ARM34: Keeping the Faith (completed!)

ARM34: Keeping the Faith

General ARM Rules

Previous ARM

Background

Having previously bought an SVP Bearclaw and had it restored to his desires, Keith Davis is on the lookout for a new project to turn his attention to. For years, he’d been eyeing a pristine example of a fourth-gen Morrison Kestrel GT, one of the Bearclaw’s main rivals. Produced from 1992 to 2002, this was a clean break from its predecessors, with sleek, curvaceous styling concealing an all-alloy V8 driving the rear wheels.

Even at launch, this was, by far, the best-performing of all the various generations of the Kestrel, and this became even more true later in its lifespan. Unfortunately, this generation would not be replaced at all after its discontinuation, nor is the Morrison nameplate being used today. However, both it and its maker still enjoy a good following, although they are slowly starting to become scarce.

Keith eventually tracked down a well-kept example, one that had miraculously survived the L.A. wildfires intact. And if there was any motivation for this to rise like a phoenix from the ashes, it’s this: even though its stock output of 275 horsepower (good enough for a 0-60 mph time of 5.9 seconds) was competitive when the car was new, it falls well short of what many modern sport compacts and even pure battery-powered EVs can manage.

Still, this leaves plenty of room for improvement for Keith, who seeks to improve its performance to help it better keep up with modern standards. Especially since its small size (by today’s standards) makes most modern cars seem oversized/and or overweight by comparison. Overall, it’s an even more promising base for his next project than the Bearclaw had been.

Priorities

Primary Priorities :star: :star: :star:

  • Exterior Aesthetics: While a head-turner in its time, Keith wants to give his new car even more presence on the road - enough to make bystanders exclaim “Wow!” whenever they see it. A subtle yet faithful modernization of the exterior, or a more extroverted yet period-accurate bodykit, would work equally well, for example. Just make sure not to stray too far from the basic premise of the donor car. In short: if it looks right, then it usually is right.

  • Performance/Sportiness: It’s not just the raw in-game stat that matters here. Straight-line speed (in terms of 0-60 mph and 1/4 mile times), along with 200m skidpad grip and braking distances (taking drivability/sportiness brake fade), are all key factors - the more the better. Again, if it goes right, then it most likely is right.

  • Authenticity: Keith would prefer if the basics of the donor car remained intact, but were enhanced significantly from stock. Just don’t deviate too much from the classic pony car recipe of a front-mounted V8 driving the rear wheels exclusively.

Secondary Priorities :star: :star:

  • Reliability: The less likely it is to break down on the road or at the track, the better.

  • Value for money: Keith is willing to use as much of his budget as he can to get the best possible results, although he will go for a cheaper build if it does the same job just as well as a more expensive one.

  • Drivability: This is no city car, but any improvements in ease of use would make living with it a little bit more stress-free.

Tertiary Priorities :star:

  • Overall running costs (fuel economy, service cost): These were not a strong point of the original design - just try not to increase them too much.

  • Comfort: While not the most luxurious thing on the road at the time of its launch, a fancier interior and modern infotainment system would be appreciated here, for the sake of livability.

  • Safety: Even a minor boost to survivability in the event of a crash would help, considering how much more performance the finished product would have.

  • Interior design: Though not as important as exterior design, this is one area where any improvements will still yield a bonus. Any improvement, however slight, would be welcome.

General ARM Rules

  • Clone the model and family simultaneously after importing the .car file by clicking on the Clone All button (highlighted in red) shown below:

  • Set the model, trim, family, and variant years to 2020 (the latest one in-game) - I recommend that you exit the game, then start it again, after cloning and before changing those years.

  • Maximum price of $50,000 AMU as shown in the Detailed Stats section of the Overview tab.

  • No race parts (intake, tires and headers) allowed. No V16 engines (I don’t have the DLC). Semi-slick tires may be used.

  • Retain the default techpool allocation of +5 in all areas (as used for the donor car).

  • Use quality points sparingly. For example, a +15 interior and -15 body/trim quality will seem odd, to say the least. If you get too cheesy or min-maxy with your quality point allocation, you’ll be marked down.

  • Current stable release (Ellisbury) required (not the Al-Rilma open alpha).

  • You may ask the client two personal questions via DM regarding preferences that may influence your build. You may also ask as many questions as you wish regarding this challenge and its rules.

General Car Rules

  • ARM is generally about improving a car’s stats - although a minor decrease in one stat may be worthwhile if the others are all significantly improved. Just make sure to avoid statistical downgrades as much as possible, though.

  • 98 RON super unleaded maximum. Lower grades of unleaded may be used, but they won’t help you at all.

  • The donor car must remain road legal, according to common sense - the most important parts must be retained no matter what.

  • Do not change the chassis type.

  • WES 8 compatibility required at minimum.

  • ATS (advanced trim settings) may be used in moderation for changes that cannot be made through engineering.

Extra-Cost Options

You must add the cost of these changes to your car’s estimated price (as shown in the Detailed Stats section of the Overview tab) if you choose to apply them. The prices of each option (in AMU) are as follows:

  • Changing chassis material (not type): $2000

  • Changing panel material: $1500

  • Changing engine orientation: $5000 (any drive type changes will be included for free with this option)

  • Engine swap (defined as changing block material or engine configuration): $2000 (includes cylinder head changes for free; see below)

  • Cylinder head change (defined as changing head and valves and/or engine material while retaining stock engine configuration, block material and family capacity): $500 (automatically included with engine swaps)

  • Changing body style: $3000 (this is defined as using a different variant within the same body set)

  • Changing suspension type: $1000 (per axle)

  • Drastic alterations to bodywork using morphs and/or 3D or patchwork fixtures: $1500 (note that any alterations that can instead be achieved by changing body types, such as using negatape on the roof on a coupe instead of switching to a convertible variant, are not permitted)

  • Changing drive type: $4000 (exception: if engine orientation is changed, then all drive type changes are free)

  • Changing gearbox type (i.e. using any type other than manual): $500 (using a manual with a different number of gears will not incur this penalty)

Submissions

Rules discussion begins on 12:00 am (UTC+7) on February 6th, 2025 and ends on 12:00 AM (UTC+7) on February 12th, 2025, after which submissions will be open until 12:00 AM (UTC+7) on February 26rd, 2025.

The naming scheme for your ARM34 submission is as follows:

  • Model/trim: ARM34 - (your forum username) / (your car’s name)

  • Engine/variant: ARM34 - (your forum username) / (your engine’s name)

Donor Car

Click on the link below, then save the file to your CarSaveImport folder to store it:
ARM34-yourname-PLEASE_CLONE_-_Morrison_Kestrel_GT.car (98.3 KB)

Good luck, and have fun!

4 Likes

There’s been no reaction yet from others, so I’ve extended the rules deliberation deadline to 12:00 AM (UTC+7) on February 12, 2025. I’ve also pushed the deadline back accordingly to 12:00 AM (UTC+7) on February 26th, 2025.

And good news: I’m not hiding anything in details spoilers in the OP, for the sake of visibility.

I can’t speak for everyone, but the reason I haven’t said anything during the rules delib is that the primary ruleset seems to work just fine.

You may be right. Even so, I’ll keep you posted if anyone requests any changes to the ruleset before the submission window opens.

Also, I’ve further clarified some of the extra-cost options in the OP, to remove what little chance of confusion may remain.

Submissions are open!

LMJ DESIGN PRESENTS: THE MORRISON KESTREL SPORTS ROADSTER


What’s even better than a Morrison Kestrel? Well, enjoying fresh air in a Morrison Kestrel, of course! Which is why we did this open top, 2 seater conversion with a classic tonneau cover giving it a sporty look. For safety, the headrest humps are hiding rollover hoops.


The front end was restyled, and we’re not going to lie - inspiration was taken from two classic Ferrari models, the F50 and the Enzo. But unlike them, we kept the popup lights, since they are a huge part of the identity of the Kestrel - we just updated them with modern projectors and a bit more mean looking graphic design. LED DRLs were added in case you want to drive with the popups down during daytime conditions.


Yes, the taillight panel was cast in carbon fiber and now incorporates round lights, and yes, we admit it, once again with the F50 as an inspiration source. The rear wing follows the shape of the original, but vastly enlarged, and the rest of the bodykit was made aggressive enough to match this look.


Since the original interior is a rather nice place, it just got subtle updates. Carbon fiber detailing, a new steering wheel, new sports seats and a new upholstery in red/black leather/alcantara. A simple but functional modern infotainment system was added.


Fact is, nothing suits this car better than the classic factory red, so we kept the shade and just replaced the fading single shot urethane with a modern base/clearcoat system. The wheels are another thing that draws inspiration from Modena - in this case, heavily influenced by the F40 model.

For $35 000 AMU, it is competitive in price compared to anything with a prancing horse on its emblems, though. What do you get, then?

Well, the engine got a complete overhaul, now sports two turbochargers and a 554 hp power output. Everything under the shell was beefed up and built to better tolerances. A big brake kit gives it stopping power, launch control makes it easier to take off again. The electric variable steering decreases parasitic losses of power while giving better reliability than the stock hydraulic system. We have mainly worked with details otherwise - but details giving you a much better car than the original. It can now corner 0.99 G. It stops from 100 in 37.2 meters. Quartermile is done in 12.24 seconds. The 0-100 km/h sprint in 4.77 - while 2.05 seconds from 80-120 gives you blazing passing acceleration on the highway. Top speed? 336 km/h should be more than enough, right?

THE MORRISON KESTREL SPORTS ROADSTER. BY LMJ DESIGN.

4 Likes

RTech Engineering Mistral GT20

The RTech Engineering Mistral GT20 is a complete overhaul of the classic Mistral, blending modern design cues with the car’s original character. Its iconic V8 block remains at the heart of the build, now equipped with a newly developed head that pushes output beyond 600 horsepower. A 6-speed manual gearbox preserves the timeless, engaging feel of the Mistral while amplifying performance to an entirely new level. Inside, a handcrafted leather interior underscores the car’s commitment to refined craftsmanship, rounding out a thoroughly modern yet unmistakably faithful homage to the Mistral legacy.

Starting from $42300.

8 Likes

2 days left until the deadline!

However, the two entries I’ve submitted so far have violated the model year/family year rule:

Using @asdren’s entry as an example, as shown above, both the model year and family year (first from left and second from right, respectively) are the same (1992) as those of the donor car. However, the OP clearly states that you must set both of them to 2020 (to simulate a fully remanufactured chassis and engine). So please, for God’s sake, don’t forget to do so before you submit - if you haven’t done so already!

Steve Car Designs presents… the new and updated Kestrel!

Featuring new electronic stability control and completely remade suspension!

3 Likes

this is indeed a car of all time

Less than a day to go!

I have received submissions from:
@Knugcab
@asdren (note: incorrect model/family years - you MUST fix BOTH of these before the deadline, but I will give you only one chance to do so!)
@Vento

If you have a submission ready, please PM it to me before the deadline.

Update: Submissions are closed!

I have not received any new entries. Expect reviews and results to follow shortly.

Oh, I missed the deadline with an hour, been a busy day so no automation time until now, sorry.

I finish the car and post in my own thread if anyone wants to see it.

FUCK i was going to send it in today but missed that the deadline was in UTC+7

ARM34 Reviews and Results: The Top 3 (of 3)

These three proposals for a Kestrel restomod all look tempting, but which one of them will take the crown?

Keith may have had high hopes for his soon-to-be-restomodded Kestrel, but he was initially disappointed to find three proposals on his table by the deadline. He did, however, expect the low turnout to be outweighed by the sheer quality on offer. So he ranked the three proposals in ascending order - a task that turned out to be less difficult than anticipated. The finishing order was as follows:

  • 3rd: Kestrel GT SCD (@Vento): Apart from a few potentially questionable engineering choices (carbon-fiber wheels and active suspension), this doesn’t move the game on enough from an aesthetic standpoint. With the exception of a weird pearlescent pink paint job, it could be too easily confused for a stock example… except from the front, where the bumper treatment makes it look even more dated. Performance has indeed improved, with 332bhp from the rebuilt engine, but it needs a taller sixth gear to fully exploit this. At $39,700 with options, this could’ve benefited from a more thorough styling job and a more appropriate set of performance mods. Still, it deserves credit for one of only two proposals to use the donor car’s OHV head setup, the other one being the next proposal on the list.

  • 2nd: Kestrel Sports Roadster by LMJ Design (Knugcab) - An outrageous proposal for sure, with a roadster conversion topped off by a rear wing and taillight clusters reminiscent of an F50 (although the retractable headlights have been retained). Twin turbos strapped to the enlarged engine yield 577bhp and 695 lb-ft of torque - impressive numbers indeed. However, with a basic entry-level infotainment system, it’s not as comfortable as expected. Also, with significant brake fade (due to a relative lack of brake cooling and unusually soft brake pads), it’s not as good at holding up to the stresses of spirited driving as it should’ve been, not helped by excess understeer (a symptom of undersized tires/wheels and a soft suspension tune) and traction issues (again, due to having too little tire width for the power on tap). So as tempting as it sounds on paper, this one won’t get the nod either, even at $36,500 AMU with options. It did finish ahead of the SCD proposal, though, on looks alone, but the fact that it ranked dead last in terms of sportiness killed its chances stone dead eventually.

  • 1st: RTech Kestrel GT20: If a Far Eastern tuning company got a hold of the Kestrel and worked its magic on it, this would be the result - with its wild body kit (though not as over-the-top as what the LMJ proposal had), it wouldn’t look out of place rampaging through the highways of Tokyo or drifting along the Hakone Pass, especially with those flush-fitting exposed headlight lenses and split rear window. Grafting five-valve cylinder heads (when four-valve units would be almost as effective) onto the engine might seem like overkill, but since the engine is still normally aspirated, the 661 horsepower at 8100 rpm (400 shy of the redline) available are much more controllable than in the LMJ proposal. For $42,400 AMU with options, this is a lot of bang for your buck, especially with the upgraded brakes and wider tire/wheel fitment. Also, instead of a lightweight sports interior, there’s a more luxurious hand-made one inside, although a more upmarket infotainment suite would’ve been preferred. Still, as the proposal that makes the most of the donor car, Keith is sure to make this one his top pick - by a mile.

Epilogue

Keith contacted RTech for the conversion job right away and happily sent them $42,400 AMU. Within a few weeks, the conversion was complete, and his decision to pay RTech instead of the other two companies was vindicated the moment he took it out for a test drive. With it being vastly superior to the donor car in so many ways, he could not be any happier - especially when he gave it a shakedown run on the nearest road course and drag strip, where it remained competitive against newer machinery. But unlike the Bearclaw, this latest project of his will not be sold - he wants himself and his family to keep it in their heirloom for as long as they can, ensuring that they can keep the faith alive for decades to come.

Notes

I tested the viability of this ARM by creating a build using the ruleset I’d outlined in the OP, with the intent of answering the question “What if I’d been an entrant in this particular ARM”?, before waiting to see how close any of the entries got to it in terms of in-game stats. My example test mule, however, was more expensive than any of the actual entrants’ submissions (due to using more extra-cost options than they did) - potentially too much so to sufficiently justify whatever statistical superiority it may have had. However, the RTech proposal came closest to my test mule’s stats, which explains why it won out in the end.

Final Ranking

Many thanks to all those who entered - I hope you enjoyed it as much as you did!

4 Likes

Congratulations asdren! Indeed a worthy winner from what I can see. At least I loved the styling and it seems like the mechanics was a great match too then.

Are you going to take up hosting of round 35?

Thank you @abg7 for hosting!

@Knugcab If you would like to host the next round I more than happy to hand it over to you.

1 Like

Could round 35 include al-rilma maybe?

OK, if you say so! Since I had a poll for ARM33 and the second most popular alternative seemed to be almost as popular as the one that won, I have a theme on my hand so it’s fine with me. I will just have to sync it a bit with the already running challenge I have, but expect it to be up in a not too distant future still.

3 Likes

I hate to say this, but after examining the proposal by @Ch_Flash, it would’ve placed 2nd (ahead of the LMJ and SCD proposals, but behind the RTech design that ultimately won) had it been submitted on time. The main reason for this it that it would’ve had the second-highest drivability and the third-highest sportiness values, and the second-best aesthetics score - a more conservative look than the RTech, but still a worthwhile improvement over the base car. However, I would’ve dinged it for only using 2-valve DOHC heads in 2020+ and having standard 2000s safety (thus incurring a realism penalty for both), while the other three entries all had some form of 2020s safety, so as good as it could’ve been, it still would not have won anyway, especially since it cost $46,000 AMU with options - higher than any of the other proposals I received.

1 Like

Personally I think the 2 valve design is realistic, just “outdated”. Kinda like Pushrod valve designs. The Chevy LS engines still use a Pushrod design even though that design was been surpassed by SOHC and DOHC a long time ago.

I agree with the safety part though.