Lessons Learned

The official UE4 car design challenge was an awakening of sorts to me. There were things I did not know that could be done with this game; perhaps I just played the Kee version too much. I didn’t put much detail into my designs because, to tell the truth, I didn’t know how. I also learned that a good design is not just the least offensive one. I originally posted these “lessons learned” in my company lore thread, but I felt that distracted from the story I was trying to tell.



I see…was this really necessary? You could have just posted this in your lore thread with a disclaimer that its OOC.


Give me a minute, sheesh! Had to reshoot some photos.

Protip: there are people on at nearly all hours of the day, and we see a lot of threads that don’t go anywhere and die without ever actually leaving the OP. Which is a bit of a waste of space and clutters the feed. Your paragraph sort of abruptly ended and gave no indication that it was going to continue, hence the confused responses.

You can avoid the impending dogpile by adding PHOTOS SOON or something to the bottom of your post.


First was my 1940s American Luxury barge. I did not submit an entry because I did not feel comfortable with a car with 31 driveability. Also, I tend to use the hood and trunk lines as hard boundaries; this was a mistake. This is not really all that great, but I promise it’s a ton better than the original. I tried to capture the essence of a Packard Super 8, without the benefit of an inline 8 cylinder being available. It looks more or less like a Clipper instead.

My original 1950s Euro Family sedan was inspired by a Fiat and Volvo kind of crossbreed, that wound up sort of looking like a mini-Cooper. The judges said it looked very plain, and particularly the back looked empty. Here, I added some American flourish, and chrome. I don’t think you would have seen anything like this in Europe back then, but the design carries through, and is consistent.

I did not submit for the 1960s American Muscle category. Again, I was embarassed by a car that was barely driveable. After watching the video, I learned a whole lot of design cues that I did not know I could do. One thing I’m still a little confused about, is that there were entries with white striping (definitely white). The only options I was able to get were body color, bonnet color, black steel, grey steel, and chrome. Here, I chose black steel, but I feel white would be a better fit. Also, I still need to learn to use the camera a bit better. I wanted to angle up so I could show the open scoop. The wing doesn’t really fit here, but I couldn’t find an appropriate spoiler.

I did not submit a 1970s Roadster, because I always associated Roadster with convertible. The closest thing I could figure was the Carrera body, and I figured there’d be like a hundred of those. After watching the video, and finding out what they were looking for, I designed this El Camino concept, I lovingly dubbed El Cabong (if you don’t get it, you’re too young). With a lightweight aluminum V-6, this makes a perfect light sport vehicle. The G-body variant has some issues, and this is still a work in progress (although I’m not sure if I’ll actually continue working on it), particularly with the grill, and the melting bed.

For the 1980s, I returned to the G-body, because I’m a glutton for punishment, and well, this is what I was raised on. I took some artistic liberties with this, by putting an inline 6 in it; this car would likely have had a small block V8 in real life, but I wanted a more luxurious take. For the design, I was trying for Cadillac, but ended up more Chrysler.

I did not submit a 1990s Hot Hatch, because I only found 1 1990s Hatch body, and could not make it work. This body that reminds me of a 90s Passat, had a hatch variant that I did not know about. This style is typical 1990s with aluminum rims, a turbo charged 4 cylinder, and lower body grille. I also include a sun roof, but you can’t see it. Again, the wing is not working, but there is an issue when the car is morphed this way, that precludes a proper spoiler.

I don’t care what you say, this will always be an SUV to me. This guy is not particularly photogenic. Those lights are casting some sort of weird glare, and I swear to God, those letters were aligned when I left the design room. Somehow they got jumbled on the way to the photo.

Again, sorry about the glare. My submission to the 2010s Hypercar was too plain with not a whole lot going on. To be honest, I did not include any badging because I did not know we were allowed to. I also get a lot of crap when I show too much personality; well here it is, my personality. I absolutely love this teal/purple pearlescent, and the gold trim makes everything pop; all that carbon fiber is really what I think of hypercars. The car I submitted had a 12 year ET, to which the judges quipped, 11 years to design the paint and 1 year for the car. Actually, it was because the model I submitted had a crazy 775 HP Turbo V10 (again, what I think about hypercars), whereas this particular model has a NA V12, that along with all the carbon fiber, brings the ET to between 7 and 8 years.


I did not upload a 2025 concept, because I did not see anything that would warrant a 2025 launch, but I recently submitted this to CSR65, as a future concept based on a retro design. It’s a 40s style roadster, with a distinctly 2020 powertrain, with LED headlights and taillights. I am also kind of proud of the pipe work I did. It could be better, but it still looks cool.

I know there are people on this forum probably sick of seeing this, but I swear this is it, I’ve got it out of my system (at least until I find some better decals) I took the concept of crazy/creative to mean think of something that absolutely nobody else would; so I designed this van. Admit it, nobody else would. I gave it a psychedelic color (this is a more toned down, almost weedlike color), and port windows; like you would see hippies driving. I was given a 1, if only for the windows. I am not ashamed of this design, although I did not realize I could use these decals; would’ve probably bumped me to a 2 :wink: .

Anyway, those are my lessons learned. I would encourage others to post their lessons learned, so we can all learn from each other, and be better designers. Ultimately, that’s what this forum is for, right?


Originally I had, but I felt it derailed the story. Also, some of the designs, particularly El Cabong, were uncharacteristic of the designs I had put up before. I cleaned up that thread, and tried to get the story back on track. I still feel this is important. Like I said, this isn’t just my thread. I want others to post here too.

1 Like

I’m picky and therefore none of your cars deserved a like in my eyes… except the last one. It reminds me of some cars I tuned in Saint’s Row 3 when I went wild with ideas :wink:

Yes, I know what you mean. After watching the car comp videos, I’ve also learned to start thinking more outside the box. I haven’t watched them all though, so forgive me if the following question has been answered somewhere in the videos, but how are these designers getting racing stripes? I’ve looked through the default decals and besides trying to stretch the letter I to make stripes, I can’t see what else to use. I haven’t found any dedicated decals on the Workshop either. What am I missing?

As for your cars, you had some fine designs there, and some that I wasn’t keen on. Having said that, I don’t like the look of most real cars on the road these days, so don’t let my judgement get you down :joy:

1 Like

In the bumper bars category, there’s a flat rectangular piece of chrome (it can be chrome, black steel, grey steel, or the color of the primary body, or bonnet) You stretch that out to make it like a racing stripe. You have to be careful, because if you make it too big, it’ll gravitate toward the center, and you’ll have a bitch of a time moving it to where you want.


There is actually a somewhat easier fixture to use as a racing stripe(s)


The Space “Letter” in the 80’s barred font under misc. fixtures.


@undercoverhardwarema I had tried the chrome strips, but they’re raised and look wonky.
@Fayeding_Spray I’d also looked at that lettering style in the decals section, but I didn’t notice that particular “letter” you’ve pointed out.

It would be nice if the devs added a few simple rectangle stripes to the decals section, in addition to the coloured graphics they’ve already got.

1 Like

Thought Process
Just a rambling here. I was going to take a break from challenges, considering I haven’t fared too well; but if I don’t fail, I’ll never learn, right? I was perusing through CSR67, and they’re looking for an off road capable budget car from the 1980s. All the entries were pretty good (getting 24 mpg and such), but they all looked like Tercel 4X4, Civic Shuttle, or Subaru Justy.

There were a couple that looked like ye olde S10 blazer, but I knew I wanted to submit something different.

My first attempt was at a compact pickup truck, like the one I used to own when I was younger.

Mine was an S10 with a 2.8 Liter V-6 and a 5 speed manual. The thing I was having a problem with was gas mileage. My S10 got 20MPG while delivering pizza, and on an adventure between Lansing MI and Marion VA, averaged 30 mpg (the only time I actually took it out on the highway). I know that’s not typical, the EPA rating for that vehicle is 17 city/22 hwy (20 overall). I could not replicate those results with my version of the GM LL2 motor

I thought that during the 80s, the base model came with a 2.5 Liter 4 cylinder, so I recreated my version of the GM 4tech

Better, but now what I needed. I mean, everyone else was posting 24+ mpg in their ads (like real car companies in the 1980s, they could have been lying, but I don’t think that’s the case, as the round MC would have called them out). Also, EPA estimates for this configuration was 21 city/28 hwy. Not to mention that this was a rear wheel drive standard cab. Adding an extended cab and 4X4 transmission, as well as offroad skid tray sapped an extra 1.5 mpg (accurate).

In real life, if you wanted your S10 as a 4x4, you wound up getting the 4.3 liter Vortec V-6. I didn’t feel like creating another real world engine to compare this to, so I used this 5.0 liter V-8 I used in an earlier round (This is about the time I started getting into historical ‘accuracy’) which itself is a clone of the 305 cid v-8 GM used in the 80s. It got better gas mileage than the 6 cylinder, and for the amount of extra horsepower, I’d say the 1.5 MPG drop was worth it (another 1.5 mpg for the 4x4 and you have a light duty pickup that only gets 15 MPG)
So I gave up on the pickup truck; the blazer had a much better drag co-efficient, but that would only be good for an extra MPG or so; also, at this point there were already 2 other Blazer entries. Further, I had been making my own opera windows at this point, but now there was a mod for it, and being the hipster that I realize I sound like, I didn’t want to rehash that design. So the question is, how can I do something uniquely different?
One thing I haven’t seen in CSR67, or any other challenge for that matter, was an AMC Eagle clone. Growing up in Northern Michigan, Eagles were a very common scene; the roads were constantly crappy, and presumably the Eagle got better gas mileage than a truck. In real life, the Eagle came in coupe, sedan, wagon, and oddly enough, a ute (which I’ve never seen until I googled it). The only body type in the vanilla game, or in the workshop that I felt closely resembled what I was trying to accomplish was this coupe, which I had previously used as an 80s muscle car.

In reality, I couldn’t tell you what the Eagle came with without googling it (upon looking it up, I found that it did in fact feature the aforementioned 4tech 2.5 liter, as well as a 4.2 liter inline 6, but we’re going budget here). I recreated it using the 4 Cylinder, and it got 20 mpg.

I did not think that it could compete with the likes of the Tercel, so I used some quality sliders, which seemingly reduced the cost of materials for the motor, but also increased ET/PU, so I guess it was a net loss. I go this model to 24 MPG without using turbo; which you would not want in a 4x4 because it would likely shear an axle if you ever got stuck. Plus I’m having a real problem with turbos, trying to balance lag with an actual increase in performance, but that should be a different post.

For comparison purposes I used the V-6 and V-8 versions for this.
If you’ve made it this far, congratulations! That was a bit of a ramble. The question I now ask myself is this: Should I include this in my lore? If I were doing a lite campaign, this car would’ve never even crossed my mind; as you can see, the desireability numbers aren’t really all that good anyway. For that matter what demographic was the AMC Eagle aimed at anyway? I built this under the Star marque, which is my “car for everyone” brand; but this seems to target a specific niche. Also, this is built on the same platform as the Pantheon Serval, which I’ve decided to keep as lore, as an 80s muscle car in my performance car brand (coincidentally based on the Camaro/Firebird in real life, which in 1986, was also available with a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder)
As always, thoughts and comments (as long as they’re constructive) are welcome. Also, feel free to share something you’ve been experimenting with. And here is the car, as submitted to CSR67, quality sliders and allCSR67-UndercoverHardwareman - Star Xeno 4WD.car (32.2 KB)

Heres a tip. Use a turbo


Yes ofc that was clearly a problem.

So much so that this turbo diesel Pajero was well known for having its axle snap…oh wait, no it wasn’t.

I added a turbo, on the default economy setting, which does help my fuel economy. I’m still not sure it’s entirely realistic. The torque curve is really what my concern is. As you can see, with the economy turbo, the difference is not really that stark. It is however, still 30 lb. ft. almost instantaneously.

I still feel it’s not too realistic, not that the real thing was all that great. Desireability took a hit though.

Also, being that it is full time 4WD, shouldn’t it be an automatic locker? I put manual, due to cost, driveability, and desireability, but if there’s no 2WD mode, it should be automatic, right?

First of all : oof

The problem is your are trying to present a car to a customer in CSR. A basic 4 Seater with no storage room, halfway offroad features and raceparts in its engine are not a good idea to give to and older coupe who have no real interrest in car culture.

Your car looked more like someone took the most basic Coupe, rebuild the engine (Badly) and than put the shell on an old Russian Ladder.

I downloaded your car to see what up and made some changes :

Besides the design changes I modified :
->Changed the Front Axle to Wishbone. Front Axle is for serious Offroading, not for Baja.
->Removed all the Quality Sliders of the engine. They were just inflating the price
->Changed some of the engine part : Putting all the Botton End part to Cast, the intake to Standart, and Exhaust to Short cast. A 111hp Inline 4 doesnt need high Performance part.
->changed the Tyres to Offroad and the rims to something more rugged
->Put on a Offroad Undertray, Put the Aircooling back to 50 (There is no reason to go 45) and put the Brake airflow to 0 (Thats something maybe a Racecar or Supercar needs)
->Put in a another seat in the back and switched it to Standart Interior

All this got me here

So it is at least an Offroader for more bad roads, sand , mud etc

Of course one could say now : “Hey that’s not what i wanted”
Well if this would be for the buyers of CSR It would need :
→ Storage. The buyers need to move a boat, garden stuff and a dog. With 2 seats, a liftback and a roofrack , Maybe.
→ Better comfort. 6.3 Comfort is like sitting in a Trackcar. A KTM Xbow can have that, this not.

Also some smaller design flaws:
The lights in the front bumper would be smashed to pieces quite fast.
Also i am pretty sure that filler caps on the back were outlawed in the 80’s
The cars scream, like you stated, for a V6 or V8.

(Sadly i lost my save , because i reimported the car. But please don’t take this to harsh. This is the only way someone can improve.)


I like yours. I sacrificed a lot of stuff (skidtray and chunky tyres) for economy, but I really wanted to have those. Also, my first draft had standard 5 seat interior and cassette, but took it out (made sure to include them in my ad though, in case the MC would take that into consideration) I would actually have liked a better body than this, but I was trying to be unique.

1 Like

First off, if all you’re doing to tune turbos is to select the presets, then you’re doing it wrong. They’re guides not the go to. You don’t press the drive-ability setting on the suspension tab and get the best drive-ability. Experiment, move the sliders around to see what gives you better stats. In most community challenges, desirability does not matter.

Secondly, being unique is great…as long as it makes sense in the context of the challenge. If the brief asks for a offroader, you don’t submit a slammed, stanced sports car. A coupe would have been an interesting choice for the current round of CSR, but you decided to go half and half and go for something that simply didnt work.

1 Like

The problem was you sacrificed stuff because you have sunk in money on other stuff.
Like the +5 on everything in the engine.
I put in all the Offroad stuff and got better economy.

Also Basic Interior is something for Fleet Vehicles. You covered all your interior with nice grey, hard plastic.
Options are okay, but the Base model counts.

Being unique is okay. But it has to make sense. Giving an older couple a back breaking road legal Baja car is not the best idea. Sometimes you have to find smaller things to be unique in. It doesn’t even need to be in the game sometimes. Little features like LineLock, Parking assistant and other nice gimmicks in the Ad. (But it has to be realistic of course :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: )