OH I HAVE A WEIRD CAR FOR THIS 
Lemme just say that another trim of it was intended to be entered into CSR 163 (damn, it’s just the second round since then? what in the sleepy snail…), but I didn’t finish it in time 
3 Likes
I think you should loosen the age restrictions on the bodies a bit. The Fiesta body for example would be spot on for building an 80s hot hatch but unlocks in 1970.
4 Likes
I’m thinking of building my entry on a hatchback variant of the '89 Ice Cream (most likely the 2.4m wheelbase version), considering that it’s barely old enough to qualify.
Also, the minimum rear seating requirement of +2 (reduced size) seats is due to the fact that some body sets can’t accommodate any full-sized rear seats in their (3-door) hatchback variants.
To echo this the “mobula” body can quite easily be used well into the 80’s too. Maybe a special exception for these two body styles would work if not allowing earlier years.
I think we should just completely bin body year restrictions at this point, and just penalize unrealistic designs.
5 Likes
Oh damn, yeah, I’ve just realised that my car is built on the Mobula
Oh yeah I’m up for this one 
I just have a question coming when I read you guys about body years, about the difference model/trim, and especially regarding to campaign-extracted vehicles.
In my case, I have the perfect car for the challenge. The body is from 1975. But the project itself was launched in 1976, for a release though in the end of 1981. And facelifts after that.
The question being, is the Model considered a 1981 model (though automation showing 1976) ? Or perhaps the other way of asking would be Can it be considered this way ? (please ?^^) Or maybe just the automation year (in sandbox) is considered the release year anyway ?
And kind of the same question for this Mk3 facelift begun in the really end of 1984 for a release in 1989, cause that one would be my entry.
I don’t know maybe I’m just crazy for wanting that level of lore in my entries… I know I’m not the only one at least^^
Regarding aero fixtures, I’m suggesting a maximum of 1 wing/spoiler on the rear, and up to 2 lips, with a maximum of 1 each on the front and rear, to avoid aero cheese. In any case, they should be attached to the car and not be hidden.
2 Likes
Most of these challenges act like the engineering year is release year. Unless we can move the model year down slightly - the Delta HF and the Mk I Golf GTI 1.8 are both based on 70s cars and were released in the 80s - your best option is to export from campaign to sandbox and push the model year forwards a bit.
3 Likes
That’s what I had in mind actually, thanks for confirming that !
i do prefer making exceptions upon request over changing it, just send me a DM and i can clear the specific body.
Same goes for @Hshan and @mart1n2005
Well, I am building on a body that will pass the unlock year, so for me personally it is not a problem. I was thinking more in general…
I would suggest that the in-game “sportiness” rating be factored in somehow, as it reflects some driving characteristics not captured in pure performance numbers.
2 Likes
I’d rather relying on the more in depth stats as mentioned on the priority list. It’s purely a preference thing for me as the judge, but if people want it to be added, sure.
I have to agree. It’s rather weird that we’re making sport cars and the sportiness stat isn’t considered at all. Otherwise I’ll just make sure the car goes fast and has relatively okay cornering G’s, whilst absolutely ignoring the stat itself. That’ll allow me to have a more comfort oriented suspension tune. Not including the sportiness stat in judging will result in this type of cheese.
2 Likes
alright fair enough, adding sportiness to the priorities
Careful with entries exported from the campaign, the cost may be waaay off, as well as techpool of course. Better to even triple check those in such case…
yep I’m above 20k with something like $9M of techpool… I think I’ll keep it this way, adjusting just slightly for it to pass the rules
Does this mean that the Engine Family and the Car Model are between 1980 and 1989? What about the Engine Variant and the Car Trim? Even though the goal of the challenge is to get a range of 80s hatchbacks, I would suggest picking a specific year for Trim/Variant requirements because otherwise probably one of two things are going to happen: (1) everyone is going to build a late 80’s car to take advance of technology improvements anyway or (2) people are going to build a wide range of cars, but the ones with an earlier year are going to be at a disadvantage because of technology disparities.
Does this mean 95 AKI or 95 RON?
This seems more restrictive than most tire rules I’ve seen. I am assuming there is some thought that has been put into this, but I’m struggling to understand why both tire type and tire quality would be so firmly restricted.
The only in-game country to require WES 7 emissions at any time in the 80s is Fruinia in 1986. I would suggest rolling this back to WES 6, especially if you are accepting early 80s cars.
I agree with trying to ensure the designs are period appropriate, but I’m not sure this rule is either necessary or sufficient to ensure the cars look period appropriate. I have seen some good designers take an “outdated” body and make it look just right for the time period, and I have seen other designers take a period-appropriate body and throw on design elements from the future. I would suggest instead adding a “Realism” scoring factor for period-appropriateness of the designs or making period-appropriate design a factor in the “Looks” score.
Thanks for considering my suggestions, even though I know there are a lot of them. I know from some of my hosting experiences that having a thoroughly thought out and clearly defined rule set can make a huge difference for both entrants and host when it comes time for judging.
7 Likes
Spot on.
It’s most likely the latter.