@AndiD and @Knugcab reminded me that yeah, I’m a derp and didn’t read through everything I wrote. There are requirements. I have updated the Round 3 requirements to include emissions, cats, and safety.
1 Like
A nitpick: CM is Hetvesian, not Swedish.
What about bodies with integrated bumpers? Do they need to have 5 mph bumpers tacked on to them as well?
If the bumper on the car is already a 5 mph kind, I would think not. Mine already has a bumper on the car and I didn’t need to put anything on top of it to make it legal.
Also, I saw that the entry from @interior isn’t shown on the results despite he has already posted in the challenge (or does he haven’t sent the file yet?) : Cult of Personality ][ : The Boogaloo [LORE][RD 3 SUBMISSIONS]
Just a reminder.
I would agree with this. Also, in real life, the C3 Corvette adopted integrated 5-mph front bumpers as early as 1973 (before gaining an equivalent rear bumper the following year), and still had them by 1979. Just to be sure, does the body shown below (which I am thinking of using) count as having integrated bumpers, or does it still need extra 5-mph bumpers tacked on at both ends anyway for compliance’s sake?
Last but not least:
We are no longer in the first round - in fact, the current one is the third (of five) - so this particular requirement should be waived going forward.
1974-79 IP RUGGER
(I made an ad. I forgot to save. I won’t do another one)
In 1974 IP released its fourth (or fifth, if you count the “Lily Rugger” based on the first generation Lily) generation of their Rugger pickup truck. Already with the previous generation the panel van and station wagon was gone, leaving the pickup truck as the only choice. It had a pretty conventional setup for a minitruck, with a ladder frame underneath, independent front suspension, leaf sprung solid rear axle and rear wheel drive. Engine choices were an 1.5 litre and an 1.8 litre inline four, and there was a choice between 3 speed auto and 4 speed manual. Later on, a 2 litre inline four and a 2 litre diesel inline four joined the lineup. Options the first years included things like front disc brakes, radial tyres and 2-tone paint. Later on, disc brakes and radials became standard equipment.
The fourth generation Rugger was built until 1979, when the fifth generation took over, now offering multiple alternatives like an extended cab and four wheel drive.
(Interesting facts: To get around the chicken tax, IP started building all their commercial vehicles for the american market in the Hillstrom plant in Mobile, Alabama, starting in 1972. It was a joint-venture with Hillstrom, which also resulted in a version of the Rugger with slightly different front sheetmetal being sold as the “Hillstrom Gnome”. All of this went on until 1990, when a failed fusion between the two companies resulted in a very infected situation, leading to IP withdrawing ftom the joint venture altogether. After that production of the Rugger for the American market was moved to the IP plant in Hermosillo, Mexico.)
8 Likes
1975 ARMOR CRICKET
AMC, Chevrolet, and Ford all beat Armor Motors to the punch when they unveiled their new sub-compacts in 1971 (the Gremlin actually came out in 1970). While the first generation Cricket became the obvious favorite after its release in mid-1971 (if only by default; quality problems and fear of exploding plagued the Vega and Pinto, while the Gremlin’s engine was inefficient), Armor was livid that they had let the other American manufacturers beat them at their own game. They vowed they wouldn’t let that happen next time.
So, Armor engineers started work on the next generation Cricket as soon as the original car hit the showrooms. Seeing the potential in the Simca 1204, they decided to reverse-engineer their own version, utilizing the new SOHC 4-cylinder they just developed.
The new front-drive Cricket arrived just in time to kick off the 1975 model year. Styling was conservative, and the car combined roominess with fuel efficiency and reliability. It was everything the AMC Pacer was supposed to be, and since Armor Motors had been smarter with their money by focusing on smaller cars (AMC was still trying in vein to compete in the full-size market with their Ambassador), they had been able to realize their vision. After no less than TWO oil embargos, perhaps Americans were ready for change as well.
10 Likes
I did send the file, i think i got binned for the glass covering on the lights.
2 Likes
Oh, thanks for clarifying.
Even with glass coverings you should be able to score in import/export.
2 Likes
No idea, Maybe it was forgotten or that it was delibrate
Safety of 30 is pretty high; requirements in campaign don’t get that high until really late game. Should the rules really be that strong?
I don’t know if 30 really is so high. I have reached 26 with a relatively small BOF truck with standard 60s safety for this round (Trucks had less stringent regulations, as stated in the rules). For a passenger car sold in the US, standard 60s would generally be too low for this era, since it means only lap belts, no collapsible steering column etc. if I remember things correctly. And in this era, anything that’s BOF and not a truck would be a relatively large car, which would compensate somewhat for the lower safety score a BOF vehicle would get. I would say that 30 is realistic for period correct stuff of this era.
2 Likes
Yeah, my bad. I corrected that. For some reason I had Ivera in my brain when I was writing your blurb.
Interior was informed 10 days before the deadline that his entry was not North American compliant. I informed him of such because his first round submission was compliant, so this was a departure from his existing path in the competition, and I wanted to point it out and see. But after that point he never corrected and resubmitted or declared his intent to leave it noncompliant and get score in I/E only.
(Historically, that’s a very un-interior thing to do. He’s normally very quick to resubmit after correcting mistakes.)
As Knugcab said, it’s not unrealistic. IMO the campaign requirements are too low in the 70’s-90’s era. And as he said, not much was left that was full BOF in the late 70’s, besides Cadillacs, trucks, vans, and SOME mid-sized GMs.
Now, for the final debate here…
Consider this as well:
Those were the US-spec bumpers for the Countach.
Would a compromise be better for you? Allow smooth integrated bumpers but require a minimum of standard 70’s safety AND say, +3 safety quality (to simulate the extra weight and cost involved)?
6 Likes
Mostly forgot about it to be honest. Am i able to submit a car for this round?
Yes, of course you can.
MY1979 Schnell L4
It’s been decades since this car was reintroduced into the world as the D-Series line of passenger SUVs and Sedans in 2000. The L4 was the first ever car in the Schnell lineup to use a Front Engine, Front wheel drive layout becuase of the 1970s American crisis, the car in development was planned to use a V6 instead but it was forced upon to use an I4 for it to sell. The MK1 used trailing arms instead of solid axle rear suspension so they’re not as behind as their competitors.
The L4 series was eventually discontinued in 1992 for the original set of cars until the D-Series model merge happened in 2000.
It was a direct replacement to the 1700 and 2200 cars. The brand had a rich tradition of building sports cars, but they needed a consumer friendly alternative to a fast car.
The L4 had several engine options. a 1.7, 2.0, 2.2 I4 and a 2.5 V6 (Europe Only) and a 4.0L V8 (Europe Only) and a choice between a 3-Speed Automatic, a 4, speed manual and a 5-speed manual in the V6 cars and the 2.2 I4 options.
3 Likes
Are bumpers that arent fixtures but part of body morph, but visibly protrude from the body, allowed as american-compliant?
Look at BannedByAndroid’s entry. That’s a prime example of “yes”