It depends. My Gasmea car gets it, the Frunian not.
Sorry for double posting, but this is now the promised big update in the thread.
I wont judge the cars not only by objective scores but also after a long test drive in BeamNG. I thougt the community would only accept hard facts, but looking at the CSR and other competitions i am pretty surprised (in a positive way) that some honest test drive reviews are ok for most people.
The judgement will be the following:
The scores in each category will be added, some categories have higher value than others:
drivability: x1,5
comfort: x1,5
reliability x1,2
practicality: x1,0
utility: x0,8
safety: x0,8
environmental resistance: x0,7
sportiness x0,5
Now that is part one.
The second one will be points in a rating from 1 to 25 in the categories
consumption
maintenance
price.
The best car gets 25 points and I will downgrade the rest appropriately so that it should be fair
The last part is the test drive in Beam NG, same thing here, 25 for the best, the others will be compared to the benchmark. Multiple disciplines.
Deadline 15.03.2019 is now confirmed.
But now its time to present the entry for Gasmea:
CMT L-Class L24 TX
The L-Class sedan is a family (sport, except luxury trim) premium car since 1976. The second generation launched in 1987 features a new, stiffer aerodynamic body and many internal improvements. The base trim comes with a threevalve 2.5L 5-cylinder engine and high level of standard features completed with a sporty setup. The taxi version has the following changes:
- smoother and slightly more reliable V6 engine, althoug a warmed-up old 1965 design.
- softer suspension and higher ride
- plastic bumper clads, unpainted mirrors
standard features are heated artificial leather seats, four-speed computer-controlled automatic transmission, a little wood decor on the dashboard, antilock disc brakes, dual airbags (new in 1990 for all models), variable hydraulic power steering and airconditioning identical to the civillian base model.
And now for Frunia:
CMT Regent CX
CMT has the 1987 Hypro compact sedan and the 1983 (facelifted just now in 1990) Mantra midsize sedan i the portfolio. But the Hypro is too modern and is quite costly in maintenance, going 30 Dollar over the maximum budget, while the Mantra canât hide its age and fails in safety by some 5 points.
And CMT thinks taxis need to be big sedans. The Regent, launched in 1975, got a last minor redesign in 1988, recieving a modern 4.3L V8, overworked automatic transmission, brand new air suspension and other things.
In the pictures you can see an original 1975 Regent V8 and the 1990 Taxi version.
Although being nearlly an oldtimer in the portfolio a lot has been done to let it fade out with glory. The front got new brighter and larger headlights, the rear as well. The reverse lights have been mounted higher for a better view in the dark. The reworked front and rear end is a little shorter, saving weight and space. Its still 5,2 meters longâŠ
All plastic bumpers are lighter and cheaper to replace.
Many aerodynamic tweaks have been done.
As new door handles and new mirrors, those even with also a larger field of view. But they did not fit to the doors, so they had to be mounted on the fender which looks really out of place.
The engine has been taken from the facelift Mantra, a brand new 1.8L four. A shame for a former luxury car. As the performance is rather low and the car still not as aerodynamic as new ones a manual was the only option to let it reach at least 170 kph top speed. The whole giant car is not as heavy as you might think, the acceleration is surprisingly acceptable.
Even if that 108-horsepower car is rather a vasectomy compared to its former glory and pride, it fulfils the specs wanted in Frunia. Often very, very close, but at least it does.
The Jidosha K. Hino-F 848 is⊠is a âmodernizedâ version of an earlier car, and is intended for both markets.
it features premium quality comforts, automatic transmission, and a 3.8 Liter I6 making 100 Horsepower.
I wont disclose more since⊠there really isnât much more to disclose about it. Enjoy?
maybe if we donât tell them, they wont know itâs old stock from Archana?
8 Likes
Does this refer to servicing costs? Iâm sure it does.
And is there a minimum limit on cargo volume? After all, paying passengers are likely to carry lots of stuff with them.
Yes, it does.
And there is no real minimum cargo volume, although what you write is definitely correct. But I think nobody will send me a convertible, by now all entries have rather spacious trunks.
is it possible to extend the deadline?
5 days is fairly shallow considering the ruleset is comfirmed for only 12 hours
Letâs say I will start to test the cars on March 15 and that will take a few days, especially a proper review writing. March 18 is deadline for late entrants, until then I wonât reject cars as there wonât be results until March 20
same to me. its only possible with a sedan âŠ
can you lower it to 45 please?
wellâŠ
iâve been looking at the regulations and there are some things which do not really make sense in my eyesâŠ
1st: environmental resistance
why does Gasmea require more resistance if they have more consistent and generally better weather than most Fruinians?
(there are legit regions in the US where cars do not rust at all)
2nd: reliability
again. why do 'Muricans want more of it?
gas is cheap as f**ck and cars are simple enough to be fixed manually. In conjunction with the higher comfort needs this is kinda questionableâŠ
(you can meet reliability with ease tho)
3rd: emmissions
assuming you are looking at trim emissions, you can get by without a cat in Fruinia. In a time where almost all cars had a three-way.
4th: utility
Have you ever seen a Taxi towing stuff?
i havenât.
5th: fuel
91RON in 'Murica? Fine by me
91RON in most of europe.
well⊠available, and used by some cars at the time, but not terribly common considering 95 being a wide-spread thing here.
6th: scoring
remember me talking about suggesting to ditch the formula?
or at least keep it secret?
you pretty much replaced the old one with a new system completely abuseable by all the entrants.
Tho having the â25 Points systemâ is a step in the right way.
This is not meant to come across as rude. If it does, i am sorry for that, but i am just putting my concerns here since i actually started building nowâŠ
Here is my list of suggested changes:
- lower both Environmental Resistance values to around 30-ish, because rustproofing and early 90s did not go that well together
- make Emissions a bit more stringent, espeecially Fuinia
- cut utility altogether.
- allow 95RON in Fruinia
- sorry⊠but revamp scoring a second timeâŠ
EDIT:
what i like is not being constrained by ET/ PU limits.
allows for engineering creativity 
1 Like
I wonât reject a car if itâs close to the specs needed. That means 10% of the needed value, for 50 its 5 then, so a safety 45 car will be able to take part here. But consider: If itâs under the maximum score, the lacking points will be doubled and the score will be reduced by it.
For example you need 50 reliability and you have 46, so your score will be reduced by 8 points. That allows cars that are not meeting the requirement but are otherwise overall good to take part.
If you go over the financial limits, you will get half the points of what you otherwise get. The best car got 25, you in relation to the best still 10, but I will give you only 5 then.
I canât make it any more fair because otherwise it would be a disadvantage for those who did reach the scores I wanted to have.
hmmâŠ
seen that scoring system before:
MinMaxed for driveability and blew the competition
Thanks for your honest and constructive critique.
It might be better to stick to the 25 point system overall.
I am a little afraid I am confusing the participants by doing one step foward and two steps back, then going sideways. But this is my first competition since nearlly three years and the last one was just all about lap times, so much easier.
To your comments:
-
I saw that a 1990 car is prone to rust, but this is exactly why the commisions of these countrys want it to be resistant. They should last long even in Alaska or Sweden.
-
91 RON was quite common in Europe in 1990, but you are right, the early 90 made the turn towards 95 RON. A taxi burns a lot of fuel in its life, so Frunia still goes for the cheaper one. In a 2000 contest that might follow if this one turns out to be fun it will be definitely 95.
I am not trying to stop you from doing unconventional things, thatâs why I dont like ET and PU limits. if a car is sold exclusive to taxi fleets, it doesnt need mass producion to meet the demand. And you are not limited in your entries, you can easily throw in a second one if you want me to try out different concepts.
the 25 point system is not what has been bothering me.
in fact, i do like t since it is detailed enough to give the entrant a clear view of what is wanted, but vague enough to (mostly) prevent overly aggressive Min-Maxing
what was concerning to me is the âfirst partââŠ
people can deduct the exact score calculation formula based on the info give in there, thus provoking the MinMax towards the more important stats.
Example, if a change, despite being unrealistic, trades a point of sportiness for a point of comfort, the typical MinMaxxer will go for it, because âi get a point out of itâ.
Thats really cheap for the C-Class body. I am looking foward to test its abilites.
1 Like
Does the number of seats affect score?
Indirectly yes. A taxi needs 5 seats and a decent trunk. 7-seaters are of course more versatile, and van bodies score better in practicality which I consider in the evaluation. But its the question if this is superior over the disadvantages a van has compared to a sedan.
So thereâs no instabin or severe penalty for submitting a four-seater?
No instabin, but it will definitely be a thumb down for that. Depending on the other scores of the car, it might be still able to hold up.
