The first ever G6
The New Baumhauer 3 Series
The Baumhauer 3 Series is at the forefront of innovation in the compact executive segment. Launched in late 1994, the 3 Series debuted a new, evolutionary design language which would eventually be used in the entirety of Baumhauer’s car lineup. The 3 Series had a wide choice of engines ranging from four to six cylinders, forgoing the five cylinder engines which Baumhauer is famous for.
The model shown is the Baumhauer 318t, which is powered by a technologically advanced 1.8 litre engine with a new 5-valve head design and a turbocharger producing 150hp which is sent to the wheels via the optional Vier™ advanced all-wheel drive system. The Vier™ gives the car excellent traction in all road conditions for a more secure and enganging driving experience, though front-wheel-drive models are no slouch either. The 318t is available with a choice of either a 5-speed tiptronic transmission or a 5-speed manual transmission.
© 1994 Baumhauer AG. All rights reserved
I feel like it’s a perfect slugfest between BMW 325i and Audi A4 1.8t, ehm, I mean, Primus Merit 250 against the Baumhauer 318t.
You never disappoint in terms of design, that’s a great looking sedan.
Get behind the wheel of our refined Tramontana sedan ! This special edition adopts a 4.3L V8, carefully raised in the Alps, ready to sing it’s heart out. Producing 300 hp and paired to our IAT5O automatic transmission, you get to a hundred kph from a standstill in a close 6 seconds. The speed is electronically limited to 250kph, while maintaining a fuel consumption of 12l / 100 km. A car that will turn heads around, for 25 000$.
Swanson 225 NP
Submissions are closed.
Expect reviews and results in 24 hours.
One evening, Don is about to settle down for his after-work routine, when he decides to check the latest issue of Highway & Raceway for reviews on the current crop of mid-sized executive cars. Before he does so, however, his mind briefly turns to the few cars that were ineligible for consideration for one reason or another:
@shibusu - IAS Griffin Executive - Engine variant year of 1991 instead of 1994. That aside, poor reliability (stemming from the use of a turbocharged all-alloy I5) and untreated steel panels would have kneecapped what looked like a promising entry due to its well-executed styling.
@Bbestdu28 - BMA Tramontana 430 - Car techpool allocation exceeded by 3. Not only that, but this is a min-max-fest, with negative quality points in some areas, and a very poorly sorted suspension that is prone to bottoming out. Besides, its (flat-crank) V8 engine means that this car could upstage the higher-ups Don answers to.
@crwpitman1 - Canmo Kestrel Executive - Used default engine tech pool values (+5 in all areas) instead of stipulated maximum of 10 points in total. Also, although the power peak is at 6400 rpm, why on Earth is the rev limiter set at 8000 rpm? This defies all logic, and would have left Don shaking his head in disbelief at such an odd decision.
This leaves Don with 11 cars to consider, so here is what H&R thought about them.
@Jaimz68 - FM HiWay Exec - “Aesthetically, the HiWay suffers from odd proportions and a front end that appears too soft for this class of car. And with outdated components such as semi-trailing arm rear suspension and recirculating ball steering, it’s not as competitive as it seems, even considering its relatively low price.”
@Happyhungryhippo - Primus Merit 250 Elegance - “Apart from brake fade issues (due to undersized brakes and no brake cooling) and somewhat soft suspension, the Merit has a lot of, erm, merit. It has plenty of standard equipment (including stability control) and looks the part inside and out, with commensurate performance. Staggered tires could complicate servicing, though.”
@Knugcab - IP Vagant 3000 GLX - “Underneath its generic bodywork lies conservative mechanicals (an 18v SOHC V6 without VVT). Some parts of it are overbuilt, but not needlessly so; however, a luxury stereo with a cassette tape deck but no CD player leaves it behind the times somewhat.”
@Lanson - FMC Kingfisher 250 - “One of the best all-rounders in its class, and it has the presence to match thanks to crisp, modern styling. Although a passenger side airbag is not standard, everything else meets or exceeds our expectations for a premium car of this type - you should definitely put this on your shopping list.”
@nightwave - Hydrion Orinoco - “It’s hardly a looker, and is suspension is generally stiffer than it should be. Recirculating ball steering and weak, under-cooled brakes don’t help its cause, either.”
@DuceTheTruth100 - Allure G6 - “Lackluster styling, excessive oversteer, a strange choice of transmission (a non-electronically controlled 5-speed automatic?) and overly stiff damping rates are enough to make anyone turn away.”
@GetWrekt01 and @vouge - Siegert Chelson LSi - “It looks the part, but like the Allure, it suffers from the oversteer bug - we suspect it’s because its tires are too wide and/or its engine is mounted too far aft. A huge shame, considering how well it scores across the board otherwise.”
@S_U_C_C_U_L_E_N_T - Baumhauer 318t - “Cleanly styled for the Nineties, but that sleek body conceals an unusual mechanical package - that longitudinally-mounted turbocharged 20v straight four drives the front wheels instead of the rears, leading to improved drivability and, sadly, higher than average servicing costs. Anyone who buys these things should therefore do so with caution.”
@conan - DSM Everlast VR - “This is too easily mistaken for a scaled-up Camry given its price, and for something at the top of our price range, it’s not the most exciting car to drive, thanks to high body roll. Even considering its comfortable ride, we think it’s generally too dull to cut any ice among image-conscious buyers.”
@mart1n2005 and @xsneakyxsimx - Jager D300 - “It has the pace to back up its panache, which helps justify its top-dollar pricing. Apart from a few oddities, such as a very soft suspension and long gearing with individual ratios that are as closely spaced as possible, this is one of the most competitive cars in its class.”
@Ludvig - Swanson 225 NP - “Another victim of chronic oversteer syndrome, presumably because its flat-six engine sits too far aft. Ignoring that for a moment, it has a menacing beak nose, but its body has truly bizarre proportions, with a very short front overhang and a very long rear overhang. You’d need to be out of your mind and at your wits’ end to even consider driving, let alone buying, one of these.”
After a brief period of deliberation, Don settled on the FMC Kingfisher 250 as his next car. Using the money earned from trading in his previous ride, he was able to specify a few desirable options, such as a passenger airbag and traction control, in addition to the Kingfisher’s standard features, and he drove off the dealer lot feeling as contented as ever.
2nd: @mart1n2005 and @xsneakyxsimx
Many thanks to everyone who entered! I hope you enjoyed entering this QFC as much as I did hosting it.
Well, I guess the Vagant kind of shows that it was a 1989 model due for replacement in 1995 here.
for winning though.
A shame, as it was well-made but too conservative in it’s appeoach. If the customer would have been an old lady, that car would propably have made it.
The judging was really quick this time, however, reviews were short but giving enough feedback to know what’s right and wrong with the cars.
Third seems like a good result for a good car, and the Merit is one of my better-styled cars, this time, my sometimes difficult visual taste didn’t shoot me in the foot.
If it’s not a huge hassle, may I see how the steering graph looks on your end?
Here it is:
One indicator that a car tends to oversteer is a low-speed steering graph (left) that peaks in the red area.
Hmm, that’s actually slightly different from what I saw last on my end, and since you mentioned larger rear tires, which did exist on the car at one point but not in the last revision…
I’m assuming it’s automation doing a goof and exporting a slightly backdated version of the car, despite me exporting it multiple times to avoid this.
Apparently I forgot about the low-speed oversteer. Proportions are whack from many angles yes, like every subcompact sedan. A front stretch and lower a-pillar move are on the menu for v3 (the rally car CSR was v2 branch)
Anyway congrats to winner and on a quick fire challenge.
Ah. Oops. Considering I made the final checkups well in to the night I don’t find it surprising I missed it haha. Then again the engine wasn’t that great anyway.
Should’ve payed more attention. Whoops.
I enjoyed submitting a car for this though, besides being binned. I’ll try again next round!
Yay I tried really hard refreshing the Kingfisher. Usually I get burned for making “all-rounder” cars but it looks like this time that corporate strategy paid off.
I’ll host then.
I’ll start thinking about what QFC20 will be and may do a bit of a poll. I keep coming back to 60’s amateur drag racing.
All other things being equal, in 1994, a turbocharged and/or all-alloy engine would have been less reliable than a normally aspirated and/or iron-block equivalent - yours had an aluminum block and heads in addition to a turbocharger, which explains its low reliability score compared to most of the other engines in the field.
That was because of the 3 Star impact from comfort, and because this was as far as I was concerned not meant to be a sports sedan. But I’m happy to get a podium finish.
QFC20 is up!
We’re going with GT homologation cars from 1967, limit 4000cc engines.