CW7: Golden Age Memories (Round 13: Environmental Resistance)

[abg7]

Round 5: Design

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and so it is with this lot. It’s not a stat that I can measure in Automation, so I’ll just give the top marks (100 points) to the best-looking car, and everything else gets a percentage of that based on how good-looking I think it is.

Best-looking car: Zephorus Grimsel (100 styling points)

How could it not be? The dramatic styling of the Grimsel makes it easily recognizable for miles, and a prime candidate for bedroom posters everywhere.

Worst-looking car: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (41.7 styling points)

While well-engineered on the inside, the Paragon is far from a styling, erm, paragon on the outside, with poor proportions, fixtures that don’t quite gel with each other, and an undersized body.

Exterior design rankings

1st: Zephorus Grimsel (100/10pts) - Not just one of the best-looking supercars of its time, but also of all time, with drama and swagger to turn heads everywhere.
2nd: Gipfe CS 40Dti (96.7/9.65pts) - A more understated offering compared to the Grimsel, but its looks are perfectly appropriate for something that is meant to be a grand tourer with a dash of sportiness.
3rd: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (94.2/9.38pts) - Although somewhat on the small side, its menacing front fascia and bulging fenders give it a menacing air on the road.
4th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (92.6/9.21pts) - A clear case of retro-modern done right, and solid proof that the Moore body sets can be made to work well for the modern era (2020 onwards).
5th: Primus Legacy SV500 (90.9/9.03pts) - Absolutely nails the Q-car brief on the outside, with just the right amount of sporty touches on a 4-door sedan body to give off a performance vibe.
6th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (88.2/8.75pts) - In isolation, this isn’t a bad-looking car, but it would be more aesthetically resolved if its proportions matched its FF drivetrain.
7th: Winchester Warrior (84.1/8.31pts) - It may look too much like a C4 replica on paper, but that car had such an iconic shape that I can’t rank it any lower.
8th: Strenus Sylphide (83.3/8.25pts) - A butch, unapologetic exterior treatment makes the Sylphide look every inch like the rally refugee that it is.
9th: Rocket Venus (80.7/6.77pts) - This one has all the retro supercar details (rear wing, big side intakes, pop-up headlights) in the right places. Needs a less grumpy face, though.
10th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD) (80.1/6.67pts) - Lots of body molding in all the right places make this minivan feel light, airy, and surprisingly attractive for its body style.
11th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (78.7/6.44pts) - It needs more cab-rearward proportions, and a slightly different shape for its headlight covers, but this is still a solid design.
12th: Wells Sidewinder SS (74.4/5.72pts) - A typical '90s aero-influenced design, but the rear wing is too boxy and the headlight covers are a bit too small. Still, the proportions are quite good.
13th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (70/4.98pts) - The headlights are a bit too small, and a slightly larger lower air intake would be welcome, but the proportions fit its RR layout perfectly.
14th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (66.3/4.36pts) - From the front, it looks quite decent, but the shooting brake rear looks forced and too tail-heavy. The side mirrors should also be slightly larger.
15th: Lepus GT (61.1/3.49pts) - On the outside, it takes the Q-car theme a bit too seriously. The result is something that, rear spoiler aside, could be too easily confused with its lesser siblings in the range.
16th: Oryu Destriero GTS (58.8/3.11pts) - While not a bad-looking car per se, the headlights are mounted too low, and the mirrors should be wider. It also needs some more detail on the sides.
17th: Aero Flow (55.9/2.63pts) - It looks like a supercar that had shrunk in the wash and melted in the sun, but at least its aero fixtures are the right size and shape.
18th: Kato Celeritas (51.4/1.87pts) - The way the front-end fixtures are placed and scaled makes it look sleepy, and this car also suffers from small-mirror syndrome.
19th: Norrsken Esox R (48.5/1.39pts) - I know this one is built on what will soon be a legacy body set, but that doesn’t excuse its upright front fascia, which clashes with the overall wedge-shaped profile.
20th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (40.2/0pts) - Mara gets the wooden spoon for using an undersized body set with poorly-proportioned morphing settings, and placing the fixtures on it disharmoniously.

Standings after Round 5
1st: Zephorus Grimsel (51.72pts)
2nd: Gipfe CS40DTI (49.38pts)
3rd: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (49.36pts)
4th: Rocket Venus (43.89pts)
5th: Primus Legacy SV500 (38.62pts)
6th: Winchester Warrior (28.65pts)
7th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (28.52)
8th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (26.74pts)
9th: Wells Sidewinder SS (24.65pts)
10th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (21.6pts)
11th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (17.6pts)
12th: Aero Flow (17.33pts)
13th: Lepus GT (12.02pts)
14th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (9.85pts)
15th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (9.08pts)
16th: Oryu Destriero GTS (8.98pts)
17th: Kato Celeritas (2.85pts)
18th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (1.55pts)
19th: Norrsken Esox R (-1.74pts)
20th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (-10.05pts)

Stay tuned for part 6!

[mart1n2005]

Is this very important part of the cool wall scoring going to be ignored for this challenge basically?

The whole point of this is to make the scoring relative to the top and bottom numbers for a given category. If you use this scoring then out a 10 point scale for example the top car getting 100 in reliability would mean the second place car with only 50 reliability then gets 5 points out of a possible ten, even though it is in second place it is half the points due to the relative nature of the scoring.

With the system used currently the second place car would get 9.5 points even though it’s reliability score is half of the top placed entry.

[abg7]

I thought about using the original Cool Wall scoring system for this round, but decided to replace it with a different one just for this round, and will update the OP accordingly.

[Knugcab]

Well…my five cents, if you are deciding to ditch a well established scoring system in a continous challenge and replace it with one of your own, “updating the OP accordingly” should probably be done before the end of rules delib and not over a month after the deadline for submissions…

[Tsundere-kun]

What is the point of updating the OP when everything from the rules, the entries, and whatever judging it is are already said and done? Genuine question, is this just some sort of satire?

[abg7]

Apologies for the unexpected change - I realized late in the deliberation phase that I would rather switch things up for the scoring system, but only for this iteration of the Cool Wall Challenge - future iterations will revert to the usual system last used in CW6.

[Riley]

It’s not so much that the lateness of changing a rule is bad, but the way the challenge is meant to be hosted has been changed after we’ve all submitted. The scoring is straight up wrong, and far more basic than it should’ve been. To prove a point, here are the real scores after our current scoring.

As you can see, things don’t really move at the very top or the bottom, but after that it’s a mess, everyone shuffles everywhere with several people jumping or dropping 10 spaces or so.

Ty @Danicoptero for doing this visual place swap thing.

[abg7]

Thanks for pointing that out - I’m seriously considering reverting to the original CW scoring system and adjusting points per round accordingly.

[Riley]

Please do! it would make many of us very happy. The original calculator is right there.

If you were going to run your own version of CW the way you did it would be “fine” but this is the real thing!

[abg7]

It’s getting late where I live, so I’ll go to bed first, then readjust the rankings the following day.

The new scoring system I had wanted to replace it with, however, will not go to waste, and I may consider using it for my own standalone challenges later.

[abg7]

Round 6: Reliability

They say that a car is only as good as how far its oily bits can take it - the further the better. Or is it?

Most reliable: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (88.0)

Mara has shed its reputation for badly built knockoffs of Western machinery with the Paragon. Odd-looking it may be, but it conceals a heart of iron.

Least reliable: Yajirushi 290 CTC

Overcomplicated on the inside, its sleek looks conceal mechanicals that are not quite as robust as they seem.

Reliability rankings

1st: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (88.0) - An overbuilt engine, interior, and body help make Mara’s flagship performance car outlast its competitors mechanically. If only it looked better…
2nd: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (83.5) - While not as over-engineered as the Paragon (at least in terms of body and engine quality), its interior is far better built. Being a full decade newer also helps.
3rd: Zephorus Grimsel (83.3) - By resorting to using an exquisitely finished body and a more robust drivetrain, it does not need to have as many quality points sunk into other areas for a podium finish - a remarkable result considering its age.
4th: Gipfe CS 40DTI (82.6) - Built using the same philosophy as the Grimsel (more drivetrain and body quality points, fewer such points elsewhere), the Gipfe leverages its newer design to compensate for the complexity of its fancier infotainment.
5th: Rocket Venus (82.3) - It takes a similar approach to quality allocation as the Zephorus and Gipfe, but leans even more heavily on body quality to offset the reliability penalty of its active suspension.
6th: Lepus GT (81.1) - With its quality points distributed more evenly (but with fewer of them assigned to where they affect reliabilty the most), the Lepus barely misses out on a top-5 spot, but is still one of the better built entries here.
7th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (80.5) - Despite not using any quality points in many areas, it invests many of them in a few crucial places (including bodywork and drivetrain) to score highly in this field.
8th: Primus Legacy SV500 (80.2) - Like the Lepus GT, the Legacy opts for a more balanced allocation of quality points, but leans even more heavily into its philosophy to remain competitive in this regard, despite its age.
9th: Winchester Warrior (79.7) - Even with a luxury interior and CD player (which I’m assuming was an optional extra), its robust engine and drivetrain help ensure that it can last a long time.
10th: Oryu Destriero GTS (79.2) - In terms of quality allocation, its approach is similar to that of the Myosotis, though not as extreme, thus resulting in a top-10 finish.
11th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (77.5) - By using few or no quality points outside of the suspension and drivetrain, its reliability suffers accordingly, and never rises far enough above average.
12th: Aero Flow (77.4) - It has the same problem as the Pegasus (too few quality points in general), but not to the same extent. However, its age also partly explains why it finishes behind the Pegasus in the reliability rankings.
13th: Wells Sidewinder SS (76.6) - Another car plagued by a similar issue as the Pegasus, but for a different reason: some of the quality points have been assigned to places where they don’t affect reliability as much.
14th: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (76.2) - The oily bits and interior are fairly well-built, but not to the same extent as the class leaders, and the rest of the car even less so, though the relatively low amount of body quality points may be somewhat to blame for its disappointing reliability ratings, especially when combined with the use of active suspension and semi-active dampers.
15th: Norrsken Esox R (76.1) - Using lots of quality points across the board to reinforce an older design can only go so far - the Esox’s sheer age really holds it back here. It still avoids a bottom-5 finish, though, by going all-in on that approach.
16th: Kato Celeritas (75.7) - Although it invests lots of quality points overall, it spreads them too thinly, especially in the gearbox and interior.
17th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (74.3) - Most of its components are set to 0 quality, and the others haven’t had a large number of positive quality points sunk into them.
18th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (74.0) - A lot of quality points here, but spread inconsistently - they should have spent more of them on the gearbox, interior, and bodywork, where they are most effective.
19th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (70.3) - No quality points anywhere on the trim (and even on some engine components)? That’s a recipe for a shitbox down the line - only its offbeat exterior design saves the Quix from being one, though.
20th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (69.9) - The bottom of the barrel in terms of reliability. In part this is due to having active suspension (very cutting-edge for 1991), but the real deal-breaker is the complete lack of positive body quality.

Standings after Round 6

1st: Zephorus Grimsel (55.42)
2nd: Gipfe CS40DTI (52.89)
3rd: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (51.1)
4th: Rocket Venus (47.32)
5th: Primus Legacy SV500 (41.47)
6th: Winchester Warrior (31.36)
7th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (30.62)
8th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (27.87)
9th: Wells Sidewinder SS (26.5)
10th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (25.36)
11th: Aero Flow (19.4)
12th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (17.6)
13th: Lepus GT (15.11)
14th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (12.78)
15th: Oryu Destriero GTS (11.55)
16th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (10.3)
17th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (6.55)
18th: Kato Celeritas (4.45)
19th: Norrsken Esox R (-0.03)
20th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (-9.94)

Stay tuned for Part 7!

[moroza]

@abg7

twin-turbo

Huh?

[abg7]

Sorry, but I didn’t catch that oversight initially - the engine is naturally aspirated and has had quite a lot of quality points sunk into it everywhere. I traced its relatively low reliability score to its active suspension system (specifically, active springs) - it’s the most advanced one the game offers (and provides unmatched drivability, comfort, and sportiness), but it’s also the most complex, expensive and least reliable option of all.

Also, one major observation I made when analyzing the reliability scores for each entrant is that adding body/trim quality provides a significant boost to reliability, by improving overall fit and finish.

[abg7]

Round 7: Comfort

Drivability is not the only criterion for everyday usability; interior and ride comfort also play a part. For a performance car, however, it may be best to balance this with overall sportiness, although it may be worth sacrificing some comfort (but not too much of it) if the customer is brave enough.

Most comfortable: Gipfe CS 40DTI (60.0)

Top-of-the line infotainment, an advanced automatic gearbox, softer brake pads, variable electric steering, adaptive dampers… They threw the kitchen sink at it, and ended up with the most comfortable car of the bunch.

Least comfortable: Aero Flow (13.8)

Stiff suspension (with standard, non-progressive springs) and unassisted steering, combined with a relative lack of sound-deadening, make it a challenging proportion to live with on a daily basis, to say the least - but in return you get visceral thrills rarely found elsewhere.

Comfort rankings

1st: Gipfe CS 40DTI (60.0/5pts) - With the best infotainment money can buy (for its time and market segment), plus a buttery smooth engine, this is nicest place to be on a long haul or in rush hour.
2nd: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (50.3/3.95pts) - A surprise silver medal for the glass bubble on wheels, whose CVT takes the hassle out of gearchanges, while fancy suspension bits and a premium interior keep the occupants contented all day long. Electric steering adds a pleasingly light touch to the controls.
3rd: Norrsken Esox R (41.2/2.97pts) - This is the full-fat trim, with its luxury interior and cassette tape stereo, and the extra balancing mass makes it quite a smooth ride for its time.
4th: Rocket Venus (40.6/2.9pts) - Active suspension (which, to be fair, should’ve been tuned slightly better), a top-end sound system (with a CD player) and lots of balancing mass make it more livable than most of its rivals in the supercar class.
5th: Wells Sidewinder SS (36.6/2.47pts) - Maximum balancing mass may not be good for engine response, but it definitely cuts down on NVH, while the suspension focuses mainly on comfort.
6th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (36.1/2.41pts) - A high-quality interior and infotainment, with variable EPAS, adaptive dampers, high balancing mass, and a DCT - all hallmarks of a luxury car worth many times its price, and surprisingly welcome in something so small.
7th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (34.9/2.28pts) - Another car with active suspension, although this one is a tad firm for its intended purpose. It’s still a good fit for what is meant to be a grand tourer, especially with its luxury interior and CD stereo sound system.
8th: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (34/2.19) - Yet another case where the active suspension is on the firm side, but at least it’s more in tune with the car’s positioning. A top-tier sound system/CD player also helps, as do comfort-biased brake pads. Balancing mass is on the low side, though, and the performance intake/ single muffler combo makes the engine quite noisy (although isn’t that what we expect from a supercar like this one?).
9th: Primus Legacy SV500 (33.4/2.12pts) - The spring rate is a bit on the stiff side, but at least it has adaptive dampers. Also, the premium CD player is a bit outclassed in something with a full-on luxury interior. Still a good choice for a sports sedan to use as a daily driver, though.
10th: Lepus GT (33.2/2.1pts) - An unusual (and firm) application of active suspension, not helped by the mid-grade standard infotainment, but still a fairly usable choice of daily driver.
11th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (32.8/2.06pts) - Standard infotainment is a bit out of place in its premium interior, and the non-progressive standard springs don’t help. The 2+2 seating makes it even worse, but at least it has a DCT, and VVL with the lowest possible initial cam profile, to smooth things out.
12th: Winchester Warrior (31.9/1.96pts) - Another stiffly sprung car, but one with adaptive dampers and a full-house luxury interior/CD player (along with slightly softer brake pads) for the daily grind, although the balancing mass is a bit light…
13th: Oryu Destriero GTS (31.5/1.92pts) - Despite a high-quality premium interior, it is somewhat held back by its relatively small size, and consequently a lack of interior volume. Also, the single muffler on the exhaust makes it a bit louder than expected.
14th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (30/1.75pts) - Another undersized entry, and one without progressive springs, but the narrow tires and high balancing mass are a boon for comfort (relatively speaking). A single straight-through muffler with mid cast headers is a bit out of place, though.
15th: Zephorus Grimsel (27.7/1.5pts) - Its adaptive-damped air suspension is a bit firm, and the sports interior/premium CD is not quite as well-built as some other interiors here. That said, high balancing mass (with balancer shafts) help soften the blow from having dual straight-through mufflers.
16th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (24.7/1.18pts) - Adaptive dampers and semi-active sway bars are all well and good, but the 2+2 seating limits the amount of space in the rear. Interior quality is only average, and balancing mass is on the low side.
17th: Kato Celeritas (22.1/0.9pts) - Its active suspension (with adaptive dampers) is oddly stiffer in the rear than it is up front. Also, the rear bench seat is a bit cramped in a body of this size, and the turbo kicks in too late, resulting in an unpredictable power delivery. The interior quality is quite good, though.
18th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (19.4/0.61pts) - The only car with a semi-trailing arm rear suspension (to simulate rear MacPherson struts?), but it’s quite firm (especially with non-progressive steel springs). Then again, it’s meant to be a hard-edged homologation special, so it might be possible to live with that.
19th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (17.3/0.38pts) - Its suspension tune is very much like the Sylphide’s, but even stiffer. Also, it lacks some sound-deadening and has no balancing mass for its engine’s harmonic damper. The result is an unusually high idle speed (1900 rpm!) and a rough engine that feels lethargic until you reach 5000 rpm - the high level of intake noise doesn’t help.
20th: Aero Flow (13.8/0pts) - Stiffly sprung, with unassisted steering, reduced sound-deadening… Even with a kerb weight of over 1.5 metric tons, only the brave or foolish would use it as a daily driver.

Standings after Round 7

1st: Gipfe CS40DTI (57.89pts)
2nd: Zephorus Grimsel (56.92pts)
3rd: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (53.29pts)
4th: Rocket Venus (50.22pts)
5th: Primus Legacy SV500 (43.59pts)
6th: Winchester Warrior (33.52pts)
7th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (32.68pts)
8th: Wells Sidewinder SS (28.97pts)
9th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (28.48pts)
10th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (27.77pts)
11th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (19.88pts)
12th: Aero Flow (19.4pts)
13th: Lepus GT (17.21pts)
14th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (13.96pts)
15th: Oryu Destriero GTS (13.47pts)
16th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (10.68pts)
17th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (8.3pts)
18th: Kato Celeritas (5.35pts)
19th: Norrsken Esox R (2.94pts)
20th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (-5.99pts)

Stay tuned for Part 8!

[ErenWithPizza]

This still on?

[abg7]

Round 8: Value

This is where it gets tricky. While a cheaper car will leave more headroom in the budget for upgrades, upkeep, and running costs, a more expensive one is generally presumed to be more capable out of the box. Built or bought? It depends on where Chris would rather spend his money on. The rankings for this round will thus be based on the percentage of the budget that remains when the car’s approximate cost is subtracted from the $30,000 allotment.

Cheapest car: DAW Corsica Mojarra ($11,250)

Small size and a small engine explain why the Mojarra is the cheapest car of the bunch right now. For all its faults, its low price would leave Chris with a lot of spare cash for aftermarket parts to turn it into a giant-killer.

Most expensive car: Lepus GT ($30,000)

This AWD hot hatch had the kitchen sink thrown at it from the factory, and therefore sits right on the budget cap. However, at least Chris could end up getting a lot of car for his cash if he picks this one.

Affordability rankings (based on percentage of remaining budget)

1st: DAW Corsica Mojarra (62.5%/5pts) - Though sparsely equipped relative to some of the other entries here, this is quite a bargain, for what it’s worth - it embodies the “built, not bought” philosophy very well.
2nd: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (50.58%/4.05pts) - With so little of it spent on proper performance parts, this one could be a surprisingly practical yet affordable (and quirky) choice for a daily driver.
3rd: Wells Sidewinder SS (33.78%/2.70pts) - Second only to the Corsica for affordability among the true performance cars, the Sidewinder may well be a more promising starting point if Chris wants a project to work on.
4th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (33.33%/2.67pts) - Just missing out on a podium spot (in part due to its AWD system), the Sylphide would still be a good choice as Chris’ next project car regardless.
5th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (25.81%/2.06pts) - That undersized body pays off in the affordability stakes, although its convertible top may explain why it ends up on the edge of the top 5.
6th: Winchester Warrior (20.05%/1.60pts) - With more standard equipment for its time than the Mara, the Warrior misses out on a top-5 finish, but at least you’ll get quite a lot out of this one.
7th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (18.81%/1.50pts) - A fairly well-appointed AWD liftback, and one that performs well enough to justify its pricing.
8th: Rocket Venus (15.09%/1.21pts) - Even with its powerful engine, this thing lives up to its name, considering its relatively low cost. Of course, if you want to spend even more on it to make it faster still, then go ahead - but don’t go too far.
9th: Oryu Destriero GTS (13.57%/1.09pts) - That big engine up front accounts for most of its price, but on the other hand, it’s squeezed into a relatively small body, so it’s still a bargain for its pace.
10th: Norrsken Esox R (9.98%/0.80pts) - This is where things start to get pricey - this particular trim level has a lot of creature comforts as standard, and it shows.
11th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (9.88%/0.79pts) - Almost as affordable as the Esox, the Goodwood just misses out on a top-10 spot due to its use of more advanced technology, despite using a FWD platform.
12th: Kato Celeritas (8.22%/0.66pts) - Quite a pricey beast, considering that it was positioned as a premium product in period, but it’ll still leave some cash left over for upgrades if Chris wants a sharper drive.
13th: Aero Flow (8.10%/0.65) - Despite not having power steering, the lightweighting and advanced construction make it one of the more expensive entries here, but it is a visceral experience worth savoring nonetheless.
14th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (7.53%/0.60pts) - The reason why it uses up more of Chris’ budget than the previous car is because of its active suspension - but at least it’ll still leave some cash for him to get it sorted.
15th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (4%/0.32pts) - As a relatively new car powered by a twin-turbo V6, this is one of the more expensive entries here, but it’s more than capable enough from the get-go.
16th: Primus Legacy SV500 (1.39%/0.11pts) - This trim level has held its value quite well, being a high-end super sports/luxury sedan with all the mod cons you’d expect from its kind.
17th (3-way tie): Gipfe CS40DTI, Nordwagen Loki S-8x4, and Zephorus Grimsel (0.3%, 0.23%, and 0.22%/ 0.02pts each) - All of these cars use up nearly all of Chris’ budget, but with their stellar performance and showstopping presence, it may just be worth it.
20th: Lepus GT (0%/0pts) - Throwing the kitchen sink doesn’t always work, and the Lepus actually offers less value for money than the Gipfe, Nordwagen, or Zephorus. It’s more practical than all of them, though.

Standings after Round 8

1st: Gipfe CS40 DTI (57.91pts)
2nd: Zephorus Grimsel (56.94pts)
3rd: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (53.31pts)
4th: Rocket Venus (51.43pts)
5th: Primus Legacy Sv500 (43.7pts)
6th: Winchester Warrior (34.92pts)
7th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (33pts)
8th: Wells Sidewinder SS (31.67pts)
9th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (31.15pts)
10th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (28.56pts)
11th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (20.48pts)
12th: Aero Flow (20.05pts)
13th: Lepus GT (17.21pts)
14th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (15.68pts)
15th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (15.46pts)
16th: Oryu Destriero GTS (14.56pts)
17th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (10.36pts)
18th: Kato Celeritas (6.01pts)
19th: Norrsken Esox R (3.74pts)
20th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (-1.94pts)

Apologies for the late post, but real life got in the way. However, I’m absolutely determined to get the whole thing done no matter what it takes, so…

Hold on tight for Round 9!

[abg7]

Round 9: Service Cost

Supposedly, money saved is money earned, and service cost is no exception. Having to allocate less money spent on routine maintenance (without skipping intervals, of course) will save some cash for aftermarket parts, accessories, etc.

Cheapest to service: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (914.9)

It may have a CVT, but it doesn’t have too many (any?) performance-oriented parts as standard. So for once, the least fitting car on offer (on paper, at least) leads a category in scoring for the first time here.

Highest service costs: Busan Pegasus Coupe ($2714)

Putting aside the fact that this is a newer car, it’s still quite tech-heavy (mid-grade infotainment nothwithstanding) - and gets unfairly slugged by the service cost penalty for turbo engines (especially one such as the twin-turbo V6 found on this trim level).

Service cost rankings

1st: Quix DIscopop 1.7 AWD ($914.9/2pts) - Ironically, not being a performance car meant that the Quix placed atop the service affordability rankings.
2nd: DAW Corsica Mojarra ($1129.3/1.76pts) - A small engine and relatively narrow tires make it cheaper and easier to work on compared to any of the other cars here (except for the Quix, of course).
3rd: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE ($1218.9/1.66pts) - Another relatively small car whose engine doesn’t take up too much space. Only its convertible top seems to hold it back from second place (or better).
4th: Aero Flow ($1528.4/1.32pts) - This pared-back, lightweight wedge has a cavernous engine bay, which seems wasted on a relatively small engine, but on the other hand, makes those servicing bills a bit more palatable.
5th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe ($1568.1/1.27pts) - Another small car with a relatively small engine. Even though it’s mounted transversely and drives the front wheels, it’s still quite cheap to run for its era.
6th: Yajirushi 290 CTC ($1594.7/1.24pts) - Although fitted with fully active suspension as standard, its wheel/tire fitment and camber settings are not too aggressive, and its turbo mill fits neatly into its engine bay without too much trouble.
7th: Oryu Destriero GTS ($1664.5/1.17pts) - A relatively big engine in a relatively small car, but one whose tires are not too wide or low in profile (or even aggressively cambered) to raise service costs even further.
8th: Wells Sidewinder SS ($1676/1.15pts) - See Oryu Destriero GTS above, although its engine is larger.
9th: Norrsken Esox R ($1689.1/1.14pts) - Despite being a full-fat luxury trim, its relative simplicity (mostly stemming from it being the oldest car here) helps it salvage a mid-pack finish.
10th (tie): Kato Celeritas ($1779.4/1.04pts) - Another turbo speedster, but at least this one leaves a lot of room in its engine bay for Chris to work on.
10th (tie): Lepus GT ($1779.4/1.04pts) - As stated in the previous post, this one packs a lot of stuff into such a small body, but the relatively narrow tires keep costs from spiraling too far out of control.
12th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 ($1839.4/0.97pts) - This turbo AWD rally rocket has a small engine in a modestly-sized body, but the wide tires (a necessity for its leech-like grip) put this behind the Lepus in the servicing affordability stakes.
13th: Winchester Warrior ($1922.2/0.88pts) - The luxury interior and stereo sound system on this trim level raises its service cost considerably, but it could be a lot worse.
14th: Gipfe CS40DTI ($2027.6/0.76) - A modern AWD turbo coupe finishing above the bottom 5? Chalk that up to having a longitudinally mounted I6 engine up front in a fairly large body, and tires that aren’t too wide or low-profile for the power they have to transmit to the road.
15th: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 ($2290.6/0.47pts) - With a relatively small engine bay housing a fairly large engine driving all four wheels (wrapped in lower-profile tires, to boot), we’re starting to get into supercar-level territory here, as far as servicing cost is concerned.
16th (tie): Zephorus Grimsel ($2314.2/0.44pts) - Very wide, square-fitment tires and a large mid-mounted engine place this in the bottom 5 for this category.
16th (tie): Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V ($2314.9/0.44pts) - Yet another AWD turbo rocket ship, but unlike the Gipfe, this one is built on a smaller body set with a smaller engine bay, which may explain why it costs even more to service than the mid-engined Loki and Grimsel.
18th: Rocket Venus ($2337.1/0.42pts) - Staggered tires and a mid-mounted turbo engine put it in the bottom 3 for servicing affordability, but it could be worse.
19th: Primus Legacy SV500 ($2368.9/0.38pts) - A very large engine, in a body set with a relatively small engine bay, combined with a high-end interior and stereo sound system, would have made it the most expensive car to service if it weren’t for the…
20th: Busan Pegasus Coupe ($2714/0pts) - …whose twin-turbo V6 with variable intake runners (among other things) puts the retro wedge at the bottom of the servicing affordability pile.

Standings after Round 9

1st: Gipfe CS40DTI (58.67pts)
2nd: Zephorus Grimsel (57.38pts)
3rd: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (53.78pts)
4th: Rocket Venus (51.85pts)
5th: Primus Legacy SV500 (44.08pts)
6th: Winchester Warrior (35.8pts)
7th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (33pts)
8th: Wells Sidewinder SS (32.82pts)
9th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (32.12pts)
10th: Knightwick GoodWood Coupe (29.83pts)
11th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (21.72pts)
12th: Aero Flow (21.37pts)
13th: Lepus GT (18.25pts)
14th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (17.44pts)
15th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (15.9pts)
16th: Oryu Destriero GTS (15.73pts)
17th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (12.02pts)
18th: Kato Celeritas (7.05pts)
19th: Norrsken Esox R (4.88pts)
20th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (0.06pts)

Round 10 is up next!

[abg7]

Round 10: Fuel Economy

As with service costs, money saved on fuel tends to be saved for other stuff - but in a performance car, this is generally less of a concern. Still, every little bit helps, so here are the economy rankings in descending order.

Highest fuel economy: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (42.62 mpg)

With its highly efficient turbo I4 and small, light platform, the Goodwood is by far the most economical car of the bunch.

Lowest fuel economy: Wells Sidewinder SS (13.67 mpg)

The Sidewinder is the thirstiest car here, due to its aggressively tuned OHV V8 - but at least it has a lot more power than the Goodwood.

Fuel economy rankings (in descending order)

1st: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (42.64mpg/2pts) - With an early spooling turbo mated to a tall-geared 6-speed DCT, the Goodwood leads the efficiency stakes by a wide margin.
2nd: Busan Pegasus Coupe (31.18mpg/1.21pts) - It may not even come close to the Goodwood’s >40-mpg figure, but its variable intake system (which yields a wide, flat torque curve) ensures that it is surprisingly economical for a car of its type.
3rd: Gipfe CS40DTi (30.38mpg/1.15pts) - Even without a variable intake manifold, the Gipfe nearly matches the Pegasus, thanks to some clever turbo and cam tuning.
4th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (29.91mpg/1.12pts) - A modest power output and a smooth CVT put it on the brink of a podium finish.
5th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (27.58mpg/0.96pts) - Another car with an early spooling turbo, and one that makes the top 5 in this category even without VVT (which is justifiable considering its age).
6th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (26.12mpg/0.86pts) - The second-most economical of all the normally aspirated cars, primarily due to a mild cam profile.
7th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (25.76mpg/0.84pts) - This one benefits hugely from a small engine in a light body, despite a high engine speed; a flat floor also helps.
8th: Kato Celeritas (23.68mpg/0.69pts) - Even with a lot of turbo lag (it doesn’t kick in until after 4000 rpm) and short gearing, its slippery body keeps it in the efficiency top 10, albeit in the lower end.
9th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (22.79mpg/0.63pts) - Another car whose engine has a broad, flat torque curve (thanks to a mild cam), despite only having one overhead cam instead of two.
10th (tie): Lepus GT (22.07mpg/0.58pts) - It squeaks into the top 10 with its flow-optimized undertray; even though its secondary cam profile is fairly aggressive, the primary cam profile is much milder, providing a decent amount of low-end torque.
10th (tie): Norrsken Esox R (22mpg/0.58pts) - Amazingly, despite its age, it almost matches the Lepus in economy, mainly due to being much lighter.
12th: Rocket Venus (21.88mpg/0.57pts) - Despite a late spooling turbo, low boost and low downforce keep the fuel economy from being too horrendous.
13th: Primus Legacy SV500 (21.78mpg/0.56pts) - Its gearing is a bit on the short side, but its effects are mitigated by a flat floor and a flat torque curve.
14th: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (21.52mpg/0.54pts) - Combining the lowest possible primary cam profile with an aggressive secondary cam profile in its VVL tuning makes it easier on gas than you think, but it’s a long way from the top 5 in that regard.
15th: Aero Flow (20.73mpg/0.49pts) - Even with VVT only on the intake side, and an aggressive cam profile, its slippery body keeps it out of the bottom 5.
16th: Oryu Destriero GTS (20.42mpg/0.47pts) - A fairly powerful engine (with a hotter cam compared to the Aero Flow) in a small, light car, combined with a lot of downforce and brake cooling, knock it down to the bottom 5 in the efficiency rankings.
17th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (19.64 mpg/0.41pts) - Despite an early spooling turbo, its short gearing makes it far less economical than expected.
18th: Winchester Warrior (17.52mpg/0.27pts) - The Warrior sits in the bottom 3 for fuel economy due to its large OHV V8, but it could be worse.
19th: Zephorus Grimsel (15.64mpg/0.14pts) - An aggressive cam profile combined with short gearing put the Grimsel near the bottom of the pack here, and yet it isn’t the thirstiest car; that dubious distinction goes to the…
20th: Wells Sidewinder SS (13.67mpg/0pts) - …whose pushrod V8 is even more aggressively tuned than the Warrior’s, leading to a worst-in-class economy figure.

Standings after Round 10

1st: Gipfe CS40 DTI (59.82pts)
2nd: Zephorus Grimsel (57.52pts)
3rd: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (54.32pts)
4th: Rocket Venus (52.42pts)
5th: Primus Legacy Sv500 (44.64pts)
6th: Winchester Warrior (36.07pts)
7th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (34.21pts)
8th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (33.08pts)
9th: Wells Sidewinder SS (32.82pts)
10th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (31.83pts)
11th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (22.58pts)
12th: Aero Flow (21.86pts)
13th: Lepus GT (18.83pts)
14th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (18.28pts)
15th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (16.31pts)
16th: Oryu Destriero GTS (16.2pts)
17th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (12.65pts)
18th: Kato Celeritas (7.74pts)
19th: Norrsken Esox R (5.46pts)
20th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (1.18pts)

Round 11 coming up!

[abg7]

Round 11: Practicality

This may not be on the mind of every performance car buyer, but having the ability to carry more than one passenger and/or some extra luggage space may be helpful at times.

Most practical: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (63.4)

As the only minivan/MPV in the field, its egg-shaped body obviously lends itself well to long road trips and cargo hauling, with copious amounts of cargo space.

Least practical: Aero Flow (22.9)

No surprises here either. Its wide, wedge-shaped body leaves precious little room for cargo, and its low roof doesn’t help.

Practicality rankings

1st: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (63.4/2.0pts) - Loads of cargo and passenger volume; there’s no provision for a third row, but it doesn’t need one anyway.
2nd: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (60.9/1.88pts) - A high load capacity combined with a voluminous 5-seat interior (for its size) cement its runner-up finish.
3rd: Primus Legacy SV500 (53.5/1.51pts) - Despite only having four doors, it still notches up a podium finish, thanks to having a spacious interior for its size.
4th: Kato Celeritas (51.4/1.41pts) - Another 4-door car, but this one’s smaller than the Legacy. It, too, has a decent amount of trunk space for long trips.
5th: Lepus GT (48.4/1.26pts) - It may only have 4 seats, but it’s still a hot hatch (albeit a 3-door one). Thiis is enough to put it into the top 5, though not by much.
6th:Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (47.7/1.22pts) - Although only a 2+2, its liftback shooting brake body style gives it more load space than you’d expect from a car of this type.
7th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (41.8/0.93pts) - A fairly big 2-door coupe with lots of passenger and cargo space is bound to finish in the top 10, although it would have done better with an extra seat and/or an additional door on each side.
8th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (33.2/0.51pts) - One of the widest cars here, but as a 2+2 it can carry more luggage space (or even small occupants) than it otherwise would.
9th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (30.7/0.39pts) - The highest-ranked of all the pure 2-seaters, its RR layout endows it with more cargo space up front than its small size would lead you to believe.
10th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (30.2/0.36pts) - It squeaks into the top 10 by virtue of having more load capacity than the DAW, squeezed into a smaller body.
11th (tie): Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (30.1/0.36pts) - The Paragon almost ties the Goodwood for practicality, finishing only 0.1pts behind (in terms of in-game scoring) due to being slightly wider.
11th (tie): Oryu Destriero GTS (30.1/0.36pts) - Both it and the Paragon notched up identical scores here, but the Oryu trades load capacity for more interior and cargo space in its smaller body.
13th: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (30.0/0.35pts) - An even smaller car than the three that finished above it, but its RR layout allows for a spacious luggage compartment up front.
14th: Wells Sidewinder SS (29.1/0.31pts) - Far wider than the Loki, but in return it gains a lot of interior volume for both of its occupants to use.
15th: Winchester Warrior (28.2/0.26pts) - More load capacity but less cabin volume than the Sidewinder puts it very close to a bottom-5 finish.
16th: Gipfe CS 40DTi (27.9/0.25pts) - Bigger on the inside than the Warrior, but that’s mainly because it’s built on an even wider body set.
17th: Norrsken Esox R (27.6/0.23pts) - Its load capacity trails the Gipfe’s, but at least it’s based on a narrower body set (one that, sadly, could soon be deprecated) that sits higher off the ground.
18th: Rocket Venus (27.4/0.22pts) - For a car as wide as this, it has less interior space than the Esox, or even the Gipfe for that matter.
19th: Zephorus Grimsel (25.8/0.14pts) - Being built on the second-largest of the Super Wedge body sets, its width makes it a pain to maneuver in tight spaces.
20th: Aero Flow (22.9/0pts) - The widest car of the bunch, and hence even less wieldy on narrow roads than the Grimsel, not helped by having very little cargo and cabin space for its size.

Standings after Round 11

1st: Gipfe 40CS DTi (60.07pts)
2nd: Zephorus Grimsel (57.66pts)
3rd: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (54.67pts)
4th: Rocket Venus (52.64pts)
5th: Primus Legacy SV500 (46.15pts)
6th: Winchester Warrior (36.33pts)
7th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (34.96pts)
8th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (34.72pts)
9th: Wells Sidewinder SS (33.13)
10th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (32.19pts)
11th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (23.51pts)
12th: Aero Flow (21.86pts)
13th: Lepus GT (20.09pts)
14th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (18.67pts)
15th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (17.53pts)
16th: Oryu Destriero GTS (16.56pts)
17th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (13.01pts)
18th: Kato Celeritas (9.15pts)
19th: Norrsken Esox R (5.69pts)
20th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (3.18pts)

Part 12 is up next!

[thpethalk]

it’s like my car is just stuck lmao…