Still in the top 25, maybe not as mad as I thought the car was
2 Likes
Having survived 2 rounds of binning, Iâm starting to think my car was just missed xD
3 Likes
survived again⊠phew, its getting tougher now tho
1 Like
one of these days Iâll figure out how to survive a forum challenge
until then Iâm content with sending in uncompetitive cars that I like and getting roasted for it.
1 Like
as a new kid on the block, quite wanted to be in the runner up list at least once tho, hehehe 
3 Likes
Wait, does that make me a new kid on the block too having participated in only two CSRs or does my account age disqualify me from that?
technically yes, u still only do 2 CSRs right? it means u still technically new to challenges and stuffs 
âNewâ.
1 Like
Oldnât
I have done around 15-20 CSRs (didnât keep exact count), and the best I have had is a top 5. The competition here is very high, anything in the top 1/3 is really good IMO. I still get insta-binned for rules, my fault, and still hurts. Hang in there new guys, the secret is trial and error.
I should have sent the more reliable version of my motor instead of the one I butchered to confirm with more reasonable mileages. Curse that mileage issues till the day I die
Iâve won one of these back in the Kee engine days, but since then Iâve kind of been around high rankings and low rankings. Part of it is my refusal to part with company lore.
4 Likes
Iâve been around for a while, but there are some large gaps, looking at sent messages:
CSR20, 22-23, 31-33, 36-39, 50, 52-55, 57-63, 78, 90-91, 94, 99-101, 113, 115-116 & now with 121, If my count is correct, 121 is my 32nd CSR Entry, and IIRC I never made it past the binning into the finals, or at least not in a while.
Edit: Attempted to enter, some (at least 1, maybe 2) was sent too late.
2 Likes
Bump, any updates?
Damn! Iâd just gotten into Design Zen, and was busy making a 4 seat coupĂ© based off of a really weird 50 MPG (UK) saloon made by my Italian supercar company that I did a while back, and then I saw the date of this post⊠xD
Still, it was fun to read through all these, and hopefully I wonât miss CSR122 due to being on another design hiatus!
its been quite a while, might need to get ready for biiig elimination⊠might be from 25 to 5 cars
CSR121 Binnings part 3.
May, 2011.
Finals are over, and most students have returned home for the summer, but quite a few stick around for summer classes or just to avoid home. Kayla has not returned home; sheâs decided to get a summer job in preparation for the new car. But sheâs barely any closer to deciding.
On a warm Wednesday afternoon, a few of Kaylaâs friends swing by her apartment, as her complex includes access to a pool. Kayla explains to one of her friends, Steve, a fellow gearhead, that sheâs interested in a sports car, but canât narrow down the choices.
S: âHell yeah, what kind of stuff are you looking at?â
K: âToo many things dude.â
S: âLike what though?â
K: âI donât want to list them all out now. But if youâre not heading home for the summer, once I start actually going to see the cars in person youâre welcome to come alongâ
S: âYeah man, Iâll be in town at least through Maymester. But if youâre really having a hard time narrowing it down, hereâs a trick my dad told me when shopping for a fun car. Make a list with the cars. For each car, write down your answers to two questions about it. One: âWhy do you want it?â then Two: âThen why havenât you bought it already?â Itâs basically pros and cons, but itâs a little more engaging I think.â
K: âAlright Iâll try that.â
Later that day, Kaylaâs back at her computer, giving Steveâs system a shot.
Editorâs note: When I reference âaverageâ from this point forward, itâs only in relation to the remaining vehicles, with already binned vehicles removed, and if you want to get stats-nerdy, itâs really the median rather than the average iâm using, but that doesnât sound good when writing.
1992 Lynx La Course @mart1n2005
Why do you want it? Itâs cool looking, very unique, and has excellent driving dynamics.
Well then, why havenât you bought it already? Itâs rear engined, and Iâm a little afraid of that, and it effectively rules out drifting (safely) with it. Itâs not as reliable as Iâd like, and theyâre a little expensive to run.
The 1992 Lynx La Course is out. Itâs really quite a good car, with excellent sportiness that doesnât sacrifice driveability or comfort, and a very realistic engine choice with an NA 12v SOHC V6. Reliability figures are a little lower than average, and running costs are a little higher than average. While the balance between comfort, drivability, and sportiness is excellent, it doesnât excel enough to outshine the FR competitors.
MAHG Silhouette 3000GT24v @S31
Why do you want it? Itâs cheap up front, and a very sporty drive without sacrificing too much comfort
So why havenât you bought it already? Very high running costs, straight pipe, some reliability concerns, and not a fan of itâs looks.
The 1989 MAHG Silhouette 3000GT24v is out. It finds a good sportiness/drivability/comfort balance, but running costs are very high, and trim reliability is below average. The design clearly apes the Z32 300ZX, but there are much better looking cars than this in the competition. Long tube headers and no mufflers on a 2.5â full exhaust is a little weird, and make for a very loud car.
1993 Yuro Overture Type LS @variationofvariables
Why do you want it? Itâs within budget with low mileage, sporty handling, and a spacious interior.
So why havenât you bought it yet? Awkward styling, comparatively slow, rustprone, top of budget.
The 1993 Yuro Overture Type LS is out. I see that this was smashing a 4th and 5th gen Prelude together into a single, fictional RWD Prelude, and while the end result is impressive, I would be lying if I said it was pretty. It does find a solid sport/drive/comfort balance, but with itâs larger size and 186hp NA 4 cylinder, straight line performance is unimpressive. Itâs got weak environmental resistance and below average trim reliability as well, and itâs another very-loud straight piped NA car with headers.
1989 BT Motors Panthera STT @EddyBT
Why do you want it? Big, useful station wagon combines good performance with everyday usability.
So, why havenât you bought it already? All aluminum body is a real concern.
the 1989 BT Motors Panthera brings to the table an impressive balance of sportiness, comfort, and drivability, although a little low on the sportiness scale. The engine is really good; a 2.5l SOHC 12v turbo I6 with very little lag, and a solid 215hp and 211 lb ft or torque. But in a spacious wagon, it seems like the figures might be a little short on the performance scale⊠not the case due to an incredibly low 1278kg weight. Howâs this wagon so light? All aluminum panels. Unfortunately Iâve got to dock this carâs finishing position due to that, an aluminum bodied wagon in 1989 isnât realistic.
1985 Silver-York Accolate Zacspeed Edition @ProfessorP3PP3R & @chiefzach2018
Why do you want it? Just look at it. This Silver-York Zacspeed is so freaking cool. I can imagine me in thing, just cruising around town, top down, looking cool as fuck. And it comes with the factory hardtop. It would be cool as hell fighting Silver-York stereotypes as a college-age girl driving one of these instead of a grey-haired white guy.
So, why havenât you bought it already? Despite the Zacspeed treatment, this is still a classic Silver-York, so it might not be the most willing partner out in the mountains or on the track. Driving dynamics arenât very strong. Running costs arenât cheap either, as you might expect from a luxury car from the mid 80s, and fuel economy is poor.
The styling is so cool; so sleek, very contemporary for its era, and unmistakably a wonderfully gaudy sports version of an American personal luxury car, with a sweet ground effects package; period-cool turndown exhaust tips peeking out of a rear bumper lip are an especially cool touch. Credit where credit is due, this was one of few solid axleâd entries, and one of even fewer pushrod engined entries, but reliability figures still come in just a little better than average, and, similar to the EcaMobile Ace, the luxury 80s interior hurt running costs, and this comes in on the high side there as well. The driving dynamics fall a little short among other competitors; it doesnât find as good a balance, as sportiness is rather low and, while comfort is solid, itâs still less comfort than quite a few more sporty cars. While I donât car too much about fuel economy, this one turns in less than 11 MPG, which is a hard pill to swallow.
1983 Mitsushita Cassiopeia 1.6 LX @conan
Why do you want it? Beautiful classic sports car styling, very cheap running costs and very cheap upfront price.
Why havenât you bought it already? Itâs pretty heaviliy modified already. Compared to other options, or even the Anhultz, itâs lacking sportiness and performance. Iâd probably need to find a new exhaust for it too, because the ultra-loud exhaust would lose its novelty fast with daily driving, especially since itâs not an especially comfortable car as it is.
The 1983 Mitsushita Cassiopeia 1.6 LX is out. This car is interesting, and of all the entries, was the one that took the most liberties with modifications, providing the classic sports car with many more modern features such as fuel injection, a 5 speed manual and lsd, upgraded brakes, upgraded suspension, aftermarket exhaust, upgraded head unit, fiberglass hood, and aftermarket wheels. Despite all the modifications, the car still comes out slower and less sporty than the other options. Running costs are inexpensive and reliability is about average. The aftermarket exhaust is too loud.
1983 Anhultz Dione XII Flex Tape Edition @Elizipeazie
You all know what an Anhultz Dione looks like, so hereâs just my favorite part
Why do you want it? Itâs pretty sweet looking, and such a large fastback hatch would make it a pretty useful everyday car. Theyâre damn reliable too, fast as hell for 1983, and this one is super cheap
So, why havenât you bought it already? Theyâre expensive to run, and theyâre not quite as sporty as other options, and this oneâs already got almost 234 thousand miles on it.
the 1983 Anhultz Dione XII Flex Tape Edition is out. Reliable, fast, and inexpensive, but a little low on sportiness, high running costs, and high mileage combine to knock this one out of the running.
1996 Hokuto Senera VTi @On3CherryShake and Kurokama SC-C 2.0 Zenki @ST1Letho
âThese cars are so similar to each other, I can compare them together.â
Why do you like them? Low mileage, spacious, useful sedans, with turbos and 6 speed manuals.
So why havenât you bought either of them yet? Lack of sportiness, heavy, top of budget.
Itâs hard to talk about either of these cars without talking about the other. Their stats are extremely similar. They weigh within one kg of each other! Style-wise, the both are attractive and inoffensive mid 90s designs. The Kurokama is sportier overall, and has fantastic styling in the rear. It looks like what iâd imagine a Pontiac would look like if Pontiac were Japanese, and I do mean that as a compliment. But the Hokuto is prettier from the front, and is no slouch from other angles either, with very pretty rear taillights and a more luxurious look. Barely anything between them on that front either. From the perspective of a driving experience, the Senera has is slightly sportier to drive, partially due to the SC-Câs electric power steering, but the SC-C is a little faster, pushing 24 more hp from itâs 2.0 liter turbo 4 vs the Seneraâs 2.7l turbo 5 tuned for regular. Both come very close to the top of the budget, and the Senera has slightly fewer miles on it, but the SC-C is cheaper to run and more reliable. Both are more along the lines of high tech family cars than sport sedans, and both do the job well. Nearly identical for that matter. Between the two, for my needs, the Kurokama comes out the better of the two, but neither is sporty enough or fast enough to stay in the running.
1992 SSV Galaxy GT-Apex @george_m997
Why do you want it? This thingâs a rocketship. Tied for the fastest car to 60 of all the entrants, and itâs sporty handling dynamics are unparalleled.
So why havenât you bought it already? Running costs are really high, and they quite simply arenât reliable.
the 1992 SSV Galaxy GT-Apex is out. On one hand, this thing looks like a shoe-in for a top competitor. It holds both the highest sportiness and highest drivability figures of the competition, itâs tied for the fastest 0-60 time of the competition, and comes in more than $800 below the price cap with a pretty-low 132k miles. That all sounds great! But running costs very high, just over $1,200, and reliability for both Trim and Engine are very poor.
1991 Avantii Raurus S @EnCR
Why do you want it? Quite reliable, pretty fast, and a relatively useful daily driver as a sedan, (albeit considerably smaller than the HokutoKama twins), and sweet V8 sounds.
So why havenât you bought it yet? Styling and driving dynamics arenât soul-stirring, slightly high running costs.
A mixed bag, but cheap price, strong reliability, and solid performance are a hard combo to argue against. An all iron, 4.1 liter 2v SOHC V8 is a solid engine choice as well, providing excellent reliability with good power and torque. However, lower sportiness (higher than the HokutoKama twins but still well below top competitors) and dull styling make it a safe choice that doesnât pull at the heartstrings of an enthusiast. The styling feels like it is a good start, but it feels unfinished, lacking badging and detailing. The rear taillight cluster is an interesting idea but also needs more work to feel complete.
1990 Morton Gambol Turbo @CriticalSet9849
Why do you want it? Big, useful car with solid power, solid driving dynamics, and cool styling, enhanced by itâs sweet body kit.
So, why havenât you bought it already? Long gearing makes for poor acceleration. A jack of all trades but master of none.
This is pretty good at most things, but doesnât excel at anything either. Very middle of the road everywhere but acceleration. Weird gear spacing and narrow tires make for weaker acceleration figures than itâs power to weight ratio would suggest. I really like the style of it, including the cool body kit with deep spoilers and the roof wing, but I have to mention that it looks dated for a brand new car in 1990. Detractors here are the 266 hp turbo engine running on regular gas, and partial aluminum panels, both unrealistic choices.
1989 Mondo 420E SL @Ezdmn
Why do you want it? This is a harcore sports car. Extremely light weight, low running costs, 8000 rpm gem of an NA V6, cool styling.
So, why havenât you bought it already? All aluminum body is a scary proposition should I get in an accident. Despite the low weight, no power steering might be an issue for me, and the lack of ABS could be scary in looser road conditions.
While many IRL cars of this era did not have ABS, very few entrants didnât include it, but this is one. When combined with the lack of power steering, this might be an especially hard car to drive for a 20 year old girl. Sportiness is strong though, maintenance costs are low, and trim reliability is above average. An all aluminum body is a bit of a stretch as far as realism is concerned for a 4 seat coupe in 1989.
1990 Kasai A2000 Turbo @goblin95
Why do you want it? Itâs got a low price, super low running costs, nice styling, and seating for 5.
Why havenât you bought it already? Despite its appearance and the fact that itâs a RWD coupe, itâs not actually very sporty to drive. Reliability is just OK.
Like the Morton, the 1990 Kasai A2000 Turbo is a car with relatively few flaws, but few strengths as well. Surprisingly, itâs the least sporty car remaining, but itâs running costs are quite affordable, with fairly average engine reliability and slightly below average trim reliability. Styling is very neat, tidy and realistic, and even goes so far as to include surface rust on the rear wheel well, a really cool touch. Overall this is a good car, but weâre at the point now that I have to nitpick to choose between the remainders.
1996 GMV Criterion TTS @Endfinity
Why do you want it? Sporty fast wagon with relatively low running costs and low mileage.
So, why havenât you bought it already? Within $13 of the price cap. Below average reliability and surprisingly low comfort for a wagon.
This one looks pretty good at a glance. Itâs quite sporty, itâs fast, itâs running costs are low, and the mileage is low, and the comfort is not terrible, but low for a wagon. Thereâs some weirdness in the engineering choices here; A station wagon with partial aluminum panels is pretty damn advanced for 1996, but despite that high tech choice, it still runs rear drum brakes. Itâs got an impressive engine, pushing 100hp per liter from itâs 20v twin cam I5 turbo, but despite being such a high performance engine pushing the 100hp/liter mark, itâs tuned for regular gas. The styling is pretty cool, and the interior is partially modeled, which is an impressive feat, and the overall look is not bad, albeit a little messy in some places and a touch modern for 1996.
1996 Honghu Beifeng 3.0S @yangx2
Why do you like it? Incredibly comfortable and spacious car that surprisingly can hold its own on twisty roads. Very low mileage as well. Unique styling.
So why havenât you bought it yet? Not as sporty as the other options. Near the top of the budget.
The 1996 Honghu Beifeng is impressive. The highest comfort of all the entrants by a massive 6 point margin, but with sportiness on par with the Avantii, the sport/drive/comfort balance is pretty strong here, but, as you may expect from the Chinese personal luxury coupe, leans more heavily on the side of that balance that Kayla is less interested in. Reliability slightly above average, and itâs a 1996 with low miles. It is a coupe, but it looks good from a useability standpoint based on sheer size; itâs the biggest car here, larger than even the Anhultz and the HokutoKama twins. Running costs are low too. So itâs a strong competitor, but can it overcome its lack of sportiness and high-end price?
1992 Aria Kaze GT 2+2 @Boiled_Steak
Why do you want it? Sporty, low miles, fast, and neat, understated styling.
So, why havenât you bought it yet? Very close to the top of the budget, pretty poor reliability figures.
This car could be a very top competitor if it were more reliability, but both trim and engine reliability are low when compared to the remaining company. Itâs sport/drive/comfort balance is excellent, and running costs are acceptable. Styling is cool. I really like the reshaping of the rear quarter window, which gives the car a very Supra-esqe appearance in profile, but I do wish it were a little more aggressive with a wing or a body kit. Nothing Kayla canât modify herself, though. Aside from the reliability concerns, this is a strong entry.
HERE IT COMES, ITS TWIN TIME AGAIN: 1995 Rhisuki Kuesa GT5 @Repti and 1995 Forea Mezora @vouge
What do you like about them? Low mileage, low running costs, strong reliability, and comfortable.
So, why havenât you bought one of them yet? A little short on excitement.
So I thought the Hokuto and the Kurokama were similar, but then I looked at these two. Now THESE are twins. Both have all iron 24 valve, SOHC 6 cylinders. The 3 liter straight six in the Forea makes 10 more hp, at 210, but is 18 lb ft of torque short of the 3.3 liter flat six in the Rhisuki. Like the other pair, these two also score extremely similarly, but unlike the other twins, thereâs not a ton of give and take between the two; unfortunately for the Rhisuki, the Forea betters it by the numbers. Itâs a little more comfotable, itâs a little faster, itâs running costs are a little less, its reliability figures are better, and itâs noticeably sportier. The Rhusuki in comparison has only slightly better drivability, slightly lower mileage, and slightly better fuel economy to itâs name. Both cars impress with strong comfort, very strong reliability, and excellent running costs, but are a little slow. The Rhisuki falls out of the running earlier, due to itâs lack of sportiness; only about on par with the big Honghu. The Forea makes it a few places further, but still comes up short of the top of the field for sportiness and performance.
1992 Cascadia Hariken VT @thecarlover
Why do you like it? Excellent sporty driving dynamics, low mileage, cool styling with period-correct Transformers inspired paint scheme, and T-Top roof.
So why havenât you bought it yet? Poor comfort, high running costs.
The 1992 Cascadia Hariken VT brings a lot of sportiness to the table, one of ther very highest. Itâs a real enthusiastâs car. That said itâs sport/drive/comfort balance isnât that great due to low comfort. Itâs a cool looking car, and I like the T-Tops, but itâs a little simplistic compared to the cars that really wow in this competition. Like I said before, Iâm starting to really nitpick to choose between what remains. 187 hp with a solid torque curve is a good engine, but is a little on the low side in this crowd, and both reliability figures are a little below average. It does come in around $3800 with only 135k miles on it, so itâs a strong competitor.
1990 Suisei Denreisha G2 @Falling_Comet
Why do you like it? Sporty drive, boat loads of power, low running costs, and an entry cost a full $1,800 below the price cap.
So why havenât you bought it yet? Dismal comfort, slightly below average engine reliability.
This thing is hardcore. The first thing you see when you look at this is the huge power figure. 341hp. Thatâs a huge figure. The engine running costs are unsurprisingly high, but the trim running costs The car also has very low trim maintenance costs. Some of that cheapness, and the upfront cheapness, comes from itâs interior. Basic with basic cassette. It isnât the absolute worst, but 13.3 comfort is right on the edge of barely tolerable. Styling is cool, with an aggressive front fascia, a deep character line along the shoulder and aggressive body kit. Aside from the crap interior and poor comfort, this is an excellent car, and the most enticing budget entry, but that comfort just canât quite be overcome.
1994 GEC GS2 Turbo @abg
Why do you like it? Sporty, fast, low mileage.
So why havenât you bought it yet? Boring styling, turbo lag, and engine reliability not on par with the top competitors.
This is a seriously impressive car. With top tier sportiness only very slightly shy of what the Hariken offers, this does so without the hefty running costs, more comfort, and much more straight line speed. So what are its drawbacks? Some minor technical ones; The 2 liter DOHC 4 cylinder doesnât make 120 hp per liter without suffering some lag. Itâs less lag than a lot of other competitors, but itâs more lag than any of the top entries. Same story on engine reliability; not bad on the grand scale of entries, but a little weak now that weâre at the top. Styling is the biggest drawback here though. Itâs not ugly, but for such an exciting sports car, itâs looks donât excite at all. Thereâs a nice lower fascia on the front bumper, but the rest of the carâs design has nothing going on beyond the basics. I hate to eliminate such a good car primarily on looks, but style was a strong priority, and the competition is tight up here.
âSteve was right. This helped. Now Iâve down to three cars. Let me contact the owners for a test drive.â
The test drive impressions of the finalists and the finale will appear later today. Congrats the the top 3, but also, congrats to everyone who made it this far at all. These are quite good cars.
17 Likes
Iâll happily take a honorable mention - this was a tough round filled with lots of strong opposition, and I was lucky to even make it this far. And yet⊠Even if my car had more attractive exterior styling - a side vent or hood scoop would have helped - I would most likely have fallen short given that its engine is not as reliable or responsive as any of those found in the top three cars.
One thingâs for sure: Kayla had her work cut out just picking the top three cars of the 25(!) that were in contention up until now, and choosing a winner will be even more difficult for her, considering how good those are.
1 Like
tbhâŠ
EVERY mileage based thing heavily favors newer carsâŠ
either way: challenge done and i can put another one to the everlasting legacy of the dione
as expected huh⊠i did sacrifice the running cost a bit for drivability and kits in the car, and most of the engine reliability to make it quick and has less mileage in the calculator tho, welp, made it until this far is already satisfying (mostly in this CSR Round) which is very tough⊠, btw, the last 3 really is the best one too tbh.