The first iteration of any CGCB would represent a car in as-new condition; later iterations would simulate damage, poor maintenance, or simple wear and tear over time.
1 Like
I hope nails can’t get concussions, because you hit it right on the head!
Otherwise you might have a nasty lawsuit on your hands...
Though, there are plenty of ideas for themes of each round. Maybe the owner makes some choice modifications, or it sits rotting for 20 years, or something. Lots of ideas!
I had some thoughts about the specific format of things I’d like to seek a consensus on.
Basically:
- Past this first design-to-market round, each subsequent “owner” round is styled kind of like QFC or something.
Participants present their altered car according to the wants of the next-in-line buyer and we see which hypothetical build becomes the real one! And then what happens next becomes the next round… which could vary a lot. Maybe a whole new car, maybe a similar replacement after the previous round’s pick was wrecked or scrapped, or maybe a next-potential-owner… lots of possibilities!
Now, this leaves a lot of options, which could just come down to how the challenge is hosted over time. Tradition is overrated, so I’d say it should be at the discretion of the host, in line with the given theme.
- Is the previous winning car file shared for participants to modify for the next round? Or do they use their previous round and try to work it into what the next buyer wants and take the lead?
- Do participants swap cars around? Could be a randomizer, could be agreements between them, could be a bracket-esque elimination or something. Heck, maybe the worst of the batch condition-wise compared to the previous round wind up scrapped or crushed — or that could replace “motor hell” for bins and the worst eliminations, lol
There are some things I’d like to see continued:
- Multiple awards! Sure, a Best in show is mandatory. But what about Best style, Best engineering, Best weathering… there’s many awards that could be given!
- At least 3 rounds, but probably no more than 5 or 6. I mean, how many cars go through 6+ owners anyway…? Especially after the abuse we’re gonna dunk on 'em.
- Not every round has to beat the life out of the ride. Maybe the 3rd or 4th owner wants to restore a rotted rusty beater of a '50s cruiser, or restore a horribly “riced-out” import to a more stock-alike condition… or they just want to cram a big engine in what they bought last round, and it turns into a crate-engine competition for a round!
I seriously think flexibility, rule-of-cool, and most importantly, having fun are gonna be what make this challenge great. I mean, sure, designing a car is fun… but so is beating it up! Think of it like painting a model train, and then weathering it to make it fit, or turning a die-cast into a detailed beater or junker or derby-racer. (ooh, there’s a round idea for a future host!) It’s building to break, lining up dominoes to knock them over, playing Jenga with financial implications and steadily worse insurance rates!
I’m kind of surprised I can’t find an older thread doing something like this, but I’m excited to see if I can make something that’ll wear and tear better than the future scrap-heaps spawned by it…
And please, anyone considering participating or wanting to give input, feel free! I’m new to this, and this might be ambitious… I’m even open to bringing in a more experienced co-host to aid in setup and judging behind the scenes.
2 Likes
Seems like its JOC, but following the car instead of the owner. I love lower stakes challenges/experiments like these, so I’m all for it! From a hosting perspective, it does seem a bit big in scope though, even given the extra laid-back nature of it, but once it gets the rules together I bet it’ll be pretty fun.
Some short thoughts:
-
The idea of having multiple rounds with the same car is interesting. Consider having the subsequent rounds still hosted by the same person though, rather than trying to switch hosts each time; switching hosts might be more work than its worth. Also, I wouldn’t recommend trying to grow into a serial challenge from the outset; just design a good one-off for now. If it happens to catch on later, even better.
-
So after each round, sticking with one car and having everyone modify it each round would be the simplest option to run, but maybe not the most interesting (pretty similar to ARM). My favorite idea wold be swapping cars between participants, but that feels like it could be the biggest headache to run since not everyone will likely participate in every round.
-
Round 1’s luxury premise is good overall. I like the idea of broad requirements, but it should have some rules just to give builders some sense of direction. What price (range) are we building for? What techpool should we use? Also, it’d be good to provide an inspiration section, with some real-life cars to serve as demographic and aesthetic inspirations.
-
Once its finalized, Some examples of what changes we’ll need to make during GCGB1 would be appreciated. Especially if you go with the random spinner (which I like personally), it’d be nice to know in advance what’s gonna be going into it.
1 Like
Oh, yeah, rounds under the same overall iteration are all the same host. Otherwise there’d be way too many changing-hands-ing. Should’ve clarified that.
As for the “leading” car, I think publishing the file of the round-winner is a must, but narrowing it to exclusively that isn’t. Alternative options (be it newly designed and “weathered” models fitting the original premise to target the current round’s demographic, or a continuation of a previous entry that didn’t get sent to a pick-n-pull) should definitely be allowed. Will also clarify that.
I’m gonna tighten the specifics of things like minimums, maximums, etc once I get a few mules out and propose some numbers. Those are gonna be out later today, as are some inspirations. I did throw a few names out there, but I prefer including both images and names proper, so I’ll get on that.
(That would also probably be appropriate for the "worn-down" rounds... images from real craigslist, FB marketplace, even Copart or something...!)
I might even include a polished-up version of my test-mules as “market competition” so there’s a baseline of potential targets, i.e. big brick luxo-SUV, soft-luxe Town Car-ish thing, something trying to out-sport-luxury an M3… I don’t know if anyone’s done that before. Kind of like a weirder version of that Cool Wall does, I think?
Either way, expect more soon!
Especially as far as possibilities go for the fates of the good cars… (though keeping the final choices a mystery will DEFINITELY make it more fun when the wheel is spun.) Some “demos” based on those mules might also show up, though. I have a feeling this is gonna be pretty fun to actually try…
As something of a bad car enthusiast myself, a couple of suggestions:
First of all, using setting font size to 1.1vw or 2vw makes this thread all but unreadable on mobile, at least for me. I’d request a change there.
Second of all, in both rounds of BDC, I actively scored realism, in a “Would a real car company make this?” sort of way. It’s easy to submit a five fixture wonder with everything at whatever the minimum quality is; it’s hard to make a Pontiac Aztek, a brainfart that could have realistically come from Detroit. I’m a fan of that, feel free to steal.
3 Likes
Oh, I had no idea VW measurements got super butchered on mobile. Will adapt accordingly with next revision!
As for the realism, very much the goal for round 1. That’s gonna practically be like QFC or something — this is new car selling! Or, at least, “selling” to the theoretical shareholders/focus groups/dealerships. The actual buyer of “the” car will be revealed afterwards… and probably decided via spinny wheel.
I don’t want to strictly hate on “meme-y” entries, or simpler ones, but I do want to maintain road legality as a bare minimum no matter what the premise is. I’ll be adding further req.s per this theme later, but I want that to be a running trend; round 1 makes a truly viable car to sell, so every round after can just absolutely ruin it. It’s more fun to rip apart when there’s more things to tweak, after all.
Okay, VW thing fixed. Big post is now all nice and reliable PX measurements, as far as I can tell. I’ll have to remember that VW is not the simple solution it seems at first glance… (emissions joke goes here, too.)
As far as notes go, here’s the list so far:
-
Challenge host decides theme for Round 1
-
This round is focused on a realistic design to fit a possible demographic, perhaps giving potential buyers as a “focus group” to keep in mind, as well as inspirations or competitors in the field
-
A buyer is chosen (either invented based on the focus group, or perhaps selected from it at random) and “evaluates” each submitted car. The round winner’s car is purchased.
Other cars are also ranked; for example, best style, best overall score (focus group as a whole, perhaps), and any that stand out in the field, for example, an exceptionally (or even excessively) high score in a given stat. -
For Round 2, the purchase-winner’s car is made available as a file. Participants may choose (or be given the choice) to make a worn-down version of the Round 1 winner, wear-down their own Round 1 submission, or submit an entirely new (well, probably used) car for Round 2.
Cars are evaluated on realism of wear/use/mods, depreciation to original form, and factors based on… -
A new “focus group” is made for Round 2, albeit more of a loose grouping of potential buyers for a car that would’ve come out in the era of Round 1, only as a used car instead of a new one. This is where the good cars are likely to start going bad.
For example, a sporty hatch might have a fine first owner who takes it for dealer maintenance regularly and always does scheduled maintenance… but the second owner might chop the second muffler off, turn the suspension into a joke, and beat the transmission into the dirt. -
The subsequent rounds follow something similar to Round 2, with “focus groups” made to reflect the previous round-winner’s potential buyers… if any are left except the scrapyard, at least.
Other things…
- The decision to make another round may be left to challenge host discretion, or maybe contestant votes…? Not sure yet.
- While focus groups might be made with specific possibilities in mind, the resultant buyer should be chosen at random… unless a very specific theme is in mind. Then, perhaps, the focus group exists only so as to prevent submissions from too narrowly fitting a given niche. In the real world, no car fits perfectly!
- Not sure if subsequent entries of the same car should require the same model and family and only be changed in trim and variant, or if each should get its own model, family, etc.
This is mainly because if a car’s frame is rotting, it probably won’t have the same level of
quality" in the bodywork that it did to start… but it also will probably still have, for example, partial aluminum panels. Unless something really crazy happens… (carbon fiber panel replacement restomods ARE a thing, I think? People are crazy.)
There was something else, too, but I’m forgetting it. I’ll probably think of it later.
EDIT: I remembered. If there’s something special someone wants to do, even if it kind of busts the rules a bit, they should be able to negotiate with the host. This stuff can be a little more fluid — if car with a basic steel frame gets terrible frame rot, you might need less than the minimum quality restriction will allow to REALLY simulate it. (Granted, those slider limits mainly apply to the Round 1 entries, unless specified otherwise. Might limit how far a slider can go per round, too, or cost changes, or something. Not sure yet. There’s only so much wear one can realistically put on a car all at once…)
Posting here before updating big one to see what the public thinks.
3 Likes
P.S. sorry for the delays on this, lotta stuff with visiting family over my break and all. Will get faster next week.
Hey there ! I really like what I see here : )
It does look like a lot of work, but also a lot of fun ! I found some points to clarify, and had some ideas.
As a user, I’d feel a bit lost having too many options for Round 2, while having to deal with all the randomized stuff. I had ideas when reading :
-
Instead of choosing only one car for Round 1, make it so it passes some test (your/host judging). If a car passes the test, it becomes available for the market (it gets a random owner) and therefore participants can choose one of them for Round 2. Projects that don’t pass the test are scrapped and never enter production (it doesn’t get an owner and is not available for Round 2).
This way participants are more likely to make “believable” cars in Round 1, and will still have a choice for Round 2 (between less cars, so some will use the same, although surely a different way). So no random “awarding” of a car for Round 2, I think it’s important that the user gets to choose at first when beginning a round. Or everyone gets the same car, but it would be a shame not to make the most of several good entries imo. -
The wear could be dependant on design choices (steel and cast iron will rust, electronics will fail, high stress or hardcore engines will have been worn much faster than dull ones, etc…).
-
Maybe Luxury is already a bit high-end for the first customer ? I don’t know I’m neither rich nor American^^ And maybe 2008 feels a bit too “new”, although I understand that you have some visuals in mind, and again, what do I know as a poor french yokel
Anyway thanks for offering this challenge, looking forward to see what it becomes !
4 Likes
You raise some good points here — I do want to make clear that Round 1 entries will all either “make the cut” and be built and sold, or miss the margin and get shelved in the concept phase.
As far as the transition to Round 2 with a random owner, I was wanting to keep things simple by narrowing it down to one buyer for the “winning” car, like a mini-QFC or something.
Wear would be dependent on such things — I’ll have to do some testing with a few mules to decide exactly what avenues I want to be open for that, but the main idea is things like reducing quality sliders, replacing safety with older or simpler versions if the frame is rusting or crashes have weakened it, putting on cheaper tires (medium becomes long life), etc.
Of course, this isn’t universal, as maybe some owners are more careful, or some will make modifications instead of downgrades… there’s many possibilities, in the end. Not every GCGB has to end with a junked jalopy! (This one might, though.)
I chose a 2008 luxury car because I thought “what’s better for depreciation than the best becoming the worst?” Again, though, the real fate of the winning car will all be a result of the stream of buyers whom exchange it. Maybe it’ll be a perfectly respectable used car until age alone claims it… or it’ll get totally trashed buy an owner who barely maintains it. Or the third owner will do some “Pimp My Ride” tier modifications to it…
That brings up a new idea. Next post coming shortly.
2 Likes
Got it for wear and luxury 
Although I will stand on my position for the transition between R1 and R2, probably because I don’t understand one thing - and I just might look like a fool, although I saw no one pick up on it - what actually is QFC ?
“Quick Fire Challenge,” A separate long-running challenge series focused on short rounds, simplicity, and a low barrier to entry
2 Likes
The reason I compare it to QFC is the format — namely having a theme, goals to meet, and a buyer with specific wants.
I think there might be better comparisons, and I know other challenges do this, but QFC is the main one that comes to mind. I want the whole thing to be easy and to avoid massive min-maxing, because while that can be fun in its own way, going too niche starts to dampen the fun, IMO.
That’s also the idea behind the focus groups — give “possible buyers,” so an entry can either target a handful, or appeal to all of them in some ways. It leaves more room for variety.
Maybe the cars are ranked per member of the focus group, and each “winner” that’s bought becomes available to get worn-down for Round 2? Or would focusing on one be best? I’m not quite sure, because while I want everyone to get their time in the spotlight, I don’t want to over-complicate things. Both for my own sake, and for any future hosts, should this become the kind of challenge that gets passed down like that.
3 Likes
This seems a very interesting idea to build for. I’ll definitely be keeping an eye out for when this begins!
1 Like
Current to-do list:
-
Work out some finalized “please meet these” numbers for the main priorities, as well as a budget
I kind of have something for this, including desired scores for drivability and comfort, as well as a desired price range between $45k-$60k, with $50k being the preference (wiggle room for more budget-luxe or extra-luxe as one sees fit, because a single hard cap is lame!) -
Get those inspiration car pics in already
(I keep forgetting this somehow!) -
Probably some other clarifications I’m forgetting
I might just put all the technical-ish stuff in a Google Doc for each host to share with the next as far as hosting rules/intentions go, should this go well enough to warrant future iterations. I hope it does…!
If all goes well, I want to have a polished product ready to open within a week at the latest. I think 2-3 weeks is a decent running time, but I might extend it, because I forgot when my finals week is (oops) and if it coincides with that… well, to put it bluntly, there would be no judging happening until I was done with that, and leaving a gap between submissions closing and the judgement period is a very lame-sounding thing for me to do.
(If it does wind up extended, submissions will re-open and resubmissions will be allowed. Honestly resubmissions will probably be allowed for the entire duration, because there is nothing more painful than finding a single mistake that changes everything when fixed.)
And so, I tentatively suggest the challenge opening APRIL 14TH!
It might even move ahead of that if I can make things happen quick enough, so stay tuned...
I'll likely duplicate the challenge listing in a new post further down to make it easier to reference, maybe. Or I'll just link back to it. I dunno yet. We'll find out when we get there!
I'll likely duplicate the challenge listing in a new post further down to make it easier to reference, maybe. Or I'll just link back to it. I dunno yet. We'll find out when we get there!
3 Likes
Things might just work out, for once. Numbers and inspiration coming tomorrow! The planned opening date might happen! Exciting stuff. Stay tuned!
It may be slightly delayed again! Augh! Life is evil, folks.
Hopefully today or tomorrow (4/15-4/16) will let me finish up the last of things and kick things off with a bang. I’m thinking a 3 or 4 week period for submissions. Will update some things with the challenge soon.
1 Like
Okay, it might be more than a few days. I regret having to postpone things again because now 90% of this thread is me postponing things. But that’s life!
I really don’t know when things will be clear yet, so I’m not giving a definite date. It won’t be longer than a week, I hope.
1 Like
Sorry for the radio silence! I’m in the engineering program at my university (it’s pain) so things got a bit rough, but I’m pretty much home free now.
With that out of the way, I am proud to announce: The post will be updated soon, and we go live TODAY!
That’s means,
April 28th start
And since I think this is plenty of time,
May 19th fin
Any thoughts are appreciated. Going once, twice…