Take your time my friend!
Just⌠Try and buy a better camera pleaseâŚ
Or at least change out your chemicals
Idk how many submissions you got but it seems pretty big. A few days is no big deal.
Thank you for your comprehension
THE BINNING
Early 1973
Mark has lost his limp and Jones has found him some cars,
however âŚâŚ not everything that Jones has found is quite what they are looking for.
John spots some of the cars, that Jones has found, on the table in his office.
John looking at the images of cars scattered on the table with notes tacked on with their respective specifications.
âChrist almighty what are these? This canât be the best heâs been able to findâŚâŚâ
@young_doofmanPrefect Mk IIINot following the CSR naming, very loud (34.6), low 0-100 (7.9), headers / 4 barrel (not technically illegal, however a lot of performance parts, high service costs)The design is clearly more of a British one, not horrible, not great either, it's almost solid broadly speaking.
@WelcometoCostcoILUKawaiidesu Carnage Second GenerationNot following the CSR naming, very loud (34.8), low trim reliability (51.5), many performance parts, 4.8 DOHC I6 ??? too advanced with high service costs 1411.2 (bad eco as well), monocoque not great for strength, missing key holes and police antennas. Not even going to mention the name, no sir.
@ShinyBatPipi Falcon Devil5-speed manual in 70s american car, standard interior with +2 quality, hard long life tyres are very questionable in a big v8 car⌠oh and 315âs in the back on 19ââ donks. Also very poor and sloppy styling.
@FitRS
@Kyuu77
@WALL
@mgobla
@hugotronix04
@Wachu
Interceptor V8 GTLOUD NOISES (36.9), DCOE and long tubular headers are questionable, very slow 8s (0-100), high service costs 1655.1, missing keyholes and police antenna, solid looking car, however a bit outdated for the early 70s
@variationofvariables
@HybridTronny
@LinkLuke
@Mikonp7
@Aaron.W
@mcp928 & @mat1476
Preliminaries part 1 coming soonâ˘
Your elimination criteria for the first set of cuts is quite reminiscent of the binning process for CSR64, which also had a muscle car theme - and one thing about it reminded me of how realistic American cars of the early 70s should be:
Spot on - as far as I am aware, no American car of that era was fitted with a five-speed gearbox, even as an option. Nor did their engines have alloy blocks or heads, or multivalve setups for that matter. And they definitely didnât have double wishbone rear suspension either.
On a side note, this is the third time in a row that I havenât fallen at the first hurdle of a CSR - and I canât wait to see your verdicts on the remaining cars, including mine.
There was no requirement the car be American.
Wouldnât it be easier for TC to have listed illegal parts if theyâre instabin? Not everybody has an encyclopedic knowledge of early 70s US-specific car building conventions.
Quick question, what does the engine PU refer to?
production units
???
I didnât broke any rule, stop being a dick.
Looks like someone isnât used to get binned.
Also, this gif pic
You used fiber glass panel ÂŻ_(ă)_/ÂŻ
And also monocoque with V6 even if it wasnât unrealistic, it was mentionned that ladder en V8 were hardly prefered.
But yeah Fiber Glass is unrealistic
Blasphemy
I thought âloosey-goosey rulesâ was just optional requirements.
If you donât know about certain regulations/conventions based on a region, then research. It takes an hour at most to have a decent chunk of knowledge if you know what to look for. Besides itâs easier to bin people by their silly mistakes instead of holding their hands in the rules.
Yeah except you literally broke the CSR rule of keep it real. How about you stop giving a hard time to the host and try to understand where you went wrong. Fiberglass panels and a V6? What muscle car from that era had either of those?
Ok, now I accept that⌠I just tried to build something different, the oil crisis is comming and I tried to take advantage in fuel economy and price.
I couldnât have told it in a better way.