JOC6E: Coming Home (Open for Submissions)

JOC6E

The Story

British Columbia, Canada 1998

Earl walks into the house from mowing the yard and sees Wendy sitting in the kitchen, staring into space.“What’s wrong, hon?” He asks. She startles, as if just noticing her husband.
“I just got off the phone with my mother. My father is in the hospital…he had a heart attack last night.”
Earl gets down on on one knee and takes Wendy’s hand into his. “My god, is he alright?”
“Yes, it sounds like he is stable. But…Earl, they’re not getting any younger. I don’t know if ma can take care of him herself.I…I’ve been thinking.”
“What?”
“Perhaps that it’s time for us to move back home?”
Earl is taken back and takes a moment before answering. “Moving back to the states? Back to Carolina? I dunno hon, what of all that we’ve made for ourselves here? The reasons that we left in the first place?”
“Earl, it’s been 30 years It’s not like it was when we were younger, the world’s grown to be a better place. And I imagine most people have long since forgotten why we left back then. And what tensions we did have with folks have mostly been mended with our yearly visits with the RV. Besides, love, I miss home. Don’t you?”

Earl gets up and walks over to the sink, staring out the window. He watches the birds flitting through the trees in silence for a moment before sighing. “Yeah, I do miss it sometimes. As much as I love it here, there is always a little bit of me that always there. And as you said, our parents ain’t getting any younger. It did seem like my own ma was starting to slow down as well. Taking care of the homestead by herself does seem to be taking a toll on her. ”
Wendy walks up to Earl, placing her arm around his waist and leans her head on his shoulder. “Perhaps it’s time for us to start a new chapter? The kids are adults now, they get by fine. Perhaps it is time for us to get back to our roots?”
Earl bends and kisses the top of Wendy’s head. “Yeah, perhaps it is.”

Six months later, South Carolina, USA

Wendy and Earl’s old Waddser pulls up in front of an old farmhouse. An elderly woman is waiting for them on the porch. She comes down the steps as Wendy exits the RV and embraces her in a hug. “My, my, our baby girl has come home,” she weeps.
“Yes, mama, that we have. How’s pa doing?”
“Oh, the stubborn old fool is as ornery as an ox. Keeps trying to do things around the place even though doc says to take it easy,” she laughs and embraces Earl as he gets out, “And how is my favorite son-in-law?”
“Oh, can’t complain. It’s always good to see you.”
“How’s you’re ma? Did you stop in to say hi?”
"Oh, she’s a firecracker like always, " Earl laughs, “And yeah, we swung by her place for breakfast this morning. She told us to send your her love.”
“Aww, what a darling. I’ve always liked her. Be sure to send her my regards the next time you see her.”

Wendy’s mother squints at the old Waddser RV. “So, were you planning on staying in that old thing?”
“Oh, no mama, we wound up selling our house is BC and found us a farmstead the next town over. But we also figured it best to sell our SUV rather than haul that down here with us as well.”
“So ya’ll are just driving around in a motor-home?”
Earl replies a little defensively, “Just for the time being. We just figured a new start could do with a new car as well. I never did really like how rough our SUV rode. Would rather have something more car like. Remember that Ariete we used to have years ago? That thing served us pretty well until our son crashed it when he got his license. Was thinking something like that, but something that sits up higher like the SUV. Something a bit more environmentally friendly as well. But preferably one that still has some off road capabilities. We’ve been seeing adverts for these things they be calling “crossovers”. Was thinking of looking into one of those.”

In summary, Earl and Wendy are looking for one of the early wave of crossovers from the late 90’s.

Ruleset:
  • Engine variant and Trim year set to 1998 (Engine and body family may be older)
  • SUV or estate/wagon body type
  • +5 tech pool all around (Default tech pool)
  • No negative quality
  • At least two rows of seats with full seat per row
  • No legacy bodies (labeled “DLC” in game), mod bodies allowed
  • Ellisbury stable version only
  • Must meet WES 8 emission standards
  • Regular unleaded fuel (86 AKI/91 RON)
  • No race parts (semi slicks fall under this category)

We the hosts reserve the right to penalize wildly unrealistic engineering choices or apparent attempts to “min-max” or exploit the rules. So please try to keep the engineering reasonably down to earth.

Recommendations but not hard rules

  • Recommended wheelbase: About 2.4-2.7 meters or 95-105 inches
  • Recommended price range: About $16,000-$22,000 AMU
Submissions:
  • Naming scheme “JOC6E - YourForumName” for both engine and body family, trim and variant is free
  • please send a car file via DM to both oldmanbuick and Maverick74 and post an ad in this thread
  • submissions open April 12th, rule discussion until then
  • submissions end May 2nd, anywhere in the world
Priorities:
Four Star
  • Design - A car’s looks are considered a must for Earl and Wendy.
    Since this is a US-market vehicle, keep in mind US-market rules including reflectors (amber by front, red by rear) and at least a rear US-dimensioned license plate. Bonus points awarded for interiors.
  • Fuel Economy - Wendy and Earl become environmentally conscious during their time in Canada
  • Drivability - Wendy has never liked land yachts (see JOC6B), and while Earl is confident in his driving skills (see JOC6A), he’s gotten a bit tired of trekking halfway across the continent driving an RV (see JOC6E)
Three Star
  • Comfort - Earl and Wendy are both well into middle age now and have enough aches and pains of their own that they don’t want their car to add to them–which is doubly true for their parents who might ride with them on occasion.
  • Reliability/Environmental Resistance - Earl and Wendy have always considered reliability in a car important and have held onto their vehicles for a long time, so it needs to hold up under daily use.
  • Price - While Wendy and Earl have cash on hand at the moment, they’d prefer to invest their money in their farm and hold onto savings so a bad harvest or two won’t ruin them.
Two Star
  • Safety - They want a reasonably safe car, but it doesn’t need to have top-of-class safety for them to consider it.
  • Performance - Earl doesn’t have the need for speed he once did, but he doesn’t want a total dog.
  • Offroad - Wendy and Earl have spent a lot of their lives in places with bad roads and/or bad weather, so they appreciate having that capability even though there are many more paved roads in the area than there used to be.
One Star
  • Practicality - Wendy and Earl need enough space to carry cargo when running errands and maybe to give their parents a ride to the doctor from time-to-time.
  • Utility - While a bigger truck came with the farm, it would be nice if they didn’t have to use the big truck every time they need to pick up some supplies for the farm.
  • Sportiness - Sure, Earl has mellowed with time…but he wouldn’t mind something that offers a little bit of driving fun.
  • Prestige - They’ve gotten used to dancing to the beat of their own drum, so they don’t need to keep up with the Joneses…but it also would be nice to not be the but of jokes around town.
Previous Rounds

JOC6A
JOC6B
JOC6C
JOC6D

Design Inspirations







8 Likes

Typo?

Mild suggestions:

  • Allow wagons
  • Open up techpool
  • Allow negative quality

Medium:

  • ABCDE diesels
  • Free weight redistribution
  • Remove transmission and torque comfort penalties
  • Deprioritize Safety, because it’s kinda broken

Strong:

  • Disregard Utility and Practicality, which are broken

Thank you for pointing out the typo.

As far as the other things, oldmanbuick and I did talk about allowing wagons, but agreed it best not to have them and leave it as just SUV body types. Techpool and the comfort penalties add complexity to the judging that neither of us want to deal with. Diesel engines really weren’t a thing in the US at this time, so I don’t see much benefit to adding them. And safety, utility, and practicality are all already low priorities compared to the rest. I think you can judge how much you want to invest in those stats.

3 Likes

Since this was an era that was a bit of wild west for the crossovers still, how do you view cars of the era like the Nissan Terrano II and the Suzuki Vitara/Chevy Tracker, that were kind of crossover-ish and viewed as such on the market, but still weren’t really there yet with proper 4x4 and BOF construction?

(Damn, didn’t read properly I see now, sorry)

3 Likes

To rule out no BOF outright in 1998 seems off IMO especially since in the US the Ford Explorer was still pretty popular, one of the top selling vehicles at that time…I may be wrong but yea.

And yes, according to C&D…the Subaru Forester won the comparo…I remember being very upset by that. The Explorer wasnt even in that comparison i beleive.

But at least give them a chance maybe?..not saying at this point that I would make one…but to those out there that are more gung ho.

I can maybe see that you want to rule the actual offroaders out of this. But I guess banning all terrain/offroad tires, manual lockers and maybe solid front axles could be more effective. The Kia Sportage in the inspirations is a BOF too (weirdly enough it’s on a modified Mazda Bongo van chassis IIRC :roll_eyes:) and could maybe be seen as a Terrano II / Vitara competitor.

Just some reflections though, it’s not that I think the world stands falling with what you decides to allow or not here.

You may have a point. Our client doesn’t want his next vehicle to lean too heavily towards off-road use.

I think the reason there’s demand for allowing wagons (hell, maybe vs is the amount of extra shapes that open up as a result. A lot of SUV bodies are lame (or BOF-coded)

3 Likes

OK, so talking it over, we will allow wagon bodies to be allowed. And ladder chassis will be allowed as well.

Anybody have other comments or concerns about the ruleset? We’re only a couple days out from opening submissions.

" keep in mind US-market rules including reflectors (amber by front, red by rear) "

I just want to be sure : you’re talking about indicators right ? Or just those small reflectors you sometimes find on rear bumpers (see images below) ?

Like, does this work ? (1. Amber rear indicators)

Or does it have to to be like this ? (2. Red rear indicators)

1 Like

Those are turn signals and both red and amber turn signals are legal in the US. We’re talking about reflectors here.

1 Like

Okay so 1. works, thanks !
For the front, does it have to be outside turn signals or can it be built-in if those are already a separate amber fixture ?

To clarify, there must be a red reflector/marker lamp on the side near the rear of the vehicle (this is separate from the reflectors on the rear) and an amber one on the side near the front of the vehicle. They may be either separate from the headlight and taillight housings or included in a light housing that wraps around the side.

It’s not a huge deal or something that will be a binnable offense, just a little detail that can boost realism/design scoring.

2 Likes

Yeah I’m asking because I wanna learn :stuck_out_tongue:
Thanks for the clarification !

2 Likes

I know it’s pushing the rules a bit more open but any love for mpv bodies? I’m thinking Renault scenic RX4 mainly. But you also have stuff like the Mitsubishi Delica 4x4, Renault scenic quadra and vw Sharan synchro and I’m sure some other Japanese stuff I’m not familiar with.

2 Likes

Also, there was the proposition of making the weight distribution free (by not counting the slider added costs I guess).

It would make sense for things like this :


How are we on that ? (and same question for weight optimisation ?)

I personally don’t think it’s necessary. Whether a spare tire is under the rear of the SUV or attached to the back probably isn’t going to affect the weight distribution more than one or two percent. Plus, I could see people taking full advantage of it instead of engineering a more balanced vehicle to begin with

Just my thoughts

2 Likes

The way I see it, weight distribution is a pretty useless slider for what it is…

Automation has an artificial and nonsensical weight distribution penalty for wagons and SUV. Engineering a more realistically balanced vehicle requires undoing or at least mitigating these penalties.