I always thought of it as stainless steel like a DeLorean.
I might check the game manual later.
2 Likes
Any updates on this? Progress is extremely slow for what is just pasting results from a spreadsheet.
I am away from home right now, and am not expected to return for two more days. However, upon returning home, I will update the rankings as soon as I can.
1 Like
Cool Wall results are often deliberately slow, for the sake of suspense. Also, abg is doing individual notes for each car in each category, which is way more work than usual.
Im gonna be honest, It kinda feels like you dont really care about hosting. From looking at CW6 you seem quite eager to host and just appointed yourself as host and now it feels like you’re just really lazy.
Yes life sometimes gets in the way but this is not that. Either your planning was absolutely horrendous or your just being lazy. Because the “reviews” are basically just putting the numbers in the spreadsheet and than it does the rest for you. The pictures are the basically the same copy pasted thing each time and there are only to pics for each segment and the reviews aren’t even really reviews, they are like one or two sentences that honestly sometimes don’t even make sense. We even had to ASK to have that added which, even though im super new to challenges, I can see that we shouldn’t need to tell you that.
Getting a new segment out should take at max a day or two a not a week+ with how simple they are. I think most of us would appreciate either some faster posts or more quality in each post.
Yeah, I’d suggest you go back and look at other Cool Wall Challenges. They’re an unique type of challenge with a different format than usual; the spreadsheet use is part of an established format that the host is following. And again, having “reviews” for each car at all is not part of the convention and actually way more than was expected of them; overall, I think they’re doing pretty well (other than changing the scoring calculation without explanation and not even responding to questions about it)
Come to think of it, I should probably do one of those “General Rules and Guidelines” posts like ARM and CSR has, I’ll get to it at some point.
1 Like
Not a bad idea. I guess part of the problem is that this was not supposed to be a continous challenge from the start and it has taken some rounds to figure the right format out. Now it is time to have some guidelines when it is no longer wild west, I guess.
1 Like
Hmm yes, looking at the other CW I agree that the review format seems a bit different.
Still I think my other points still stand, the other CWs seem to post each segment with a day or two in between, if we’re waiting for a more than a week I think we should se a reason for that like for example more quality in the posts, or that’s my take at least. Like I said im still quite new to the challenge part of auto but I think my reasoning seems fair.
This was an August challenge, it is now the middle of October… I’ve basically given up on participating in any challenges after only 2 of the 6 August challenges that I entered have finally been completed. 2 of them were cancelled after the closing deadline, this one is taking forever to get incremental results released, and the last one has had zero results since closing in September and zero comms in over 2 weeks.
Challenge hosts really need to get their shit together.
5 Likes
You’re right, it has been particularly bad with challenge results lately. Hurricanes, hardware failures, and health problems seem to be happening all at once to a lot of people. (ATC had all three things get in its way) As someone on both sides of this problem, I think reminders/encouragement are welcome, but antagonism isn’t helpful.
10 Likes
What Moroza said.
I think that part of the problem is also that lately there has been many challenges opened by users relatively “new” to hosting, and often they tend to want to create the Rolls Royce of challenges the first thing they do, and they don’t realize that it is very easy to bite of a larger bit than you can chew, neither do they have the experience needed for hosting anything more complex. Been there, done that, TBH…
Now, ABG is one of the veterans here so it does not apply to him in this case, but I don’t think that it should discourage you, there HAS been some quick challenges lately, the previous QFC for example, and the CSR took a long time, but it actually had progress all the time which I think makes all the difference there.
8 Likes
No one lives for Automation, sometimes more important obligations just come up, like school or work, or like moroza said, a situation that’s out of anyone’s control.
Also, it’s one thing to have weeks of radio silence and a whole other thing to be complaining after five days of no updates when the host is writing a review for every single car in every single category.
5 Likes
My problem here is the lack of any explanation for why its taking the time it is.
With some of the other challenges the host came forward and said “Hey, im having XYZ issue in my personal life which will hinder the challenge progress”. For me at least that justifies it taking time as personal life of course comes before automation.
That’s what I feel is missing. Because if we are going to wait a week in between each segment, its gonna take 9 weeks as there were at least 9 points mentioned in the main post, personally I don’t feel its justified atm to wait more than 2 months for a full results list with what we’re getting.
1 Like
While the lack of communication on the part of abg is one issue, the other is that the points are not calculated as they should be instead of being based on stats as in the main post the points are awarded based on the place occupied in the ranking which means that a loss of 0.1 in a certain stat against another car means a 0.5 point loss and on the other hand being 20 points better than another car only gives you a 0.5 point advantage.
4 Likes
To be unbiased here, this is the season of school/college/work to be ramping up of which people now have less time than ever before, hell I got both work and college that takes a majority of my time.
The times that I saw the most free time was probably during the summer or winter where most breaks happen. It is completely reasonable that abg7 is doing one of the 3 that I’ve mentioned and that it’s eating into his time, leaving crumbs that he could very well be using for himself.
While it is true that hosts have been hard times publishing their results, we still have to remember about how we all are in our own worlds with our own struggles, and using Hanlon’s razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity, people don’t usually have bad intentions and are just living their lives just like us. Not to derail, but coming from someone who had failed to host JOC4A and semi-host both ATUC and HYF, it’s important to know that things will come out of nowhere and you have no time to explain yourself, and that we are mostly consumed by time anxiety.
3 Likes
Round 4: Drivability
This is the measure of how easy it is to handle a car under most driving situations - sacrificing some of it might be desirable for a performance car, but there are limits.
Most drivable car: Gipfe CS 40Dti (87.6)
An advanced automatic gearbox may not be everyone’s idea of what should belong in a performance car, but when combined with a suspension tune that balances firmness and suppleness and a trick AWD system, as well as a fat, consistent torque curve throughout the rev range, it makes the Gipfe a doddle to drive even at ten tenths.
Least drivable car: Aero Flow (59.7)
Its absence of power steering, among other factors, makes it more of a handful than any of the other cars here. Still, a drivability score of nearly 60 without this item isn’t too bad in absolute terms, but it shows how far standard in everyday usability have improved since then.
Drivability Rankings
1st: Gipfe CS 40Dti (87.6/10pts) - A super-smooth 8-speed advanced automatic gearbox, taut suspension tuning, a consistently fat torque curve, and fast-acting variable electric power steering make the Gipfe the easiest car of this bunch to drive fast, especially with its balanced AWD system.
2nd: Lepus GT (84.0/8.71pts) - It may not have the plateau-like torque curve of the Gipfe, or its fully electric variable steering, but this AWD pocket rocket is still far from unwieldy in any driving environment, even the most taxing ones imaginable.
3rd: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (82.9/8.32pts) - As the only front-driver of the bunch, the Goodwood performed as expected - in other words, very well. Its advanced (dual-clutch) automatic gearbox, though not as well-geared as the Gipfe’s, is well-suited to its engine, and its variable electric power steering is perfectly matched to its chassis, which underpins one of the smallest cars here.
4th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (78.8/6.85pts) - Among all the rear-drivers, the Paragon is tops in the drivability stakes, with a flat torque curve and a relatively small body, with a firm yet compliant suspension tune that keeps things from getting too lairy.
5th: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (78.7/6.81pts) - Trailing the Mara by 0.1 in drivability, the Loki achieves its score by being even smaller than the Mara, and leveraging it with a sportier suspension setup, effectively negating the penalty its manual gearbox incurs.
6th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (77.8/6.49pts) - The best drivability figure among all the entries using a DCT. This, combined with a well-tuned suspension and variable EPAS, make it surprisingly exploitable, and not just for a pure rear-driver.
7th: Primus Legacy SV500 (75.5/5.66pts) - As an older rear-driver built on a larger body, it should not be as easy to drive in extremis as it is, but still ranks in the top half with its well-judged ride/handling balance and linear torque curve.
8th: Rocket Venus (74.2/5.2pts) - While its dyno sheet shows a less progressive torque curve than expected (mainly due to forced induction), its ride/handling balance is perfectly suited to an ideal blend of daily use and spirited driving, even without AWD.
9th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (73.5/4.95pts) - Its CVT make it extremely smooth around town, especially with its supple ride/handling balance. However, mild oversteer at the limit keeps it from placing any higher.
10th: Oryu Destriero GTS (72.7/4.66pts) - Wide tires should’ve made this thing a handful, but ESC and sporty suspension tuning ensure that it doesn’t become too unruly.
11th: Kato Celeritas (72.3/4.52pts) - Despite not benefiting from having an automatic transmission of any description, its electronically controlled AWD system helps it leap off the line just as easily as it can negotiate the daily grind.
12th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V (71.1/4.09pts) - It loses out to the Celeritas due to not having its suspension setting quite as dialed-in, but still runs it very close. It could be worse, though.
13th: Zephorus Grimsel (70.6/3.91pts) - The Grimsel ranks so low this time around because of its unusual square-fitment tires (275mm wide front and rear). This leads to an oversteer bias, but at least its AWD system and progressive power delivery help keep things from getting too far out of hand.
14th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (70/3.69pts) - It should be easier to drive than the Grimsel, but it isn’t, thanks to its relative lack of grip. Still, as an AWD turbo rocket with rally heritage, it’s easier to drive to its limits than its boy-racer exterior suggests.
15th: Winchester Warrior (68.9/3.3pts) - The wide staggered tires (255mm front/285mm rear) are the culprit for its relatively low drivability score, but its torque curve is very conducive to around-town blasts, and its suspension helps keeps that fat rubber planted with ease, all the time.
16th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (68.3/3.08pts) - For something with fully active suspension, its oversteer bias really handicaps it when driving below seven- or eight-tenths. Some minor gearing adjustments wouldn’t hurt, either.
17th: Wells Sidewinder SS (68/2.97pts) - It suffers from the same problem as the Yajirushi 290, but at least it has better throttle response, along with ESC for the daily grind. You could do worse than this for something to use in everyday situations, though.
18th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (66.2/2.33pts) - Staggered tires (185mm front/215mm rear) combined with a high idle speed (nearly 2,000 rpm) make it somewhat stroppy unless it’s driven flat-out, but its small size makes it easier to place on the road than its rear-engined configuration suggests. Its suspension needs a slight retune for a reduced oversteer bias, though.
19th: Norrsken Esox R (60.6/0.32pts) - The absence of power steering, combined with standard springs and an oversteer bias (even with staggered tires), make this wedge quite an unruly, wayward one - but at least the factory spring/damper settings are well-suited to the kind of spirited driving it was built for. Just make sure you’ve taken some bravery pills, though.
20th: Aero Flow (59.7/0pts) - The Aero Flow gets the wooden spoon for drivability due to a lack of power steering (in something weighing over 1.5 metric tons), an unusually low driving position, and staggered tires (something the Esox lacked). Then again, considering its high sportiness rating, it may just be worth it for the brave souls willing to try it out.
Standings after Round 4
1st: Zephorus Grimsel (41.72pts)
2nd: Nordwagen Loki S-8x4 (40.36pts)
3rd: Gipfe CS40DTI (39.73pts)
4th: Rocket Venus (38.14pts)
5th: Primus Legacy SV500 (30.62pts)
6th: Winchester Warrior (21.65pts)
7th: Wells Sidewinder SS (20.65pts)
8th: Strenus Sylphide HT4 (20.24pts)
9th: Busan Pegasus Coupe (20.02pts)
10th: Aero Flow (15.83pts)
11th: Knightwick Goodwood Coupe (14.1pts)
12th: Yajirushi 290 CTC (13.35pts)
13th: Lepus GT (9.52pts)
14th: Oryu Destriero GTS (6.98pts)
15th: Ayatsuji Myosotis GSR Spec-V DAW Corsica Mojarra (6.85pts)
16th: DAW Corsica Mojarra (5.58pts)
17th: Kato Celeritas (1.85pts)
18th: Mara Paragon 4.0 KSE (1.55pts)
19th: Norrsken Esox R (-2.24pts)
20th: Quix Discopop 1.7 AWD (-15.05pts)
Round 5 coming soon!
7 Likes
My car uses a six speed dual clutch btw. It’s the same as in my CSR entry
Dang, I did not expect 60 drivablility to be the bottom of the pack. I must be too used to building older, weirder cars from ALC & LHC.
The Esox does actually use staggered tires, the fronts are 205 and the rears 245
Also now looking back I see I sent the wrongly tuned car, therefore the oversteer bias, RIP my score ig 
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!
2 Likes