right. i’m a bit late because stuff. but the entry is now closed.
first round result should be up relatively soon. provided i can be arsed to take all the car pics right now nothing annoying comes up
8 Likes
because of the sheer number of entries, i wanted to make it quick. do this 1st part had to be short.
RESULT! (Preliminaries)
-
HighOctaneLove – Boqliq Slyde Engage
Brakes are only sold discs. We’d be scared of the brakes over heating on a traffic jam going down the mountain with the car filled. When we go on a vacation, we’re rarely alone after all. And the interior is just way too basic for it’s over the top price. Staggered tires just adds up to the unnecessary costs
We’ll skip this -
Conan – Mitsushita Keechan
We haven’t found really anything that would make us worry, but we’re also not sure about how it compares to the competitor.
We’ll hold on on this -
Abg7 – Genra G3A 2.0T Estate
Actually an estate or a wagon is still considered a sedan in terms of tax, but because I forgot to mention that, I’ll let that pass. But the car. Only 5 seats, the brake discs are solid, and the engine is just overcomplicated for what we demands of it.
We’ll skip this -
Jaimz – FM Passenger
Big 2.4L engine, but 2-way catalytic converter?? (fyi, in case you don’t know, 3-way converter also filters some stuff that 2-way cats doesn’t. so it won’t even pass emission tests). Again with the solid disc. And the safety system is ancient.
We’ll skip this -
Vmo – Gabatron Maxus AWD
Over complicated engine with none of the advantage of the complexity, AWD with LSD is an overkill we have to pay for that we’ll never use, brakes are just incapable of stopping the car in an acceptable manner in 2018 standards, suspension setting are really hard as well
We’ll skip this -
Goblin95 – Wijaya MPV
Same problem. Overcomplicated engine, with minimal advantage. Plus the capacity is too small for a (1.5L)V6 nowadays. This isn’t the 90s where mazda and Mitsubishi has 2.5L and smaller V6 and it only has basic infotainment system usually found on cheaper cars
We’ll skip this -
Undercoverhardwarema – Nagoya Tagalong
Light Truck monocoque? Why? And you put a FWD drivetrain on it too. And then 1544cc. that classifies as over 1.5L, so you put your car in the 2.5L tax bracket, with only a 1.5L engine. Which I mention has ITB. A lot of cost for a family car, and extra stuff to go wrong. Brakes are almost okay, but under load would be sketchy, and pneumatic suspension just adds to the list of stuff to go wrong.
We’ll skip this -
Knugcab – DT Funlife 1500 Prime
This is not the class of car we’re looking at, too small.
We’ll skip this -
Echowaffle8 – Aeros Bulan
Light Truck monocoque again. The car is not for hauling heavy stuff, just a lot of light items, and people. Also solid axle coil on the rear, modular design maybe then? But other than that, and the only passable entertainment system. We found nothing wrong with it
We’ll hold on on this -
MasterDoggo – Sakurada SportWagon
We found nothing mechanically wrong, and everything seems to be sound.
We’ll hold on on this -
Mr.Computah – DB Breeze Ecotec – II
A bit lacking in the interior department. equipped with a rather simple 1.3L i3 with old style port injection. But a rather advanced suspension. But it’s also so cheap. We feel like we’re missing out. Nothing wrong with the car. But at this price, it just feels like they can offer more with higher prices. And that’s what we’re looking for
We’ll skip this -
Private_Miros – Polezny 7
It’s just REALLY bad quality everywhere, with outdated equipments
We’ll skip this -
Yurimacs – Ripoche Bagnole de Luxe
Big, but magically impractical with small space inside, drink a lot of fuel, not comfortable, expensive for what’s it’s offering, 1.6L, again 2.5L tax bracket with none of the advantage
We’ll skip this -
DoriftoDorito – Nohda Kelana
Plain steel body, a BIG 2.7L i4 which is only making 122hp, a power figure achievable by either a 2L or a turbo 1.5L with a lot less in taxes. Brakes is inadequate.
We’ll skip this -
Ryutachi – Kosori
It’s…… just……. Wrong…………………………………. Let me list one out of the stuff that’s too long to list. It’s an alumunium panel covering up a space frame chassis. Which, in real life, only found in small, niche car company.
We’ll skip this -
Just4 – Kishiwo Kotjoi
1.5L turbo i4 with billet crank?!?!? And it’s able to run RON88 fuel. I don’t know if that’s intentional or not, since we still do have RON88 gasoline to this day. Although nobody is filling up their personal car with it anymore because of it’s low quality. Reverse Staggered tires?? Only Solid discs brakes too, and it has a full undercladding underneath, but has no ESC
We’ll skip this -
Machalel – Harimau New Style
Horrible HORRIBLE HORRIBLE quality.
We’ll skip this -
Thecarlover – Cascadia Moondust Diamond
The engine is a 1.5L NA making only 89.5hp. it’s leaving quite a lot to be desired, and with ITB too, for some reason. Solid discs front brakes and drums on the rear. Same worry again. But
We’ll hold on on this -
JohnWaldock – ZAF Sumerian 1.7LX
A 1.7L engine with power significantly below the 1.5L engine class again. LSD is an overkill, the brakes. What brakes? No ESC
We’ll skip this -
Mikonp7 – Kutsche Gross
Nothing wrong, apart from the brake size are just a tad bit on the worrying side, and apparently the front lip is functional
We’ll hold on on this -
Cheeseman – Valta Hanke 1.5T Sportline
Nothing wrong with it, apart from the solid discs again. And the full undercladding. How efficient do you think it would be travelling at an average 90km/h though?
We’ll hold on on this -
Chickenbiscuit – Isami Northstar LX
A turbo 1.5L cast iron i6 SOHC4v with VVL making 100hp. all the potential problem with nothing to offer. Lackluster gearing, inadequate brakes, only Basic infotainment
We’ll skip this -
Luilakkie – 1.5L Turbo SUV (???)
No name??? Plus there are just too many BAD DECISIONS made.
We’ll skip this -
DoctorNarfy – Shromet Appalachian
Just, massive turbo lag, and only standard entertainment. That’s it
We’ll hold on on this -
Nicholander – Minat
Minat Means… ‘interest’. 1.5L dohc 5v with big turbo, and Manual Locker Diff…… do you think we live in some jungle in the middle of nowhere? Plus the brakes are inadequate
Sorry, we’re not interested -
Zschmeez – Albatross G150T
Doesn’t look that appealing, not ugly either though. But the brakes are lacking, and there are no ESC, and with other cumulative small decisions made on this car we decided to
We’ll skip this -
Chipskate – Delta Urbaniq 1.5T
We found nothing wrong with the car, other than we’d like the brakes to be a little stronger, it’s just enough, but that’s it, JUST enough. But, it’s a small problem with a simple fix.
We’ll hold on on this -
Rk38 – Maesima MQX-2+ GX-E
The looks of this car captures what is happening irl over here. Car manufacturers trying so hard to make a boring car look good, but then went too far with it. but the luggage space is somewhat small, only holds 6 people uncomfortably because it’s a bench seat on the front and on the back. Quite thin tires, relatively bad fuel economy and no ESC.
We’ll skip this -
Leo 6913 – Kilimanjaro 1.5 Tellurium
Aside for the relatively aggressive engine torque curve. We found…… no real fault.
We’ll hold on on this -
TheElt – BM Ecomove
Barely adequate brakes. Only basic infotainment. Bad value.
We’ll skip this -
Titleguy1 – Protostar BXt 1.2
Barely adequate brakes, old hydraulic Power Steering, It’s just not the class of car we’re looking at. It does offer more comfort than it’s class average. But still not the class of car we want in terms of capability and feature and creature comfort stuff. Good value though
We’ll skip this -
DukesofHazard – Rijesena XRV
Just bad decisions all around. Resulting in low drivability, just passing fuel economy, bad reliability and relatively low cargo space somehow (for the body used)
We’ll skip this
Now. The statistic and paper figure elimination round has been done. Let’s actually see the car of those who passed and inspect them visually on the next part
12 Likes
1) Conan – Mitsushita Keechan
Well this looks like most of the cars that are out there already. It really feels just like an outdated look, but with a modernized touch. But it is not bad at all. But also not stunning.
the car is relatively easy to drive, but the comfort is the least comfortable amongst all the ones who passed the preliminaries, and the seats are really a 5+2 not a full 2 seater. But they do quote the lowest service cost amongst all of them.
We’re gonna hold our judgement on this car
2) Echowaffle8 – Aeros Bulan
This… just falls apart on the headlight department on the front, and the rear part looks a bit more 2014 or 2015 instead of 2018. It could have been great if it was in 2014. But it’s not.
The Drivability is the lowest out of all of them so is the comfort level, and at the price it’s offered at, all of the competitors are just plainly better for the value.
So this one we sadly have to drop out of contention
3) MasterDoggo – Sakurada SportWagon
Looks pretty damn hot for a minivan with sliding doors. It looks modern with a point, but it is also not overdone. If only this kind of styling could be put on a sedan. It’d be even cooler. But that’s not what we want. And this is probably one of the best looking minivan we’ve seen yet. Highest drivability. Best fuel economy, decently low service cost, and one of the higher ones in terms of reliability, but it also has the lowest safety, and the 3rd lowest comfort. But for the price it’s offering. It’s an amazing value. Probably the best value out of those still in contention
We’re gonna hold our judgement on this car
4) Thecarlover – Cascadia Moondust Diamond
It looks like a smaller version of a bigger western family van. You know, like those ‘MotoGP Replica’ motorbikes out there? Or how a 250cc could look similar to it’s 1000cc superbike brother? Yeah this car feels like that. But it’s done well it’s sleek, it’s clean, it just doesn’t seem like it’s trying hard to look cool, to look cool. Get it?
Now drivability wise it is just okay. So is the comfort, so it the safety rating, and so is basically everything. Also lowest power figure, and the brakes are just solid discs on the front. At least put a vented on the front, and cut down to drums on the rear? In the end, It is a beautiful car, that is functionally just ‘okay’. But looks only goes so far for a car used daily for the family.
So this one we sadly have to drop out of contention
5) Mikonp7 – Kutsche Gross
This one is visually…… unique. I don’t think I can give a comparison so I’ll try me best describing it. it’s like the tried to integrate stuff from a 90s sports car into a modern family minivan, but it’s done oh so very well. It’s clean, it’s a bit striking. It just…. Works. It’s an idea I thought would never be a good idea. But here it is in front of me. Done. Well done. Except the tires though. Wtf dude? So thin, or maybe it’s just sitting too high?. I dunno, but the tires feels off.
Function wise. It has marginally more power than the Cascadia. But with the similiar configuration, it does accomplish it more efficiently. As is evident by the fact that it is the 2nd most fuel efficient car in the lineup that passes preliminaries. Although it is just a 5+2 seater though
We’re gonna hold our judgement on this car
6) Cheeseman – Valta Hanke 1.5T Sportline
It’s not what we call great…. But it is also not ugly. It’s still a lot better than quite a few others that was entered into this round though. So visually, it’s just ‘good’.
But functionally the opposite, it is on aggregate slightly above the average of these finalist cars. great drivability, good comfort, okay safety, semi-large trunk and passenger space, good fuel economy, but rather low reliability, and again with the solid discs. We know engineering wise it’s probably would be fine and we’re just paranoid about it. but it’s just not reassuring the buying public. And if you can provide what the market wants, then it’s a big selling point for you.
We’re gonna hold our judgement on this car
7) DoctorNarfy – Shromet Appalachian
Another SUV. And this looks…. Cool. At least on the back. The front doesn’t have as much wow factor as the rear, but it’s still pretty cool. And that’s the gist of it really. It’s a COOL SUV.
And this time it’s not a 5+2 seater. It’s a double bench 3+3 seater. And yet, somehow, they have the best safety rating out of the bunch, and the 2nd best comfort level. It’s like they know the 3+3 bench seat is gonna be a problem so they over engineered it to solve it, and then some, except for the infotainment system. But it does seems to come at a price, no, not the sheer cost of the car, but rather, it’s the worst in terms of reliability, and the least efficient car of the bunch, although it does have a really high power figure. 217hp. highest in the class.
We’re gonna hold our judgement on this car
8) Chipskate – Delta Urbaniq 1.5T
It’s an SUV, and it’s not pretty. It’s INTIMIDATING, and it’s awesome looking. It’s not pretty, but it’s awesome looking if you can understand that. And it does look really modern (if not copying a bit of 2018 Honda CRV on the back)
Drivability is also one of the highest of the bunch, so is the comfort, and safety, and it’s a real 7 seater too. The power figure is only passable at 136hp, but with 7 speeds, it should be not much of a problem, but the fuel efficiency is just average though, and the service cost is one of the higher ones in the bunch. Although not by much. And the brakes seems to only be JUST adequate for the car. But it is offering all of this at the 2nd lowest price of the bunch.
We’re gonna hold our judgement on this car
9) Leo 6913 – Kilimanjaro 1.5 Tellurium
This one also does look awesome, sleek, clean, and still intimidating at the same time. In a different way. I mean, if the Delta Urbaniq is ‘a bouncer at a club’ kind of intimidating, this is ‘the CEO of a major national company’ intimidating presence. Both looks awesome, but I feel like they can’t be directly compared. But I do like both of them
But functionally it can be compared directly. The Urbaniq makes a steady linear torque curve and makes power with revs. This one makes power with brute force, by having a higher boost threshold level. So while it does make more power, and more efficient at the same time, the turbo lag is something to keep in mind when driving it, and not to mention this has a dual clutch transmission instead of an auto. And it being only the 3rd worst in reliability, highest service cost, and just a 5+2 seater just makes more stuff to keep track off in your mind.
So this one we sadly have to drop out of contention
9 Likes
17.Machalel – Harimau New Style
Horrible HORRIBLE HORRIBLE quality.
We’ll skip this
Really? oh… I mean, yes I reduced the quality a bit in 2 spots to help with the price, but I didn’t think that it would make that much of a difference to your rating, especially since it had hardly any impact to reliability and desirability of the market segment in-game. 
well i did basically gloss over… everything
and i never even said even once, that i’d be looking at the market desirability did i?
well mostly because you’re probably looking at gasmean figures right? but it’s closer to archanan figures, and even that isn’t accurate. so i didn’t look at it at all. that is assuming you did look at gasmean numbers
but let’s see what made me say that okay? this is a critic, not an attack. because i do realise that single line is rather harsh
let’s see on the chassis
your car as is, $18200
did you know that putting that -3 in your chassis actually increased your price??
try putting it to 0.
better literally everything. from a consumer perspective.
and the price actually drops to $18067.
now let’s see here
your exhaust is stranggling the engine, but that’s fair, economy based engine
your peak power is at redline. which is not what we want in game. but irl, apparently quite a few cars over here do that. so okay, on this particular case, it’s fair. but not something you should do on any other cars.
your piston. 5800rpm is the rev limit. you’re revving it to 6100. that’s a massive reliablity penalty for what? 1hp.
2 options for this.
- since you already have power at redline. just put the rev limit back to 5800, you’ll be getting a lot more for that 1hp you lost.
- stroke it down. it’s MASSIVELY undersquared. you could just stroke it down to 2L capacity and rev it more, or you could replace the stroke with bore until it’s not giving reliability penalty
and at the same time, you could do away with the need for forged conrod. another cost saving.
Body quality -3. okay, i tested it, at the price of reliability you saved… $330. and -3 fixture saved you another $23 with more reliability cost.
and would you know it. those reliability is one of the critical points. in a market where most car owner doesn’t even understand what wheel balancing, wheel rotation, and how to change oil by themselves. every single problem eliminated is a good thing. and none of the finalist has lower than 70 reliability. in fact only 3 cars out of the whole 32 entries is below 70 reliability. yours included.
and your brakes is almost enough. but not enough.
i see no reason not just to put bigger brakes or better brakes
if the brakes is not enough for the car itself with probably just the driver inside. i would not trust the brakes to stop the while car fully loaded with 7 people and luggage traveling at highway speed.
(and a lot of people also did the same thing. why?)
-4 interior? cheap? sure. fair. but i’m still looking at that lost reliability
in the end, the average reliability of the whole entry it from 70-75 with some even higher. yours is at 68.5
5 Likes
Thank you for the feedback! That was more detailed than I was expecting, but understand completely now 
The negative quality increasing price is… unexpected. I’ll have to play around more. To be honest, this challenge really pushed me, I don’t know why but I found it harder than usual to hit to right balance - and I wasn’t happy with my visual design either.
Thank you koolkei for that in-depth analysis. Was very useful for us trying to learn.
My entry was one trying out an element of company lore, the Polznys are Russian boxes. I expected the bad quality remark.
(On a side note, relating to equipment, I tried putting in a satnav in my car just now and the weight spiked up with over 200kg… That cannot be right.)
So out of the finalists. This is our personal top pick
1# Delta Urbaniq 1.5T – chipskate
This is a really good looking car that we just can’t find any major problems within and the ones that it does have, can be fixed with the leftover money due to the much lower price than expected. Simply It offers all of what we want, at a significantly lower price
2# Sakurada SportWagon – MasterDoggo
It’s only real major problem is the safety rating, but we Indonesians actually don’t care that much about it, and the comfort it provides is lacking, but it does have an impressive fuel economy figures, putting even the 2nd best at quite a distance. And best drivability, and still even cheaper than the Delta Urbaniq 1.5T
3# Shromet Appalachian – DoctorNarfy
An amazing car with an engine that’s just pushed a bit too far and with a cargo space that’s below average. The reliability is bad, but the service cost while it runs fine, is not bad. I just need to take care of it. and the fuel economy might be bad, but at least we never have to worry about not having enough power, ever.
4# Valta Hanke 1.5T Sportline – cheeseman
5# Mitsushita Keechan – Conan
6# Kutsche Gross - Mikonp7
edit: i made a boo boo
16 Likes
First off, I would like to say congratulations to the winners!
@koolkei Fair enough about the headlights, I’m not a massive fan of them either but I did like the grille and wanted to have lights that complemented the edges of it. Additionally, I’d argue that the taillights are more dated-looking than you gave them credit for, but I had assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that most Indonesian consumers would have rather spent the equivalent of $10 USD on burnt-out bulbs or $150 to replace a damaged taillight assembly for conventional bulbs instead of $800 on a replacement LED taillight to fix either problem. As for the low comfort (which didn’t surprise me) and the low drivability (which did), I do realize that picking an automatic transmission would have partially solved both of those problems, but also figured that Toyota had a reason for offering a manual transmission as standard on their vehicle in this class and therefore chose one for mine because it had lower service costs and was cheaper. I will also concede that I probably put too much money into the engine at the expense of most other things.
That being said, I am impressed that I made it past the first round
well that’s probably the first time someone ever said their entry was worse than what i wrote.
but on the case of headlight costs. if it’s LED or HID main headlight, well we just tend to take it to a garage. but if it’s the non critical lights like turn signal or the DRL which isn’t mandated, or such. if it’s bulb ye. it’s literally just $1-$3 a bulb (not $10). but if it’s a small LED light, we may pick a chinese one that works 80% as well but costs $10 at worst 
not all do though.
To me, it feels like a -4 slider on the interior would be something like a real budget 80s car (like Skoda or Lada from that age) with acres of hard plastic inside that is warped, rattling, barely fit together and falling apart already in the dealers lot. If you’re not cheap as chips, that would scare many buyers away…and in this case they weren’t looking for a cheap car either.
This is a car that we just can’t find any major problems within
…which is probably the best anyone could say about any underpowered wanna-be offroader ever 
That was a great write up, I’m honored to have taken first place! Unfortunately I’ll have to pass on hosting (unless like none of the other finalists are interested) since it’s too time-consuming. @MasterDoggo I’m passing the ball to you.
Car file for those interested: CSR68 - Chipskate - Delta Urbaniq 1.5T.car (56.3 KB)
6 Likes
A lot of entries in this one.
I probably would have, but I’m kind of tardy to the party. I was not sure about the displacement thing. I kind of thought anything up to 1549 would have been 1.5 liter. I really have a lot to learn about non-American cars.
1.5L is 1500cc to about 1450cc
it’s the law. you know. technicalities.
it’s technically could be called a 1.5L still. but the law specifically says <=1500cc and on the papers it would be that 1549cc is technically <=2500cc.
I think I understand the confusion.
The general accepted standard for most manufacturers in most countries is to measure the displacement of the engine to the nearest 100cc. So in common use, 1450cc to 1549cc gets rounded to 1.5L
The law doesn’t (usually) round, however, so you’ll find that almost every country’s regulations and legislation will give a ‘hard’ limit. 1.5L will mean exactly 1500cc.