This is what I was going for- a hassle free, cheap, utilitarian truck with decent drivability and a lot of configuarability.
Um, I don’t mean to be rude, but was there anything to say about the Somervell itself? It’s never mentioned alone in a sentence O_O
1 Like
Performance-wise, the Somervell was good. It benefited hugely from being a convertible rather than a coupe, in terms of looks - and the wheel covers were a nice distinguishing touch. Being so close to the limit of reliability didn’t help, though.
Good to know that my suspension set up is weird. I dont know a lot about that stuff, but i should have guessed that 2 different supensions might not blend well
If it helps, I could explain why it was weird;
Your suspension setup is that you had a solid axle in the front; the problem with that is that the engine is usually also at the front. So to accommodate both, the car’s ride height has to be super tall so the axle can go under the engine. The only reason you would ever want to do that is if either your car was meant to be super tall anyway (like an offroader), or if you were trying to build as cheap a car as possible; your car, being a sports car, fits neither.
So in real life, it’s pretty rare for a car to have solid axle in the front, and almost unheard of to have one in only the front. Having solid axles in the rear doesn’t come with the same drawbacks, though, and is still popular even today in work vehicles and offroaders (the 2005-2009 Mustang also had a solid rear, I believe).
3 Likes
Up until the mid 30s, almost all cars (exceptions have always existed I guess) had solid front axles, but after that, individual suspension was starting to take over. The only reason why one should find a solid axle up front in a 50s sports car is if the model was a carryover from the pre-war era, more or less.
3 Likes
And that would also imply a solid rear.
3 Likes
Worth noticing there, though, is that most cars in the early 30s and earlier had the front axle in front of the engine, hence not the same problem.
5 Likes
If the engine is behind the front axle, wouldn’t that technically make the car mid-engined?
2 Likes
That’s a discussion I don’t even want to touch, especially not if we start involving most older FWD french cars… 
5 Likes
True ofc my friend.
But in most cases we refer to cars having engine between passenger compartment and rear axle as mid-engined, even tho Merc SLS, Dodge Viper and some others are also in this group, having it between front axle and passenger area
3 Likes
the term here is “Front-Mid” engined
so technically its both (?)
thank you guys i really appreciate it. hopefully next round i’ll make something not as weird lol
4 Likes
Excuse my excitement but i just went in to change the front suspension out of curiosity and HOLY SHIT IT RIDES SO MUCH LOWER!!!
4 Likes
We all learn. Challenges like this are a way of speeding up learning.
6 Likes
Trial by fire(ing squad).
3 Likes
A solid front axle always has a higher minimum ride height than any independent front suspension, and is therefore generally not recommended for use on anything except heavy-duty off-roaders that require the extra ground clearance.
Ha - ha, the game doesn’t feature solid axles at all, there are some kind of differentials everywhere that separate the shaft!
Abg, it was no wonder!
? Solid axles don’t necessarily need to be drive axles. And every drive axle has some kind of gear differential setup, whether it be open or a locker or an LSD. The term ‘solid axle’ only means that the differential and output shaft housings are one piece, or if it’s not a drive axle it’s simply a solid axle connecting the two wheels (like in the above picture of the Model A (?) chassis).
But I think this is getting off topic. In the interest of not spamming this post, any questions or discussions about chassis setups can be dm’d. I’ve also been working with Automation since it was on kee engine, so if anyone has questions feel free to ask me in dm.
5 Likes
An update on judging:
Since doing those first three posts, progress has stalled somewhat. The largest reason was work. Thursday and Friday are typically work days, but I also had to work all day on Saturday due to a work meeting. Then, on Sunday, I found out that my members in a group project haven’t been contributing and there’s a mess to clean up there - I got part done but still have some to do. Today was another work day, tomorrow is split between uni and a late work meeting, Wednesday may have a slot for reviews depending on what is left to be done. Thursday and Friday are back to work… You get the idea.
Topping it all off, I’ve been involved in a medical trial for treatment of chronic anxiety, and I’ve been particularly stressed, which have both made it harder to judge. Finally, I’ve run into some technical issues with bodies just vanishing while I am playing and breaking cars.
In practical terms, this means that the earliest “natural” closing date for round 2 is the 6th of June - the third Monday after the 17th/18th of May. The issue is that I have exams on the 14th and 15th - so I’d be judging when I’m meant to be studying and preparing. So, ALC2 will most likely close at some point between the 15th and 20th of June. Depends how I feel. Yes, that does probably mean around double the expected round time, but IRL and exams have to come first. I’d much rather extend a round than shorten one.
22 Likes