Well I think I’m retiring from challenges until the exporter is fixed. All of that is fine on my end- TP, downforce, everything. This is ridiculous and unacceptable.
2 Likes
Are you checking the downforce in the correct tab? It’s the test track page not the aero one
For positive downforce the test track tab will show a lower downforce figure than the aero tab; looking at the wrong tab would just result in leaving downforce on the table
1 Like
Darn. Just checked, I’ve the same engine TP problems. With all the times I switched engines trying to figure that car out, must’ve forgotten to do it the last time.
Oh well. Aero’s racing “comeback” will have to wait.
Curiously I recall my chart saying 37.5lbs… wonder if that’s automation being shit, or the exporter. I’ll investigate more after work. But this TP stuff repeatedly resetting is just the worst. I’ve spent so long checking these only for it to screw up at the last second… absurd. Unless the lua exporter and techpool get redone, that really just has to be it. I’ve been affected by that in more than half of the challenges I’m in, and this time is just too much.
EDIT: Turned out to be a really, really weird automation bug on the consumer cars, then user error on the race car 
Letara Motozine
at the 1980 Letara Transportation show!
Welcome dear readers to our first report of the Letara Transportation show!
We received an exclusive first look at the exhibits and are excited to showcase the best automakers are bringing onto our ever so busy streets.
On of the first booths was set by Swanson showing of the “Concept 2000”.
A study on what the car in the future of 2000 might look like. The concept is a very sleek hatchback design, something we only seen very recently on our todays streets.
The car features a great looking glasshouse with a lot of ducts and aerodynamic ideas which might or might not be beneficial. The engine is a 450 hp 3,7L Boxer 6 with a Turbo which the team predicts is able to move the concept to 300 km/h with a 0-100 time in just 4 seconds.
If we will ever see something like this on our roads, or is just vaporware is written in the stars.
A bit further the exhibition we found the Mara booth. Here they are showing of their all new lineup of more off road focused vehicles.
The Kanyon, Bizon and Yak (left to right) look like they are aiming at a more compact form of off roading. Every model only has 2 doors and seem to have a smaller footprint than other cars in this category.
Even though these cars are handeled under three diffrent names, the underlaying structur is being shared across all cars. While cars are available in 2wd or 4wd they all feature a 80hp 2.5L four cylinder engine.
We will be looking forward to get one of these to test out, how rugged these things really can be.
Next we had one of the weirdest lot of the whole show. While most brands had a cozy warm spot inside the centre, Areo was doing something diffrent. They build up base outside at the centers on little pond where a lot of these little pods where floating around being boated around by visitors. Even we had to wait our fair share of time before we where able to take a spin… swim?.. in it.
If you haven’t caught on yet, Aero showed of the Free Float. A small little personal amphibious vehicle. Sitting in the little craft was certainly weird. Everything was like your standart Areo, the only real diffrent was the lever to engage the two propellers in the back.
Boating the Aero was certainly something you would want to do for relaxation, don’t get this if you are trying to get a shortcut to your in-city office job. If we will ever see this things not just float, but also drive around is something for the goverment to decide.
Back inside Primus Globus set up shop, showing up a great array of current, new and soon-to-come cars!
First they had their current Publica set up and showed the their new trims, this was kind of overshadows by the car they had set up next to it. Its new replacement, the Urbano. The same small budget concept with a new radical design.
On the polar opposite was the facelift of the Atlas, not a lot was changed about the pickup which we know since 20 years, besides it new front. Maybe its time to update this giant piece of metal.
The most interresting piece of their show was the all new Imperator. While other regions already had the car, we are also finally able to get our hands on one over here. The big sedan comes with 2 engine options of which we will be only getting one: the 320i featuring a 3.2L V6. A diesel option is also being sold, but it wasn’t greenlit by the goverment. While the outside was more downed down, the interior was where the party was. With its intergration of computers, the inside of these cars are probally fancier and more tech than most peoples houses.
If you like excess, Popas has is all. From small sportscar to trains, this is where you go everything.
Need a truck for your new construction business? Popas Osel. Need a car to get from A to B? Popas Rushba. Want something to show people “Yes, i can afford to buy two Rushbas”, Popas Cheechi.
Most people were most interrested in the Blinsky. A small cheap 2 seater hatchback featuring a smallish 4 cylinder boxer in the rear of the car. While many people were interrested in the base 100hp version which was priced the same as a base Rushba, most people were interrested in the “Turbo Special” of the car. A wided, more aggresive version pushing the same 1.6L engine to over 160hp.
Sadly only the ones who are ready to struggle with importers can get a Blinsky for themself at the moment as these are not legal to sell in Letara.
The most people could be found at the Vaughn booth. Here people were able to see the new generation of the Wraith.
People were excited, even though only a small part of them could probally afford one of these. The top of luxury at our fingertips.
While Primus Globus also was in the same market, we thought that the Wraith was a more refined packet, with a broad but elegant design. While people knew you had money if you bought a Imperator, you also look like you have money in one of these.
The new generation was smaller and was also now Front wheel drive, completly eliminating the driveshaft tunnel, giving you more room on the inside.
Vaughn showed of three trims. The Montezuma a executive coupe, the Neapolitan, a four door version and the Hierophant a more downturned model.
While the Montezuma and Neapolitan shared a 4L V8 engine and fully indepentent suspension all around, the Hierophant was the model we will probally see around the most. It still features a lot of the base features of its higher trim brother, but the Hierophant had a smaller engine and a overall more toned down look, with less chrome and only coming in a conventional sedan bodystyle. But it seemed like people were already signing up to be the first in a all new Wraith.
And thats all from the show! Each time we want to give one company the prize of “Best of show” and this time it has to be Vaughn. Seems like people are looking for status symbol cars now. Its all about having a better car than your neighbour, even if that means going for the “faux luxury” trim of a car. As long as it looks more expensive, people were happy.
19 Likes
Woho! 
2 Likes
A NEW ERA OF LIBERTY
Distributed by Liberty Corp.
1978 Lineup
For the past generations, we’ve been crafting cars that are made to be the best. This year, Liberty Corp. is continuing this tradition with an all new, luxurious lineup for our customers. We know that you will in maximum comfort while riding in style with our cars. We welcome you our new era of Liberty!
Our Technological Advancements
Liberty Corp. has always aimed to adopt innovative safety features even before they are needed and regulated. We will continue adopting, not only safety features, but also new innovative technology that provide a better experience for both our drivers and passengers.
Learn about the Control Panel
The Control Panel (Shown above in a Liberty Civilian) is a new computer technology that removes the confusion of steering stalks, and replaces them with simple buttons and switches. Not only that, but here you will find warnings about your car that you can check when the light on your dashboard is on. If you get confused, or if you just want to check your car, you can test a part by simply pushing a button.
Learn about importance of Cornering Lights
Recently, reflectors on cars have been mandated by some governments. While Liberty supports this, we believe that small reflectors don’t do enough and that they can be improve. What we’ve done is put lights on the corner of our cars, which not only helps other drivers see you in the night, it also helps you see what is on your sides while turning. We hope other car manufacturers adopt this in the future.
Televisions in Cars?
Yes, you read that correctly! If you buy a Liberty Bell, 2 small TVs will be included in your car, meaning your passengers can enjoy the magic of television while being driven around. As a safety precaution, the TV in the front is turned off while the car is being driven.
Liberty Delphia
The Liberty Delphia is our cheapest model, starting at 25,000 AMU. Despite it’s lower price, it still manages to offer the luxurious Liberty experience with futuristic technology. It features a high quality 8-track player with an AM/FM radio and a built-in phonograph; the latest safety and technological features; and a hydropneumatic suspension.
Specifications
- 3.0L Turbocharged I6
- 170 HP
- 200 LB-FT torque
- Automatic Transmission
- RWD
- Luxurious Interior
- 5 Seats
- Advanced Safety
- Control Panel
- Touch Transmission
- Cruise Control
- AM/FM Radio
- Phonograph
- 8-Track Player
- 25,000 AMU
Liberty Vania
The Liberty Vania is the fastest luxury car that will be on the market. It features many of the same luxurious features as the Delphia, except is has a screaming 4.5L Turbocharged V8 that pushes out 435HP. It has a 0-60 time of 4.3 seconds, top speed of 260 Km/h, and it can race around the 1977 Lerance Raceway in 4 minutes 41 seconds! Just 10 seconds from qualifying as a proper race car!
Specifications
- 4.5L Biturbocharged V8
- 435 HP
- 480 LB-FT torque
- 260 Km/h Top Speed
- 0-100Km/h in 4.30s
- Manual Transmission
- RWD
- Luxurious Interior
- 5 Seats
- Advanced Safety
- Control Panel
- Touch Transmission
- Cruise Control
- AM/FM Radio
- Phonograph
- 8-Track Player
- 32,000 AMU
Liberty Bell
Our final car is the Liberty Bell, which is based on the New Yorkers and the Bell concept car. Like the New Yorkers, the Bell is handcrafted from the highest quality materials. This car represents the future of luxury, featuring a handmade interior, 2 TVs, a Phonograph, 8-Track, and an AM/FM radio. Like the previous generation New Yorkers, we know that this will be the most luxurious car you can buy.
Specifications
- 3.0L Turbocharged I6
- 170 HP
- 200 LB-FT torque
- Automatic Transmission
- RWD
- Hand Made Interior
- 4 Seats
- Advanced Safety
- Control Panel
- Touch Transmission
- Cruise Control
- AM/FM Radio
- Phonograph
- 8-Track Player
- 2 Color Televisions
- Ice Box
- 34,000 AMU
Liberty Corp. Advertising and Engineering Department, 1978
Building 420, 69th Avenue
Philidelphia, PA, USA
+1-215-xxx-xxxx
16 Likes
It looks like Liberty can keep up with Primus in terms of electronic gadgets. Well done.
There is almost nothing the onboard functions of an Imperator II can’t do, but watching TV? No. That point goes to you.
4 Likes
Rd. 4 RESULTS
Chapter 3: Consumer car segment 1975-1984 - Pick-ups and medium-duty trucks
Left to right (back row): Garland L-500 Super Hauler and Garland L-500 Super Hauler Facelift @ChemaTheMexican
Left to right (front row): Popas Rushba 1800-2 MK-II @Mikonp7, Mara Irena 2.0 PR @AndiD, Niichi Dynema M40 Ute @MisterRocketMan, Kessel Ardennes 4x4, Kessel Ardennes Crew Cab @GassTiresandOil, Van Zandt Brazos Pickup @VanZandt_Breda, Rhania Protector-WH @happyfireballman
This time the reviews will start with the utility segments. In the past several decades Letarans have gotten used to a scarcity of utility vehicles. If they wanted something specific they had to resort to grey-market imports. Sure, there were a few very competent vehicles on the market, but the variety was limited. But the late 70s to early 80s brought a change - the utility segment experience a (small) increase in the number and type of offerings to choose from. It was enough of an expansion that the segment could legitimately be separated into two chapters. Let’s see how Letaran’s received the new and highly anticipated vehicles.
Let’s start with the two biggest and heaviest vehicles available to date that could still be driven with a regular drivers license: the 1978 Garland L-500 Super Hauler and its 1984 Facelift edition. When these arrived on the market they were sure a surprise to many. And they were a category of their own. In appearance they mostly resembled the big commercial lorries that haul bulk goods around Letara, and no such large vehicle has ever been available to the consumer masses. But here the Garlands were, with large powerful V8 engines and a giant box on the rear that could hold more stuff than several regular vans combined. So they were seemingly an interesting new idea. Although completely impractical for the average Letaran, they did get picked up by a new emerging industry: the “more yourself” rental market. This new idea rested on the premise that not everyone wants strangers touching their stuff when they move house, nor does everyone want to pay ridiculous fees for a commercial company to move their couches. So enterprising start-ups started buying these trucks to rent out to folks that only needed for a day or two to move - whatever they needed to move. There were still a few hiccoughs to work out though. Both trucks came without legal front side markers, so each rental company had to install them themselves. Also, the facelifted version came without steps attached, so those needed to be mounted for easy access to the cabin. On the engineering side there were also some questionable decisions that resulted in some problems: the light-truck monocoque was not as strong as a ladder frame would’ve been, and resulted in easy warping under heavy loads. The 4x4 drivetrain with locking differential was mostly useless for the truck’s intended use, and with the casual renter not being knowledgeable, the system was often left engaged in locked 4x4 mode, resulting in broken drivetrains. The semi-clad bottom increased service costs needlessly. Combined with an extremely poor fuel economy, this resulted in very high long-term costs that rental companies just passed on to the customer - but it did make one wonder if the rental price is indeed worth it. So while the whole “move yourself” idea was neat, there were still some problems to sort out before it could really take off in earnest. As for commercial uses? Well, similar sized commercial grade trucks just were more capable and reliable, so the Garlands remained in the consumer realm. (OOC: These cars a good demonstration why I have the “no make-believe” rule in effect. This mod simply breaks Automation stats - for example they weigh about half of what an equivalent real-life truck should be. So they quite hard to judge fairly. In light of this I will re-evaluate the admission of such mods that are clearly not within the game’s original purview.)
The first pick-up to hit the market was the 1974 Van Zandt Brazos Pickup. At first glance it was very apparent that it was your run-of-the-mill premium pickup - a general workhorse with a few more premium touches. It had a ladder frame, a V6 engine that had adequate power for the task but nothing more or fancy, an autolocking 4x4 drivetrain, automatic gearbox, off-road skid tray, standard interior and A/T tires. The only un-truck-like element was the semi-trailing arm rear suspension - a solid axle would’ve been more fitting and allow for more hauling capability. For having a bench seat, it was still relatively comfortable, it had decent drivability, could manage any dirt road in Letara (but not extreme off-roading), had acceptable reliability, and was quite cheap and easy to maintain. In short, it was a no-nonsense get’er-done midsize pick-up with an appealing look to boot. So the customers so hungry for a replacement of their ailing Kinnister flocked to the Van Zandt dealership.
The following year the Mara Irena 2.0 PR was released. The Mara was significantly smaller and cheaper than the Van Zandt, and aimed to be a replacement for the old Popas Rushba and Suma M312. It was not only cheaper, but cheaper looking too - quite bland actually. As a small car based truck, it has a monocoque chassis, but did have a solid rear axle with locking differential. In terms of other equipment, it was very similar to the Van Zandt - standard interior and entertainment, off-road skid tray, and A/T tires. The engine was much weaker, however, even in relative terms to the size of the car, so it barely reached highway speeds. It was slightly more off-road capable due to its better approach and break-over angles, but was not nearly as comfortable. However, it was slightly easier to drive and was slightly more reliable. But in the end the Mara and Van Zandt weren’t really direct rivals, the former being a cheap budget offer and the latter coming with a premium price tag. The Mara was in most aspects better than the pick-ups it aimed to replace, however, so it basically took over the market in the small budget-category. Not that in the general population much of that market still existed… the Mara was mostly bought up by farmers who wanted a cheap and small second truck to commute around their farms and move small supplies between operations.
Two trucks were released in 1976: the Kessel Ardennes 4x4 and Kessel Ardennes Crew Cab. These trucks were the only standard-priced pick-ups of the decade, and pretty well split the difference between the Mara and Van Zandt. These vehicles were quite different again from the previous two: they had a light-truck monocoque chassis and solid axles front and rear (coils up front, leafs in the rear). They were further decked out with off-road skid trays, locking 4x4 drivetrains, A/T tires, and first in the segment all-wheel disc brakes. Their suspensions were lifted quite a bit too, giving both Kessels segment-leading off-road capability. In fact only one brand managed to exceed the Kessel’s capability over rough terrain, but more on those later. So the Kessels were extremely capable vehicles in the rough, and excellent use in the most rugged areas of Letara. The main difference between the two trims was that the 4x4 had a regular 2-door cab and 2 standard seats and standard entertainment, whereas the Crew Cab had a 4-door 5-seater cab with premium interior and entertainment. In terms of engine and performance, they shared the same I6 powerplant that provided more than adequate power to get the large trucks out of any sticky situation, and confident power and speed on regular roads too. One minor drawback for both cars was that they were fitted with orange rear side markers, so dealers had to replace those with red units before sale, but those were minor costs for vehicles that were in high demand. And that they were. The 4x4 was quite popular among younger buyers without families, who wanted a nice pickup to show off on back-country roads, and wanted to haul all of their survival gear with them on each trip. The larger Crew Cab option was mostly favoured by people with families who wanted a bit more comfort and more seats, but were willing to sacrifice some cargo space. Although not quite as practical as a wagon or SUV in terms of keeping cargo dry, pick-ups were a slowly growing fad for the new “adventure family” - parents who grew up during the early years of Letara’s National Parks and now wanted to pass on their love of nature to their children.
In 1979 the Popas Rushba 1800-2 MK-II was released to the public. This pickup was a facelift of the Popas Rushba 1700-2. The facelift certainly succeeded in modernizing the look of the car, but it was still just a facelift of an outdated model. In terms of price, it directly competed with the Mara Irena, both hugging the bottom of the budget price bracket. The Popas was slightly larger, but otherwise its engineering was very similar: car-derived monocoque chassis, independent front suspension and solid-axle rear with locking differential, and off-road skid tray. The Popas, however, opted for a premium interior and utility tires. It was slightly more capable than the Mara in terms of speed and cargo capacity, but was despite the premium interior less comfortable, less safe, harder to drive, less off-road capable, and significantly less reliable. Especially this last statistic worked against it in sales, as people who were in the market for a small and cheap pickup needed it to be rock-solid. So while objectively a better vehicle than the one it replaced, the Mara managed to make a larger leap forward, allowing it to claim the larger share of this snippet of the market.
A year later the Niichi Dynema M40 Ute was released in Letara. The Niichi was also a small - city car size in fact - pick-up with a budget price tag. Although slightly more expensive to purchase than the Mara and Popas, it was however much cheaper to maintain in the long run (owing to its excellent fuel economy), overall making it the cheapest option. It was even more clearly a car-derived vehicle with monocoque chassis and independent suspension front and rear. It did have a locking differential and off-road skid tray though, so even with its utility tires it had decent off-road capability. The standard/standard interior was quite nice, and the car was surprisingly comfortable to sit in. It was also the easiest to drive utility vehicle of the decade. Its looks were also quite modern and forward-looking, which consumers appreciated. It was admittedly a little smaller and could haul less than the Mara or Popas, but those who bought these cheap ‘mini-pickups’ didn’t exactly buy them to haul large and heavy goods, so in the end that didn’t hamper the Niichi’s sales. So it was overall a better - or rather more suitable - car for its intended audience, and managed to become the dominant ‘face’ of the small and cheap pick-up segment.
Last on the pick-up scene was the 1984 Rhania Protector-WH. The Rhania became the most expensive pick-up of the decade, firmly in the premium price bracket. It was also the largest pick-up on the market, although it only had two doors and two (standard) seats and standard entertainment. It was a fully work-vehicle set-up with a ladder chassis, coil solid axle front and leaf solid axle rear, locking 4x4 drivetrain, off-road skid tray, and A/T tires. It also had a class-exclusive ABS system and 4-wheel disc brakes, which might come in handy indeed as it was also one of the fastest and heaviest pick-ups on the market. It wasn’t as excessively overpowered like past Rhanias, and was more accessible to the general public. Its general stats were adequate in all areas - relatively low drivability, but relatively high off-road capability, relatively high reliability, but relatively low comfort. Where the Rhania shone was its cargo capacity; where it did not, was in the looks department. It was a rather bland and even unappealing car, so it was certainly not purchased to show off with. But it was meant to be a work vehicle, and as such it became quite successful as the big-pickup of choice for farmers and tradespeople.
…to be continued…
18 Likes
I still owe you my third consumer car - well, it’s boring.
It is the 1981 Globus Premier 310, because a facelift for the new decade seemed like a good idea.
Now thriftier, slightly faster and with updated appliances in the interior while maintaining solid reliability for a low price.
7 Likes
Kessel would like to formally apologize to the Letaran people for our turn signal mishap. Our quality control manager has been disciplined, and we have molded replacement lenses in the correct color for all future vehicles.
(Sorry, I must’ve just skimmed the ruleset).
2 Likes
Rd. 4 RESULTS
Chapter 4: Consumer car segment 1975-1984 - Vans
Left to right: Aero Free Base Pack @Edsel, SUMA M313 Entrega @Banana_Soule, Immortale Automotive Grigory Hauler @Admiral_Obvious, Moover V10-D @Elizipeazie, TIV Asna @Maverick74, Van Zandt Brazos Conestoga @VanZandt_Breda, Sarek II Twin Van Clone @AMuteCrypt, AMCW Scout Workmate and Kasivah Serenity Camping Coupe @Madrias
The other side of the utility market consists of consumer vans - boxes on wheels that can be used to transport goods that should not get wet. Similar to the pick-up side of the segment, the number of choices expanded quite considerably in this decade. While competition wasn’t as fierce as in some other segments, at least Letarans had a few different models to satisfy their various needs.
The first van to hit the market was the 1974 Van Zandt Brazos Conestoga. It was quite a handsome vehicle although the looks might be said to have been a little outdated even upon launch. In many aspects, it was a very average or standard vehicle as nothing really stood out about it. It had a standard price tag, was mid-sized, standard interior and entertainment, segment-appropriate ladder chassis but car-derived independent suspension, hard tires, acceptable comfort, reliability and drivability. It wasn’t very good on any kind of rough terrain however, so it was mostly restricted to paved roads. What was slightly off-putting to some consumers was that it wasn’t a panel van. Meaning, that the rear window of the wagon trim was not covered up. This left the contents visible, and also left the car more fragile: shove one too many boxes in there and you might bust the window! But since it was the only van available, it was the van to have in 1974.
Until the 1975 TIV Asna was released that is. The TIV undercut the Van Zandt in price, although its upkeep was higher, so overall costs were about the same. Despite having a shorter wheelbase, the TIV offered a lot more cargo space than the Van Zandt with a cab-over architecture. It had a light truck monocoque chassis, independent front suspension but leaf-sprung rear axle allowing for quite the load to be carried. Access to the cargo space was made doubly-easy with side sliding doors, which made this van extra versatile and useful. It was not a fast vehicle, but it could manage highway speeds and could manage all but the worst dirt road, making it very suitable for long-distance deliveries and use in remote areas too. It had a standard interior and standard entertainment, but had an 8-track player in the dash which allowed workers to bring their own tunes on the road. This was much appreciated for those long-distance hauls and made it one of the most comfortable vans of the decade. It was also easier to drive than the Van Zandt and was quite a bit safer. Its only achilles heel was reliability: nothing disastrous, but they did need more frequent care than other utility vehicles. So all that to say that the TIV took the delivery market by storm and was ubiquitous on Letaran roads, even if owners had to spend a little more on upkeep.
Consumers had to wait three more years till the release of the 1978 Moover V10-D. The Moover undercut the TIV in purchase price by a little bit, but its long-term upkeep was the real kicker: it was about half as much! It used about half as much gas, and a service appointment didn’t break the bank either. Not that you would have to service it all that often: it had absolute bomb-proof reliability. So that was a significant selling point for the Moover. It was, however, a longer wheelbase vehicle that was clearly based off a regular family wagon (monocoque chassis, fully independent suspension). On the inside it had a standard interior and basic 8-track, giving it a hint of comfort, but not as nice as the TIV. Its load capacity was greater than that of the Van Zandt, but nowhere near that of the TIV, especially when it came to heavier cargo. Nevertheless, it was quite easy to drive and could go everywhere the TIV could too. So for those who didn’t quite need as much space or weight-carrying capacity, the Moover was an attractive choice with it much cheaper running costs. Thus the TIV became more known as the ‘heavy’ delivery truck, and the Moover the ‘light delivery’ of choice.
The smallest and cheapest van on the market was released in 1979: the Aero Free Base Pack. The engineers at Aero once again brought something quirky to the market with adorable looks and questionable practicality. This absolutely tiny car was cheap to be sure, but it was also very basic - except for its advanced 80s safety package, making it on paper (and standardized crash tests) even better than the Van Zandt. But with two seats it was extremely cramped and uncomfortable in the cabin, it had practically no cargo space, was quite difficult to drive despite its diminutive size and weight, and was only suitable to use in cities. It had one strength though: with its mid-engine configuration, it could dump excess heat directly into the cargo space. With a quick upgrade to insulation and clever venting, this vehicle was ideal for the hot food delivery market. Indeed, its cargo space could fit five stacked pizzas, or six cooked and packaged dinners. And while it was not a large market, many restaurants chose to ditch their fleet of scooters, and opted for a fleet of Aeros instead. And customers appreciated food that was delivered hotter than ever before.
A more serious contender in the van market was the 1979 Sarek II Twin Van. This vehicle was priced above the Van Zandt and even with a slightly cheaper maintenance than the TIV, it was still the most expensive van on the market in the year of its release. The Sarek was a large and boxy vehicle that was marketed as an “off-road delivery van”. It had a ladder frame and coil-sprung solid axles front and rear, locking 4x4 drivetrain, off-road skid tray, and cross-ply A/T tires. The latter were by now quite outdated and hard to find replacement for, so most customers chose to upgrade them to radials right away. They might as well, since they had to make modifications to the vehicle anyway before driving off the lot: the stock front and rear side markers were mounted in-line with the axles, not in front or to the rear as required by law, so they had to be moved. The rear one had to be replaced altogether, because it was orange, not red. So anybody wanting the Sarek had to really want it. And who would want it? Well, its only great strength was its rock-crawling off-road capability, and also its relatively large cargo capacity was of value. So it was the most suitable for certain niche tasks, such as off-road rescue in the most remote areas, and bringing supplies to the roughest areas of the country. The Sarek was no commercial success by any means, but it did find itself with this small niche all to itself.
Three vans were released in 1980. The cheapest of them was the IA Grigory Hauler. Price wise, it was a direct competitor for the Moover. However, with a wheelbase that was 50 cm shorter, it was a much smaller vehicle, so had very little cargo space in comparison. But this is not where the problems for the IA ended. It was a car-based panel van, similar to the Moover, but despite its smaller size and front-whee-drive and advanced automatic gearbox, it was still harder to drive than its larger and heavier rival. It had an off-road skid tray and A/T tires, but still only managed to traverse regular dirt roads - anything more challenging was out of the question for this small vehicle. Although it features a similar standard interior and basic 8-track as the Moover, it was quite a bit more uncomfortable too. While absolute reliability was not an issue for the IA, in comparison to the Moover it seemed like each was a lemon (it wasn’t, objectively reliability was quite good in fact, but when your rival never breaks down… ). And the final nail in the coffin for the IA was that it didn’t have any side markers, requiring customers to fit aftermarket units. So unfortunately the IA never made a big splash in the delivery market.
The second vehicle in 1980 was the AMCW Scout Workmate. This ugly duckling of a van was something new and interesting on the market. It was priced higher than the Sarek or Van Zandt, but its long-term upkeep was lower than that of the Moover or IA, so price-wise it was still an attractive proposition as a small delivery vehicle. It had a car-derived platform with monocoque chassis, but had a coil-sprung live rear axle. Considering its price, the basic interior and basic 8-track was a little disappointing, and it was quite uncomfortable, especially in the rear seats. That’s right - this van had five full-size seats! That turned out to be its main selling point, as its other stats were not that great. But if you had to move a small crew to site (and didn’t really care about their comfort), and carry some cargo with them, then the AMCW was the vehicle for the job. Of course many companies simply opted for a regular wagon for this task - especially one where the rear side marker wouldn’t have to be replaced immediately - but some who did need to carry a bit more gear in a covered panel van went with the AMCW.
The same year the AMCW’s more expensive sibling was released too: the Kasivah Serenity Camping Coupe. It was priced twice as high as the AMCW, and its upkeep was twice as much too - putting it in the luxury price bracket. Indeed, if we compare it to the regular wagon market, it would be the second most expensive one on the market. And being twice as expensive than any other van, it is easy to see that Letarans were a little skeptical of the Kasivah. In many aspects, it was the same vehicle as the AMCW: a five-seater panel van. But the Kasivah received many upgrades: it had an advanced automatic gearbox (vs. the AMCW’s manual), had a premium interior and premium 8-track, power steering, and vented disc brakes all-round. It also had a large and much more powerful V6 (vs. the small I5 in the AMCW). With that it was by far the fastest, most comfortable, safest, and prestigious panel van on the market. And therein lied the problem. It was a panel van, not a luxury family wagon. Nobody wanted such an opulent workhorse, no matter how much money the company was making - throwing money away is just bad business. Not to mention that at this price point certainly nobody wanted to deal with having to change a rear side marker before even leaving the lot. So while the AMCW had a nice niche, the Kasivah never took off.
The last van on the market was the 1981 Suma M313 Entrega. The Suma entered the market on the opposite end: it was priced just above the Aero in the budget category. This was a relatively small panel van with more truck-like engineering than many of its rivals: it had a light-truck monocoque and coil-sprung live and locking rear-axle. So despite its size, it could haul heavy items with ease, and could traverse even the worst dirt roads. It had a standard interior and standard AM radio, so comfort wasn’t the greatest. It also suffered in the same areas at the IA when compared to the Moover; in fact, it was even harder to drive, was less safe, and was even less reliable - in this case not just relatively, but also absolutely. So even though it looked quite nice, and was not a bad vehicle in an of itself, it didn’t manage to remove the Moover from top spot in the segment, but fought for the minor sales figures with the IA.
…to be continued…
24 Likes
Rd. 4 RESULTS
Chapter 5: Consumer car segment 1975-1984 - Wagons and SUVs
Left to right: Popas Rushba 1800-5-4 MK-II @Mikonp7, Kessel Pantheon @GassTiresandOil, Martinet Erable 2.0 GLi Break @Ch_Flash, Van Zandt Grand Ranch @VanZandt_Breda, Kamaka Destiny 2000GT Turbo Wagon @LS_Swapped_Rx-7, KHI 792 Pelican @doot, AMM Sarek II Twin Offroader @AMuteCrypt, Wolfe E450 4TRAC 3.2L @karhgath, Macht Teuton GL500 Luxuswagen @GetWrekt01, Rhania Protector and Rhania Protector-F @happyfireballman
But what if one needs to combine utility with family transport? Well, they certainly could buy a panel van with five seats - that is an option now - but more likely these people are shopping for a wagon or SUV. These cars provide plenty of storage space in the back while having enough seats for the whole family. Wagons are typically more utilitarian than their sedan counterparts, but there are exceptions too. Nevertheless, Letarans expect these vehicles to be capable of taking them anywhere they might want to go camping, and get them there reliably and safely. Let’s see how this decade’s crop did.
Released in 1974 the Van Zandt Grand Ranch had a monopoly on the market for two years. Its looks and engineering were fairly traditional but quite nice. It was a body-on-frame car with fully independent suspension, five premium seats and a standard 8-track in the dash. It ran on medium-compound tires, but did have an off-road skid tray for some extra protection. Power was delivered to the rear wheels through an automatic gearbox. Power and performance were more than adequate for a family wagon. All of this came at a premium price point and upkeep seemed a little on the high side, but not exuberant. The car was surprisingly comfortable, but despite its advanced safety package trailed other cars in standardized crash tests. It was not too hard to drive, had decent reliability, and could traverse all roads except for the worst rutted dirt in the most remote areas. So overall it was just a no-nonsense family wagon that got the job done. It might’ve been a tad on the expensive side, with the monopoly on the market it was either this, or looking for a used wagon - and with the growing economy more people opted for new, even if it meant taking out a small loan.
In 1976 the Kessel Pantheon hit the market. Price-wise it undercut the Van Zandt and was the only wagon in the standard price range for the decade. Upkeep was quite high, however, even more expensive than the Van Zandt - in fact more expensive than all but the most expensive wagon and the SUVs. So it was questionable if in the long run it’d save any money at all. It was a truck-derived wagon with a light-truck monocoque chassis and solid axles front and rear. With a locking 4x4 drivetrain, off-road skid tray, and A/T tires it was also very much oriented toward the more adventurous. And despite its low price tag it still have five premium seats and a premium 8-track. It had similar on-road performance as the Van Zandt, but it really shone off-road, being as capable as the rugged dirt-oriented pick-ups and SUVs. Well, and in reality, although it was registered by the government as a wagon, in reality it was an SUV. Although it wasn’t quite as comfortable, reliable, or easy to drive as the Van Zandt, it filled a niche, being able to take the family on camping trips to the back-country, and was… well… a car with a lot more presence. So, even though people had to swap rear side markers upon purchase, it had no problem attracting people to the show rooms.
People had to wait another three years before the next wagons came on the market. The 1979 Popas Rushba 1800-5-4 MK-II entered the market promising to be the “best value” wagon. True to its name, it was the only budget-priced wagon - about $7,000 cheaper than the Kessel. Upkeep was also much cheaper. The Popas was smaller, though, but still managed to fit five premium seats, but only standard AM radio as entertainment. This monocoque car had independent front suspension, solid rear axle, and power was delivered to the A/T tires though a locking 4x4 differential. It also had an off-road skid tray. True to its price point, some corners were cut in the manufacturing of the car, and it also had some cheaper components: it had the weakest engine and drum brakes on all four corners. And this really showed in all-round performance, comfort, drivability, safety and reliability. In this economy it was a car that one only got if they couldn’t afford anything else. Luckily, it did have the Popas off-road ability, so it was quite suitable as the main transport vehicle in the poorest and most rural areas of Letara. And that is exactly where most Popas ended up, transporting the family and the occasional sheep or piglet in the back to market.
Released the same year, the KHI 792 Pelican was a direct rival to the Van Zandt. It was a slightly smaller car with distinctly more modern looks, which was much appreciated by customers. It had similar five premium seats, but upgraded premium 8-track in the dash. It was the first car wagon on the market with the modern AWD drive system; and the off-road features didn’t stop there: it had a locking differential, off-road skid tray, hydropneumatic suspension and A/T tires. It was about as comfortable on dirt as the Popas, but blew the Van Zandt out of the water. It was quite capable on-road too, was comfortable, and had average drivability and reliability. So while it didn’t fill a specific niche as the Kessel and Popas could, it handsomely competed with the Van Zandt, ending its monopoly on the premium wagon market.
This same year the AMM Sarek II Twin Offroader was released. The most striking feature of this large box-on-wheels was its funky paint scheme. Not to everyone’s taste, it certainly stood out! This wagon-SUV was priced about the same as the KHI and Van Zandt, but was a distinctly different car than either - it was more in league with the SUV-like Kessel. It was a large ladder-framed car with solid axles front and rear, and went-all out with all available off-road oriented engineering choices, including full-on mud tires. It also had a class-exclusive advanced automatic gearbox. With all these goodies under the hood, something had to give - and that were the five standard seats and standard 8-track, which were a little disappointing in this price range. Then again, this was not really meant to be a cozy family vehicle: this was a vehicle to climb mountain with, and you could carry your family or best friends with you if you so wished. And it was indeed the most extreme off-road capable vehicle in Letara in this decade -it seems that extreme off-roaders are just meant to have funky and arguably obnoxious paint jobs. But this car was not as incredibly over-powered as the Rhanias of yesteryear. This was a more sensible car, bringing mudding and rock-crawling to the masses. So the AMM never became a family car - but it was the go-to for anyone who wanted to participate in (or pretend to want to participate) in more extreme off-road activities. After fixing the side reflector issues, of course…
This year the most expensive wagon was also introduced: the Macht Teuton GL500 Luxuswagen. Most expensive, while accurate, still feels like an understatement. It was $70k to purchase - three-and-a-half times as expensive to buy as the AMM, and 1.5 times as expensive to maintain. Needless to say, it was very much in the upper bracket of the luxury price bracket, and only three other cars managed to be more expensive in the entire decade. So this was certainly not a vehicle for the average Letaran. For all of this money one got a medium-sized wagon with four hand-stitched seats, a luxury 8-track player in the dash, and nice alloy wheels clad with comfortable medium-compound tires. The excess power of the large V12 engine was kept in check by a geared LSD and an easy to use advanced automatic gearbox with two overdrive gears. Even so, the car had sports-car acceleration, but top speed was limited electronically to 160 km/h. But that was OK, this car was not bought for its top speed, but to be the most comfortable family car for the uber-rich taking their kids to piano recital (or double-bass recital, since that instrument actually fit in the back!). And in this it excelled. Given that Letara has not seen a true luxury wagon in very many years, it the Macht Teuton was something new, something unique the rich could sink their teeth into, and so it became quite a popular car around the villas of Fiegheni. The only shadow mark on the Macht was that the rear side reflector had to be changed immediately…
Three wagons were released in 1980. The cheapest was the Martinet Erable 2.0 GLi Break. This car was priced at the bottom of the premium market, slotting in between the Van Zandt and Kessel. This car-based wagon had a class-only transverse FWD lay-out. It had five premium seats and a premium 8-track in the dash. And overall it was a fairly standard car with standard looks, nothing fancy, noting extra: manual gearbox, no undertray, medium-compound tires, solid disc brakes all-round. It had an adequate engine giving it adequate performance, it had adequate comfort (but lower than its rivals), good safety, mediocre reliability, decent drivability. It was just a middle-of-the-road car that had similar dirt (in-)capability as the Van Zandt. But was being a bit cheaper enough? Not really. It could rival the Van Zandt, but the KHI was still better, and with the continued economic improvement, there was no need for a cheaper-but-worse alternative on the market. So the Martinet just hit the market at the wrong time into a space that was already occupied by cars offering more or being better specialized. And its cause was certainly not helped by missing both front and rear side reflectors, necessitating the installation of aftermarket units…
The 1980 Kamaka Destiny 2000GT Turbo Wagon slotted into the middle of the premium market between the Van Zandt and KHI. This five-seater wagon had standard seats but a premium 8-track for entertainment. With its turbo-engine it was the performance oriented wagon of the decade. Although it didn’t make the most power - in fact even the Kessel made more power - it used it much better. With its geared LSD and light alloy wheels it got off the line much faster than any other wagon (except the Macht of course), but not being limited it achieved the highest top speed of any wagon (over 200 km/h). Not only that, but the Kamaka handled the best of any wagon too. But all this sportiness came at a price: it was not very comfortable and could not perform any of its tricks off the paved surface. Surprisingly perhaps, it was quite easy to handle though, and didn’t suffer from any undue reliability issues. So no, the Kamaka did not become an overnight success, and not many families lined up to buy one. But there are always a few young-at-heart families (let’s be honest, new dads) who were told by their wifes they need a wagon, but want to feel like they haven’t really given up on their youth. For they could still race very fast to pick up the kids at school.
The Wolfe E450 4TRAC 3.2L was the next entry in the luxury bracket - but still half the price of one Macht. Being 1.5 time as expensive as the AMM and others in the premium market, it neatly split the difference and provided an option for those that were wealthy, but not outright swimming in money. In any case, it was a ladder-framed vehicle but with all-round independent suspension. It had a strong I5 engine that provided power to all four wheels through a sophisticated AWD system, and power was maintained by a geared LSD and the car was speed limited at 160 km/h. The car did feature an off-road skid tray, but was on hard compound tires that hampered both its comfort and off-road capability, so that seemed a bit of an odd choice for such an expensive vehicle. On the inside the occupants were treated to five luxury seats and a brand new luxury cassette player. Despite all the modern electronics, it was a superbly reliable vehicle and it was also very easy to drive and handled quite nicely. It was also quite comfortable - not on the level of the Macht, but much better than any other wagon on the market. In this time of upward mobility, the upper middle class started to reach upward and dream of more luxurious transportation than they were previously used to. The Macht was truly out of reach for all but the richest people, but the Wolfe was the perfect stepping stone for those who wanted a taste of luxury - and being a wagon was still quite unique in the luxury bracket. Of course, it didn’t hurt either that by chance the Wolfe resembled the looks of the Macht - one could almost pretend…
The last two vehicles in this segment were the 1984 Rhania Protector and Rhania Protector-F. These were the only true SUVs as registered by the government. The Rhanias slotted in at the top of the premium price bracket, above the AMM, but below the Wolfe. They were large ladder-frame vehicles with solid front and rear axles. They were unique in the market with three rows of seats (2/2/2 seating) - and only two people movers could seat more people than the Rhanias. Despite their practical seating arrangement and large size, they were off-road oriented cars: locking 4x4 drivetrains, off-road skid trays, hydropneumatic suspensions, A/T tires and all-round vented disc brakes with ABS made these quite capable on and off-road - they were in the same league as the much cheaper Kessel in that aspect. With their size they were quite hard to drive though and comfort was poor for the Protector with its standard seats and standard 8-track, and only mediocre for the Protector-F with premium seats. In terms of power, they had plenty, especially the Protector-F with its larger engine had a very high top speed of over 200 km/h. So while much more reasonable than previous Rhanias, the legacy lived on. Letarans noticed one more thing about these cars: they were exceedingly plain looking; the fascia were just empty, basic… not many people could get over the looks. So in the end, aside from offering more seats, they didn’t seem to offer anything extra or better than other wagons and SUVs, and were not a large success on the market.
…to be continued…
17 Likes
Wow, I think this is the first ever time I’ve shot for a segment and demographic and it has landed perfectly. Kudos to me I guess, happy with the review my Luxuswagen got!
I swear to god this game
Oh ps: great writeup as always!
4 Likes
Nice writeups for the Utility markets! I’m glad to see my vehicles fitting about where I had hoped. I’m a bit surprised the Grand Ranch wasn’t knocked more for only being a two-door wagon. Glad Letarans got their fun though and had a lot of great alternatives in the decade.
3 Likes
Rd. 4 RESULTS
Chapter 6: the renovated Lerance Raceway opens 1977
After a popular vote and some persistent lobbying, it was decided to keep the Lerance Raceway alive for another decade as Letara’s premier racing facility. However, several lay-out changes were proposed and subsequently accepted. These changes include abandoning the ‘long track’ and building of a twisty inner dirt track to allow for a mixed-surface rally-cross style event. The old outer track portion still in use has also been remodelled to align with modern racing standards: more challenging corners, flowing S-es, and gravel run-off areas are all part of the renovation plan. All of these changes should provide a new and exciting challenge for manufacturers. Especially the mixed surface aspect should prove to be interesting, especially if the heavens open and the dirt gets drenched and slippery.
The spectators were not forgotten of course. There are new and upgraded stands with improved seating, new track-side viewing areas in the dirt section, and a whole new camp ground in the midfield surrounding the lake to allow for all-weekend camping and relaxation during the race weekend. While no new speed records are expected to be broken in this new format, the racing is anticipated to be even more exciting than ever.
After initial scrutineering (see here), 19 cars remain to race. Let’s see how they stack up on paper.
The cars
Left to right: Raceteam Malmo Stadsbil Letara RX @AMuteCrypt, Mara Irena 5.0 RX @AndiD, Vizzuri Ossopeske QV Group 4 Livery @Aruna, Mons 356-esque @cake_ape, Martinet Castor III TR @Ch_Flash, TIO-Mocabey RT214B @DrDoomD1scord, Durendal 490 Melbourne @GassTiresandOil, Rhania Rochester @happyfireballman, Primus RT Rallycross @Happyhungryhippo, Wolfe Racing Razor GTR @karhgath, Kamaka XSM-1 @LS_Swapped_Rx-7, Swanson 969RC @Ludvig, Minerva Solarian Vyrada Test Mule @Madrias, Knightwick S-Roadster RALLYCROSS @mart1n2005, Torshalla Griffin III @Maverick74, SAETA Montaraz Proto @Petakabras, Levante Grifo GRT-i @TanksAreTryhards, Benetsch Lerance 4600ZRZF Rallye Turbo @Texaslav, Van Zandt Vitruvian @VanZandt_Breda
With modern technologies, more precise pace and statistics modelling can be conducted on these cars (see below for stats panel). These statistics are derived from car simulations ran on dry, pristine pavement, but should still be very useful for bookies while setting up their odds on race weekends.
On paper, the Benetsch is the fastest car (~4:10) by quite a margin, followed by the Vizzuri at some distance (~4:16). Then a slew of cars are bunched together around the 4:20 mark: the Levante, TIO, Wolfe, Mons, Martinet, Swanson. Behind, the field starts to get stretched a little with the Durendal and **Minerva pair at ~4:22, then the Primus, Torshalla and Kamaka two seconds slower. The rear of the field consists of the Saeta, Van Zandt, Raceteam Malmo, Knightwick, Mara and Rhania cars.
But outright speed is of course not the whole story. Especially not this year with the dirt track and the potential for rainy races. And reliability is always a factor of course. In the latter category the Van Zandt car is expected to struggle quite significantly. The other cars are much closer together, but a blown gasket or electrical fire is still possible even for the most reliable of cars. As usual, however, the Mara seems to be absolutely bomb-proof, and Raceteam Malmo also seems to have invested in heavy-duty components.
In terms of user friendliness, the Minerva, Levante and Martinet cars seem a handful to drive around the track, while the Primus, Rhania, and Wolfe can be steered around with two fingers. Since the races are long - over 1000 km - this time, comfort is of paramount importance too to maintain driver fitness. Here we see that Vizzuri in particular have chosen to pamper their driver, but Primus opted to install a wooden stool with splinters.
Offroad prowess is a key metric in this new format, and becomes especially important as the track becomes wetter. Some cars better hope that it never rains: the Minerva, Martinet, Knightwick, Primus, and Van Zandt cars are especially expected to suffer during damp and wet conditions. On the other hand, the Wolfe, Raceteam Malmo and TIO cars seem to revel in poorer conditions, and might make up some time when the going gets tough.
With the above information in hand, eager Letarans wanting to test their fortunes will be able to make “informed decisions” regarding their bets come race weekend. What do you think, how will these races pan out?
…to be continued…
26 Likes
I won “Most Ornery Car” at the Dundies this year, Ma!
edit - TBH though, I think we are all eager to see how things play out balancing for offroad. There is a pretty large disparity in some of the stats.
What all is accounted for in pit stops?
3 Likes
There is a precise calculation based on the car’s footprint and fuel consumption; with a random number factor thrown in. I had hoped to optimize my car for 1 pit stop only, but it seems that has not worked and my car may have to spring for 2 of them in some races.
3 Likes
I thought this was Round 4… why are we going back to Round 3?
1 Like