It’s a non-issue really, because the car would have scored so bad anyway. Nobody lost anything, there was only gain for the user submitting the car.
Vic is doing great work managing this competition and mistakes are human. He accepted the mistake. Let’s move on.
Also @Dorifto_Dorito, drivability means how easy the car to drive. Handling might be part of that but it doesn’t need to be. Some older cars were very drivable in every day life, but if you took a corner at 50mph they’d keel over. They had bad high speed handling but were excellent commutors. Likewise an old Cadillac was extremely drivable and luxurious, but handled like a boat.
Right, I acknowledge Vics done a great job so far, but we all need to acknowledge our flaws and this challenge has some severe ones imo.
EDIT:
Yes this is indeed true, but you have to ask, why do lateral Gs matter in a family sedan in the first place? I don’t think the average Joe buys a family car only to hoon it and take it round the track completely stock. I mean someone does ofc, but 99% of the people who buy family cars dont care about that.
Dorifto - Thanks for your two cents. After the discussion the other round about people putting unrealistic stuff in their cars, it actually seems to have gotten better, just strictly on an honor system. For the record, the entry level cars this time around were all pretty realistically made as far as engines go. Either carbureted or SPFI. Even several upscale models were carb’ed. And nothing was really out of whack with suspension design on them either.
I’ve been using interior trim to do sorting of sedans for a bit (note: sedans… cars that are clearly sports or utility vehicles get placed in those categories automatically). Size alone can’t determine whether something is entry or upscale. Let’s go back to the 90’s for an IRL example. You could get a big old Pontiac Grand Prix with a really blah interior, basic AM/FM only radio, even crank windows… or you could get a nicely loaded BMW 3-series. Tiny compared to the GP, but also clearly above and beyond with fit and finish and comfort. The 3-series is not an entry level car, and the GP in its base trim is not an upscale car.
I admit fault for classifying his car wrong. As I’ve said already, I probably had the wrong tab in the sheet open and didn’t notice it. I’ll redouble my efforts to check before recording each individual entry. But even with standard/standard in his interior, his prestige and comfort numbers were high enough that they didn’t seem out of place in the upscale category. So even using a number threshold would not have stopped the error in this particular case.
It’s not unusual for me to get a car that does legitimately belong in two different categories, and I end up having to make a choice as to where it goes. This is usually when someone offers something that would in reality be a luxury coupe.
Also, I see it like this, in the limited universe of Automation, there is hard to get a completely fair category system. In the real world there’s no way that a Porsche 959 would have been compared to a base level Chevy Camaro of the same year, or that a Suzuki Samurai and a minivan would have been competitors. But then, for them tons of cars are tested every year, here it is only one model each from a very limited amount of manufacturers, if there would be loads of categories most of them would maybe hold only one or two cars…and almost everyone would be “best in class”. Not much point of competition then.
Having read all of that, it tells you have clearly misjudged where I’m coming from. I don’t care for winning or losing - if I were id be min maxxing my cars all the way through, instead I’m sticking to suboptimal choices, old engines and fairly low tech.
The problem I’m having, which I had discussed with vic in private before and not gotten a satisfactory answer, and that I have discussed with others in private too, is how the buyers preferences seem to change without any indication of the trends. I disagree with the system currently available in the game, where each target market gets a specific score which tells you how well a car does. However, knowing which trends are being more valued by the market is something car companies know and have information on.
On the topic of calculations, of course the challenge has numbers spit out of a spreadsheet, and it is possible to automate such a process, as me and others have done before. I was offering this method which would take only the time required to transcribe the stats so vic could make better use of his own time.
Just, to finish off, I love how I was called rude despite being extremely polite. Yet people cheer and like a post with a snarky remark and suggesting I’m not welcome. But whatever.
Carry on.
The late 1970s were a trying time for all US automakers, Fenton Holdings included. When the Winthrop first came out in 1979, it got caught flat footed on the economy front with a V6 engine. Though still quite economical, the next generation of imports were better. Initial sales were lower than expected.
The bulk of the effort that went into the car after 1979 was to do one thing - make it sip gas. Most of the remaining effort went into quality engineering thanks to the horrible experiences that were the 2nd gen FHL S-bodies. The result by 1988 was a car that got 28 US mpg and that they confidently offered a warranty of 5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever came first.
1988 being the last year for the 1st generation Winthrop, it was a somewhat dated design but was not going down without a fight against newer cars on the market. And it had one thing that patriotic buyers would spring for - it was American.
To the neutral observer you were not friendly. You strongly demanded a complete redo for a silly mistake in a competion that you couldn’t win and where you don’t care you win. It’s good you flagged it and Vic should take measures to prevent it. Your other points on trends and scoring might be valid - although for me buyer preference in each era seems fairly obvious and Vic seems to following historical trends and realism. The score you get is - correct me if I’m wrong - an indication of how you score relative to competitors, and not an absolute score standing separate. And you basically threw a fit when you didn’t get what you wanted. And then you try to get the moral high ground.
Has anyone actually read and properly understood Leo and Vic’s original disagreement? Because this just seems to be descending into a petty debacle of who agrees with who.
I think Ive addressed this issue well enough already. Its not about the score, its about where the car was placed. Some people don’t care for the score but rather their lore, and to see their car being placed in the wrong category is frustrating and annoying. Think of it this way, if it was your car that you spent maybe an hour of your own time making the lore for, writing it up on your thread, designing your car and placing it into a challenge only for it to be thrown in the wrong category, it doesn’t matter what score you got, its in the wrong place. If your PMI Sabres were placed along side Bogliqs in the entry spec levels you wouldnt be too happy would you?
And also if were talking about an outsiders view on who is more rude.
ngl these seem a lot more rude than anything Leos said
I wanted to remain silent up until now but if you excuse me, I’m going to give my 2 cents. This is not a “with or against the host” situation, there’s a wide spectrum of opinion in this kind of issues; attempting to take down any opinions that don’t side with yours is way more rude than any criticism that has taken place here.
