceeding maximum wheel size (16" wheels). If corrected, this car still needs a lot of work to be compettiive; it has 0.3 comfort, was the 3rd most expensive car, and, while straight line speed was not a major consideration, you’d want a sports car at this price to be quick, but it’s acceleration numbers were the worst of all entries.
Hinata Aurora Celeste 2200 GT
Bin for exceeding engine ET limits (90.9) and rear downforce (37.3 kg). A very good looking car; disproportionately large wheel/tire combo the only note I have on the styling. Compared to the top level competitors, this FF sports coupe is short on sportiness, has expensive running costs, and surprisingly low fuel economy.
Maartens Bristol 160 GT-R Mk.I
Bin for engine ET (92.8) and minimum sidewall (60 rear). Also a good looking car, unfortunate to be eliminated so early, but compared to the top contenders, it’s short on sportiness, has very poor comfort (6.4) not helped by the nearly unmuffled engine (50.4 loudness), and has surprisngly poor fuel efficiency
Kurskian Gala GSR
Bin for minimum sidewall (60 front and rear). Another pretty sharp looking car, and this one with no major faults, but a little short on sportiness, drivability, and fuel economy.
AZS Falco 2500s
Bin for minimum sidewall (60 rear). Really sad to see this car go so early; design-wise, it was my favorite of all entrants, both outside and in. While it would have been a top competitor if not for the rule issue, it does trail most of the competition in price, running costs, and reliability. Which make sense, given this car falls on the exotic end of the spectrum with it’s price, power, speed, MR layout, and appearance.
Pusilanime Amorous
Bin for engine displacement (2995cc) and downforce (2.63kg front). This quirky and endearing design is actually front-engine, despite it’s shape. It’s lacking sportiness and drivability, but is very comfortable, has cheap running costs, is quite reliable, and has pretty strong fuel economy considering it has the largest engine and an OHV valve train.
Eliminations:
Wells Raven
0 drivability. 11 sportiness. 0 comfort. Terminal oversteer at 45 mph. 8600 stiffness front swaybar. 9.4 stiffness front springs. -3 rear camber. 86 hp @ 5100 rpm redline from a 2 liter engine, despite DOHC valvetrain and internals allowing up to 7300 rpm. Cost is slightly above median, safety is on the low side, running costs are quite high.
RAUK PM3
0.3 comfort, 56.7 loudness engine. Still behind the top competitors in sportiness and driveability, and the worse in test on safety (18.5). Appearabce has some nice details, but the wheel/tire package is quite large for the size of the car, giving a bit of a off-roader stance.
Wanka Sport GTV6
0.4 comfort, and quite high running costs. The rest of the stat’s are fairly good though. The design is fairly bland, but the interior of this car is seriously excellent, among the best.
Bazard Tsunami
Just 1.5 comfort and well behind on sportiness and driveability as well. It’s cheap and powerful, but it’s not actually very quick and there are cheaper and better. Safety is among the worse in test and fuel economy is at the very bottom.
Yinzer Sport MK70
It’s very sporty, and drivability is strong too. But this falls apart everywhere else; styling is bare minimum, comfort is barely acceptable, running costs astronomically high, reliability and fuel economy poor.
Posite Spider 6
The most expensive entrant by a pretty wide margin provides race car performance and nothing else, with very minimal styling, weak comfort, poor safety, poor fuel economy, and horrible, horrible running costs, knocking on the door of $2,000.
Alira Carlisle 2.5
One of the biggest entrants here, with a big I6 hanging out behind the rear axle. It’s reliable, safe, and inexpensive, but falls behind in all other stats, and styling is very awkward.
Yamaguchi Hako
This is an odd duck; this RWD hatchback is the smallest of all entrants, just 120" long, but is stuffed full of I6, 2 liters worth, and sits very low and on really massive tires given the car’s footprint. Comfort is dismal (5) and is the only competitor to run a basic/basic interior, at odds with choice of a prestigious and large (for the car’s size) 2 liter I6. Styling is very basic and safety is low. On the positive side, sportiness is strong, running costs are low, reliability is good, and the dashboard looks nice.
Manda Yokai GT
This diminutive sports car is full of weird choices. Despite it’s tiny size, it’s among the most expensive entrants. Despite FWD, it has staggered tire widths, wider at the rear. Despite it’s 1.3 liter V6 bringing the least torque of all entrants, it has just a 3 speed manual. Despite FWD, it has a limited slip differential. It has no mufflers at all(83.3 loudness). Sportiness, drivability, and comfort are good, but reliability is quite poor.
Mayster Triumf
On paper, not a bad car, although pricey for what it offers. Styling really lets this car down, only the bare minimum was done.
Bogliq Bodkin Sport
The cheapest entry, it’s cheapness shines through, with weak stats across the board, most notably just 4.7 comfort. While you expect sacrifices at this price point, it is outclassed by the other budget options.
Hart Whipray 1800 GTE
A nice looking car, a realistically sportier variant of conventional European family car. While it brings adequate power, it’s sportiness is worst in test (16.3) and comfort is on the very edge of binworthy on it’s own (7.1). Safety and running costs are competitive, but the rest of the car underwhelms.
Tiffosi Zero BB
Strong sportiness, drivability, and comfort and held down by hefty running costs, poor reliability, a slightly high price tag, basic styling, and a transversely mounted boxer engine.
Transitstar Gnome ZL 2.5 Targa
A chariot dressed in spaceship clothes. The futuristic shape covers a very conservative machine, on a ladder frame with a solid rear axle. This benefits the owner in middle of the road purchase cost, low running costs, and good reliability. Unfortunately, styling is awkward, and sportiness and drivability are behind the pack.
DMS Rimini 1.8
A very middle of the road entry, coming near the median point in price and giving excellent comfort and drivability. Unfortunately, sportiness is low, and the styling really lets this one down as well.
Taube 3000 Straße
Quite a nice looking car, but it’s near the top of the range in price, and doesn’t offer much for it compared to the competition; sportiness is a touch weak, drivability as well, comfort low, running costs high, safety low.
Armor Motors Sunburst GT
The muscle car approach. Styling is pretty nice, although the size-maxed wheel/tire package gives this small car a truckish stance. Lots of power from a 2.8 liter I6 make this one of the fastest cars in a straight line, but and while nicely drivable, it’s not a sporty drive, nor a very comfortable one, with mediocre reliability as well.
Tevian Plethora 2.2
A very good looking coupe with strong comfort, drivability, safety, and cheap running costs, but weak reliability and among the very worst in sportiness (18.2). This is the basic pony car to a T: a very stylish and usable car, but not sporty enough for this crowd.
Decarlis 5 C 2500
This car is beautifully styled, outside, but especially inside, one of the very best. But it seems to have found the wrong competition, as it’s sportiness is very low, and it’s price quite high. Drivability and comfort and good, safety is above and beyond the competition, and power is plentiful, but it’s not the sports car we’re looking for here.