Exploration vehicle challenge (RESULTS ARE IN!)

Community Challenges & Competitions
1

exploration vehicle challenge

TO: Any Interested Car Companies
Subject: Exploration vehicle needed
From: explorationteam@worldscience.com
Message: Hello. We are the exploration team scientists over at worldscience, We have been having success in mapping, exploring, and preserving many parts of the world including in the amazon, Sahara desert, and many protected nature reserves. what we need is a new exploratory vehicle fleet since our old ones are, well, old. we just have a few requirements, we need the vehicles to be less than $20,000, we also need these vehicles to run on low octane fuels since many of our fuel stops may only carry such fuels. we also need the vehicles to have a good amount of utility to them for hauling scientific equipment and transporting samples. we’d also like the vehicle to have the ability to carry many people at a time, the more people one vehicle can carry, the less vehicles we need to deploy making it cheaper on us. we’d also like for the vehicles to at least be relatively comfortable since they can be our homes and office for up to a month at a time. and because of the fragile nature of the ecosystems we explore, we would like a vehicle with as low of emissions as possible. we also request for no EFI systems since the last thing we want is our fuel system to short out while fording a river, and our final request is to install the off road tires for us, try to reduce the total work for us on getting these vehicles ready

rules
final cost: $20000 (markets tab)
year:1995
Low quality unleaded
3 way catalytic converter required (not high flow)
no EFI
chunky off-road with 0 quality slider
All steam workshop mods allowed
naming format;
car; model: EVC-username-model name Trim: EVC-Username-trim name
Engines; model: EVC-Username-model name variant: EVC-Username-Variant name

if any submitted vehicles do not meet the rules, the submitter of the vehicle will get a PM notifying them of what they need to fix and the entry will be disqualified until it is fixed

ALL ENTRIES MUST BE IN BY JANUARY 1ST 2016!!

scoring: off-road, fuel economy, engine reliability, total average reliability, total seats 2X multiplier
comfort, utility, drivability 1X multiplier
every $100 below max budget (one point per 100), Total torque, total doors, total emissions 0.5X multiplier

Example score:(121.8+25+102.2+130.6+10+32.9+65.5+30.1+5.5+88.5+2-283.05)/12=27.6 pts (rounded to nearest tenth)
test vehicle: 27.6 points on those rules

the winner will not only get the contract with worldscience, but i will also make a complete review for the civilian market for the vehicle.
any questions just ask

ACCEPTED ENTRIES:
SillyWorld
HighOctaneLove
Zabhawkin
TheCarLover
DoctorNarfy
asdren
NiuYorqCiti
theh4x0r1337

2

So we’re pretty much building this?

I like the idea.

3

[quote=“squidhead”]So we’re pretty much building this?
(hungy)
I like the idea.[/quote]

yep, just currently creating the rules

4

How about allowing efi with a penalty of having to spend 5 tech points on the fuel system?

Edit: I relise now that this is a dumb idea =/

5

hmm… i’m kinda not feeling this one too much since being stuck with carbs/mechanical injection (which in 1995 isn’t terribly expensive) does add a bit more to the challenge, but if i find a good reason i’ll implement it

EDIT: i thought of a good reason why, but then it just kinda knocks everything out of whack, so unfortunately i don’t really see this one being in there (the required +5 will reduce the octane levels by a good bit, basically allowing for people to just make a lot more torque just off of a penalty)

6

Towing capabilities are part of the utility stat, so if you’re considering the towing of a trailer as a scoring factor, a minimal utility score would take care of that.

7

ah thanks for saying that, i’ll just leave it at utility then

8

ok, judging by the lack of repllies is everyone happy with the current ruleset?

9

I’m pretty happy with it.

10

As am I. Should be an interesting challenge since it isn’t all about speed and performance.

11

ok, well in that case what seems like a fair due day? new years? that’s a good 2 weeks

12

I have a monster SUV pretty much ready for this

13

now open, only added in the rule of if a car didn’t meet the rules, i feel that it is fair enough.

14

I’ll get to building then.

15

Well, I think a 0.5 multiplier is more of a penalty than a multiplier… How about increasing all the multipliers by 0.5?

EDIT: Nevermind, I was being an idiot. Total Emissions should be a penalty instead of a multiplier, though.

16

[quote=“Urbanliner”]Well, I think a 0.5 multiplier is more of a penalty than a multiplier… How about increasing all the multipliers by 0.5?

EDIT: Nevermind, I was being an idiot. Total Emissions should be a penalty instead of a multiplier, though.[/quote]

total emissions are a penalty, they get subtracted from the score, the 0.5 on it makes it so that way the score isn’t always negative which was happening in testing

17

The Powerbus, specially made for moving a lot of people from extreme-place point A to extreme off-road point B. Capable of working in a variety of hostile enviroments and in the most harsh conditions, the most useful tool for explorers and extreme scientists.

8v9YgJU.jpg1166×766 62.4 KB

18

just clarifiying. NO ELECTRONIC fuel injection right? not downright fuel injection?

cause even if it’s mechanical, it’s still better than carbs

19

[quote=“koolkei”]just clarifiying. NO ELECTRONIC fuel injection right? not downright fuel injection?

cause even if it’s mechanical, it’s still better than carbs[/quote]

correct, no electronic, mechanical is 100% ok, in fact it’s what i used in my test vehicles

20

Yeah, Mechanical fuel injection is better as far as horsepower output, but in my opinion, it’s not worth the price gap. I’ve found a way to use carburetor to get pretty darn good reliability, but in the process, I think I’ve won the award for lowest specific output. 8 liters of thundering fury, developing… Wait for it…

110 Horsepower.