— Post deleted —
Newly reopened Centauri Industries has submitted it’s sporty 1992 personal luxury coupe the Knight GT for review. 
[size=150]1992 CONAN COMPACT F 1.6L[/size]
The Conan Compact F 1.6L is Conan’s small hatchback model that rivals cars such as the MKIII VW Golf GTI.
Performance http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Conan Compact comes with a rather sporty sounding and high revving 1.6-litre 4-cylinder engine that produces 128 bhp @ 7000 rpm and 106 lb-ft @ 4700 rpm. Thanks to a almost completely flat torque curve and the fact 85%+ of max torque is available at 1000 rpm, the performance is pretty good from the word go. This also means that the engine is a very reasonable smooth performer, however it could do with being a little bit more responsive to throttle inputs as you can feel a slight delay between flooring it and actually performing. The gearbox is geared pretty well and there are no large jumps between the 5 gears that you have available. At motorway speeds it is more than happy to cruise along in top gear and although some speedy overtaking maneuvers make require a downsift, the car has more than enough welly to get accelerating if needed. The 0-62 mph time is 9.9 seconds and the top speed is 131 mph, similar performance to the MKIII Golf GTI.
Ride Comfort http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The suspension set-up of the Compact F is very firm. The front suspension is a bit more forgiving, however the rear suspension is overly firm. At low speeds the whole car shakes and fidgets about over the road surface, be it well surfaced or not, and it can become tiring. As speeds increase though, the car does begin to settle down and although it remains firm, the front suspension is capable of soaking up almost all bumps and the rear suspension is reasonable, and this is also helped by the fact that the tyres aren’t too low profile. The suspension does do a good job at settling down after going over a large bump at higher speeds and it doesn’t bounce around at all. The body roll is kept extremely well under control, keeping you from leaning over in the cabin around the bends.
Handling http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
Where the suspension is bad it is made up for with the handling. The handling was very almost given a 5-star rating however it wasn’t quite worthy. The car grips on around bends very well and it takes an awful lot of pushing before it starts to run out of grip and understeer. The steering feels well-weighted, precise, responsive and gives a good level of feedback, boosting your confidence further around bends. The addition of traction control also helps keep the car more under control, however it would feel more and fun and more sporty if it didn’t have any like most other cars in this category. As we know this car manages to corner very flat.
Refinement http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Compact F also does a rather good job at shutting the outside noises from getting into the cabin. The engine is quite at idle and the same goes for when it is cruising, however when travelling at motorway speeds it is doing 4000 rpm, which does spoil its ability to keep quiet. It also does a reasonable job at getting the volume levels just right for when you are accelerating. It makes noise but it doesn’t make your ears hurt. The road and wind noise is kept pretty much silent up until higher speeds when it begins to intrude a bit, but it isn’t enough to make you raise your voice or turn up the radio.
Equipment http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
This car does have a reasonable level of equipment however it is lacking somewhat. All the basics come as standard on this car and it comes with a few other things you expect there to be, however it doesn’t come with any more than that. It is fine for you to go from A to B, but you may find you will have found life with the car easier after doing a number of long journeys or having the car for a while. It does come with good safety equipment though
Quality http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Compact F, as well as having a rather mediocre level of equipment, only has a rather mediocre interior as well. The materials used in the interior aren’t very special but they are reasonable enough, especially those in the higher up and more visible areas. There are rather large areas of rather boring looking solid black plastic around the cabin and in the lower areas, as expected, these plastics become hard, rough, flimsy and cheap feeling and looking. It does feel very well screwed together, which is a bonus.
Reliability http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
This is another area where the Compact F does a very good job and almost got a 5-star rating. The engine has been through a lot of testing and it has proved to be very reliable and requires little servicing, however this may be down to the fact the Conan spend 175+ hours making the engine in this car making almost impossible for it to be unreliable and costs a lot to build. If it does go wrong, this may mean you will be facing a big bill. There aren’t many electronics in this car which means there shouldn’t be much to go wrong and Conan also spend a lot of hours working on them as well. That does mean, yet again, that if they do go wrong a large bill may be on its way.
Running Costs http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Conan Compact F is only really considered acceptable when it comes to running costs. As mentioned previously, in the event that something does go a bit wrong with the cars components (which shouldn’t happen) you could be facing large repair bills, which also means that you will also be forking out a lot more than the equivalent car when it comes to insuring it. This car is claimed to do in the region of 40 mpg, which is acceptable, but not much better than its rivals which also get around this figure as well. The servicing costs the Conan claim are reasonable.
Safety http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
This is the one area where the Conan Compact F excels. This car comes with every single piece of safety kit you could imagine, some of which that are more at home in luxury saloons and not small hatchbacks. Everyting from airbags to crumple zones has been taken very carefully into consideration on this car and it does make you feel confident that when you do have a crash you are going to be able to walk out in a reasonably good state. The car also has the welcome addition of traction control which adds a further sense of security, however misses out on stability control.
OVERALL http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png [size=50](yet again)[/size]
For: Good handling, lots of safety tech, good reliability, quiet cruiser
Against: Poor ride, stingy equipment, mediocre running costs
The Conan Compact F 1.6L is a very decent small and fast hatchback. It performs well in many areas, and reasonably in others, but it performed in the areas that count most in a car like this and that is what managed to scrape it a 4-star rating. The fact that Conan spend many hours making this car (an awful lot more than its rivals) does make you wonder how they manage to make this a mass-production small hatchback and also causing concerns as to how much it costs, which we don’t know yet. Until then, a recommendable car. 
This is a great review! It’s just what I had in mind when I made the car. 
Seishido Motors will send you a brand new Seishido Proxima 1.1 LX to review as soon as possible
-EnryGT5, Seishido Motors CEO
Here is my model:
Silvano Sport
Edit: Sorry, didnt read. I’ll PM.
Please
I will accept this one, but any future ones will not be accepted.
Soon I hope to send a Znopresk or a BMMC.
[size=150]2012 MONTES URBAN[/size]
This is a small hatchback developed by Spanish manufacturer Montes with a rather powerful 160 bhp engine, making it almost the version before the hot hatch. It also is RWD which is a bit different. Is it any good however?
Performance http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The 2.0-litre 4-cylinder engine pushes out 159 bhp @ 7500 rpm and 144 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm. The power delivery isn’t as good as you would hope it to be looking at the figures as the torque curve isn’t the flattest and there is a definite increase as revs rise and then it reduces slowly after peak torque, but it still does perform quite nicely. It just doesn’t perform very smoothly. Otherwise, the car is very rapid indeed. The cruising ability this has is brilliant and it doesn’t even require a downshift for overtaking as it has more than enough power to pull it along. The engine is also reasonably responsive. The 0-62 mph sprint is done in a rather quick 7.8 seconds and the top speed is a very rapid 149 mph, faster than a lot of more powerful cars.
Ride Comfort http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Urban doesn’t ride particularly well. The suspension set-up, front and back is rather firm. At low speeds, as expected, it jiggles and fidgets about quite a lot and can become rather uncomfortable for those who do a lot of town driving. Out on the open road however, the car begins to settle down a lot and manages to soak up the bumps reasonably well. The car can still feel a bit too firm over poorer surfaces but at these speeds it is never tiring nor uncomfortable. The car’s suspension does do a good job at keeping the car sturdy though. It doesn’t bounce around at all after going over larger bumps (however it does jolt a bit) and the body roll is kept very well under control,
Handling http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The handling, considering that it has a firm suspension set-up, isn’t as good as we hoped. The steering is nice and precise, quick to react, well weighted and has enough feedback and, as we already know, it keeps body roll under control, but apart from that it isn’t exactly brilliant. The grip is alright, but it is no more than that. It manages to get up to the point where you are just about to go around a corner reasonably quickly and it will run out of grip and understeer. If you put your foot to the floor, you may think that as it is RWD it would spin up its rear wheels somewhat and give you the ability to have some tail-end happiness fun, but because there are so many traction aids on this car it is next to impossible.
Refinement http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Urban is rather disappointing is this category for a simple mistake. The engine is very quiet at idle and when cruising and only makes a bit of noise under acceleration, but Montes seem to have forgot to work on sound insulation. Road noise and wind noise can be heard at considerably low speeds and it doesn’t even need to be over rough surfaces, and once you get the car up to higher cruising speeds the road noise and wind noise becomes really rather vocal. The wind noise is almost so bad that it makes you wonder if a window is open slightly. On poor surfaces it can become really rather annoying and requires you to raise your voice to have a conversation or turn up the radio in order to be able to enjoy listening to music.
Equipment http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Urban only comes with a rather standard level of equipment and not much more than that. Although it comes with every traction aid under the sun and the amount of safety tech is reasonable, the car fails to come with the equipment you would expect from a top of the range hatchback. What you expect to find in any hatchback is there however it misses out on some options we are beginning to find more and more often in hatchbacks such as cruise control and touch screen systems for the controls. It is reasonable, but could be better.
Quality http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The interior of the Montes Urban is only reasonable as well. There are some nice soft-touch plastics in the upper areas of the cabin and the rest of the materials in the visible areas do feel reasonably nice and very well put togther, however when you get into the back of the car and look in the less visible areas of the cabin, you discover that the plastics start to become rather scratchy and rough feeling. These poorer plastics do remain to feel nice and solid and it looks like it will be able to support plenty of rough treatment. This sounds alright, but in a 160 bhp hatchback that isn’t what is to be expected.
Reliability http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Montes Urban impresses a lot more in this area and almost scraped itself a 5-star rating, but it didn’t quite get there. The engine is very reliable and should be able to undergo 40000 miles of driving without running into a single issue, however this is no better than what we expect an engine to do nowadays. It is still good. Thanks to the fact that the interior feels sturdy and well built enough to withstand poor treatment and the fact that there are not many gadgets to go wrong, we reckon you shouldn’t be facing bills any time soon after buying it and even then it won’t come to much.
Running Costs http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
This is another only reasonable area for the Montes Urban. Most 160 bhp engines nowadays are turbocharged and smaller than the 2.0-litre engine that is seen in this car which makes them more fuel efficient, however even then the 42 mpg claimed by the 2.0-litre engine doesn’t sound that great. The MkVI Volkswagen Golf GTI has 60 more bhp than this car yet that is claimed to achieve 47 mpg. This, therefore just isn’t good enough. Another downside is the fact the servicing prices Montes are asking for aren’t exactly cheap either. On a good note, insurance shouldn’t cost much and may be cheaper than rivals due to the fact there isn’t much tech to go wrong and there is no expensive turbocharged engine inside.
Safety http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Montes Urban comes very well equipped in the safety area. All the safety equipment you would need is in the car, including multiple airbags and pretensioning seatbelts. It doesn’t have anything super special like pedestrian detection or automatic brakes, but these aren’t really necessary. The traction aids are all there, inculding ones that aren’t even really needed such as launch control (more of a performance thing, but still). In the event you do crash it into something then, you are more than likely to walk out unscathed, unless of course it was a hard crash.
OVERALL http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
For: Good safety equipment, decent reliability, wonderful engine
Against: Many mediocre areas such as driving, refinement, quality and equipment.
The Montes Urban 2.0 isn’t as good as hoped. The engine is very nice and the amount of safety tech is comforting, but everything was not quite up to scratch and with some cheap and simple improvements it could have been a much better car, which is a shame really considering it had so much potential.
[size=150]2013 MONTES URBAN MSR[/size]
The Montes Urban MSR is the hot version of the Montes Urban. With a 290 bhp 6-cylinder 2.0-litre turbocharged petrol engine and AWD, it means it rivals the likes of the Audi S3 and BMW M135i.
Performance http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The MSR version of the Urban has a 2.0-litre 6-cylinder turbocharged engine with 290 bhp @ 7800 rpm and 224 lb-ft @ 5700 rpm. This does mean that it takes quite a while before the turbo begins to spool and kick in, which means performance low down feels like a normal 2.0-litre engine. When cruising along it is more than powerful enough, however if you decide you want to make an overtaking maneuver you will need to change down until you have the revs high enough to get the turbo spooling. This also means that the engine can be a bit unresponsive. When flooring the car though, it feels like an absolute monster. 0-62 mph happens in a supercar rivaling 4.1 seconds and the top speed is 158 mph. We think the car could do so much more than this as when testing we discovered that the car was still pulling strong beyond 150 mph, but the gearing is too short. The engine is also extremely smooth.
Ride Comfort http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The MSR’s ride comfort is even harsher than the standard version, as expected. At low speeds the car transmits every single bump and imperfection in the road surface straight to the car making it feel fidgety. Worst of all, after long periods of time not only does it become uncomfortable but it also becomes tiring being jiggled about inside the car continuously. As speeds increase the car does begin to calm down a bit, but even at motorway speeds it still continues to fidget about somewhat over poorer surfaces and only really calms down properly when on smooth roads. Over big bumps there is a big jolt and a thud, but at least the car takes next to no time to settle down after going over the bump. As a plus, the car doesn’t roll going around corners and the extremely smooth engine makes the drive more pleasing.
Handling http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Montes Urban MSR’s handling is much improved over the standard version of the MSR however it still seems to be missing some ability. The tyres on this version are wider but nowhere near as wide as those on its rivals, yet it still manages to have a lot of grip. The steering is all correctly weighted and gives enough feel and feedback as well. The firm suspension does help, as mentioned previously, to keep the car pretty much dead flat around corners and also to keep the car stable, but on poor surfaces it can upset the way it handles quite a lot. The car has an awful lot of cornering potential, but it is ruined somewhat by the amount of driver assists preventing you from taking it too far.
Refinement http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Montes Urban’s main flaw was the refinement and on the Urban MSR it is even worse. Yes, it is nice that you can hear the 6-cylinder turbocharged engine roaring and whistling when you want to, but when cruising at motorway speeds at 3500-4000 rpm it can be quite annoying hearing the engine rumbling. Thankfully, the engine is reasonably quiet. Wind and road noise is even more vocal in this version of the car and it begins to intrude when driving through villages and it doesn’t even need to be on poor surfaces. When at motorway speed the car fills with the sound of roaring wind and tyres on tarmac.
Equipment http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Montes Urban MSR is exactly the same as the Montes Urban when it comes to equipment. There is what you expect there to be in a hatchback but no more than that, but it does come with a lot of safety equipment and driver assists.
Quality http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The interior in the MSR version is pretty much the same as in the standard one but with some extra sporty touches. The interior doesn’t look particularly special and the materials used aren’t exactly what you call posh, but they are reasonable enough.
Reliability http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The Montes Urban MSR remains pretty much as reliable as the standard version. The electonics in this car are exactly the same as those in the normal version, so it is expected that they are going to be just as reliable. The engine in this version of the car is an awful lot sportier than that in the normal version and, as expected, the car won’t last as long as it if not serviced. We do reckon it is still going to be able to last a very long time when serviced regularly and shouldn’t cause any issues though.
Running Costs http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
This is one of the most shocking aspects of the car. The 290 bhp engine is just as economical as the 160 bhp engine as it manages 42 mpg as well, something that matches its rivals in some cases and beats them in others. Don’t expect however that the insurance will be cheap and the servicing prices that Montes are claiming are more than eye-watering.
Safety http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The MSR has exactly the same safety tech and the same driver assists as those used in the standard model. In other words, more than safe enough.
OVERALL http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
For: Wonderful engine, great handling, safe, good fuel consumption
Against: Unrefined, dreadful ride, average equipment and quality
The hot version of the Montes Urban only just about scraped the 4-star rating and that is only because it is good in the areas that count when it comes to these cars. It is a reasonable hot hatch, but rivals like the Audi S3 and the BMW M135i do it better as they don’t have the flaws that this car has.
1 Like
Nice reviews so far 
[size=150]2014 FMC C-T RUNNER[/size]
The C-t Runner is a supermini from the Portuguese manufacturer FMC. It has a little 0.9-litre 4-cylinder turbocharged engine and is attempting to claim the supermini throne as well as the fuel economy king throne. How good is it?
Performance http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
This car uses a tiny 0.9-litre turbocharged engine produces 79 bhp @ 5800 rpm and 90 lb-ft @ 3300 rpm, which generally speaking is enough for a small car. The car however weighs an awful lot more than the majority of its rivals at 1200 kg, meaning that it doesn’t have the best performance. The 0-62 mph sprint takes 13.2 seconds and the top speed is 111 mph. Because of its minute size and the fact it uses a turbocharger, the engine needs a few revs in order to be able to get going, but once it does it is brisk enough for most situations. Overtaking does require downshifting, but cruising along on the motorways is more than happily done in sixth gear and accelerating in any other situation doesn’t require massive revs as the turbo starts to work at roughly 2500 rpm. The engine is reasonably smooth, but it can take a while before there is acceleration after you have put your foot down on the pedal to the right.
Ride Comfort http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The C-t Runner does a reasonable job at soaking up bumps. At low speeds the ride can feel a little bit firm and can get a bit fidgety over poor surfaces, but to be honest it does do a reasonable job at ironing out the imperfections in the road surface. At higher speeds the ride becomes very smooth. The suspension does its business whilst the occupants inside barely feel a thing. On poorer surfaces at high speed it is even reasonably good and when there are big bumps in the road it doesn’t take that long for the car to settle down. It does bounce a little bit, but it isn’t going to make anybody feel queasy. The body roll is kept fairly well under control too.
Handling http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The C-t Runner handles pretty well too considering the good ride comfort. The car has an incredible amount of grip and can go around corners as fast as some sports cars and feels reasonably sporty. The steering is set up just right and the car remains reasonably flat around the corners which is a nice confidence boost on top of the fact it has grip in abundance. Although the car does achieve some sort of a sporty feeling when pushed, it doesn’t quite feel as sporty as some of the best handling cars in the category though.
Refinement http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The C-t Runner couldn’t be more refined and wouldn’t go amiss in the most luxurious of cars. The engine is almost impossible to hear at idle and even more so when cruising along, but the most impressive thing is that you can barely hear it when accelerating as well. Wind and road noise is kept completely under control at all speeds as well. You know it is good when at motorway speeds you can’t hear a single thing the car is doing and you can see that the engine is revving at just over 3000 rpm and you are travelling at 80 mph.
Equipment http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
This car doesn’t come particularly well equipped. This is a bit like the Lystex Amatista when it comes to it. Everything you expect to see in a supermini is there such as air-conditioning, radio, CD player etc. but no more than that. On top of this, there is only what you expect there to be when it comes to safety equipment as well and the same goes for driver aids. It is all rather average and not special in this area.
Quality http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The interior of the C-t Runner is poor and almost got just 1 star. The interior on the inside looks like it is going to fall to bits in next to no time. The plastics used on the inside are all extremely cheap feeling and fell hard and rough. In the upper areas there are just masses or rough and scratchy feeling grey plastics that look dreadful, and when you look in the areas that aren’t as visible or that are hidden away, the plastics become so fragile you could break them or make them snap off simply by putting some pressure on them, and on top of that there are huge gaps between panels and so rough and sharp looking edges. On the plus side, the dials and instruments are good looking and the buttons and controls feel reasonable.
Reliability http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
This is another area where the car excels massively. The engine in this car has been through extensive testing and so far it is the best we have seen. The engine is capable, according to the manufacturer, of over 50000 miles without needing any servicing (on average, some fare better than others). When you look at the engine it does look extremely well put together and over 100 hours of work is put into every engine. The electronics are brand new and should therefore be very reliable. The interior plastics are very prone to breaking and falling apart, but we found out that they are so cheap to replace it doesn’t really make much difference.
Running Costs http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
This is another area where the C-t Runner very nearly scraped itself a 5-star rating and there was only one thing holding us back from giving it. The engine is extremely efficient. The car manages to achieve a whopping 71 mpg and emits just 92 grams of carbon dioxide every kilometre, therefore meaning that fuel bills are exceptionally low. The insurance doesn’t come to too much either thanks to the small engine and very cheap interior (the turbocharger does make it a bit more expensive though). The one thing that stopped us from giving this car the 5-star rating though was the servicing costs, which are just too much for a car like this
Safety http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
The C-t Runner could do with being a bit better in this area. The safety tech that it comes with, as mentioned in equipment, is only what you expect to be seeing in a car like this, in other words, it meets the minimum requirements. There are airbags, yes, but not many, and there aren’t any special safety systems to save you in the event of having a crash. It does come with electronic stability management, which is a plus, yet misses out on traction control, which is a bit weird because most other manufacturers do it the other way round when they only have one of the two.
OVERALL http://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/firmLlM.png
For: Costs peanuts to run, astounding refinement, bulletproof reliability
Against: Ghastly interior quality, average equipment and safety
The FMC C-t Runner is a very reasonable small hatchback that excels in many areas and fails in a couple of others. The very good ratings make up for the areas where it hasn’t done so well, yet the interior could simply do with a little bit of improving. King of fuel economy? Yes. King of superminis? Not quite so sure.
Congrats on the cool Idea! I’d think that if/when this picks up, more people would be needed to offset the workload 
Looks great so far, very detailed! Keep up the good work mate.
EDIT: What are you doing in terms of extra engines within a car? will you just test one, or will you test all of them?
Looking foward to mine and the rest of the reviews!
Yes, most likely.
I have already done a review like this, the Morgan. If you send in the whole range of engines it will be all under one review. What I will then try to do is pick the engine best suited to the car in the bit I do after the cons and pros, something I didn’t do with the Morgan because I was completely unsure.
I would be more than happy to help you Cheeseman! I am looking to become a lot more active on the forum. PM me if you have any questions for me.
I’d also be willing to help out when you need it.
I’d like to help you too, so that your list of cars to review doesn’t get super long 
Just a quick thing I would like to put in here:
Firstly, apologies for there being no reviews today, but I haven’t been feeling my best again. Hopefully things will pick up again tomorrow so I can catch up on the huge amount of reviews that are coming in.
Secondly, I would like to thank everybody. Those who sent there reviews in, those who have said kind words about my idea and also to the devs for giving us this wonderful game that allows me to do this and also for mentioning me in a post on Facebook. I feel extremely honoured and I can’t thank you all enough.
Finally, I will sooner or later be wanting people to join the reviewing team as the work is piling up and things are only going to get wilder. As soon as I am ready for people to join I will let you know here on this thread on what I what people to do and how to apply (this sounds like I am the boss of a real company here )
That’s the random rant over. Thanks again everybody!
Good luck CEO of Cheeseman’s Auto Review and and feel better!