I mean, sure. 3.0L SOHC-4 V6, used in several Sinistras. 2.0L SOHC-4 B4, used also in a few Sinistras. AMCW has a 2.3L I5 and 2.8L I6, as well as a few other engines derived from that bore/stroke combo. The I3 was derived from a 5.9L V6 which itself grabs its displacement from the theoretical maximums of the Ford Cologne V6, and even in AMCW’s hands would normally be capacity limited down to sensible ranges like 4.4 liters.
I just didn’t feel like being sensible this time.
This is slightly besides the point, but a proper text tutorial on the forums as to how Techpool and Quality actually work together would be highly beneficial.
Not saying you specifically should do it, but someone whom knows how it works would help a lot of people by making something like that.
I didn’t use hydraulic steering because it lowers the drivability score should I not do that ? ;~:
“More torque means you absolutely require overdrive”…you learn something new everyday, ill go back and look at that
I definitely need to learn how to tune an engine properly…gotta figure that shit out🤔
Im not looking at the graph right now so ill ask about the gearbox maxing out later…maybe, But based on the torque/overdrive comment im guessing the gear ratio was shit.
Aye, but it drove good in Beam tho!!! Lol…actually it was just decent, it wouldn’t even chirp the tires from a dead stop under full throttle, but picked up speed quite well. The stats were “good” at that point so i figured it was ok 
Most of all, thanks for the feedback and i appreciate it.
Hey man, I tried really hard… all of like 15 minutes. /s
Jokes aside, I am aware that my design skills are definitely not up to snuff. Just need a few more… tens, no hundreds of hours practicing on it it seems.
I kept that in mind when designing my QFC23 entry - I invested a lot of techpool points in many areas, and increased the quality as much as I could for most of those as my budget allowed.
CSR 154 - Round 2 (Brackets 1, 2 of 5)
Next on Tony’s agenda was a dental visit. He had a bunch of health and appearance concerns after having worked a lengthy fight with a stiff jobber about 3 weeks prior, and was eager to get through as many as he could in his generous week of downtime.
In the waiting room, he just so happened to find an almost-fresh issue of The Open Road, a big-name auto magazine. With two elderly people who had appointment times prior to his, Tony decided to see if the issue had any valuable information.
The SVM Savant (@abg7) is firmly in the ‘innovation’ camp: this premium midsize sedan features an advanced port-injection V6 mounted transversely, power rack steering, a three-speed automatic transmission and a comfortable premium interior with a cassette player option that our test car included. The fuel economy is a respectable 21 miles per gallon, and the Savant drives mighty well, too, tracking straight and settling into a predictable plowing mode when grip limits are exceeded. The car mostly succeeds in making a case for itself - however, it falls apart at the price tag. As the most expensive car in this comparo at AM$16,500, it should present itself as the model of robustness and quality in this crop - when instead, it’s looking almost fragile compared to the rest. The interior fittings are more squeaky than they should be, the engine isn’t as steady at full throttle as befits a port-injected system, and the suspension was tuned far too harshly for a car with no touring-sport aspirations. The faux-vinyl top is also a questionable decision for a car which otherwise presents itself as forward-thinking, doubly so because the soft covering extends all the way to the A-pillars and mirror mounts.
(Another car that did not use quality points to its great detriment. 70 reliability would have been a good value in the pre-techpool sandbox days, but it’s subpar in this competition; as is 36 comfort for a car with premium everything, power steering, and automatic and IRS.)
Opposite the Savant, the GAZ-21 Volga Mara Hussar (@AndiD) carries the torch of tradition and thrift. It’s the cheapest car of those tested here, at a knockout bargain price of AM$9920. It’s also the larges, with a 110-inch wheelbase reminiscent of US compacts from 5 to 10 years ago. Mara, the “people’s company” from Archana, has been known to offer 80% of a class-leading car at 60% of the price - and on paper, that sounds like the case here, as well. The old-school four-cylinder makes 100 horsepower and, breathing as it currently does through a variable-venturi carburetor, delivers good economy at 20 mpg. However, the Hussar fell off its horse once tested out for real. The thin tires and manual steering box make the car handle like a bottom-of-the-barrel 1974 Chevy Nova. The 3-speed automatic coupled to an engine obviously engineered for a closer-ratio manual transmission makes the acceleration and passing abilities significantly crummier than a Nova - coupled with a short rear differential that’s still not short enough to move the car quickly, but also too short for the car to sound nice and refined. And comparing the exterior of the Hussar to any Nova is like comparing a school play to Star Wars. That’s not to say, however, that the Hussar is a bad buy for the price it commands - it’s a bargain, to be sure - but if you have any expectations for your car other than perpetual tedium, then you will surely wish for it to die long before it actually does.
(The Hussar is actually a mighty impressive feat of cost-cutting and putting quality and techpool where they need to be - that sub-10k price is savage as hell, and it’s also the most reliable car in this bracket - but it gets otherwise clobbered in most other regards. Standard fare for AndiD, to be fair.)
Rear-drive cars aren’t confined to the “dirt-cheap decrepit” club, however: the Takeda Dignitary (@ChemaTheMexican), only in its second year of production, is purely in the camp of strength through technology. The engine is a twin-cam, multipoint-injected straight-six engineered for compactness, allowing the oriental midsize car to match the power of something like the Hussar with less displacement and a class-act 26.2 mpg. The car isn’t fast by any means, even with the four-ratio automatic helping it along, but it has exquisite handling that far outpaces that of the Savant - and despite the Dignitary being similarly harshly-sprung, the ride and overall comfort are better in the Japanese vehicle. It even has a better cassette player - despite being cheaper. We have just two serious complaints: the short gearing on the differential leading to a loud cruise, and the slightly too-grabby rear brakes that make panic stops less safe than they ought to be. Overall, however, the Takeda is pretty much the objectively better choice in comparison to the Savant - and oh, we forgot to mention, it looks like a spaceship. Head and shoulders above anything in this comparison.
(Good if not infallible engineering, coherent and cool design and a good price point are all strengths of this car. The powertrain is the biggest drawback, with a top gear speed of 124 mph (thus insufficient overdrive) making the car less economical and/or less powerful than it perhaps ought to be. Quality is underutilized, leading to a reliability score that is not catastrophic, but not impressive either.)
The Mitsushita Karna (@conan) is another SVM-killer. This front-driver is powered by a 2-liter four-pot with an aluminum 12-valve head - in other words, it packages the same amount of engine and breathing into a still lighter and more compact package than the straight-six in the Takeda; comes with a supplemental restraint system for amazing safety for the class; and has a fancier autobox with a lock-up clutch for better highway economy. A compelling package, to be sure - though, as with the similarly-priced SVM and slightly cheaper Takeda, the Karna is not bulletproof by any means. You do still have to deal with rear drums, steel wheels (an odd choice for a premium automobile!) and - in what we consider its most serious drawback relative to the Takeda - a very unremarkable exterior styling.
(An entry clearly made to win on engineering rather than styling - understandable, since the engineering is very good. Of the non-bin entries reviewed up until this point, this has the best quality usage.)
Speaking of unremarkable: it stings less if you paid less for it. That’s true for the Mara to an extent, and also for the Salon Companion (@Mad_Cat) - the second-cheapest car in the comparo at AM$13,300. In contrast to the Mara, the Salon is the smallest and lightest car in the mix, and honestly is more of a compact than anything else size-wise. It’s also the only one here without an automatic option - perhaps for the better, as is 2.0 OHV straight-4 is the least powerful and least advanced motor in here. That being said, it performs admirably, actually outgunning all but the last car in this comparo - the IAS Griffin - in acceleration. That said, the Companion’s humdrum cloth interior doesn’t impress even despite the new-looking cassette player, and just generally it’s a much rattier car than the more expensive bunch - resembling the Hussar in that respect.
(Another value proposition - and one on the “cheap because small, has stuff” side rather than “cheap because no stuff, but big” side. Skirts comfort for other stats with decent payoff, while being only okay in the looks department. Overall a good effort - but the cost-cutting outweighs the cost-saving here, as well.)
The final car, the IAS Griffin (@shibusu), stands out with its meteorite performance relative to the rest - 150 horsepower from an 18-valve 4-liter V6. 4-barrel-carbureted and high-compression, it almost evokes an old-school V8 image; except, of course, for the fact that it’s a six-banger. Even with the highest-overdrive automatic, it’s got both the best acceleration and worst economy in the group - though thanks to the Hussar, the difference isn’t large. It’s not beautiful, but it does project a mean and prestigious presence; it’s got great interior space; it’s among the safer vehicles in the group; and it’s ever so slightly more prestigious and cool than the rest.
(The wildcard of this group. The prestige gain proves that in my framework, not having performance/sportiness as a priority doesn’t mean you should go with the slowest reasonable powertrain. Quality is used decently; however, the highest svc of the bunch and a mediocre fuel econ compared to the other cars here both play a role in dragging it down.)
So, which one should you get? Well, it really depends on your wallet. If you only have AM$10k or 14k, then the cars available at those prices will serve you reliably enough - but you do get what you pay for. If your budget is closer to AM$20,000, then the two Japanese cars - the Takeda and Mitsushita - are a cut above due to good economy, comfort and more than acceptable reliability and serviceability.
One of the geezers ahead of Tony went to get his grill drilled, so Tony - who largely agreed with the review’s conclusion - picked up the other issues and sifted through them for relevant reviews. He didn’t find any that were quite right, but the June issue did have a big-car comparison.
After a short period of seeming resurgence, the recent unrest in Iran has put the full-size car class into jeopardy once again as fuel prices rise. With the future of gas and its guzzlers uncertain, we put four competitive large cars at the crossover point between mid- and full-size cars to the test to figure out if any of them are still worth it.
The Anhultz Dione (@Elizipeazie) is a perpetual player in the segment - it’s a solid steel brick which never stops or breaks, even in its current guise with the variable-venturi carburetor on the V6. That addition also makes the Dione reasonably thrifty at 21.3 mpg. That said, the 8-track player isn’t of the highest grade, even if it’ll last a good while; more importantly, the car is unwieldy, slow and not the easiest to control. Despite having four camshafts, the 130hp V6 runs out of steam at high speeds and makes passing difficult. And, quite frankly, it’s not exactly the classiest thing to show up in. We still expect it to sell relatively well in the next few years, though, as customers become ever more willing to put up with wheezemobiles. The new safety restraint system only adds to its appeal.
(A solid build. I like the unorthodox V6 layout and fuel system that’s still made to work well. Just one problem: You forgot to style it.)
What they might not be able to put up, though, is the god-damn Cadillac Seville Wraith Neapolitan (@Knugcab). The only genuine full-size in this test, the Neapolitan is almost as slow as the Anhultz - but it’s a whole lot more wasteful, as well, with an unapologetic 14.4 mpg fuel consumption. Why? Well, the all-aluminum 4.1-liter mill with a horribly leaned-out fuel mixture is trying to front-pull a 3700-lbs hunk with a shape so un-aerodynamic that it makes the Dione look like a rubber wedge. And because the powerplant is all-aluminum and made in America, it’s already been reported to have problems - even though it’s been out for mere months. Though the Wraith’s base AM$18,000 price - a bargain in terms of luxury cars - was enough to put the Neapolitan on our radar, it’s also likely responsible for the public perception that while this plushy, luxurious boat is comfortable, it is not an example of real quality, prosperity and prestige.
(This entry is one that, in my mind, bears the label of “fixable” - and I’m afraid it’s not a compliment. Without changing any part of this car’s identity or fundamental “hardpoints”, I was able to get it to a point where it would have been close to competitive. The only reason it isn’t is because there were serious gaffes in the tuning - such as leaning the engine down to zero while having a relatively high cam profile. The low reliability, courtesy both of the alu block and the general overstretching of the budget through parts and size, could also have been avoided without terribly much trouble.)
In a certain way, the Calcote Superior (@Tsundere-kun) is very Dione-ish. It’s just about bulletproof, it’s rear-drive and not too comfy, and their promotional color leaves a lot to be desired. However, it’s significantly lighter, pokier and more efficient. The drawbacks? Looks, including the just-about-unacceptable unstyled steelies, and the fact that the povo-spec we tested - still more expensive than the Dione - had a manual steering box. While the large steering wheel in the car makes steering manageable, the premium image that the car is going for doesn’t live past the first parking lot. It’s something you’d expect out of a Mara.
(Very strong on stats, doesn’t look too good visually, has a couple of weird but not necessarily improbable design choices. Overall, a 2800lbs car with manual ball steering would be drivable - but unlike what Automation says, there’s no shot it’d drive better than the same car with power steering.)
And then there’s the striking Bradford Syntax-Quad (@yurimacs). This novel sedan has a center differential that enables four-wheel drive, claiming to be an offroad-capable car - though from our testing, we’d say this system’s best use is helping traction on slippery roads. The big British sedan is surprisingly reliable for its origin, and is in fact on par with a Dione when it comes to comfort and reliability; the big, 24-valve 3.5 straight-six with port injection also makes the Bradford the most powerful and quickest car in this test. However, as a trade-off, you do end up with the same AM$18,000 that Wraith asks for the Neapolitan, and that price doesn’t even include crushed velour. What’s more, look a bit further under the surface and you’ll find that the Bradford is an old ladder-chassis pattern - and, unlike that same Wraith, lacks the supplemental reinforcement and safety systems necessary to make it safer.
(It’s a looker and also a reasonably good performer, but the total wipeout of the budget makes its admittedly impressive stats less game-changing than they would have been otherwise. The safety stat would have looked a lot better if you put at least adv 70s safety into it instead of making the car tera-heavy.)
So there’s your run-down of the full-size roster: two reasonably priced, solid cars which could stand to be modernized, and a pair of powerhouses - one in comfort, the other in technology - whose full potential cannot be unleashed at their existing price point. The Neapolitan and Syntax-Quad both need extra research and price leeway to fix their various kinks and deficiencies, whereas the Dione and Superior are both undercontented for their price points, even if they are rock-solid reliable. One almost has to wonder if the age of the affordable big car is coming to an end after all those years at the top.
Tony pretty much decides right away that fiddling with the two aforementioned ‘powerhouses’ is none of his business - but the two simpler cars intrigue him, the Calcote in particular. If a car is reliable and overall comfortable, maybe being ‘undercontented’ isn’t too bad. He jots down the name of the car next to the two Japanese ones from the previous review before finally heading into the dentist’s room. Inhale, exhale.
From Brackets 1 and 2, the following advance to the finals:
Hey, getting a copy exactly as bad as the original is an achievement, right?
Happy with my result, and kind of expected from the middling fuel economy. I’m glad I got the styling across right.
Good luck to the ones advancing!
Dang I made the car too cheap
I do love how despite that my car was still quicker than most of the competition in the same class even with only a 2.0 OHV i4
As well as softening up the suspension for more comfort, I could have maxed out the budget and improved the reliability by adding a few quality points in key areas such as the interior, and on top of that, I should have ditched the faux-vinyl roof for a body-colored one.
Here is what the max-budget version of my build would have looked like:
And here is a statistical comparison between it (right) and my actual submission (left):
I would have achieved this by adding +1 quality each to the bottom end, fuel system, and suspension, and +2 quality each to the body, transmission, and interior, as well as using this suspension tune:
I doubt these changes would have made the Savant reach the finals, especially with its higher price tag, but at least I know that not adding quality points to any area with positive techpool is generally self-defeating.
Anyway, great start to the reviews - I can’t wait to see what else makes the finals!
Makes me wonder how mine would have compared stats wise… oh well.
CSR 154 - Round 2 (Brackets 3, 4 of 5)
Following a long, boring and somewhat painful visit to the dentist, Tony (and his piece of junk Plymouth) limped home, picking up a 16" pizza, a case of beer and the brand-spanking-new October edition of The Open Road. Car off; door slammed; beer cracked; pizza box opened. Oh yeah, a lonely night ain’t so bad with proper inanimate company - especially when there’s important career research to be done.
When it comes to the RCM Atlantic (@thecarlover), the choice is actually pretty easy: Either you love the look and spring for it straight away, or you don’t and you don’t even take a second look; but hold your horses. Our Atlantic came equipped with a 3.7-liter V6 - a modern overhead-cam digital-injection unit, to be exact - paired to one of RCM’s wide-ratio 3-speed automatics. It’s readily apparent that these two halves of the powertrain aren’t meant for one another, with a conservatively-mapped valve body sending us tumbling out of the powerband with every upshift. 160 horsepower is a more than respectable power rating - but it’s no good when the entire 0-60 sprint is spent in 1st gear, top speed is reached in 2nd, and top gear is stuck playing overdrive in a car that desperately needs more gears. This is exacerbated by the fact that the engine seems unable to idle anywhere below 900 RPM. Now, with that major complaint out of the way, we are pleased to report that the rest of the personal-luxury package works reasonably well: the seats are comfortable, the ride - a firmer, more European tuning - inspires confidence, and the build quality is on the good side of adequate. We anticipate improvements by RCM, hopefully including a more modern gearbox, to whip this flash rod into shape in the next couple years.
(The review really explains my gripes with the car: The styling is hit-or-miss with the opera cutouts pushing it towards more of a miss for me, and the powertrain arrangement is crying out for an extra gear and more usable powerband, something that could easily be achieved with more balancing mass and redline at no cost to reliability etc.)
The Llewellyn Orion Marquee (@debonair0806 and @vero94773), like the Atlantic, is a rear-drive luxury coupe; however, it’s more clearly based off a muscle car platform, and is in addition to that much more outwardly pretty; a modern and practical shape is made special through the use of a bold front fascia and a vinyl roof with curved rear glass. A traditional pushrod eight, developing a classy 180 horsepower, teams with a four-speed transmission to bring the thunder. It also features a luxury interior and entertainment suite, helping justify a premium AM$18,000 price. That being said, the Orion suffers from a suspension that’s less “European” and more “Greek Parthenon” in how rock-hard it is, making the ride experience substantially worse than in the Atlantic; the autobox, meanwhile, has a pathetically short overdrive gear that makes it louder and thirstier on the highway than it has any reason to be. Like the Atlantic, then: A fundamentally good engineering design, but it needs work before it’ll be a legitimately appealing product.
(Okay, so, I think the whole community was expecting this car to place well or even be a finalist; and it really could have been, but instead it’s a “fixable” like Knugcab’s Seville knockoff. The suspension is tuned to the ‘drivability’ mark on the bar charts, meaning it loses a ton of comfort (sub-40 with a luxury interior, 8-track and an autobox); furthermore, the body is partially built of aerodynamic fixtures, and with wing angle not zeroed out they make this car have functional downforce - unheard of in the 1980s - as well as a Cd of 0.52… Also next to unheard of by the 80s, in passenger coupes at least. The result is a car that misses out on the prestige points it was rightfully entitled to as a speedy V8 slugger, as its top speed isn’t nearly all that. Lastly, the reliability is in the 60s - not acceptable in a competition where techpool is at the level it is, and where reliability is a 4-star priority.)
Fear not, two-door fanatics - though the last two cars mentioned in this test were half-baked, the Caplan Chesapeake Turbo (@donutsnail) is anything but. Its exterior is the definition of rock-and-roll, with a bold, high front, tinted glass T-bar roof, and those pretty sports alloys. Its interior? The last word in rock solid, not a squeak or rattle in earshot and with adequate comfort and amenities to boot. The powerplant? Straight from space. As the name implies, the Chesapeake has a turbocharged 3-liter engine making 140 horsepower - and 260 ft-lb of torque. With a carburetor and a late boost onset, this engine seems designed to operate in two distinct modes - efficient cruiser and fearsome brawler - rather than trying to be both simultaneously. While overdrive isn’t the best and the first two gears are questionably short, the competence of the powerplant and an electronic converter lockup still manage to pin economy at a reasonably high 20.8 mpg. Despite the comprehensive host of quality and tech - including the front-drive transaxle making for easy and safe driving - the Chesapeake, which is still built on a run-of-the-mill perimeter frame, is priced conservatively at AM$16,800.
(Going with the turbo helped out massively with the prestige stat, where the 45.6 value of the Chesapeake monsters literally all other competitors - all but the binned-for-price YAG Akumb, that is. The comfort, drivability and reliability are all well above par, locking out some of the most important scoring criteria - though I will say that I am well aware that the car would have worse drivability if it had a better boost threshold. Automation stats are… Like that, sometimes.)
Moving onto the four-doors, the Hinode Tempest (@S_U_C_C_U_L_E_N_T) is one of Japan’s first attempts to offer a true premium car in the US market. The niche in question is clearly that of a sports sedan: it won’t be as effortless and cushy as a trimmed-out Takeda, but it’ll be at 75 mph before the the Takeda in question gets to 60. The suspension is also firm and perhaps even on the unforgiving side, but that’s the feel that this vehicle is going for. It backs it up with great build quality and what is likely going to be great reliability down the road, though the Chesapeake does beat it there.
(Good but not great; the comfort is lower than the lower-priced Takeda from Bracket 1 despite similar ‘ingredients’ and a higher price point. As is typical, overdrive and post-peak RPM are not in the Hinode’s vocabulary; though props on almost matching the Llewellyn in terms of speed.)
As if in a metaphor of the clash between Japanese and American car manufacturers, the near-luxury four-door stacking up against the Hinode is the Durendal Le Grand (@GassTiresandOil). Mixing a conservative longitudinal layout with front-drive, port injection and overhead cams, the Durendal shows up the Caplan by putting out as much power naturally-aspirated as the pretty coupe does as a turbo. That said, the Le Grand is not nearly as solid a car, and does not evoke the image of gritty American steel as well even as it shoves the gritty sagging wheel arches in your face. It’s more comfortable and slightly cheaper than the Hinode, but the comfort could have been much better still had the suspension not been given the same lethal dose of sportiness. Overall, it’s a car that could have been great, but just doesn’t get there in several places.
(The general layout and base of this car is, as far as I’m aware, The Metatm; if properly tuned and given a less generic exterior, it may well have won the whole competition. However, it simply falls short in metrics such as fuel economy and reliability.)
To recap: There’s a clear winner between the luxury coupes, that being the cool Chesapeake, whereas the two sedans are a dead heat.Of these three, the Chesapeake is actually the least rapid - but it’s also the most comfortable, and has unparalleled build quality. The Durendal and Hinode are decent near-luxury products if four doors are a must, but remember: This segment is about you. Speaking of you: If we were you, we’d keep a keen eye on future The Open Road releases to see whether or not Llewellyn and RCM can get their acts together - as, barring the current blunders, both of these cars have the potential to be something beautiful.
Tony noted down the Caplan. It was true; rear doors weren’t really a priority, seeing how people tended to all disembark at the same time whenever he carpooled. Sure, some of them might whine about lap belts or something, but who cares…
Taking a bite out of his pizza and making sure the newscaster on the TV was still spouting some nonsense about the New York mafia, he flipped through the mag and found another group test - this time about some seriously fast hardware. Heh, what the hell, double feature.
Cars are a way to present oneself - and even when they aren’t the best in terms of driving characteristics, they can earn they keep by being a complement to your character. I mean, if you’re a Texan business magnate, you need a full-size Warren with some horns on it. If you’re a stone-cold rebel with a chip on his shoulder, you need a black pickup with a skull painted on it. And if you’re a bad boy who’s all too sure he’s got the looks to drive the girls wild? You need one of these. Cars with above-average performance and looks, all bite and no wallow. New-age pony cars but with a big trunk or hatch to let you get by.
With the glass buttresses and funky-shaped headlights, the Planar Owlsa (@lotto77) certainly looks like a rebel - and heck, it’s set up to be one with its rear-drive layout. The ride’s good, the safety facilities are great, and it’s got a boxer six - things are looking good. Problem is, though, the six is outdated and the continuous injection on it isn’t much newer; and it’s mated to a much too long-legged four-speed that it’s not on speaking terms with. Thus, though the Owlsa does still reach a pretty meteoric 135 mph, it also won’t get to even sixty inside 10 seconds. That’s not real bad attitude.
(The engine family being from 1955 means that despite being all-iron, the engine boasts one of the lowest reliability ratings in the competition. Strangled by multiple factors, it’s not as powerful or rapid as it could be; and the car’s small cabin size precludes great comfort. That said, it is dead sexy.)
On the other hand, the Bushido Shogun (@GetWrekt01 and @ACoolCrab) is almost subdued in its styling - that is, unless you peep the rear with its louvers and spoiler. But Bushido didn’t even bother lengthening the hood in the same way many other Japanese manufacturers did when installing a six-banger in an otherwise compact car. This means it’s light - and ripe for the 24-valve screamer mill to take it to 60 in under 9 seconds, and past that all the way to 139 mph. That being said, it’s a car with manual ball steering and staggered tires - so it’s not as fun to drive as the box would suggest, and neither is it cheap to service. At least the cassette player works well, and the build quality is sturdier than that of the Planar.
(The style is lean and mean, the engineering is kinda ham and cheese to be honest. I mean, a 175/195 stagger? I did not need to penalize it, however, as the Shogun actually ended up the highest-ranked car that didn’t make the finals cut.)
If you want a rear-drive sports hatch with a real silly amount of power, the Italian Pegaso C2700i (@the-chowi) is one to keep in mind. Even with an autobox, this athletic mite - equipped with the angriest 2.7 mill we’ve seen - pulls 0-60 in 8.5. It mixes classic European styling with a touch of square-arched, muscular brutality, and you can still have it with a civilized cassette player. On the downside, all the brakes - including the comically tiny rears - can and will lock the wheels up in a panic stop, the economy is a weaker-than-average 20 mpg due to a lack of a proper overdrive, and the build quality along with expected reliability is, well… Italian. Can you dig it?
(Real hot and powerful, pretty comfortable, pretty drivable. Not reliable at all, even less so than the big Wraith from Bracket 2. That oversight largely sinks the car.)
The Canadians’ response is this short, aggressive Swanson 225 (@Ludvig). Another boxer-six design (in a near-subcompact hatch, mind!) this one has a modern 2.5-liter, 18-valve mill that matches the Planar one for power and utterly steals its lunch money for efficiency. And even in the as-tested white, the Swanson has a black stripe, red wheel accents and - again - louvers for extra bad-boy credentials. Unlike the other cars so far covered, this minibug has a manual that allows it to trounce the Planar and the Bushido on the straights. And finally, it’s built rock-solid; Better than anything else seen so far. Drawbacks include a lack of cassette player availability, as well as a manual steering rack: light as the Swanson might be, you get tired of all the parking lot cranking all the same.
(Here’s an outlier hero. The Swanson scored well despite trading all of its comfort for basically-unjudged sportiness. Seriously - this car would have been objectively better from a judging standpoint if it had a power rack. That said, its absurd 29.6mpg of economy, its good looks and its great reliability are enough to be a finals pick.)
The last car, the AAAA Knightsgrove 4000 (@machalel), initially intrigued us: a 4-liter V8 in something this size, for real? But we learned quick that it’s less fit for a pretty boy than it is for somebody middle-aged and crazy. An unpowered rack in a car some 350 pounds heavier than the Swanson - much of it courtesy of the V8 in question. The V8 is fed by a pair of computer-assisted SU carbs which are mostly good for choking it and even stop fuel delivery completely right after the power peak, leading to shifts that fling you outside the powerband. That plus a budget manifold design means that the Knightgrove jobs to both the Pegaso and Swanson to 60 mph, all while its fuel economy is a slobberknocking 12.7 mpg off the latter. The Knightsgrove is somewhat more upscale than the Swanson courtesy of a cassette player and larger size, but the front suspension is weirdly bouncy as if to compensate. The front brakes also drop the ball - as they are solid and undersized, they fade very easily. Like we said: this is a car for masked maniacs who live in boiler rooms. Up to you if that’s something you’re into.
(I was actually happy to see Machalel, who is new to CSR but is clearly creative as seen with their JOC3A entry, progress to the second round. And honestly, I’m still happy even if they did miss the mark; it’s very bold to submit a V8 hatch to a challenge like this, and with more refinement it could have made for a very interesting wildcard.)
And there you have it - cars for showstopper scoundrels. The Swanson’s manual-only trim limits its appeal, but it is the strongest car here otherwise, with great performance, blockbuster economy and a full 1300-dollar fore on the next cheapest car ($15900 vs the Knightsgrove’s $17200). Chalk it up to simplicity - though you won’t seem a simple guy when you pop open the hood to show off your chromed intake runners. Alternatively, if an automatic is a must, you could spring for the Shogun - though you’ll miss out on a hatchback.
Tony reads on, but the magazine is fresh out of tips, ending with a bunch of used classifieds he’s not interested in. He figures he has the next couple candidates picked - the Caplan and the Swanson. He considers throwing the Bushido into the mix as well, but decides against it - staggered tires and the seasonal search for cheap winters doesn’t mix well to him. The public TV station cuts to a schedule that states a car program rerun is due the next morning - so Tony figures he’ll wrap up his research then and use Thursday and Friday (Sep 27-28) to make the rounds through the dealers.
From Brackets 3 and 4, the following advance to the finals:
To be honest, I’ll count getting to the 2nd round as a win! 
Lore-wise, the 80s were a period of decline for this manufacturer, with the company sticking to older and outdated design and engineering almost leading to bankruptcy 
(P.s. and not entirely new… just took a break since 2019 csr-108 
)
Yeah, I remember AAAA very well from my early days of playing Auto… 
Damn, i had hoped to get further this time around. CSR is seeming like a really tough nut to crack.
Fair reviews tho!
Let’s say, I went for realism rather than pure stats supremacy
Very nice writing, well done! I’m surprised at the fuel economy expectations - for all the driving Tony’s doing, I’d think he’d want at least 25mpg combined. Also surprised at how few entries have manual boxes, and that it mattered.
Curious what kind of reliability numbers made for “great” or “not at all”.
I sent you a PM some days ago, but I can imagine it got lost in the mix.
CSR 154 - Round 2 (Bracket 5 of 5)
Alarm. Coffee. Cereal. Tony thinks he could stand to mellow out since he’s got his big break - and his little actual, weeklong break. But he can’t - that stupid rerun is on at 9 AM, and he’s gotta watch it for a promised European sedan comparison. Welp, here’s MotorMouth, I guess.
Hi, it’s Dave Jameson here with MotorMouth. While the fuel crisis has seen Asian economy cars prove the biggest challenge to Detroit in the American market, the Europeans that had begun rival American autos at the beginning of the decade haven’t left. In fact, at this turn of the century they are more ready than ever to prove themselves superior with new tech, powerful engines and efficient build techniques.
The Quaglia 320GTi (@HybridTronny) is the face of that ‘powerful engines’ angle: The Italian sports sedan packs a sonorous fuel-injected 3.2-liter V6 pushing over 180 horsepower. In terms of flat-out speed, it’s mighty difficult to find a substitute: with a 7-second sprint to 60 and a 15-second quarter mile dash, there is nothing in its that matches the GTi’s alacrity - an especially impressive feat considering its long, un-aerodynamic old style body. There are decent interior amenities, but the quality is second-rate and ride is harsh and uneven. What alarmed us the most, however, is the high-speed cornering performance of the Quaglia: Despite ostensibly good powertrain control thanks to a Torsen differential, the sedan oversteers in a frightening fashion above 80 mph. On our mixed-cycle test loop, the Italian proved a big eater, only managing 17 miles per gallon.
(This is the quickest car in the entire competition. It’s unbeaten by any other car in almost any aceleration metric - only losing to one other vehicle in the sprint to 200. However, CSR154 is not a race; and of all of Tonys’ 4- and 3- star priorities: reliability, drivability, fuel economy, comfort, and value - the Quaglia excels in none. Even in a competition where performance and sportiness would have been of greater value (but similar techpool rules), the lack of quality use on the trim really harms the Quaglia’s chances of doing well. And as always, it has no idea what overdrive is.)
Our other Italian guest, the Arco Civetta Bebop (@Portalkat42), takes a decidedly different approach. The Civetta itself is a midrange and midsize model of generally solid quality, but the Bebop model features the innovation of a roadgoing all-wheel-drive system with a full-time transfer case. This makes it incredibly easy to drive, and gives it a distinct rain, sleet and snow advantage - though we estimate it to be just as vulnerable as anything else against ice. The Bebop’s spiderlike drive is connected to a five-speed manual, itself driven by Arco’s unremarkable (apart from being remarkably high-strung and shaky) four-cylinder engine producing a worthy 137 horsepower. It is thus decently quick, and the 5-speed’s generous overdrive top gear meant it managed an impressive 27 mpg in our mixed-cycle test loop. We are generally fond of the Bebop’s long list of standard and optional equipment, including a cassette player and a supplemental restraint system, but are disappointed by the exclusion of power steering from every test car we could get our hands upon - forcing a not-big-enough wheel connected to a slow steering box to pick up the slack.
(The Arco has the highest drivability at this round of the competition, not sacrificing too much to achieve it. All of the stats that are relevant are solid or better, barring the typical-for-manuals comfort; however, I must say that the car smells of cheese in several places, most prominently considering it has solid front discs, rear drums… And 100% cooling across the board to make up for it.)
We move now to Germany - though with a historically-British luxury brand, presenting the sleek Valens 816 (@pen15) sports sedan. It’s a real oddball: not only is its wheelbase more in line with compact cars, but in the field of the traditional Italian and deliberately-conservative fellow German exterior designs, it looks 15 years newer. The power output of the 3.8-liter straight-six seems to confirm that perception: 225 horsepower, allowing the car to rocket to 60 in 7.5 seconds despite sporting a non-lockup 4-speed autobox. Fast as it may be, this distinguished sedan is more a highway cruiser than corner carver, with thin-for-weight tires preventing any serious adhesion and forcing the Valens to plow in corners - despite the clutch-type differential competently preventing spins in the rain or in a straight line. This is hardly a letdown at all, however, compared to the build quality: between the complex hydraulic suspension with self-leveling, the novel digital injection, and a desire to keep costs at an acceptable level, the 816 is less than robust - and still manages to clock in at $18,000. It also won no prizes in our mixed-cycle test loop, only pulling out 18 mpg - a consequence of all gears in the four-speed automatic being non-overdrive ones.
(With the lowest reliability of all cars that weren’t outright binned for it, as well as a middling economy, the Valens never stood much of a chance - but props to pen15 for trying his heart out to make the design gorgeous. It is; In fact, I awarded it this competition’s only perfect 10. It’s fast as all hell - beating even the fearsome Quaglia in the long dash to 120 mph - but speed was not the deciding factor in this competition.)
Our last stop is Germany. The first car hailing from the land of no humor is the… very humorously named Wichsen 5-series (@LS_Swapped_Rx-7). As opposed to the very generously equipped cars representing the other models here, we got something that you could almost call a taxicab spec - meaning this 5256i model is the cheapest of the cars reviewed in this comparison. For your $16,400, Wichsen provides a 2.5-liter, throttle-body-injected inline-6 making a more than decent 137 horsepower; a 4-speed overdrive transmission; 60 mph is still reached under 10 seconds, meaning it’s faster than the Arco. You get, once again, a manual steering box - and an old and simple, though very solidly built, 8-track player. One of the less taxicabish features are the 14-inch alloys; with the well-sized tires on them, the independent rear suspension, and the reasonable spring rate, the 5256i manades to be reasonably comfortable simply by virtue of its chassis. The biggest advantage of the Wichsen over its fellow Europeans is its bombproof build quality and reliability; it quite simply will not die on you. It also won’t eat you out of house and home, as showcased by our fuel economy loop returning 25.5 mpg. It doesn’t put a foot wrong - and impressively, is the sportiest-handling car in this comparison by far, once again showing the supremacy of chassis over bolt-on. And that’s with yet another dead, unfeeling manual steering box up front.
(A very solid entry; well-rounded, good-looking, soundly-tuned. Apart from yet another manual steering cheese indulgence, pretty much the textbook balanced entry.)
As this roster might indicate, the European premium sector has been reluctant to consider front-drive cars a viable option. The Martin-Wagner 400 (@BannedByAndroid) changes that: its fancy dual-plenum port-injected V6 connects to the front wheels via a 5-speed manual transaxle. A brisk performer, it gets to 60 in a mere 8 seconds - and it handles well, too, though the tires are a tad thin for the job. While not as dead solid as the Wichsen, it’s also a fair amount more lavishly equipped - though the manual and the harsh suspension spoil the comfort a bit. The transaxle includes a Torsen differential and a short final drive - both good for sportiness, not so much for cost efficiency. Our mixed-cycle loop saw 24.4 mpg - not bad at all, but with that engine, no hydraulic converter loss to worry about and that injection system, it ought to have been much better. The MW as-tested retails for $18,000 - about par for the course for the brand, so a bit steep for the average American.
(It’s a good build, though not my vibe visually; more importantly, it’s not Tony’s vibe functionally: its reliability, comfort and fuel economy aren’t the best, and more importantly, it maxes out the budget without too convincingly outperforming cars that don’t.)
So from the orthodox Italians to the eccentric one-of-a-kind Valens and the rational Germans, these are the primary midsize offerings from the old Continent. All excel in various areas, and certainly the Valens is without equal if you’re looking for an unrivaled super sedan of sorts; however, for daily use and practicality, the Arco and Wichsen are your best bets out of this crop.
Tony turned off the TV, cracked his neck, and gulped down the rest of his coffee pot. With the two MM recommendations, he now had seven solid candidate cars. It was time to see about test-driving each of them… He just hoped the Plymouth would last him this long.
The finalists from Bracket 5 are:
They will be joined in the finals by:
From what I’ve read so far, you’ve chosen the right cars for the final seven - each one made a strong case for itself, and whichever wins overall will emerge a worthy winner.
Tony stand outside the Takada showroom. It’s shiny and new, bought from a gray importer just recently - which explains why it’s so close to his home and so far from downtown Jackson. The Dignitary - actually one of Takeda’s larger models - was first on Tony’s list not only because of the dealer’s proximity, but also because it seemed the most dynamically similar to his old car. Minus the stalls, hopefully.
Obtaining the keys from the rep, Tony stepped into the Dignitary and was pleasantly surprised by its high-quality leather interior and its new cassette player. He was pleased that each car he was checking out had some form of track player as opposed to merely a radio: perhaps it meant he was crossing over to a new social status. Getting out onto a big road, Tony noted that the Takada was indeed similar to his old car performance-wise: Somewhat wallowy, none too quick, but decently collected overall. It also shared the unfortunate habit of getting loud at highway speeds, with a low top gear - since the extra gear when compared to his Plymouth’s Torqueflite was merely there to help the acceleration not suck worse than it did. Tony imagined that the car would be thrifty enough if he actually followed the national speed limit, but he knew most of the guys wouldn’t let him live it down if he did.
Tony walks away from the Dignitary satisfied. He would’ve hoped for it to be a bit more solid, but it’s not bad at all; and he has a feeling his battle-tested body would thank him for the switch if he were to commit. The trim he test-drove was $15,700 - a fair lump of money, but also significantly below Tony’s limit. All while looking damn good.
PROS: Comfortable; Reasonably cheap; Economical; Looks good.
CONS: Loud on the highway; Underpowered; Lowest reliability in finals.
With Mitsushita’s dealership built in the middle of a disused industrial area, Tony joked to himself that the car might’ve materialized from right there. This isn’t that far from the truth, as the Japanese-designed compact was assembled in Kentucky as protection against quotas and taxes on imports. The Karna that he’s come to visit is painted in a funky purple; Tony muses that it’s not exactly Mike Maverick’s color scheme. Inside and out, the Karna has the same “good enough” feel that’s so pervasive in the Dignitary, while offering some novel features like its space-saving front-drive and an airbag restraint system; on a less bright note, it also
looks cheaper and more phoned-in despite costing slightly more than its rear-drive rival. Out on the road, Tony finds that the Mitsushita is a very quiet car, aided by its dual muffler and a slightly less aggressive final drive; and its engine has surprisingly more grunt than the Takeda’s, the displacement contributing to a much punchier start. Tony is particularly pleased with the operation of the car’s lockup clutch, which grants it much better highway passing behavior.
Dropping off the Karna, Tony is visited by a sense of longing. It’s objectively a good car, performing and to a point even feeling better than the Takeda - but it just doesn’t feel half as sweet when it looks so chintzy, to the point where his own Plymouth looks like more of an occasion. Made in Kentucky? Yeah, it shows. Tony is surprised to find that though he was dead-set on getting a very practical car, if this is the price of practicality - he isn’t paying.
PROS: Very economical; Comfortable and modern; Good safety.
CONS: Looks uninspiring and cheap; Second-worst reliability in finals.
For the next several cars - the European ones - Tony has to make his way to a trendy part of town. At one point, the ritzy Euro-car dealers made this place their home and never left. Not even the British brand, Calcote, despite the fact some larger and more mass-market players from that country never made it far in the market. On the heels of the warm review of the Superior sedan, Tony arrived here first, excited for a damn good car - and was shot down almost immediately by that color. What the hell is this, “piss-running-down-leg” hue? And why does it have these ugly, unstyled steelies? Blegh. Trying not to show the sales rep just how confused he was, Tony received the keys and sat down in the car - and though the review he’d read had readied him, the huge wheel indicating the presence of manual steering just about made him depressed. As did the very primitive eight-track with no bass/treble setting. Now, once his desire to just get right back out of the car slowly faded on the road, Tony did find the Superior a pleasant drive. As quiet as the Karna and smoother - and with even more get-up-and go; and, speaking of sound, not a single interior rattle. Just dead solid. Though a first-year car’s reliability can never be guaranteed - and Tony knew this the hard way - he felt that this car could have no quit in it whatsoever. The Calcote also had the same transmission tech as did the Karna, granting great high-speed capacity and - at least supposedly - economy.
So, on balance, Tony had exited the Superior in a better mood than he had entered it. It was still a weird car with a weird look, a weird (in this case) color and less overall comfort than either of the cheaper Japanese cars, it felt like it had an intangible measure of quality and confidence the rising star had been looking for.
PROS: Incredibly reliable; Very well-scouted power range; Solid economy.
CONS: Looks like a very derisive poverty spec; Heaviest manual-steered car in test; Short powerband; Undercontented.
When Tony approached the Wichsen dealership, he was met with the sight of dozens of similar-looking cars - but he knew from his research they were all different inside. Engine sizes, interior specs, the like - all can be customized. But even the one he is eventually led to - the gray, non-luxurious 5256i - is still the very image of dignity and solidity. That’s how you treat your entry-level customer. Alloys? Yes. Big engine? Yes. Airbag? Also yes, though it comes inside a one-size-fits-all wheel connected to a manual steering box. Like the Calcote, the equipment level isn’t quite as generous as that of the Japanese cars, but, again, the car’s bolted down dead solid. On the road, Tony notices that the car is much more lively than the other three he’s been in so far, with a sportier suspension tune that he’s not necessarily used to. On the ‘plus’ side, however, there engine is smooth, quiet and very, very powerful for the class - almost 140 horsepower, making the car the quickest and best-passing he’s driven so far. That said, after his test-drive, Tony still felt that the firmer ride did it few favors.
Tony’s impression coming away from the Wichsen is that it does much of what the Calcote did - without making fun of him with poverty-spec trim or being overly ungainly in its exterior. At a price that just about matches both the Calcote and the Mitsushita, this is one well-balanced option.
PROS: Looks like a Sir; Pretty quick; Solid economy; Reliable and easy to fix.
CONS: Undercontented; Overdamped; Could use just a bit more overdrive.
By late afternoon, Tony reaches the Arco dealership to take a look at their novel four-wheel-drive sports sedan. It sure is a looker - the traditional, aggressive front and a fuselage body shape distinguishing it from most other cars. Mike is particularly a fan of the brutal flattened-out wheel arches covering bulky aluminum wheels. The Arco is up to par in terms of gadgets and doodads, but it does also have a stick-shift - something no other car he’s driven today - or in the past three years - had. Gingerly, then, Tony eases into first and goes on a drive. It doesn’t take long to realize that the Civetta is, well… Weird. The European has a big, rattly four-cylinder engine that makes exactly as much power that the Wichsen’s six-cylinder did, except it cuts fuel flow too early to make the best use of said power. Its harshness is mitigated by the outright cruiser gear that is fifth gear - but at highway speeds, the car suffers from wind noise relating to the massive holes made in the front for cooling purposes. It’s like an overcomplicated tractor, really, though not in that bad a way, as Tony discovers that the car handles in a wonderfully confident way and stops well, too - though the fronts are perhaps too weak. As with the Wichsen, the price is a ride that’s harsher than what Tony is used to.
The Arco presents a different kind of drive than the rest of the cars so far: much more tactile and involved. It’s decently reliable, drives great, and its lack of perceived comfort and relaxation are largely attributable to the manual transmission and (once again) steering. It’s pretty good.
PROS: Dead easy to drive; Good-looking; Good economy.
CONS: Not very soft and comfortable; Weird engine and cooling choices; Short powerband.
Tony takes his time dining between the golden arches, so to speak, so it’s almost sundown by the time he reaches the Caplan dealership. Dating back to better times, it’s located downtown - and as with many other US cities, it’s a locale that’s worn down and neglected. Not so when it comes to the Chesapeake, though; the glass T-bar roof, the bold four-eyed front, all of it combines to make for an assertive and durable exterior. On the inside, Tony appreciates the adjustability of the 8-track and its intricate quality in playing his tape of Paranoid that he bought a year ago. The seats are both soft and supportive, and despite the two doors, rear space is more than plentiful. Now, with the lockup-equipped four-speed, it’s more than a competent highway cruiser: with its front drive, it’s also easy and predictable to control. Tony was expecting a good bit more out of that fabled turbo engine. Instead, even with the force-feeding, the 3-liter fails to seriously out-pull the Calcote and Wichsen’s freer-breathing sixes. Now, mind you, the turbo does provide the low-down grunt for the adequate acceleration while being both whisper-quiet and having a much lower level of highway revs than either of its European rivals. Tony isn’t actually as incensed about the low power level as he is about the poor rated economy and the absolutely non-existent throttle response.
Tony returns relieved that the American is no pushover, and amazed by how good the fit and finish is - especially in contrast to his Plymouth - but he does think that for all of the flash and fanfare, the whole “turbo” business isn’t all that. The Chesapeake is a very cool car, and a pretty good one, but it ain’t no muscle car.
PROS: Rock solid; Very prestigious; Mean-looking; Comfortable.
CONS: Bit of a guzzler; Slow for a Turbo; Not the safest.
As the sun flares up for the last time before disappearing below the horizon, it shines on Tony’s last demo car of the day: a small, spiffy Canadian hatchback. Swanson’s an unusual company, but - as with Caplan - they’ve been around for a long while, and this dealership - the neighborhood around it also having deteriorated significantly - is proof. Tony notes the wide flat six under the hood, pressed between the unequal-length arms of the front suspension - though a short stroke and deck somewhat alleviate this. Inside the stubby little slugger lies a decently-sized interior - courtesy of the taller roof - with its centerpiece being a bold gated five-on-deck shifter. It also features a well-made 8-track - not as intricate as the masterwork buried inside the Caplan, but pleasant nonetheless. The overall impression the insides of the Swanson leave is: solid and reassuring. Tony wouldn’t want to be the one changing the plugs on the Swanson, but supposedly it won’t need to be a common occurrence. Driving the Swanson (after the hassle of getting it off the lot courtesy of the surprisingly fast, thus tight, manual rack) Tony finds himself having fun. The engine is revvy, the shifter is silky (and, of course, features an ever-appreciated long fifth for cruising) and despite the car only matching the power of the Europeans, it’s so much lighter that it flies in comparison. Rounding out the driving experience are a slightly too-sporty suspension and a feel that’s slightly too oversteery for Tony due to the hatch’s notably wide-for-size tires.
The Swanson’s a different beast, Tony concludes, but even discounting all the fun it is, the hatch does everything he’d want it to: Carries five in dignity, has some trunk space, runs good, has comfy seats. One thing that actually blows Tony’s mind is the window sticker’s economy claim: Almost 30 mpg, head and shoulders around the rest of the field. And, also importantly, while Swansons are not very prestigious, this one looks spicy and special with the sassy stripe and the carved-out headlight housings.
PROS: On a hunger strike; Top-notch dynamics; Looks great; Quiet on highways.
CONS: Not comfortable; Not prestigious; Boxer in a tight space is concerning.
The Swanson is a very strong last car; but then again, several other remaining cars are solid choices as well. Thus, to his misery, Tony has to lug himself back home in the half-dead Volaré to make a decision. Sitting on his couch with yet another pizza on his lap, he takes to his notes.
The Calcote (7th) has to be the first one to go because it seriously, badly felt it was cramping Tony’s style - ungainly, piss-colored, and bearing ugly steelies. It’s not a bad car mechanically, but neither are the remaining ones - and they all look better. Okay, maybe the Mitsushita (6th) doesn’t look that much better, and that’s why that car has to get stuck back here as well.
The Takeda (5th), consequently, has to go too - because it was only slightly better than the Mitsushita when taking looks into account, and worse otherwise. Both of those cars, while comfortable and reasonable, also lacked solidity. The Arco (4th) has to follow along, too; it may be more drivable and powerful, but it’s also less comfortable and stands as the most expensive car out them all without being clearly the best one. An unenviable position.
Tony is thus left with just three: The Caplan, the Swanson, and the Wichsen. Of the three, the Caplan is a serious image leader with that snail attached to the engine - but it’s not quite as much pop now that Tony himself doesn’t buy its hype quite as much. It doesn’t change the fact that the Caplan is the most comfortable car out of the three, and the most solidly built. The Swanson is the opposite: light and just a bit more finicky, but much more pleasing to the senses - and the wallet, with that fuel sipper of an engine. It’s also the cheapest, 500 bucks less than the Wichsen and 900 less than the Caplan. This leaves the taxi-spec Wichsen as the jack of all trades - but with the important caveats of being the safest and cheapest to repair car.
That said, the Wichsen (3rd) is simply not cool enough to come forth, and lacks real big hits in its favor. And while the Caplan (2nd) does appeal to Tony’s penchant for the regular, spacious American car, its status as the worse of the three on paper (most expensive, worst to repair, slowest, most hungry) just dampens his enthusiasm for it. So in the end, he figures out that he could have saved himself his last drive in the Volaré after all: He is going to spring for the Swanson 225 PFi (1st). He might have to downsize once again even as he goes upmarket, but here’s a car whose practical strengths are good enough to elevate it to this level on their own - all while having the best looks and the most fun factor on top of that already competitive bundle. And hell, maybe having a more buff right hand and left leg will enhance his Maverick character somehow.
Thank you all for taking part in this challenge, and congratulations to @Ludvig on the victory! I am going to post fun facts and the challenge sheet at a later date. In the meantime, here is the hosting order:
WINNER: @Ludvig
2nd: @donutsnail
3rd: @LS_Swapped_Rx-7
4th: @Portalkat42
5th: @ChemaTheMexican
6th: @conan
7th: @Tsundere-kun
8th: @GetWrekt01, @ACoolCrab
9th: @shibusu
10th: @Mad_Cat
