Even if Angus only were able to get two submissions in, I am pretty happy with the results for the Vagabond and especially with the Screamer - the little Octane studio proved they could make a special car and from that point on, despite the lower sale (but high praises), they will be more and more focused on pure sport cars and supercars following in the Screamer’s footstep, backed by Angus and the Groupe Régal deeper pockets.
A lot of praise has to go to the host for this great challenge and all those who participated. That was really fun.
I only joined this challenge at the very end, and I regret not doing it sooner; Maybe I could have built up more lore. But hey, I dig having a ‘killer car’ lore bit to add to my collection. These write-ups are lifelike and detailed, and I love this comp idea. Anybody up to get another one going?
Glad to see that the Ballista and Trebuchet model lines ranked so highly for the rounds in which they were submitted. As a bonus, here is one other trim of the second-gen Ballista that I cooked up shortly after submitting the original 1992 version:
1995 Ballista 540 GTS - 5.4L NA V8, RWD, 6-sp manual, $54,500 AMU, 4.5s 0-60, 194 mph. Too new for the fifth and final round of COP2, but shows how much more potential could be unlocked from the second-gen Ballista.
In addition to the larger engine and extra gearbox ratio, the 540 GTS added larger 18-inch forged magnesium wheels and adaptive dampers, as well as larger brake discs.
The result was a car that was, if anything, even more potent than the standard Ballista 500 GT, and more capable of going toe-to toe with domestic and imported rivals than ever before.
A CD player was standard equipment on all trims for the first time ever, along with adjustable dampers with three settings (Comfort, Normal and Sport), thereby providing a more comfortable experience for the occupants.
Prior to this, I also made a cheaper, less powerful trim each of both the pre- and post-facelift original Ballista. Here they are:
1979 Ballista 305 GS - This entry-level trim was powered by a 160bhp 5.0L V8. However, its lack of power meant that it was constantly overshadowed by the more powerful 350 GT, until its facelift in 1985 (which we’ll get to later), but at least it still handled well.
1985 Ballista 305 GTS - Although the 350 GTS, with its larger 5.7L V8, was the real headline-grabber of the facelifted Ballista range, the entry-level 5.0L V8 wasn’t neglected. It, too, received multi-point EFI as part of the facelift, yielding 225 horsepower - 60 fewer than the larger V8, but at a slightly lower price point.
And this paragraph sums up the effect of the 1992 redesign rather well:
Many thanks to @VicVictory for making this whole challenge possible, and for attracting a consistently strong turnout. I hope there’s a COP3 some time in the future!
@VicVictory, first of all thanks for running the challenge. Thoroughly enjoyed it and was pleasantly surprised to have favourable reviews for all of my cars…apart from the '68 HiWay GT but that’s the US regulations that scuppered the car!
This quote is what I want FM to be about, primarily. Value for money and reliability.
What caught my eye (negatively) about the Levant GS Turbo was the use of the “detachable soft top”. This is something that was used in really cheap British sports cars in the 50’s and early 60’s, and I think the last car that used it in the US was the MG A. At a bare minimum, you should have used the “folding soft top” option, which is what the MX-5 Miata (and every other remaining soft-top convertible of the era) used. For upscale cars, a “detachable hard top” could have also been a good choice.
This is why I always encourage people to submit as early as possible. Trying to process a complex multi-round competition in a single pass per round with quick turnaround means I can’t have 50-100 entries like CSR.
Plus we got to make fun of Malcolm Bricklin Maxsim Bricklov!
Thank you. Quite honored. Be prepared for a lot of work if you ever do so! Lol…
I kinda figured that’s what happened, but I had to go with what was submitted.
I’ll take Oxymorons for 400, Alex!
Your Ballistas were honestly setting the pace for sports cars for the last 3 rounds there. I know that rounds 3 and 4 were meant to be Corvette analogues, and you absolutely nailed that. Then you took that and ran with it in your 1992 redesign. The Angus Screamer could outmaneuver the Ballista… barely. But it wasn’t that much of a contest in raw speed, which is what MURICANS are (or at least were, back then) generally more interested in.
Yes, thanks a lot for hosting this challenge, you did a great job with it as always, when you left I thought that it was pretty sad that we would miss your challenges and I surely am happy that you returned.
And with that the conquest was over. By 1995 the Seax recieved its first facelift and the justification for a continued USA presence just could not be justified. Whilst the Seax performed well and would go on to have a significant following in the future F&S was 5 seasons deep in BTCC and even preparing a WRC challenge for 1996, the books had to balance somehow. Enough damage was done to the reputation of British marques, some self inflicted.
@VicVictory this has been one hell of challenge. Your writing style and technical knowledge of car culture, regulations and the tastes of America has really made it shine and delivered something truly excellent. Thank you.
I do have to say, I learned a lot about cars doing this months-long challenge; both in general and about American cars specifically. It also boosted my own confidence somewhat: For the first 4 rounds, I posted old campaign cars to see how they would do, and they all failed miserably. But in the 5th round, when I decided to make something new, it came 2nd in its class. Seems I’ve grown a lot after all…
Anyways, thank you for doing this challenge mate! You’re writing was very interesting to read through, and I always enjoyed seeing the variety of cars that people submitted!
Quite right. In fact, the more extreme 1995 Ballista 540 GTS went even further, but as I have previously stated, it was too new for the fifth and final round of COP2. However, I would have expected it to have been equally well-regarded had COP2 gone into a sixth round.
The great thing about this challenge is the lore aspect and the fact that you are not specifically competing.
I was able to work my tortured lore and non-ideal cars, and make the cars I wanted to make. The fact they were both well received as contenders (both the Vagabond and Screamer) was great. The Screamer was also incredibly low tech compared to the blurb of the Ballistas (and cheaper), it was much more in the vein of the European sport car but with a quite troubled americanized conversion. It did way better than I expected. To even get that close to the Ballista was surprising to say the least, it was never meant to go toe to toe against it, hehe.
It ended up being enough praise for Angus/Octane to work on the Screamer Turbo tho, but that is a story for another day.
BTW great job @abg7 with that car dynasty. And again, I had a blast @VicVictory, really enjoyed the reviews and seeing all those cars being dissected with such clarity. Looking forward to your next challenge!
The main problem with the Millenium is that it was a luxury car with the comfort level comparable to the premium cars that were submitted, while being almost 50% more expensive. Yes, the Ivera Executive was even more expensive, but its comfort and drivability absolutely blew yours out of the water.
Trying to process a complex multi-round competition in a single pass per round with quick turnaround means I can’t have 50-100 entries like CSR.
