If it fits in the size limits then sure I can’t see why not. I’m sure it could look like a coupe with extra doors at that size
2 Likes
heh nice word play there! Ikigai, balance… whew
2 Likes
Are there any restrictions on body type? The brief seems to call for a hatchback, but could a small SUV or Sedan that’s been modded to be a hatchback (or fill the role of one) count?
Most of the inspirations are there because those were the real cars i was looking at at the time. If you can make something else fit in the rules then it’s fine, just make sure it fits the brief and style of car
2 Likes
Moravia Veverky RS
By the mid 2000’s, Moravia was in need of replacing their B segment car, the Laticia, which had been in production for nearly a decade. It was decided to follow the route many other companies were going and build a retro inspired car featuring design cues from their beloved city car from the 70’s and 80’s, the Veverky. Utilizing an upgraded monoque chassis and engine from the Laticia, the new Veverky hit dealerships in 2008.
In the Veverky lineup, the RS model provides the best performance for the money. The 1.2 litre DOHC 12 valve inline three features a turbocharger huffing out 10 psi of boost, allowing for 120 horsepower at 6,600rpm and 109 foot pounds of torque at 4,300. Routed through a five speed manual, this propels the 2,180 pound hatchback from 0 to 60 in 8.1 seconds, the quarter mile in 16 seconds, and a top speed of 134 miles per hour.
The Veverky RS features such niceties such as an electric limited slip differential, four wheel disc brakes, two plus tow seating, a CD player, 15 inch alloy wheels, and stability control. The price for this little pocket rocket is only $23,700AMU.
7 Likes
I like the car, but I feel those two-tone rims are too modern for 2008, idk
VW snowflakes were 2-tone already in the 80s, for example, so IDK …
Electric? Sounds like severe overkill
At this price point it seems like overkill - a geared or viscous LSD would be more appropriate.
Régal Lion - 1.4L Sport
Spitired Driving
OOC: A restyle edit - small details but a big color change from blue to red - spiffy!
The Lion was released in early 2000 to breach the a-segment market of small eco city cars. It was well received in France and many european countries, and made its debut in the UK in 2005. It was known as a reliable workhorse.
With many trims available already, Régal decided in 2008 to release a sportier version of the Lion - the (very originally-named) Sport trim!
Based on the LE premium trim that already came with the premium 1.4 liter straight four engine, instead of the 1.1L in the base trim. The Sport trim added 15in alloy rims, a 5-speed sportier transmission, and the unmodified 105-ish hp, transversely mounted engine.
Like it’s LE brother, the Sport trim still used a simple open diff and sported the same stability control, but had larger brake pads and vented front discs, but still retained rear drums. Some body flourishes were added as well and the front grill was made a bit more aggressive, in addition to sporting additional side tags and stripes.
The interior was mostly unchanged from the LE trim, with a premium upholstery and standard options, which was not as well received, customers wanting a bit sportier feel. It was announced that next year Sport trim will feature some extra ooomph inside.
Finally, the suspension was fully retuned to bring a sportier but still very comfortable drive around the curbs. Combined with the 1.4L, it’s 0-60 is under 10 seconds and it has a top speed of 112mph.
For the sensible minds wanting a bit more excitement in their life, the Lion 1.4L Sport is the right choice. Bring one home today from your Régal dealership.
9 Likes
Given the fact that such a compact class is equipped with a frisky 102 horse engine, and stands on such big rims, it’s likely to be loved by busy city owners, fast-parking enthusiasts and taxi drivers alike. Yes, the spread between wheel differences is too great, it must have taken your factory a long time to choose between size 15 or 16. On the other hand, taxi drivers won’t like the low comfort combined with the stiff suspension.
The verdict - your car will be taken to disadvantaged cities like Detroit, where every customer is very important.
So um, why is the mpg calculations based on tyres being pushed here? There may be some slight inconsistencies in how it is calculated, but putting all the cars on the same tyres won’t even things out. There are factors such as weight of the car, overall hp and torque output, and weight distribution of the car that can all change mpg. Would a car that only has a mediocre power to weight ratio with smaller tyres it could easily push hold up the same on an average size tyre compared to one with more hp and a lighter weight that originally had larger wheels and was geared to compensate? Probably not. Cars are a full system that works together to get that final mpg number. Taking those parts out of context of the whole can easily skew data and mess up what the manufacturer had intended. It’s like buying aftermarket rims and then complaining that your car didn’t get as high gas mileage as it had originally.
Honestly, changing around the settings on entrants cars doesn’t sit well with me. Yes, automation can be a buggy mess at times, but if people making cars for CSR are keeping in line with engineering that is realistic for the challenge era and car segment, the idiosyncrasies that are present will be minimized and the ones who are exploiting them will be fairly obvious.
3 Likes
I’m seeing people make cars with 100mpg. What would you do?
I can either say I won’t look at mpg at all and people start using 12.0 afr so I’m pretty stuck. My only other option is not look at the actual mpg figures but go off the engines thermal efficiency
Edit
I haven’t changed anything in any of the cars I’ve reviewed yet btw as this whole fuel thing is a nightmare
3 Likes
This may be a stupid question, but does the engine family year have to be 2008?
No the base engine family can be whatever you want, the same for the car model.
2 Likes
I mean if “realism” is the point of these challenges and especially CSR…then maybe they should get binned.
What mainstream car got 100mpg in 2008?
Yeah I’ve removed that bit out of the rules now, I was under the impression it was tyre profile causing the mpg numbers to go up to sill numbers but I did test some cars I made on top of the original tests and there is no real correlation between it all.
Guess we just have to wait on updates to fix the crazy efficiency numbers, engine thermal efficiency seems ok though on the whole
I can gather all the cars data points and put them in my spreadsheet (or give you share permission), and then you/we can do a comparative analysis on other figures surrounding efficiency.
But I did notice significant mpg changes in my offering when switching wheel diameters. I did some digging and theoretically it is possible to gain efficiency with lower profile tires (less energy consumed as heat when flexing the sidewall), the overall difference literally feels like a 10x change in Automation compared with what I think should have been a 1.1x change if that makes sense. In other words it should only change things a teeny bit. And there’s also the concern that lower profile tires are usually made with stickier, higher loss compounds, whereas in Automation we have only a couple choices that are reasonable for the cause. Tire Rack did do a comparative analysis on this topic years ago and found that MPG differences in tires can be up to about 5% between each (of the same type), and the differences between different types can vary more widely. I think that Automation is correctly modeling that part.
2 Likes
Tyre profile does have an influence that needs to be fixed in future updates, but it’s not causing 100mpg cars on its own. Another issue with efficiency (and top speed) numbers is the frontal area numbers being about 25% too small.
While lower profile tyres could yield slight increases in fuel efficiency, they shouldn’t outweigh the increase in rolling resistance caused by increasing tyre width, but that’s exactly what’s happening in Automation. The implementation doesn’t need to be removed, just fixed