Left: Centurion 100 and 120 by @ldub0775. Middle: Bazard CVL6 and BTH8 by @Edsel . Right: Empire Albert and Victoria Sportstock by @UnderlovedGhost
Normally, I start each round off with an introduction, with some musings on the state of the market segment and somesuch. The way that the market and review process went, however, both push those musings down the line, after the first review - which was written by @moroza.
No more cameos for now. Left: Victoria. Right: Albert.
Empire brings about two vehicles that look like they belong in a Circus Sideshow - the SportStock pair, with on-theme names of Albert and Victoria. Entering the market in 1972, they are essentially the same car with and without a cargo area roof - Al is a 3-door wagon or panel van, and Vicky a ute. Officially classified as utility vehicles, and duly earning the corresponding tax cut, in form and function they were at best a fanciful stretch of the definition of “utility”. Like many a bored aristocrat of recent centuries, these royals descended into decadence and leisure while paying lip service to actual utility, and are so out of touch with commoners’ reality that they fall flat on their (otherwise good-looking) faces the moment they attempt anything resembling that oh-so-plebian phenomenon called Work.
Visually, the bold, loud colors, stylish wheels, and flat-black hoods with a large scoop in the middle announce that they’re here to play, not work. The high-quality premium-grade interior is a nice place to be - one you’ll want to keep that way by keeping out things like tools and mud. The low ride height, protrusive chrome quad exhausts, and effectively nonexistent bumpers make it quite plain that they’d much prefer not to get their hands dirty or their knees or knuckles scuffed.We’re quite happy to stay in here and, uh, supervise. While appearances are generally not this segment’s priority, the initial impression given turns out to be quite accurate.
Both have legitimate cargo-only space of ample volume, but cargo weight capacity is adequate for light errand use only, at a mere 405kg for Albert, 411 for Victoria. Nor do the SportStocks get very far with what cargo they can haul; sporting Sport-compound tires - albeit fairly high-quality ones - and driving two of them with the ground clearance of a large skateboard, attempting to traverse any surface more challenging than some wet leaves is toying with the fates.
The one use case where they show some competence - if moderately - is towing. With the grunt of 362Nm (267ft-lb) at 3600rpm, and their own light weight - Albert at 1002kg, Victoria (unexpectedly) even less, at 958 - they can play tugboat fairly well. What in normal driving are overly aggressive brakes become more welcome with a load, remaining fade-free. The short wheelbase and relatively long rear overhang keep the SportStocks from excelling at this task, and in any case the proposition of buying one specifically to tow, like the idea of buying it for any purpose at all, is significantly hindered by the ATROCIOUS RUNNING COSTS.
From the utility market’s perspective, the biggest nail in this coffin isn’t Albert and Victoria’s less-than-stellar competence in utility, it’s the cost of upkeep commensurate with being named after long-reigning monarchs of a vast and wealthy empire. In the context of all vehicles entering the Aragan market this round, this pair of neon-colored nobility enjoy the dubious honors of…
- Fourth highest annual taxes (behind the Leviathan 490 and two full-fat luxury cars) at $1179,
- Third highest fuel consumption (behind the 490 and one much larger real utility vehicle) at 17.4L/100km, and
- Second highest annual service costs (behind only the Helios Turbo) at about $2825. Yes, it costs more to service than the Leviathan or the DCMW Al-Sayaadim.
But wait, there’s more! Those service costs are for routine, planned maintenance, and don’t include
- Unscheduled repair costs due to the fourth lowest reliability (67.8). And if all that were still not enough,
- The fourth-worst corrosion resistance (21.0, versus a median 34.8) means either no winter use, or labor-intensive rust countermeasures, or increasingly nonsensical body shop bills, or watching them decompose into small grimy piles of iron oxide. Then at least they’ll be cheaper to service.
As vehicles for actual utility use, they’re unequivocal duds. Where they might have redeemed themselves is as performance cars, but there too is a problem - while high-quality Sport tires and a lightweight full-double-wishbone chassis are a great start, it’s kept from a satisfactory finish by overly grabby brakes, inappropriate staggered tires, and sloppy, mismatched spring and damper rates, ending up with merely ok handling performance and comparably lackluster feel. What remains their strength is straight-line speed; by most measures, they are the fourth fastest and most powerful on the market and by far the fastest for the (initial) price. To spend any less, the next choice is the Hikaru Katana YR, with less than half the power. To go any faster on public roads means either the Helios Turbo (+$7k) or the DCMW Al-Sayaadim (+$13k) or the Leviathan (+$22k). Strong acceleration with mediocre handling would normally amount to a muscle car… except in Araga, with a bad taste in its mouth from previous failures wearing that label, there was no market for those.
In the end, their only saving grace was that a few tuners, whether out of boredom or dedication, figured out revised footwork that not only handled much better but was also significantly cheaper to run. The resulting trickle of sales was enough to keep the lights on at Empire dealers, but only just.
Near row, from left to right: Bazard BTH8, Centurion 120. Far row, from left to right: Bazard CVL6, Centurion 100, Saguaro EcoWagon
With the sideshow ponies’ acts out of the way, we finally get to the real workhorses of the Aragan economy, a quartet of models from Bazard and Centurion… And here is where things get difficult, and it’s time to deal with the difficult reality of the challenge. It’s difficult enough that I (Crypt) have taken over from Moroza, because challenge considerations and editorial discretion must now dictate how things progress. Also partially because of time issues, but these considerations are part of it too.
The flip side of the massive amount of sports entries is, well, an absolute dearth of utility entries. There are six entries… But those represent three companies each providing two trims each. And one of those pairs, as covered above, is not really a great utility vehicle. Then, one of them is only available for the 1976 Model Year. That emissions waiver mentioned above? It’s because the segment, in canon, would have seen zero utility vehicles for 1970, probably. I can’t check and see if anything from last round happened to be compliant, because of how much has changed. Edsel initially intended for Bazard to withdraw and spend a year retooling, but the government is so desperate to keep the flow of utility vehicles going. As the submissions stand, Bazard effectively enjoys a monopoly over the utility segment from 1971 to 1975. I’ll probably have some mechanisms in place for future rounds to try and deal with these issues, but for now… What are my options here?
- I can make the Bazards compete against the 4.2 stats of last round’s utility entries… But the Bazard has to contend with the rebalanced bottom end system and tightened emissions regulations. It’s not fair to Edsel.
- I can open last round’s entries in Ellisbury and just keep them as they are. This will probably generate some completely non-functional cars and awful reliability because of the changes, not great. I can make some tweaks, but that’s kinda hard and it’s not great for the challenge.
- I can compare as if the Centurion was released earlier and ignore ages a little. To an extent, I’ve done this elsewhere… But the only other car from 76 was the BetterDeals, and a lot of entries skew early enough in the era that the year isn’t the biggest difference, and there’s plenty to compare otherwise. Some of the biggest benefits of the Centurions hinge on tech that really only becomes viable late, it’s not fair to Edsel.
- I can manually reduce the model year of the Centurions to simulate it being rushed out… But as mentioned, some of the biggest benefits are tech that’s only viable late in the round. It’s not fair to Ldub.
- I can simulate a genuine monopoly where Bazard could sell literally anything and have it succeed. This makes for boring reviews with little in the way of comments, but rewards Edsel for accurately spotting an underserved market - remember, there were issues with how many utility vehicles were submitted before.
- I can come up with some nebulous idea of where competing stats should be, and try to review on vibes as though competition exists. This allows me to have at least some comment on the Bazard. Then, I can look at what the Centurion does when it hits the market.
I’ll be doing the last two. I like rewarding people for identifying market trends well, but I also want to have some level of comment. Plus, the idea that an entire segment like this with relatively inflexible buyers would completely be abandoned is just a little bit far for me.
Edsel tells me that, in the lore, the C-Line includes utes. The Bazard lineup is a lot like the real truck lineups of the time, where you’d submit an order form with multiple selections, cars offered with plenty of options. In real life, there were dozens of potential Chevrolet trucks; in Bazard lore, there would be dozens of potential Bazard trucks. Here, however, I have the CVL6, a van. For posterity, CVL6 is similar to a monitor name or similar, for C-Line Van, Low trim with a 6-cylinder engine. Thing is, I won’t implement options like that so I can only really judge 2 but… You get the idea. This is a 72 model, because the C line is entirely new from that year - a downsized version of the larger new-spec B-Lines, which launched in 71. I’m doing it first because of the last 2 letters - low-trim 6-cylinder. It is a perfectly acceptable van. Fuel economy is higher than most commuter cars at 15.6 L/100km, but there is good reason for this - a simple pushrod V6 with a single 2 barrel carburetor pushes it forward, while the body has been optimised for cooling rather than drag. Said V6 is also only 2.3 litres large in the C-Line. It can be bored and stroked out to over 4, but you get 2.3 here. Although it reaches 100 km/h in a perfectly acceptable 14.3 seconds, that’s almost as far as it goes. You’ll have to wait another 12 seconds to reach 120 km/h, and you’ll slowly creep from there to the top speed of 127 km/h. This performance is not bad enough to score points off on the ADPR score, but something is very odd if you get passed by a C-Line Bazard on the freeway. The 4-speed gearbox leaves few options at highway speed, but it’s worth it for simplicity and cost. Braking performance is similarly just adequate enough to pass the ADPR’s 65m threshold, stopping in 58.2 metres - the somewhat heavier B-Line takes 60.8 metres. Not great performance, but still sufficient.
At least it keeps the tax low, almost crossing into the territory of negative taxable displacement. The lowest level of the acceleration tax is higher than the tax on a C-Line Bazard. The included hard tyres, the simplicity of the engine and interior, all of it keeps the running costs incredibly low. Similarly, the simple construction keeps reliability high, at 81.8 - a mark only beaten very barely by the C100 (more on that later).
Features are reasonable, with some standout areas. Rather than the “barely acceptable” marks in performance, the CVL8 receives commendations for its safety features - for 1972, it is on the cutting edge of safety with the sorts of features that are standard for premium models, but not universal on the budget end. The ladder chassis brings the overall score down, but buyers in the segment generally know the benefits of such a chassis. The radio is sorta cheap but at least it’s an 8-Track, and the seats and padding aren’t the bottom of the barrel like the VME Squirrel is - even though sources like this note the presence of a headliner (one of the differences between basic and standard) as a premium feature in trucks of the time, Bazard provides them as standard even in their lower trim. Hydraulic power steering is another feature that is by no means standard at this time, but it is provided by Bazard. It’s not needed when the vehicle is empty, but the load capacity is more than the vehicle’s weight - so it’s a welcome piece of assistance when you load it up. Brake fade is pleasantly absent, formerly a spectre of the segment but now a thing of the past.
Partially because it’s the more compact one and partially because it’s just well designed, the C-Line is not particularly difficult to drive. The performance is a drag, but for just regular driving around the city, if you can handle a stick, it’s fine. Comfort is around the lower tier of the market, level with the cheaper, lower-tier commuter cars, but that’s fine too. It’s a perfectly fine vehicle to make money in. You wouldn’t drive it out of choice, but you would drive it to make money. That’s really all it needs to be, isn’t it? What more does the lower end of the utility market need than a competent, cheap, reliable appliance? In 1971, whatever nebulous competition may or may not exist aims to equal and compete with the Bazard. The monopoly could allow Bazard to cut corners, but they haven’t. It’s just a solid line.
The Bazard B-Line boasts a massively improved load capacity, partially due to being larger. We’ll get to some of the impacts of that, but let’s focus on the issues created more or less directly due to the load capacity.
Crypt Rants About Brake Fade
The C-Line Bazard uses slightly high-performance brake pads, setting the type to 64. The front brakes have two pistons, are as large as possible (275mm) and have the maximum amount of cooling. Reducing the slider to the default 50 causes some utility brake fade to manifest, so all of this is really needed.
The thing is, utility fade is based on cargo capacity. So despite the rims on the B-Line Bazard being larger to accommodate 50mm larger brakes, those 64-rated pads are no longer sufficient. Even my best efforts to retune at 64 by adding an extra piston still have about 4% utility brake fade. Still not going to have issues with the ADPR, but on the edge. The B-Line has zero fade. How? By using ninety-five rated pads. These are not pads I would expect to find on a utility car. These are not even pads I would expect to find on a sports car. These are race pads.
They are one of two evils, and I’m not sure whether they’re the greater or lesser. On one hand, there is brake fade, which I have taken points off for in the past. On the other, there is a moderate hit to drivability and comfort (around 6-7% compared to the pads in the C-Line, but that already gets a 2.5% hit to comfort and a 1.5% hit to drivability). Those race pads are also adding an extra 75 bucks to your service costs - which is a decent amount in this market!
There is, of course, a solution which is probably more palatable here but not in other challenges - vented front discs. Perhaps it’d be a realism bin elsewhere and that’s why you didn’t do it, or maybe you just didn’t think about it. Vented discs completely solve these issues, and I’d probably allow them, especially seeing what solid discs do with fade. They’re cheaper than these race pads too, by quite a lot actually. You kicked too much ass and got penalised for it. That kinda sucks? If you cheesed your suspension and reduced load capacity, this wouldn’t be an issue except your load capacity would be smaller and…
Utility is kinda weird, I guess, and utility fade especially. Maybe if I could see fade at a specific load, it’d allow for better decisions, but as it stands… Sportiness is similar, I suppose, but cars that can get up to massive speeds have good reason to use exotic brakes. I feel mixed about it all, really, so I’m going to sorta mentally update things I guess, I don’t know, I’ll have to work it out, I just wanted to write this all out, it’s almost cathartic. The existence of vented discs won’t actually make me do it, so let’s say aftermarket parts came out (yay, more soft-required modifications in the utility market!) to apply those vented pads. They offer a small increase to comfort and drivability and are decently cheaper. This situation possibly shouldn’t exist, you picked a kinda bad solution when a good-for-here one exists, so that’s the results.
Summary of the rant: Aftermarket vented brake kits give free svc reduction, for better drivability and comfort. It’s only about 75 bucks saved per year and a couple of points for each stat, but still moves the dial. Back on track, there are a couple of upgrades to the BTH8 (B-Line Truck High 8-Cylinder) over the CVL6, but they mainly come back to the size. The size is really the big draw here, the cargo space is nearly twice as long and a little wider too, while the carrying capacity is approximately doubled too, with only a modest 60% increase in empty weight. That’s the difference between a B- and C-Line. That size brings with it increased weight, of course, causing poorer fuel economy - and it’s also accomplished by a larger turning circle, meaning poorer driving dynamics. The tyres have been swapped from the long-life compound to a heavy duty one, which makes sense given the massive potential load on the tyres now. That extra weight is pulled by a larger V8 - take the V6 we saw before, add two cylinders, bore and stroke it a little and add injection and more balancing mass, plus a higher redline. This does all make it a bit harder to maintain and a little less reliable, but it’s a worthwhile trade. It’d be technically acceptable for performance with the V6 in it, but the V8 is absolutely needed. Especially if it’s loaded with cargo. Finally, we get some creature comforts and options. For comfort, there’s four speakers for the 8-track, and nicer ones too. There’s also an offroad pack, with side steps, lifted suspension, an offroad skidtray and a manual locker. It’s still really just a car you spend your 9 to 5 in, some positives here and there. The general philosophy is “buy what you need” - only need a C-Line’s worth of cargo space? Save on weight and fuel. Need to fill up a B-Line? Get the big one. Want some extra grunt? It’s there. You add an extra 5000 or so going from the bottom-spec CVL6 to the BTH8, which feels like a normal spread through a model line. You could buy a premium car for the price of a BTH8, but you get a whole lot more vehicle with the BTH8 - sacrificing comfort for utility, as this market is wont to do. It’s really a successful philosophy, and makes me wish that options actually existed in Automation. But they don’t, and I’m not adding the complexity to include them. Probably.
The Centurion 100 slots in between the CVL6 and BTH8, in terms of price, a little closer to the BTH8 - and remember, this is the cheaper one. Price-wise, it’s closer to the BTH8, on the lower end of premium cars. It brings one major feature that is a first for Araga - improved safety features. An airbag is present in the steering wheel, and the column and pedals are designed to collapse on impact. This puts Centurion ahead of the curve. They even went and polished it up a fair bit, whereas Bazard merely went for standard levels. Without a 76 MY submission from Bazard and with the amount of techpool that goes into the safety, I’m inclined to call this an on-theme win for Centurion, and one that makes their government masters happy.
The Centurion is also between the CVL6 and BTH8 in terms of running costs too, and exactly between them for fuel economy. There’s less room to make the engine bigger after the fact, but otherwise the two are pretty close - except that the Centurion uses an inline six rather than a V-engine, reducing the number of parts involved. The Centurion is marginally more reliable, but that’s largely the result of several years of advancement in techniques which Bazard would surely mimic, a dead heat on that really. It’s substantially better against the elements, for some inscrutable reason (see previous rant). Alloy rims are included, and the tyres are somewhat softer and more comfortable too, more normal. Centurion is also definitely used to its time on big trucks, where staggered tyres aren’t as much of an issue - they don’t raise the service cost too much here, but they do make things a touch more complex than on the Bazard.
The Centurion does use coil springs rather than the leafs employed by Bazard, and the quality of the 8-Track mirrors the superior H-trim one rather than the cheaper one in the CVL6. Add in some extra effort on polishing the interior, and it all makes it substantially more comfortable than either Bazard - you’d need to venture into the premium segment to get more comfortable. You could head there for the price of a Centurion 100, but some people just need a bed on their truck.
As for cargo capacity, it’s once more between the two Bazards. A larger (and hence more comfortable) cab means that the bed length is only a small amount longer than the C-Line Bazard, despite being equal in overall length to the B-line - a larger (and hence easier to work in) engine compartment is part of that too. The suspension is tuned more towards cargo capacity than that of the Bazard, but the coil springs cause it to be closer to the C-Line than the B-Line there, about one third of the way between the two. The wheel arches sitting in the middle of the bed restrict options for some loads, such as a washing machine, but it’s fairly set between the two.
In short: The Centurion 100 is in the middle ground between the C and B lines. In raw “value for hauling”, it’s probably a little worse than the Bazard pair… because some money went to being a more comfortable, safer experience. Neither option is the wrong choice, really, if you’re a small business owner, there’s a nice array of options. Want your work car to feel nicer than your commuter? Pay a little extra for a Centurion. Just want to make money? Buy a Bazard. It’s a small difference, but it’s there, and it finally, in 1976, makes for a good market. The Centurion 100 slots in well.
But what if you really want to spend extra, for something really nice? For that, there’s the Centurion 120. Remember how I said you’d have to spend premium dollars for the better-than-standard comfort in the Centurion 100? Well, you can spend top-of-premium dollars for the top-of-premium comfort in the Centurion. You get an extended cab, plus they’ll strip out the passable standard interior and put something truly premium in, swap the i6 for a similarly-constructed V8 for extra power, swap the transmission for a fancy electronic automatic while they’re at it, tune up the brakes and give you a nicer grille… All for about 4 grand more. The result is a car that can compete with the premium cars on the market for comfort, at a premium price. Sure, the more complex interior has more to go wrong with it and it’s a little less economical due to the extra weight and displacement, but omelettes and eggs and all that. It’s a sensible optional upgrade, really. Not a whole lot of changes, but enough to be a solid package… Just seriously consider whether you want them to retune the suspension. It’s a large part of how the car can compete with premium… Because it’s far softer, and can carry less cargo as a result. Of course, refusing said change puts it merely in the middle of premium for top of premium prices.
The thing with the Centurion lineup is that it’s poorly timed… For the domestic market. In 1976, businesses are preparing for a war that’s clearly on the horizon. In early years it was a question of if. In 75, the answer tilted towards probably… And in most of 76, it’s a question of when, and the answer is “probably soon”. So business owners want to save their money a bit, just in case. A couple of people bought Centurion 100s, but if you had the extra 4000 for a 120… putting it under the mattress looked nice.
The nice part for Centurion is that they didn’t need to worry about going bankrupt over the war. The 100 and 120 was a solid platform, certainly not awful enough to sink the company - and by making the 120 so similar to the 100, there’s not a lot of an impact from unsold stock. The V8s would sell elsewhere, the extended cabs could probably have a standard interior fitted, so they’re just left with the unsold premium interiors, not that much money in inventory. If the war starts? They won’t be in danger of going bankrupt, and could probably make more 100s and 120s after the war. That all hinged upon an Aragan victory, of course, but official policy was that strategic plans including war should assume an Aragan victory.
The ability to trade premium trucks for arms and armaments was an unspoken plus.
Of all the markets in the world, the utility market is perhaps the least sensitive to aesthetics. “Don’t be completely atrocious” is generally enough. That’s probably why there’s no metallic paint here in the segment. That’s why the CVL6 has exposed hinges on its rear door and lacks chrome in its grille. But all the entries here don’t just barely clear the bar, they leap right over it. The front fascias of the Bazards look much better than many commuter cars in my opinion - the rears are a touch more basic than the fronts, but that’s perfectly fine, really. The Centurions, meanwhile, are a tad more intricate with some more touches to the grilles and more complex rear lights. The Centurions and the BTH8 are both shown in really nice two-tone designs - the C120 uses a nice red to go with its premium position, while the C100 and BTH8 both use simpler (and probably longer-lasting) brown and tan colours. The CVL6, meanwhile, has a pleasant mint colour that would look great on other cars. Functional design elements are aplenty here too, with chunky bumpers on the Centurions, tow balls on the Bazards and even a modelled rail for the sliding doors on the van. It’s really well done, from both model lineups.
Believe it or not, this section was actually Edsel’s idea. Edsel also advocated for the Mijikai, incidentally. IC, it directly harms Bazard - but Edsel is a serious professional and a jam up guy. So: How does the one wagon on the market do for utility?
This was an idea we tried last round, with more wagons on the market but also more utility vehicles. The Saguaro T-REE 1190 is available in two specifications - the Wagon, and the 350 AMU more expensive EcoWagon. The EcoWagon will set you back an extra 500 bucks at the dealership and an extra 40 per year in fixed costs… And it’s absolutely the one you want here, because the Eco means fuel economy, dropping underneath half that of the C-Line (the most economical of the above). It’s about as fun to drive as the C-Line Bazards, and holds about half the cargo (once you remove the rear seats). Running costs are similar, but the purchase price is a cool 1500 AMU cheaper.
This is perhaps the clearest nebulous competition to the Bazard C-Lines. Had the C-Lines sucked and offered awful cargo capacity or comfort or the like, the Saguaro would have been a sensible replacement for it. Many Bazard buyers would have checked out the big cactus. Instead, the T-REE is really only great for a small niche. The cargo needs to be relatively light, but stuff like sand and mulch aren’t great - you really want a bed there. The buyer needs to be particularly concerned with keeping costs down, and ideally benefits from having three seats in the rear, perhaps to run the family around in addition to work.
Is there potential for some utility buyers to save that little bit of money, deal with the slightly more difficult access of a wagon over a van with sliding doors and a nice wide rear door? I think there is, yes, but not that much. We are talking small amounts of money here after all, for relatively targeted buyers. Are those buyers enough to keep a model afloat? Is it enough of an niche for a somewhat unloved model to find some success? Can it turn a “not quite” into a “yeah, sorta!”? Yeah, sorta! It’s a weird little hybrid work/family wagon and someone, somewhere will want to buy it.