Honestly, I am unconvinced by your argument; that high-pitched scream could only have come from a flatplane V8, whereas a crossplane V8 sounds much deeper - and angrier. So my car basically sounds like an HSV; yours sounds more like a 458 Speciale.
and mine sounds like a real v8 muscle engine lol
2 wins??? did i won another challenge? or did i missed something?
@abg7 hmm… maybe, i could have just forgotten about it. maybe the flatplane just because it’s lighter i think. makes sense
owh… i haven’t read that and now it kinda killed the excitement for me…
soz bby.
np bae
1 Like
5th place, strong start, lets see what happens when the pigs are taken to the slaughter(race track)
Congrats to @koolkei I’m glad it was the little pony car that managed to beat all the big monster machines! Thanks to @Sillyworld for hosting I really liked the presentation with the spinning car and engine note really great idea and helps compare designs.
I’m really surprised to have beaten @asdren as my design was somewhat rushed which is probably why it had such terrible handling and gearbox setup. But I can at least claim highest-placed car with four doors! I found out the pre-set suspension tune gave it a negative camber only to the front wheels causing terrible oversteer…oops! However, I’m glad to get some useful feedback to refine that design mainly changing to cast from low friction cast which why it had such low rev limit. Also fixed the handling and improved the gear ratios while overall lowering costs.
Great work @Sillyworld, love the format! You’re certainly much better at playing with the engine testing mode than I am, haha.
We at Adenine would like to point out that with nearly twice the fuel economy of our competitors, the Defiant may end up being the best value in the long run! 
1 Like
It’s not over yet! We all have two more contests in which our cars will be judged: a time trial at Sebring and a voting round in which we get to decide the best-looking car.
In the next round, a great deal of sportiness will be needed, but some drivability could be useful as it will help the car put its power down more easily. The last round should favor entries which look like proper muscle cars 
2 Likes
For the beauty contest (and I did put in a serious effort on this part, to both create something new yet emulate the design language from the first stage), I’d like to reiterate that the design was supposed to look like it did in this post. If you need, @Sillyworld, I can resubmit with the mods correctly attributed.
He he he, actually, see those grey lines in the track? those are supossed to be concrete instead of tarmac, those spots favour drivability over sportiness ;D
@Strop please do 
Given that my car handles nicely and is quite easy to drive (an unexpected side-effect of its heavy all-steel construction), even with just 475 bhp it should do much better on the next round. In fact, anyone using a geared or electric LSD is likely to have a considerable advantage due to the increased drivability and sportiness that these parts confer to any car that uses them. On the other hand, if a car is too light, the reduced weight over the driven wheels will actually increase wheelspin and thus compromise its drivability, particularly if its engine output is very high.
311hp 2valve DOHC MPFI engine. bye bye guys. i’ll be racing popcorn while you guys eating the track
Awesome presentation, @Sillyworld, thanks for the effort.
Second place is good. The Howler Firebrand is supposed to be an all-rounder in this competition, so I am hoping for good points from 2nd and 3rd Stages.
Grats on the win, @koolkei, well deserved. I suspected you might take this stage after our discussion earlier. The first draft of the Firebrand cost $26k, at which point I thought, “right, track oriented car, what can I do without?” and started peeling off the dollas. It wasn’t easy, but it was both fun and educational. Though the price reduction did cost me a fair bit of time around Sebring, I did leave a few expensive bits on there for next round (like an active wing). Seems likely that @Asdren will take Round 2 with another specialist. With all that money in there I’d be surprised if the Revera wasn’t packing some blistering speed.
@abg7, I would argue that the Firebrand is quite the opposite of compromised. It’s track focused and (as stated in my ad earlier on) the R1B is the entry level trim for people who want speed first and budget second. Also possibly for people who would put bolt on some carbon ceramics on the first day with the money they saved on the price. If I had wanted to go all out for Round 1, no holds barred, the easiest way would probably have been LESS comfort and drivability (via a basic interior) but that didn’t mesh with The Plan.
Good round all. See you at the track.
1 Like
There, the presentation of Strop’s car is fixed now 
Now the next round!
ROUND 2:
[smartass]Win on sunday, sell on monday[/smartass]
A simple race around the Sebring speedway track.
Times are from the flyinglap (or the 2nd sector in the track).
Congratulation to @Asdren 
a pretty quick car indeed (despise being turbo with a drivability penalty). Also amazing performance of the Firebrand R1B.
5 Likes
I’m pretty happy with my results! Faster than most of the field in a 40mpg car 
That being said, I’m pretty sure the winner is going to be either Asdren or Howler depending on how many styling points the Firebrand can accrue.
No surprises here. The most powerful cars have the edge in the time trial.
The funny thing is that the Revera GTX is turborcharged, so it has a drivability penalty, but is track oriented so it can overcome that. The Firebrand is NA so it has no drivability penalty, however, due to its weight and the insufficient braking it ended up 300 miliseconds behind.
Probably, if the Firebrand were upgraded to a lighter engine (the steel engine alone weighted over 400kg) it would have been faster.