That’s, uh, kinda the point of playing is so that you can choose these things on your own. Be creative, use that mind of yours perhaps. It’s a competition about creativity.
3 Likes
This would’ve been my alternate entry. I changed the name, because someone used GranTurismo in their ad, this is supposed to be a knockoff of GranTurismo, and what’s GranTurismo’s competition? Forza; so, there you go.
All joking aside, I really racked my brain on this one, because I think this one looks better, but the other has better stats (GQ, meaning Giusseppe Quattroporte); plus I was able to get full cladding on the GQ (helps with comfort, prestige, and gas mileage), at the expense of the staggered tyres. The Forza just didn’t look right without the staggered tyres, and I still couldn’t save enough for the cladding.
After this round is over, I will post the .car files, and I’ll unleash (had to nerf for regulation) the engine. In trying to stay true to the source material, I’ll likely make it more efficient, rather than more powerful.
According to websites I looked at, the Maseratti engine was 92.0x79.8 for 4244 cc and produced 395 hp (my goal for this project). Another website stated that compression for this engine was 11.0:1, but I just could not attain those numbers; instead, I upped the compression to 12.3. In order to get loudness below 35, I used a 3 way cat, instead of a high flow 3 way cat; again making it more difficult to attain (I had to raise AFR to 11.9). The end result, was an engine that got the desired hp numbers, but was 15.7% efficient. In the unleashed version, I tried to max out efficiency, and got to 18.9%; I could’ve done better, but peak hp had to be at 7,000 rpm. Anyway, this improved fuel economy from 12.8 on the Forza and 12.1 on the GQ, to 16 and 14.5 respectively (along with the cladding and 2+2 seating that it should’ve had all along). Another thing; since Maserattis are not too reliable IRL, I went with cast and low friction cast, over the lightweight forged in the submitted version.
After all of that, it was binned for its looks, rather than its technical merit (even though the fuel economy is a glaringly bad technical issue). The submitted vehicle was Italian racing green, with black spoke wheels, with body-matching rims (I regret nothing). I was trying out a ‘gun-metal’ type color, but thought it clashed a bit with the green.
I probably should have submitted the Forza, even as I was wrapping up the GQ, it seemed to say to me “Lexus LS” (Even Zmees said it looked like a snoozing Jag). Some fixtures I wanted to use, just didn’t work. I used the GranTurismo as the original design, and tried to port that over to the GQ, but in real life, the Quattroporte doesn’t look as exciting as I remembered it from 2007. Part of the design featured a modded grille, that doesn’t show in photo mode. The lights worked on the Forza, but not so much on the GQ (the alternative was a modded fixture ‘Cutouts’ and ‘Things’, which I just could not handle)
Submitted
GQ - Sedan.car (26.3 KB)
Forza - Giusseppe Forza.car (27.8 KB)
Unleashed
GQ - Unleashed.car (26.3 KB)
Forza - Unleashed.car (27.8 KB)
9 Likes
Pantheon XR
I haven’t fleshed out Pantheon’s lore, just yet, so I’m putting this here instead.
The XR-Red is a S80 R meets Integra meets WRX, and if I could have a double wing on the back, meets XR4Ti.
This was the competition version CSR87-UndercoverHardwareman - Pantheon XR-Red.car (26.5 KB)
This is the improved version, fixed according to host feedback (except for the red trim, that’s solid) meant to still adhere to challenge rules. Pantheon XR - Red.car (26.5 KB)
2 Likes
In CSR 73, I tried to make a vehicle that ran on low quality fuel. There aren’t many challenges, or situations that ask for this, but currently there is. Thing is, my CSR entry was terrible; the fuel economy was the worst of all the submissions. I don’t know exactly what I made, or how it was set up, but I remember (because I have it written down) that it used 24.7 liters per 100 km. I think that was May.
Anyway, there’s a challenge (His Highness Demands Round #1 (1950-56) [ENTRIES OPEN, WILL CLOSE 2/10/2019]), They want a fuel efficient, commuter budget car, and bonus points if it can run on low quality fuel. So far the most effective way I’ve found to improve economy, is to advance the spark. Even so, I’m mired in the 8 mpg range with my test car. Any tips?
2 Likes
So it’s been a while. I wanted to get a decent rig up and working before I played again. Here it is:
I’ve entered a couple of cars; they’re not the best, but the feedback I received on one was needlessly salty.
So, this is what I submitted:
CSC-UndercoverHardwareman - Typical 80s Sport.car (32.9 KB)
This was in part, inspired by reading about the Toyota Supra, as the OP had hinted that would be the inspiration. Now, this is not the body style of the Supra, as all except for myself and one other used the 1980s sedan, hatchback coupe variant. Whereas this model has the correct wheelbase (2.6 m) and roughly the correct drag coefficient (0.348), the other model has a higher drag, and longer wheelbase.
The reviewer had a point, criticizing the painted grille in the rubber bumper. It just seemed like something I remembered seeing in the 1980s, but truth be told, it was likely aftermarket on some Dodge Dart or something. The reviewer did not like the lights, and proceeded to suggest that I threw this together in 30 minutes, half-assed. Okay, fair enough, you didn’t like the lights, but I spent 30 minutes on those alone. What I was trying to do, was something like this:
Getting grilles or lids to lift just over the exposed headlight, and it’s not that easy. Maybe that’s something for American Shitboxes, and has no place on Japanese sportscars, but it was an honest, diligent effort. In my latest re-imagining, I simply imply that the headlights are there, which is fine, when you take the picture out of focus, like this:
But if you clear it up, and actually look at it, it doesn’t look right.
I’ve also tried bumper bars, but that doesn’t work either. And most of the mods, don’t work with 4.21. I submitted this without a sunroof/t-tops, The OP said to use the black rectangle badge; but that just looks like shit.
My new version is a Nagoya, and even has a wing. And since it is a Nagoya, it should also have a Boxer in it as well, for lore.
Salty Nagoya - Osprey XS Clone.car (36.9 KB)
Salty Nagoya - Osprey XS.car (36.9 KB)
And here it is 18 years later, all grown up:
Nagoya - NO-XS.car (33.6 KB)
1 Like
At no point would I consider the response you received on your entry “salty”. Rather than bitch about some criticism on another thread here, perhaps consider asking the person who is hosting the CSC for feedback and suggestions instead. Also, bear in mind the entries other people have submitted and take a moment to observe the detail and proportions used and use that as a “lesson learned”.
15 Likes
It’s probably easier to blame my “needlessly salt” than admit your car wasn’t as good as other entries. You talk like you did everything good and you should win, but let’s be honnest, look at your design, and look at the cars you took from internet.
Don’t tell me they look the same.
I see that you wanted to inspire this pontiac, and the best advice I can give you is: look at how it’s made. Look closely to details, try to use the good fixtures to copy some parts of it. I’m not telling you to make an entire copy of the pontiac, but copying some parts of the car is a good way to improve your skill at designing in automation, to learn the good proportionning of the fixtures…
I don’t host a challenge to be freely salty, and I don’t think anybody does this on the forum. I do it to give your car a feedback, an honnest feedback on what I think of it. If you don’t want my feedback, don’t enter the challenge…
2 Likes
Well i’ve learned a lesson from that…
My point was that other cars, even those that got binned, got reviews that were constructive. Mine got “spend more than 30 minutes on your design”. This post was to illustrate my thought and design process, pointing out that I did in fact try, as much as I failed; without derailing the CSC thread, as others have been known to do. So yes, I think it was needlessly salty; as if you couldn’t be bothered. The fact is, you had more to say about this post, than you did about my entry.
Yeah, keep refusing any advice, as intended.
No, my feedback wasn’t only “spend more than 30 min” and you know it. And yes I had more to say, and I took the time to give you some advices on your own thread, others doesn’t have this extended feedback. But you prefer deny everything and say I was salty.
The reality is you don’t want critisism and you don’t accept my help.
Go, keep denying everything I say, you did everything ok and I was salty, you’ll certainly progress like this.
2 Likes
I’m not denying what you said, and like I said, you had more to say. You choose to say it here which is good as it would’ve derailed the CSC thread; but you did not say it in the original response, which is my point. There are challenges where users provide detail write ups, and those where, rather than try, they hurl out an insult. I feel like yours was the latter.
And it’s not just about you. I received a write up that was, “just no”. That’s in this thread too.
All the same this thread is for me to illustrate my thought processes, so they if you don’t like those, you can tell me where I thought wrong; such as your previous post.
The car failed, and I can see that when I look at the other entrants, even before reviews. I’m not saying mine was good. I’m saying that the review came off as terse, and even if you’re completely tired of my designs, there’s a better way to say that.
Everything’s subjective, and at a certain point you’re simply tired of looking at bland design. I get it as well in my challenges.
Honestly, “just, no” is quite good for a car you don’t like in my book. That’s basically a “meh”. If it’s really horrible, that would probably lead to a more colourful feedback.
And, well, the car, even compared to the models that inspired it, looked quite meh indeed.
1 Like
Have you read the feedback I wrote to the other entries to say that?
I have more to say about other cars too, but the most importants things are here. I make this CSC on my free time after work, If I want finish it in time, I have to be brief on the first round.
And I didn’t gave you much more different feedback on your thread, I juste gave you the best advice I give to anyone: Look closely at a real car of the era.
Stop thinking I don’t like you or that the forum is “bored” of your designs, I don’t know you, and I don’t judge you but your design.
1 Like
Dude you best get out of the situation. I learned my lesson about taking this route…maybe multiple times…
I 100% agree with MasterDoggo here.
f you’re going to say that something was a certain way and refer back to the quote I’d posted, at least fact check yourself before going ahead and claiming it is something else. It isn’t a “just no”, there actually some constructive points that I have requoted for you to prove that there was a reason behind your entry not being approved. If you don’t like said criticism, that’s your problem for not being able to take it.
If you’re upset that it was too brief, too bad. If you had any idea what sort of time and effort went into hosting any sort of well-attended competition you would understand why reviews can be exceptionally brief, especially for the first round.
Like what has occurred on numerous occasions during the CSR, rather than derail a thread or bitch about something subjective somewhere else, politely request further feedback via PM to the host of the round, rather than attempting to play the victim and ultimately come across as the salty one.
There are two lessons that can be learned here: the definition of “salty”, and how to take criticism
Perhaps since this is the “lessons learned” thread and not the “bitch about shit” thread you could update us once you’ve worked it out.
8 Likes
I apologize for the CSR thing. It was my fault.
I understand youre new to the forum but could you possibly not try to insert yourself into every single thread here? The post above isnt even referring to you so your response literally adds nothing and is completely pointless.
As for @undercoverhardwarema, if you want more specific criticism, join the automation discord. Lots of people there to provide instant feedback, be it harsh or kind. If you don’t like the criticism there, well there’s not much you can do really apart from wallow in the steam forums.
12 Likes
I guess I’m not saying this correctly
I guess I’m not saying this correctly. As you’ve cut MasterDoggo’s quote off there, I’m sure you have to have some understanding of what I mean. I did not say I disagree with these points; in fact I do agree, and I could see that as the other contenders rolled in. I’ve said this in all of my responses; and tried to explain the reasoning behind that.
The rest of the quote:
I am saying, that I read that, and I don’t think unreasonably, as “sob this, I can’t even be bothered with the rest”
Ahhhhh sorry i’ll go 
I Want to do more details. This is a current ongoing project.
This is the concept
This is what I’ve got so far.
The two main questions are:
Are those handles?
What are those chrome things on the bumper?
The follow up question:
Any suggestion on the taillights, because I am not liking those.
By the way, I know I have to activate windows. I haven’t gotten around to it.