Out of Africa Challenge [Final Results]

Doesn’t seem too bad.

As for the factors that affect the offroad stat, here are those that I remember.

-Suspension setup in the platform tab
-Ride height (higher = better)
-Choice of springs, swaybars and dampers
-Differential choice
-Tire profile (higher = better)
-Tire choice
-Corrosion resistance (higher = better)
-Overhang, although I don’t remember the exact formula but it uses vehicles length compared to wheelbase.

The not-defender does have a few advantages when maximizing offroad, since it has fairly short overhang and can fit large diameter wheels, but even then you can get something very good with other bodies.

You know, guys… posting your stats in the middle of a still-open competition isn’t quite kosher. (I’m not the only one that feels this way, either. it’s been discussed before).

It puts people who have not submitted yet at an advantage because they know exactly what they have to do to beat the person/people who have posted. And if that person happens to be in the upper end of the contest, that literally screws absolutely everyone who has already submitted who is below that line.

^ What he said. I can understand the urge to burst out what you have created, but be subtle about it. People can guess, but they shouldn’t know until the competition is over.

Otherwise we might all just make a car and post it here and wait for the creator to go through the numbers here.

I wouldn’t have posted my stats if I didn’t think the last slot had been filled. I’m sorry.

Razyx could have had a spastic twitch and rammed his mouse through his eyeball during the design process, causing him to fail spectactularly. While Razyx has not been known to do this (ever, I hope :stuck_out_tongue:) contests are not over until the final entry has been approved and the creator of the challenge has officially closed it.

(I see your point, but still… a hair premature)

I agree with your proposed criterion.

Actually, on that subject: it might be good to start including boilerplate in the competition rule posts reminding people to either use the in-game photo tool or to crop their screenshots when posting images of their cars. I’ve noticed quite a lot of car pictures with attached statistics in contest threads, including this one, and the same considerations apply to those as to posting statistics manually.

[quote=“Packbat”]I agree with your proposed criterion.

Actually, on that subject: it might be good to start including boilerplate in the competition rule posts reminding people to either use the in-game photo tool or to crop their screenshots when posting images of their cars. I’ve noticed quite a lot of car pictures with attached statistics in contest threads, including this one, and the same considerations apply to those as to posting statistics manually.[/quote]

I agree it is not really nice for people to post their stats for an entry. Next time I will remind people.

On that note, I would like to inform you all that the challenge has now been [color=#FF0000]closed [/color]as we have a full set of 25 participants that have an accepted entry. Must say that the entries were filled up very fast IMO. At least this is the first challenge I host, so I do not have much comparison, but compared to those I myself participated in this one did seem to fill up very fast.

Now we wait. I need to enter a couple of entries into my spreadsheet and this weekend we should have the results. I will also post the scores and might kick off with a short post about the average across the field values I obtained from all the cars in the competition. That could give you already an indication how exceptional your car was (or not).

Well, this was some trouble that I probably didn’t need to go to, then - I edited the following stats out of an earlier post when VicVictory and SeriousSimon pointed out the problems inherent in posting statistics while a competition is still open, with the thought of reposting them when it was closed. Here they are again, I guess: Driveability 47.8, Comfort 25.6, Prestige 7.6, Sportiness 11.4, Safety 21.4, and Reliability 70.7. (I also mentioned that the Helvum AX barely met the other competition requirements.)

Thank you for running the contest, Tycondero. It’s a little bit scary how quickly these contests fill up, but the formula is a very good one: a story, some requirements, some metrics upon which cars are compared.

I will say this, I WILL have the lowest sportiness of the whole group :wink:

I dunno…

Mine is pretty low and would be really hard to beat. Had to make some sacrifices to get the cost in the regulations, after all.

As for where I probably fall in at… I’m probably “the idiot.” Made many little mistakes in my build, but I’ll see where the Baron ends up.

Average values across all entries

Production cost (dollars) 5549,3
Reliability 71,7
Environmental Resistance 86,9
Fuel Economy (US MPG) 27,1
Maintenance cost (dollars) 964,3
Practicality 77,2
Off-road 49,1
Drivability 45,6
Utility 75,0
Comfort 19,5
Safety 22,6
Sportiness 5,2
Prestige 7,3

So, as you can see in the above stats, which were taken from all the cars and averaged, the average cost of the entries was just under 5550 dollars. Most entries had a pretty reliable car, though some were really on the edge resulting in that average score being in the low 70s range. Environmental resistance was good overall, though most manufacturers choose to go with polymer bodies, there were some that used steel. It’s all a matter of choice, but I think polymer was the cheapest environmentally most resistant option to go here. The fuel economy fluctuated quite a bit across all entries. Some were really doing for that extra mile, while others hardly bothered. I have seen entries from around 10 US MPG and up to about 45 US MPG. Maintenance cost was pretty stable across the field, some performed exceptionally well with costs as low as around 750 dollars/year. Practicality varied heavily, as did off-road. Most people used the terrain type bodies and AWD, which offered good values for both, but that doesn’t mean they were the no-brainer option. I have also seen entries outside the jeep bodies which were competitive. Drivability was decent overall, one entry hardly bothered while others obtained up to 60. Utility varied also quite heavily, which I believe is most due to the engine. In this challenge I have seen a car almost up to 300 HP, whereas most were into the 50-60s HP range. Comfort was overall pretty low, but that can be expected from this challenge. Some went for sub-basic (basic with negative quality) and some had no entertainment. Safety was in the majority of cases either nothing or basic or sub-basic. Sportiness and Prestige didn’t matter all that much and were overall quite to very low. Prestige usually revolved around 7 and for many entries sportiness was even below 1. That said, these stats are included, but generally do not weigh all that much in the overall score of the cars.

I have seen many good entries and many mediocre ones. A majority of people tried to squeeze every last bid out of the 6000 dollar limit. In general I can state that in this challenge, as described in the OP, cheaper was really better. As the weight of the score is heavily in favor of those trying to restrain the cost of producing the car, going significantly lower than the limit really helped. A lot of good names will surely not make it due to this tendency. That said the costs were factored together into a single value with environmental resistance and reliability, which means that if you had a more expensive car you could still do well for the value for money score if those two were particularly high. I have also seen people going for race cam profiles to get every last ounce of HP out of their engine (which revs to 6000 RPM), not really good economically speaking.

In general I’m confident that with the approach of making a normal distribution of all the values and factoring in the weight for each parameter and adding them together we will get 3 clear winners. Later I will post the results of the Out of Africa Challenge, excluding the top 3 candidates, which will be named in alphabetical order. I will likely write one-line remarks for every entry. The top 3 will get full blown reviews and the winner will ultimately get all the glory! Doing these might require some time, but hopefully after this weekend we will have everything.

I look forward to it Tycondero.

One thing that made this challenge interesting is the very limited budget, limiting us to smaller bodies and low technologies.

Hoping to see more similar challenges :smiley:

Now I just have to hope that I have placed decently.

37.1 Driveability
5.0 Sportiveness
29.2 Comfort
14.1 Prestige
15.7 Safety
73.2 Reliability
90.9 Utility
7.6L/100km
61.58 Offroad

[quote=“VicVictory”]Razyx could have had a spastic twitch and rammed his mouse through his eyeball during the design process, causing him to fail spectactularly. While Razyx has not been known to do this (ever, I hope :stuck_out_tongue:) contests are not over until the final entry has been approved and the creator of the challenge has officially closed it.

(I see your point, but still… a hair premature)[/quote]
Haha no, I would not do it … well, maybe if we were talking about winning the national lottery or something. :blush: :wink:

You guys build your cars really fast!! :slight_smile: . Yesterday my car was half done and then, I saw the last entry available, what?!, hence I only had time to meet the requirements and send it without setting up properly…, some values might be better, like off-road (below 50).

Anyway there’s no problem, I think this body is not the optimal choice, so I don’t expect to much (even less reading about the average values on Tycondero’s post).

That’s how my ride looks:


I won’t be surprised if it will be last place car

Not likely, from what I recall. There is a terrible car (sorry, but true) that takes that spot.

I am afraid to say this but…my car may actually NOT be at the bottom this time… what did I do wrong??? ROFLOL!!

Feeling pretty good about this based on the averages. I know I’m not at the bottom, anyway. :smiley:



BTW, I also omitted the cat-converter on my car because MY thinking was you don’t want to park over some nice dry Savannah grass with a stupidly hot cat-converter roasting it till it bursts into flames and you end up burning a village down.