I’ve managed to make one under $10,000, but it looks like it will be eaten for breakfast by your car. How did you manage to get it under 10k?
Also I guess it doesn’t matter what we set our MSRP to? Mine is going to be like an upmarket GT86, so will have similar specs but cost a bit more for the same performance…
[quote=“utopian201”]I’ve managed to make one under $10,000, but it looks like it will be eaten for breakfast by your car. How did you manage to get it under 10k?
Also I guess it doesn’t matter what we set our MSRP to? Mine is going to be like an upmarket GT86, so will have similar specs but cost a bit more for the same performance…[/quote]
Looks like ours will POSSIBLY be similar then, I went more for a MX-5 type of car, should be interesting but I still have issues with tuning the handling, tend to just use the presets and let it be.
I agree with that strop but to get that thing under the $10k limit there has to be corners cut somewhere, that is possibly where a more “sensible” car would be able to squeak out something, like MPG or cornering. I honestly cant wait until this starts
No limit on production units? Because if i up some quality sliders things get cheaper and better and only the production units go up. Can i just put them at +15 without getting a penalty for the big amount of production units?
Is that no to the first question, the second question, or both? (Of course it wouldn’t make sense to be an answer to both because that would entail a contradiction )
I think it’s a no to the whole concept! Automation charges the player labour costs for every PU generated so if the original question was “So, since you stated that the cars budget was $10k MATERIAL cost then can I go nuts on the sliders since they seem to only affect PU’s?” then the no would refer to the sliders usage but since TOTAL cost takes into account PU’s then the QUESTION is invalid!
Then my point is, it pays to clarify because everybody is new at some point and doesn’t have the same understanding as everybody else. The same question was asked in a separate thread and since this is an often misunderstood point, I felt it important to at least explain what was going on.
I think this light to be one of the golden rules of hosting a tournament actually… More on that later…
[quote=“strop”]Then my point is, it pays to clarify because everybody is new at some point and doesn’t have the same understanding as everybody else. The same question was asked in a separate thread and since this is an often misunderstood point, I felt it important to at least explain what was going on.
I think this light to be one of the golden rules of hosting a tournament actually… More on that later…[/quote]
Yeah, strop, I 100% agree with you; just saying “no” when there were two conflicting questions makes the problem worse, not better! I was just stirring up the mud a bit more with a comment that was, in itself, an answer to the original question but delivered in such a way as to befuddle your attempt at making the OP clearly state his case
Are you going to post a sticky thread with tournament guidelines and FAQ’s? Because that would be an excellent idea if you are
[quote]The challenge is simple: To create the best sport compact your company can, while costing no more than $10,000 to make.
Rules!
Vehicle must be front engined
Vehicle must cost less than $10,000 to manufacture
Vehicle must get atleast 30 MPG
Vehicle must be powered by either an I4 or I6 engine - No V8s!
Vehicle must be RWD
Vehicle must be made in the 2015 model year
[/quote]
I understand it says sport compact, but what precisely is a sport compact in Automation terms? If Norman’s car is Front Engined, RWD, exceeds 30 mpg and was built for the 2015 model year (it clearly states it is a front mounted, RWD, 3.7L I6 in the photo), what is the problem exactly? The OP’s Rules don’t define compact by size, functionality, or even the number of seats. It certainly looks sporty and it doesn’t look like a Cadillac, so I say it qualifies per the OP’s Rules!
I understand it says sport compact, but what precisely is a sport compact in Automation terms? If Norman’s car is Front Engined, RWD, exceeds 30 mpg and was built for the 2015 model year (it clearly states it is a front mounted, RWD, 3.7L I6 in the photo), what is the problem exactly? The OP’s Rules don’t define compact by size, functionality, or even the number of seats. It certainly looks sporty and it doesn’t look like a Cadillac, so I say it qualifies per the OP’s Rules! [/quote]
Thank for your support. This was my same thought.
I’ve sent the car to the competition. Soon we will know if it was accepted or not.
Once they made a 6 wheel Formula 1 car only because it wasn’t written that a car must have 4 wheels. My rule bending is a bit less shocking
That there is the clarification I’m seeking before I make an entry for this. The OP hasn’t been updated since that one entry made it through 3 days ago, so I don’t know where we are in the process. If the car is accepted, then I’ll make a car. If it isn’t, then I won’t unless a rule about acceptable wheelbases or weight is written into the OP.
[quote=“Dragawn”]
I agree, discrimination![/quote]
So, RWD is discrimination? What exactly am I discriminating…? [/quote]
According to the rules, the following:
BMW 135i/1 Series M
And none of the following:
Honda Civic Type R, Volkswagen Golf GTi, Mazda Mazda3 MPS, Subaru Impreza WRX STi, Audi RS3 Sportback, Ford Focus RS, etc…
I have nothing at all against RWD, I just think that restricting a sport compact to RWD only makes as much sense as running a FWD-only drift competition, given that there’s exactly one real-world example (that I can think of, anyway), which doesn’t really count given BMW’s obsession with RWD.
Also, yes, what is the definition of “sport compact” according to your rules?
To be honest, Norman, there are no real definitions (in the real world) for what a “compact” is. It is an objective classification. So, technically speaking, the Cadillac ElDorado could qualify as a “compact” unless a defined rule prohibited it (wheelbase under 100", weight under 3,000 lbs, etc.). I drive a sport compact. I only know it is called a sport compact because it is called one by many other people. It has a 103.3" wheelbase and weighs roughly 3,000 lbs. Both the Camaro and the Corvette have shorter wheelbases and only outweight it by a few hundred pounds (probably due to the V8 under the hood). Other than the V8 (Camaros come with V6’s also, and in the 80’s came with I4’s even), what makes them not a sport compact?
@Sayonara: I agree. Most (but certainly not all) of what “I” would consider to be a sport compact (including my own car) are FWD vehicles!!
Definitions of the compact car segment from around the world (from Wikipedia):
USA: 100–109.9 cubic feet of combined passenger and cargo space
Japan: “less than 4.7 m (15.4 ft) long, 1.7 m (5.6 ft) wide, 2 m (6.6 ft) high and with engine displacement at or under 2,000 cc (120 cu in)”
Europe: complicated, but roughly correlates to “like a Corolla or Golf”. An MX-5 is not like a Corolla or Golf but is a bit like a Lotus Elise so these are grouped together as sports cars.
So if you combine all of these together, a compact car in Automation terms should have a certain range of wheelbase, a minimum utility score, a maximum engine displacement, and seat more than two people - all with very high tameness.
A sports compact is the same thing but faster and sportier.