Vibeke Henrichsen is 24 years old, she has yet not owned a car on her own, but since life recently changed, not in any tragic or disastrous ways, but still, she’s now single and needs her own transportation. Now, that’s what it’s all about really, transportation when it’s needed. Her ex boyfriend’s BMW 1502, while still being compact, is way more car than she feels that she needs for the occasions when she needs personal, motorized transport on the crowded city streets. Still, she prefers to buy something new, knowing that there are warranties and no unpleasant surprises waiting under a suspiciously well-waxed paintwork.
Don’t think that you can sell her a tent on wheels, though, she has some standards, and also wants something that’s just not an appliance, but that feels like if it has personality. All that on a restricted budget, so let’s see what you’re able to offer her.
PRIORITIES
DRIVEABILITY
Her major priority is that it should be easy to zip around with on crowded and cramped city streets.
AESTHETICS
She's looking for something chic and cute. Something that has personality. It is up to you to interpret what that could be, since there are many ways to get there. Still, it should look serious, so some meme car that looks like Barbapapa or something won't get you far.
RELIABILITY
The main reason to buy new here. If it is no more reliable than a 15 year old neglected shitbox, why pay the price premium then?
SERVICE COSTS
A city runabout should not cost like a V12 exotic to keep running.
ENGINEERING REALISM
I won’t be nitpicking, but I would suggest you to look a fair bit at how real cars were engineered. I don’t say that the exact solution must have existed on an IRL car in the era but a 2 litre V10, sequential gearbox and crossplies will show that you made no research at all….. In extreme cases, engineering can lead to an instabin despite not breaking any “hard” rules. And yes, I copied this text from KSAC1 since it still applies.
FUEL ECONOMY
Cars this size will be economical by nature, and she won't cover all that many miles, but it would really be disappointing if a car like this was guzzling gas like a yank tank.
COMFORT
True, it is a city car and won't be covering longer distances for the most part. Still, if you're stuck in barely moving traffic, you would not like to sit on a plastic lawn chair and listen to an engine vibrating like a paint shaker.
PRACTICALITY
Kind of a broken stat but still having it as a priority would probably sort out the worst decisions.
PURCHASE PRICE
There's already a budget that's not all that generous. But as usual, why pay more if you won't get more....
SAFETY
Cars this size really didn't offer much crash protection back then no matter what it was, and it will mostly be driven at moderate speeds anyway. Yet, offering a bit more is never a drawback.
SPORTINESS
Not all that important, but it won't hurt if the car is fun to drive and not just to look at.
PERFORMANCE
Getting away from the traffic lights before they turn red again may spare some honkings I guess, still nothing that matters all that much.
INTERIOR DESIGN
An interior is not needed, but doing some effort will be better than having none and a really good one might give you a small bonus.
RULES
Stable version of the game
Trim and variant year 1984, Model and family might be older.
Maximum wheelbase 2.3 metres (as rounded by game).
No legacy bodies, I don’t have them anymore.
Maximum engine displacement 1249 cc.
No billet, titanium or race parts in the engine.
The engine should be able to pass at least WES 4. If you choose to include a cat or exhaust reactor, or will manage to do it without any extra emissions equipment, is up to you.
Regular unleaded fuel.
At least one muffler required.
Gearbox should be manual or a non-advanced auto. Advanced auto or CVTs as we know them today really weren’t a thing in this class yet.
Radials with widths ending in “5” only. No race tires. Hard or medium compound. Minimum 60 profile. Staggered tires unrealistic on the cars we are looking for, and hence not allowed.
At least four seats. Even if full seats are preferred, the rear ones can be +2 or +3 to allow for some flexibility body wise.
ABS was not a thing in this class back then and won’t be allowed.
Safety package should not be older than from the 70s.
Max combined techpool total costs car+engine $25M. No negative techpool.
Max price $8750
ATS allowed in moderation for things that can’t be done via engineering.
No hard limits on quality, but keep it sane, not +15 interior paired with -15 safety for example, that’s something that will fall under the “engineering realism” clausule.
SUBMISSIONS
SUBMISSIONS START
26th of june, 6 PM CEST. Rules delib until then.
SUBMISSIONS END
17th of july, 6 PM CEST. I may give some slack for posting an ad in the thread, but I want the .car-file before that, and unless there are very good reasons why you need to send it in some other way, please use DM here on the discourse to send it.
NAMING
Car model/trim: KSAC2 - Username / The name of your car
Engine family/variant: KSAC2 - Username / The name of your engine.
Some viable bodies with only +2 seats in the back:
-1984 Muni_Hatch
-1983 90sSUVTiny
-1980 80s_E90_hatch
-1965 70sMiniCar
Most bodies under 2.2m wheelbase don’t have full rear rows so I suggest body type restrictions to anything except coupe, van or ute and allow +2 seats in the back.
You sure you only want the SUPER small city cars? Like, I see the BMW 1502 being mentioned as too much car, but that’s a 2500mm WB where this ruleset (assuming allowed rounding) allows no more than 2249, which is a full 2 sizes down. and literally too small to make something like the Citroen AX that came out 2 years later. A 2.3m limit (maybe without rounding if you prefer) could probably help people with body diversity.
Well, I was aiming slightly below the Polo/Fiesta segment TBH, but I have already had a discussion about opening up for a slight wheelbase increase to not limit things to too few bodies, since Automation is what it is after all. It’s less fun if everyone uses the same three bodies or so.
I don’t think so, but it might be worth keeping in mind cars like this at most were 2V SOHC for engineering realism (haven’t looked if there are any exceptions here at all, and no, she’s not looking for some homologation special hot hatch so I don’t count them).
Changes:
Fuel type was left from KSAC1 by accident, now changed to regular.
A little more slack wheelbase wise.
+2/+3 seats now allowed
Added the legacy body ban that I forgot
Well, looking at the inspirations, the Mini is actually a sedan, even though it is shaped more like a hatch the rear window and parcel shelf is fixed. But no, there’s no ban on sedan bodies.
VVT is selectable in 1984 if enough techpool points are assigned to the engine top end tab - but I wouldn’t allow its use (or at least install it on my entry) for realism’s sake, given that it would take a few more years to proliferate in lower-end segments.
Also, the universal use of regular (91 RON/87 AKI) unleaded here makes sense given that 95 RON/91 AKI premium unleaded would not replace it as the minimum standard in Denmark for a few more years yet.
And multi-point EFI was starting to become commonplace in 1984 - although it, too, would take a few more years to really trickle down to the bottom end of the marketplace. I wouldn’t mind it if its use were (dis)allowed here, though, but even if we could install it, its extra cost alone should be enough to dissuade anyone from actually using it.
To prevent anyone from cheesing this with unusually wide, large diameter (and hence high-profile) tires, why not also impose an explicit tire width limit as well?
Also, power steering had yet to become commonplace in this bargain-basement segment, so I may consider omitting it from my entry, if I choose to make one.
As for license plate sizes, an unscaled (i.e., all measurements at 1.00x default size) Euro-spec plate should be the best option.
“One of the safest in it’s price range” - Brake Line Magazine
“It’s Fine”- AutoFury Magazine
“I’d buy a Golf instead…” - AUTO Germany Magazine
“It unusually feels French…” - Auto Tester
“This “Thing”, is one of the cars of all time for sure” - Frankfurt Auto magazine
There are some complaints about an overly restrictive budget, and I can see it TBH. Before closing the rules delib, I ask you all the question - do you want a slight raise?
The restrictive budget definitely made the challenge bit more difficult, but I figured that’s the way it is. I’m fine with the low budget, but I see no harm in raising either the budget, or the increasing the techpool limit by a couple of millions.
This is when you want a classic car with all its coolness and pure driving experience, but the reliability of a modern car.
The 360 was introduced as the brands first car in 1963 and was a vital part of Japans mass motorization. Despite newer models being released, it is still demanded as the peak of basic transportation.
More lenient kei car rules brought a 550ccm engine, a new interior and a modernized exterior in 1976, but what is new for 1984? Fuel injection and a slightly better suspension as well as small safety improvements.
The car fits four adults, althought we do not recommed the rear seats for long trips for adults. Still, they do fit. The RR drivetrain ensures some driving fun, while suspension upgrades have kept the car safe to operate even in difficult situations. Thanks to the light weight, 28 horsepower make it not a pain on the road, being fast enough to overtake trucks and not fail in uphill situations. Speaking of failure: What is not there can not break, and Yamaguchis experience at building them for 21 years adds up to a very satisfying reliability.
Cygneoie was needing something a bit smaller than it’s home market Chèvre (and it’s rebadged export model), so it took said export model and shortened up the wheelbase. Then giving it a more up to date body as some major reworking of the 1100cc engine.
all good
