QFC21 Reviews
Part 1: Hall of Shame
These cars either broke the rules or were not submitted before the deadline.
Luma X - RS by @randomBullets: Did not follow tech pool requirement, instead using default settings of +5 in all areas. That aside, it uses a very old body set (the '88 DustBuster-like minivan), runs on race car tire sizes (230mm width all around) and has rear drum brakes, among other things, which would have marked it down massively.
IP Boulevard Star by @Knugcab: This one was not submitted before the deadline. A shame, especially considering how good it looked at first glance.
Note to all challenge entrants: If you submit an ad for your entry on a challenge thread before the deadline, don’t forget to do the same for its corresponding .car file; otherwise, it won’t count as a submission, and you won’t be treated as an entrant in that particular challenge!
Part 2: The Rest
As for the cars that did follow the rules and were submitted on time, here is what Highway & Raceway had to say about them:
Mallpark MV-2 by @HighSpeed85 - “With an all-iron engine, no VVT, a redline on the power peak, and a non-electronically controlled 5-speed automatic transmission, the MV-2 is utterly outclassed by its opposition - its overly simplistic styling doesn’t help its cause, nor does its use of an electric LSD (which is overkill for a car of this type). Even its high safety score and low service cost aren’t enough to redeem it.”
Astoria Serenity by @nate21 - “It looks the part and is cheap to service, but beauty is only skin deep in this case. The Serenity doesn’t actually live up to its name, thanks to very awkward suspension and brake tuning, and its electronic LSD (which the Mallpark also has) is overkill for a minivan. Also, its environmental resistance is surprisingly poor.”
Ascot Dragoon LX 3.4 by @xsneakyxsimx - “Apart from high fuel consumption and an unusually soft suspension (from an active setup at that), the Dragoon is generally well-sorted overall. Slightly oversized headlights aside, we also reckon it also has the right look to impress families, especially with its robust rustproofing.”
THETA Sontu by @Lanson - “Quite a looker, and not just for a minivan, the Sontu backs up its panache with lots of standard equipment, including a full luxury interior, although there is still some headroom in our budget for extra kit, like a luxury infotainment system and fully active suspension. Even without them, it’s quite expensive to service, but that’s a sacrifice worth making.”
Schwann K280 by @Hilbert - “More of a science experiment than a practical car, its all-aluminum structure saves weight but increases repair costs. We also complained of lapses in build quality, poor safety, and undersized rear brakes. Overall, not as good an idea in practice as it is in theory.”
AAAA Magnum FamilyMax Executive by @machalel - “A very quirky, boxy design, ruined by a low safety score (relative to the opposition), very high service costs (even more so than the THETA) and unusually high body roll. Also, 19-inch steel wheels and low-profile tires don’t make sense in this day and age - it really deserves some proper alloy wheels.”
Swanson 317 TPM by @Ludvig - “Another great all-around choice, with sharp styling that turns heads for the right reasons. Its engine is longitudinally mounted and drives the front wheels, which is unusual for a minivan, but even so, it’s still cheaper to service than most of the cars here. It’s also a smaller, less comfortable car, but makes up for it with superior drivability and economy.”
BMA Bastide 180 by @Bbestdu28 - “In our eyes, it looks just as good as the Swanson, if not better, but upon closer examination, it doesn’t live up to its looks - it returned inferior statistics overall, and at a higher price to boot. We therefore don’t expect its showroom appeal to last very long in the real world, even with its use of weight-saving aluminum bodywork.”
Canmo Branta by @crwpitman1 - “Another small minivan that looks the part, but this one is let down by its cheap semi-independent torsion beam rear end. The suspension in general is also stiffly sprung and doesn’t use progressive springs, which is strange for something meant to be a family car. Overall, another case of all style and no substance.” (OOC: This car did not have traction or stability control - had I mandated the fitment of the latter, to reflect current safety laws, it would have been in the Hall of Shame, but even without it, it wouldn’t have made the top 3).
Orion Visios by @Hshan - “Back to bigger stuff this time, but the Visios stands out for being AWD. It looks good enough on paper, but on the inside, the cheap standard infotainment system jars with the premium interior. As such, the Visios is not as comfortable as we would have wanted it to be.”
Hinode Aries 350 Premium by @S_U_C_C_U_L_E_N_T - “Like the Visios, this is another large minivan, but the Aries is an Asian-style one - and a very good-looking one at that. It’s the only rear-drive car here, and has a proper luxury infotainment system to keep the occupants better entertained at all times. Our only complaint is fuel consumption that’s a bit on the high side (though not as bad as the Ascot), but it’s still one of the better high-end options in the segment, especially with its low service costs.”
Jub by @Vento - “Its name is (almost) as ridiculous as its looks. Seriously, don’t use a grille fixture in place of proper headlights! Also, the taillights are mounted too low and too close to the rear bumper. What a shame, especially as it posted best-in-class drivability figures.”
Artezza Sofia Veloce by @Kevin980 - “Compared to the eyesore that was the Jub, this looks a whole lot better, but its highly strung turbo four makes a lot of torque in the low/mid-RPM range, which compromises drivability and reliability somewhat. Even so, it’s quite comfortable for something that has a mere premium interior and infotainment, and semi-active dampers and active sway bars help in that regard, but you still need to be brave to buy one.”
Amun L2.5M by @Sosy31 - “While it matches the Sofia for visual panache, its all-iron engine is an unreliable minmax-fest, and its bodywork is devoid of rustproofing of any kind. Also, its staggered tires seem out of place on a minivan, and it also has the highest as-tested price of the lot ($50k?!) and worst-in-class reliability (not helped by its use of active suspension). The upshot is that we cannot recommend the Amun to anyone serious about buying a minivan.”
Kosmo Sayugje 6T - “On paper, this looks like a winner, with good all-around stats everywhere, especially when coupled with AWD, although its 7-speed gearbox needs an extra gear or two in an era where 8 or more speeds are the norm. It looks good enough to win, too, but we found it to be thirstier than the rear-drive Aries. This would be easily forgivable if it weren’t for the fact that it tied the Amun for price, at $50k. Less forgivable is the fact that the safety kit on our test car was slightly faulty. Overall, a tempting proposition at first glance, but others offer better value for money.” (OOC: The reason why it costs so much despite only having a premium interior and infotainment system is because it uses copious amounts of positive quality in some areas, including the interior itself.)
Huron VX-80 Coil S by @OT_motive - “It looks more macho than other minivans, and in fact is one of the better-looking minivans here, although some customers may be turned off by its SUV-like aesthetic. However, there are a few fatal flaws underneath its blocky skin. Having only solid disc brakes is bad enough, but here, they’re set up very badly. Also, you’d expect a mass-market car, especially a minivan, to have progressive springs, but the Huron does not. To add insult to injury, it only has a standard infotainment suite, and not a HUD-based one either. Worst of all, its gearing is far too short, which makes it the thirstiest car here by far.” (OOC: Too much braking force on the rear, and too little on the front? This is a reminder to adjust your front and rear braking force sliders to match the grip levels of the respective axles!)
Part 3: Final Results
3rd: The THETA Sontu looked the part on the outside and delivered a strong overall performance, but was ultimately undone by high servicing costs. Then again, it had a luxury interior, so it wasn’t completely unexpected.
2nd: Hinode came very close to the overall win with a rear-drive minivan - it cost a lot less to service than the THETA and outperformed it in many key areas, except for fuel economy and practicality. Also, just look at it!
1st: Swanson’s small wonder, the 317 TPM, may not be the most comfortable car in its class, but it still takes the win by the slimmest of margins. In particular, it beats the other two finalists on economy, practicality and drivability. The fact that its sportiness rating is highest among the top three cars is icing on the cake.
Final Standings (for hosting):
1st: @Ludvig
2nd: @S_U_C_C_U_L_E_N_T
3rd: @Lanson
4th: @xsneakyxsimx
5th: @Bbestdu28
Many thanks to everyone who entered - I hope you enjoyed this QFC as much as I did!
