Postie Composites (an aerospace company) has graciously sponsored the 1970 Spider 6’s development as a PR play, some of the public think a more apt name would be “the black widow maker” after it’s reputation for going through test drivers. Rest assured their sacrifice was not in vein, the pubic offering includes several drives around the automation Co track a day. A serious interest in purchase is rewarded, with the ride of a lifetime beside rail thin racing driver topping out at speeds exceeding 140 miles per hour.
6 Likes
1970 Westpoolchestershireshire Shaguar 1600GTE
the E stands for economical lol
More Pics
Westpoolchestershireshire Motor Company Ltd.
20 Likes
I just made several test mules, all of them built on FR platforms - the one I would like to submit the most actually comes in two trims. One has the largest engine (2.8L I6 with 200 bhp), widest wheels and lowest-profile tires the rule set allows - predictably, it’s a rocket ship in terms of overall performance, but at $18k AMU, it stretches the definition of “affordable sports car” quite a fair bit, and is also heavier. The other version is lighter, has a 1.8L I4 making 130 bhp and is therefore slower, but rides on smaller wheels and tires, and comes in at under $16k AMU. Either one is a tempting idea for my submission, if I actually go through with it - I just need to finalize my decision before the deadline.
2 Likes
Can’t you make a bumper a 3D fixture and move it closer to the body?
Yes you can. Technically you can make anything a 3d object, but in doing so it no longer conforms to the curves of the car body. So you could tuck in the bumper drastically, but it would become straight.
1 Like
Maybe I was a little bit unclear there. I have used bumpers as 3D fixtures many times, and since that is a hard body to place fixtures on, it was more a suggestion than anything else. It may work better than that protruding 30s bumper but hard to tell before trying.
1 Like
Those values are in Automation values? Cause then that’s impressive for me. I may have lost this challenge by having a $19k car. Although mine is a V6, yours are inline.
Here’s some comparisons to what other cars have quoted, in case that helps.
So far, the cheapest cars quoted on this forum are at $12,600 and $14,400, though not many cars seem to be going quite that low. The most expensive quoted price, by comparison, was just cited at $19,000. So while both of yours are definitely not in the running for cheapest, that $2,000 difference definitely makes a big impact.
Horsepower figures are all over the place- ranging from 85 on one car to 260 on another -so your horsepower numbers don’t really mean much alone. But top speed wise, the slowest cars seem to be playing around 115mph (185kph), whereas the fastest cars aren’t getting past 140mph (225kph) (with exception of one 150mph (240kph) car). And 0-60 times seem to be ranging from 7-10 seconds.
So if your slower car is fast enough to stay competitive, then you might want to put out the slow one. But if the faster one is on the very high end of these stats, it might be worth the $2,000. It really on how big the difference is between them, but hopefully this frame of reference helps. :)
(note that we can only look at people who have posted their car’s specs here; most competitors haven’t, and for all we know, there’s a $10,000 200mph monster sitting quietly in a corner)
3 Likes
The slower version of my putative entry takes 8.2 seconds to go from 0 to 60 and tops out at 121 mph; the faster version needs only 6.7 to do the same thing and can reach nearly 140 mph. Both come with an automatic locking differential (which is treated as a primitive LSD for the purpose of this challenge) and use dual wishbones front and rear - which partly explains why they cost so much - but the trade-off is superior handling, especially considering their light weight and ample power (for such a small, light car). With the smaller engine it manages 0.9g on a skid pad - the bigger-engined version has 10% more grip and stops shorter to boot. Neither of them have more than two seats, however, but then again, practicality is not being graded here.
Hmmm…
1 Like
Ha ha whoopsie daisy
From my experience, and I’m new to this…moving most things in 3D is ok up to a certain point…after that, if I go too far the fixture/morph remains “straight”…
Side note: I’m finding out new things with every build, so please educate me .
2 Likes
Ok… I wasn’t really happy with my first car, sooo…
1970 ARMOR SUNBURST GT
More sporty, more '70’s, more seats.
10 Likes
well i am taking a long-comatose Brand out of hibernation…
sooo…
The Keika Kakute MkII
Basically a re-hashed late 50s sports car with a 3rd part engine kindly supplied by BERMAG mbH. (@Ryan93)
have some (as in a pair) of pics:
Yes, i know it doesn’t have any kind of interior, but nobody mandated it and i cba to re-make all the window trim shit to fix some random boxes floating about in there lol.
10 Likes
1970 Decarlis 5 C 2500
21 Likes
AZS Falco 2500S
LORE
Founded by Gianluigi Zoccarato and Amadeo Scagliati in 1958, Automobili Zoccarato-Scagliati was created with the express purpose of building the finest sports cars in Italy, as well as testing advanced technologies for the closely-associated Scagliati marque. Composite construction, disc brakes, dual overhead camshafts and many others were first trialed in AZS models, which quickly found themselves filling a lucrative niche as a more affordable alternative to the very expensive Scagliati models, as well as finding a role in amateur and professional racing all over Europe and North America.
The Falco was launched in 1970 as a compact, lightweight everyday sports car, aimed squarely at rivals from West Germany, France and Great Britain. Powered by an all-aluminum, mid-mounted 2.5-litre V6 engine directly derived from Scagliati’s Mirano V12 family, the mid-range Falco 2500S produces 161 horsepower, giving the diminutive car sprightly performance on the road, on account of its 905-kilogram curb weight. In spite of the Falco’s light weight and compact dimensions, comfort and practicality were not neglected, with trunk space both front and rear, and a very comfortable, well-trimmed interior making the Falco a sports car that could be driven as an everyday car, if desired.
Performance in the Falco 2500S is ample, sprinting to 100 kilometres per hour in 6.7 seconds, and on to a top speed of 246 kilometres per hour. All of this, for a price of $18,500.
23 Likes
1970 DMS Rimini
Submitted Trim: 1.8
In 1970, DMS introduced the Rimini as its entry-level offering. Two engines were offered: a 2.8-liter straight-six delivering 200 bhp (red car) and a 130-bhp 1.8-liter straight-four (yellow car), with the former being distinguished by dual exhaust outlets, a hood bulge, bigger brakes, and wider tires and wheels.
The six-cylinder version could sprint from 0 to 60 mph in just 6.7 seconds and had a top speed of nearly 140 mph, but the base model was no slouch either, being only 1.5 seconds slower to 60 mph, and in addition to weighing around 100 kg less, was also $2500 cheaper.
Both versions enjoy a healthy enthusiast following today for their small size, light weight, agile handling, and ample power for their engine capacity.
7 Likes
Tristella Oscen 240GTS
Tristella’s lowest end model, the Oscen, was introduced in 1969 to both homologate the its motor and to spread publicity of the brand with a less exclusive offering, outside of its motorsport ventures. Equipped with a 2.4l v6 producing 155 horsepower. Weighing in at under 900kg, the performance was impressive to say the least; that paired with a well balanced chassis and a decently well equipped interior combined together for a very comprehensive sports car package.
Pricing was started at $18,200.
Gallery
26 Likes
a stupid question, I’m more of a modder than a designer, what does ET mean? 
3 Likes