The feeling when you’ve been out of the loop and have to read about 100 posts on this topic
So uhh… Japanese cars? Sure, time to bring my Supra-Skyline-Chaser-Miata-350Z-JDM-20°-camber angle-shakotan exhaust-neon light into the mix! But with an… unexpected setup.
You’ll see. If I can make it work.
If I can’t, you’ll see a very bland, boring car.
Quality sliders are free as long as you don’t violate the price limit?
Are the scores in market categories free as well?
Yep. In both the DRC and HLC if it is not stated in the rules there is no limit on it. I am 100 percent positive this will be the closest round. And on that note i was wondering how we all felt about the random penalty numbers r they ok or should i make the times smaller?
Too bad I overlooked that in HLC, as the Buccaneer was at least the cheapest then. 
I’ll guess I might have a ricer-styled car as well as a 40s hotrod. 
BTW: In ATC your request was permitted.
I think that the random penalty times are fine, they make this challenge really fun and unexpected! You never now who will win.
Actually how big are those penalties now? I do see the (dice I suppose) numbers but nowhere the exact added time.
I am neither for or against it. Of course, fairness is replaced with concidence, but it is a more real life feeling.
5 is the middle point, with 1 being the slowest (+0.5secs) and 10 the quickest (-0.5 secs). They’ll be using a random number generator with rounding I’d say.
Realistically (missed changes, blah blah), the 0.1 per random number seems fine.
Thanks for info!
@Darkshine5 If that is the case, than I’m for making the random numbers smaller. I’ve got 2 arguments for that:
I believe max difference between 1 and 10 should be few tents, no more. Even in real world, if one car is doing 11.2 and another 12.0 you do not expect them to be competitive under any circumstances. (well that makes 3 arguments)
You’re all envy of my win! 
(Just joking 
)
Reading these arguments I must agree. If wasn’t for this big time penalty I wouldn’t have won this last round.
I agree, at the same time this element of randomness allows for more variation in the field. And the element removed is the engines probability of blowing up from real life. So I am torn, perhaps just half the current limits?
Ok this will have all times halved. do we want it done this way for this round or wait until the next?
The challenge is based on some points of reality. So halving these times would make me very happy I used the larger numbers just to increase peoples chances of winning while remaining true to lore, however now that we are at round 10 I would prefer the lower numbers. I did not include engine blowups as it is actually very rare for a car that has been checked and prepped to race to blow an engine (if something is not right they do not race), rather the guys and gals that rock up in a street car that hasn’t been tuned or they think they need to do a burnout that lasts 5 mins usually go home on a trailer. It would add a whole new element of difficulty not just for entrants but for the racemaster. The DRC is and will always be a challenge that is easy whilst moderately challenging to be competitive.
I don’t see any problem going with the new numbers for this round. We can’t plan for a dice roll, so the new numbers or the old would make no real difference.
I agree.
10=perfect run. time has .2 reduced from it
9=great run. time has .15 reduced from it
8=good run great reaction time. .1 reduced from it
7=good run nothing special .05 reduced from time
6 = average run. time remains standard
5 = average run time remains standard
4 = poor reaction time average run .05 added to time
3 = poor reaction and missed a gear .1 added to time
2 = poor reaction miss shifted every gear .2 added to time
1 = horrible reaction miss shifted and spun tyres .3 added to time
@JohnWaldock
And a reminder all entries are to be sent to myself for scrutinizing not to John.
Or hundredths? The former is either impressive or you built a barge to start.
hahahahaha Go big or go home 
At the current time I just made I4 and V6 engines and the I4 turbo was always the fastest, but I got nothing under 11.30s, even with less then 1,000kg body. Since I forgot to try a I6 turbo, maybe that’s my next try…
V6 turbo works well for me…to be honest I haven’t even tried others…