Yeah, I wanted to use a modern invasion specifically to give that low-end torque surge. I don’t think the game actually likes it for most applications when you do that.
^ I am actually disappointed in how little HP and torque and where the engine produces the ratings come into play for utility and the like. If you have a truck that can take a thousand pound payload, or tow several tons, you’re going to need a considerable amount of torque.
I am bit late to the party, but i submitted my entry anyways 
I aimed at max points therefor nothing special came out, but i think its a good mix. A healthy 6L V8 with DFI and a engine reliability of 85. You can fuel with sand, no problem. Going for turbos was not worth it IMO.
I’m more curious than ever to see how I stack up in the end, given I appear to be in the minority that used a turbo… And that it doesn’t seem to have played to my favour.
I’m going to leave my entry as is, but after reading the discussions, I discovered that the VVT did almost nothing for my engine. Seems like it should at least affect efficiency .01%, but it doesn’t. I also used MOHV.
My goal was to have as much usable torque in the 2k to 3k RPM range as possible while still maintaining between 11 and 12 MPG. I used an all Aluminum 6.8L V8 with Turbo. I ended up with a flat 550-555 FT-LB of Torque between 2200RPM and 2800RPM with a gradual drop thereafter to about 400FT-LB at the 5.1k RPM redline. Max Horsepower is 386 @ 5k RPM. This gives my 5700lb truck 11.8MPG. I went with traditional MPI, though DI would have given me significantly better stats overall. I used MPI to keep initial costs and running costs down, but the running cost penalty for DI doesn’t seem as high in this patch as last.
The price with a 5% markup is $36,960. I look forward to seeing how mine compares with everyone elses!
1 last truck before the deadline! the Rhino 3500 1 ton XL with a proper heavy duty 6.9 turbo straight 6 that’s totally not a Cummings diesel, good for 15mpg.
Alright folks, we are just under 24 hours until the deadline. All submitted trucks have been reviewed up to this point. No promises for further inspections that will allow for more revisions before the deadline. All entries received before the clock rolls over into Jan. 9, 2016 US Eastern Time will be inspected and entered into the challenge so long as they meet all requirements.
If you have recently sent in a truck, check the OP or your inbox about your status.
Additionally, I have some interesting stuff in the works for the end of this challenge, but that’s a surprise.
You guys have all sent in great trucks and this has been fun for me. [size=50](So far.)[/size] GOOD LUCK!
Alright folks, we are under 1 hour until all finalized submissions must be received in my inbox. I will not be inspecting entries again until tomorrow. At this time, all 24 submitted entries have passed inspection.
[size=150]24th[/size]
VMO, Montes Canyonero Pickup - 626.94 Points
With a unibody construction of aluminum and partial aluminum panels, this truck was just a little more flimsy than most. The reduced rigidity allowed for almost 20 US MPG on a combined road test. Problem was getting off the line and operations under load. With a short first gear that was just an instantaneous onslaught of power, it was very difficult to engage the clutch on this 6 speed manual transmission. With over 500 Ft-Lbs of torque from a big twin-turbo V8, you could feel the body flex due to its all-aluminum construction when there was a heavy payload or trailer. One of the least safe and least practical trucks in the competition, this truck scored higher than most in areas that weren’t as essential, while falling flat where it counted.
[size=150]23rd[/size]
thecarlover, Solo Brute BM 4x4 - 648.78 Points
What I would have considered as one of the best looking trucks in the competition just didn’t have the guts to make it the full all-rounder. The truck was built with a corrosion resistant steel frame and partial aluminum panels which may have given it an edge over the competition if it had a motor to match. Equipped with an exactly 4L, all aluminum, 24-valve, I6 that made 275 HP at the redline and only 297 Ft-Lbs of torque a few hundred RPMs sooner, this truck just couldn’t make use of its power. Getting off the line was difficult for the motor which consumed more fuel at low RPMs than it did screaming down the road. The Solo Brute was a looker, but it was a weak truck where it counted most.
[size=150]22nd[/size]
Matti, Repreni - 669.97 Points
If you walked into a dealer and asked for the most simple and basic truck available that could seat three, you would walk out with a Repreni. This thing was cheap to buy with an MSRP of $25095 and cheap to run with an Automation combined fuel economy of over 26 US MPG. It was also a very drivable truck, mostly due to its small size. It was lightweight and very zippy and kind of fun to run around town for a couple of things and it did pretty well on paper, but hooking a couple ton trailer to this puppy out in the field was its ultimate downfall even with 300 Ft-Lbs of torque coming in at 2700 RPM from a turbocharged 3.7L I6. This was a little truck competing in the wrong weight class. If you straddle the line between blue and white collar, this truck might suit you well, but it will not last under challenging conditions.
[size=150]21st[/size]
Madrias, Storm Wolf P1600D - 680.71 Points
I wanted to love this truck. I wanted it to place very well, but sadly, it didn’t. I had a premium interior, a monstrous 12.2L V12 that made 573 HP and an almost perfectly flat torque curve that topped out at 773 Ft-Lbs. No, that is not a typo. The only time there was less than 700 Ft-Lbs of torque available was when the starter was spinning the engine. I could have done some switching work at the local rail yard with this thing and have been completely comfortable while still managing 13.3 MPG. I still might go buy one of these just because 'Murica. Where did it go wrong? Honestly, the double wishbone suspension was where this truck fails you. With so much torque, you miss that solid rear axle to keep things solid in the rear. This design also limited the truck’s payload and towing capabilities because the suspension just wasn’t rugged enough. This thing is also very hefty to start with making the huge, but already taxed brakes go squishy with any extra weight whatsoever, brake early when towing or hauling. It also was in a tie for the least reliable truck we tested. (Although, not by much and I wouldn’t dare call it unreliable.) You expect a little more in the hardware department from such a premium vehicle.
[size=150]20th[/size]
Slax, Ratpack - 683.97 Points
This truck was different in aesthetics, design, and target demographic. For $55,650 you got an AHS steel unibody, aluminum panels, 4 doors, 4 premium seats, 4WD, a sequential transmission, and 357 HP at the 6000 RPM redline and 329 Ft-Lbs @ 4800 RPM from a 4.7L V6. I was confused when I got into this truck. For the life of me, I couldn’t figure out why there was a big gap between the seats in the back or why I couldn’t find the gear shift. Then I read the build sheet from Slax and found that it was equipped with a sequential transmission and only 4 seats by design. I think these choices, as well as the lack of a separate frame, were mistakes. This truck also lacked ABS, but had stability control. Luckily, the truck had almost a 53/47 weight distribution, or you would be locking up the brakes in the rear every time you slowed down since trucks are notoriously light over the rear axle. Now this truck wasn’t nearly as drivable, wasn’t as comfortable, had less power, and cost a whole lot more than the Storm Wolf P1600D, but edged it in our tests because it had a solid axle with coil springs. I wasn’t a fan of the sequential transmission, and it was a little finicky when shifting with a load on board, but the rear end held up.
[size=150]19th[/size]
Vri404, Titanus XT-2-4 - 684.08 Points
We almost didn’t get a Titanus, but after an e-mail to Vri404, one arrived in time for our testing, much to my pleasure. I was not disappointed in my first impression. The exterior is simple, yet rugged and under the hood was enough to make you drool. A 5.7L V8 twin-turbo making 806 HP and 608 Ft-Lbs of torque. On paper I thought it was going to spank the Storm Wolf P1600D in every way, and I liked that truck. But then I looked at some things a little closer. That 806 HP shows up at 7100 RPM. The torque? At 6800. The truck costs $50610 and also comes with 4 premium seats. It weights just over 6000 lbs. and earns an 8.8 US MPG rating. This truck was pedestrian if not sluggish to 4000 RPM when the turbos spooled. Then there was a swift, but not too sharp climb from 315 Ft-Lbs and 300 HP to the peak numbers. It’s just not usable power. It owned the drag strip, and tied for least reliable.
[size=150]18th[/size]
HighOctaneLove, Boliq Haulage Texas - 685.14 Points
This truck was your basic, run-of-the-mill pickup with a nice interior. Powered by a 4.6L V8 that was perfectly square and composed of all AlSi, it made 290 HP @ 6900 RPM and 291 Ft-Lbs of torque @4000 RPM. Can you say balanced? It got 17.8 MPG and was built on a steel frame with aluminum panels and came with leaf springs. Its downfall was the fact that it was just so average, but cost $46515. You would expect a little more power, or a specialization in at least one area. With only 2 seats, the truck is also lacking in family practicality. This truck does everything well and nothing great, and that’s where it lands in 18th overall.
[size=150]17th[/size]
koolkei, Puller - 685.17 Points
BARELY beating out the Haulage Texas for 17th, this truck fell into the same category as its closest competitor. Too average. This truck only stood out in the fuel economy category, earning a rating of 21.3 MPG. It was also much cheaper with an MSRP of $33390, but it wasn’t as nicely equipped with only 2 seats and a standard interior and a 4.5L Flatplane V8 made entirely of cast-iron which produced 299 Ft-Lbs @ 2300 RPM and 252 HP at the 5600 RPM redline, although our mechanics said it might make more ponies with an aftermarket exhaust. Comically, the pre-production prototype we initially received was taken from us just before testing. While mechanically the same as the original, the tested version looks so much better and probably earned it the tenth of a point in the right places to jump into 17th.
[size=150]16th[/size]
Sillyworld, Conqueror Rockefeller - 689.60 Points
At first I wondered why this truck would have the name Rockefeller attached, then it showed up and the reflection of the sun from all of the chrome blinded me despite my sunglasses… You, surprisingly, do not need to be a Rockefeller to purchase this truck. $38,955 gets you a 5-seater premium truck. It has all corrosion resistant frame and body and comes with an all cast-iron 5.5L over-square MOHV V8 that makes 342 HP at the 6200 RPM redline and 342 Ft-Lbs @ 3500 RPM. This all comes from a Mexican company and achieves 9.9 MPG. Can you get any more American than that? This truck was actually pretty good considering its more pedestrian price tag. However, that cheaper price showed up in the essential categories where this truck just fell a few points short of its better competitors. The brakes would also struggle under the 5590.6 pound truck. Adding weight only made the brakes give sooner. A few thousand dollars might have gone a long way in this truck.
[size=150]15th[/size]
Sebesseg, Sampson - 695.04 Points
I liked this truck as soon as I saw it because it was so green that it reminded me of my John Deere tractor. If I gave out bonus points, this truck would have just earned them. Presumably named for the biblical character, I expected this truck to be strong. With a 512 HP DOHC 32-valve 4.8L V8 made of cast-iron, I was not mistaken. The power was almost linear from idle to the 8000 RPM redline and the torque curve was a work of art. At 3000 RPM the motor was making 325 Ft-Lbs and it peaked, if you can call it that, at 346 Ft-Lbs and damn-near held it all the way to the redline. This thing was drivable, it was comfortable, it had premium interior, it got 13.2 MPG, it had an MSRP of $44,205. Only problem? A manual transmission that limited its practicality. It was also a little low in some of the other highly weighted categories and in such a close competition, it probably cost a few positions. Still a good truck.
[size=150]14th[/size]
Manche, FMU Gaucho Extra - 701.49 Points
This truck placed here because it was easy on the wallet, but managed to get the job done. This will be a popular truck simply because it’s ordinary looking and extraordinarily inexpensive. For $27,195 you get an all-aluminum 5.1L MOHV V8 that makes 235 HP @ 5700 RPM and 297 Ft-Lbs @ 2700 RPM. The truck is pretty lightweight despite its all steel body-on-frame construction. It earns a nice 15.4 MPG to go with that design choice. It’s remarkably plain and is on par where it counts and falls a little behind in areas like safety and prestige. For the price though, it’s hard to beat. This budget friendly truck definitely punches above its price tag.
[size=150]13th[/size]
AirJordan, DoIt - 703.50 Points
I’ll be completely honest, I didn’t like the looks of this truck when I first saw it. But as you may have discerned by now, looks don’t mean much when work is the priority. So looks aside, we found a pretty good truck that still used the older (read: vanilla) body style. For $46,410 you get a standard 3-seater truck that has a 6.4L all-aluminum DOHC 40-valve V8 that makes 395 HP at the 5000 rpm redline and 453 Ft-Lbs @ 3500 RPM. This thing turned out to be a tank. It had a fantastic reliability score and the highest tested utility score. It took anything we threw at it, then it caught the stuff, handled it, then laughed at us and asked us if that was all we had. If this thing had a bigger cab and more seats with improved safety with the new body it may have just won the competition. Someone needs to update this and send it back to me to see what it would do. The 2012 version might surprise you after reading this.
[size=150]12th[/size]
Rollarider10, Mercusa Brutus Crew Cab AWD - 707.83 Points
I’m calling this thing the Angry Alligator because its name is too long and it looks like an alligator that just got drug out of a trailer park in Florida. (If someone wants to help me with images, you’ll know what I mean later.) Whoever designed this truck really likes sharp angles, because this thing has a lot of them. It sliced its way to 12th with an aluminum body on an AHS steel frame with a perfectly square 4L cast-iron V8 that makes 316 HP at the 6200 RPM redline and 275 Ft-Lbs @ 5000 RPM. This truck did exceptionally well when you consider the fact that is has one of the lowest utility ratings in the field. You have to go back to the Sampson, the Ratpack, or the Storm Wolf P1600D to really find similar utility ratings. There just wasn’t enough truck to bust into the top 10 despite the low sticker price of $30,765. It was also one of the least safe trucks that scored this high, which will also keep it out of some driveways.
[size=150]11th[/size]
Nialloftara, Rhino 3500 1 Ton XL - 708.76 Points
The 1 Ton was 1 spot outside of the top ten, but it did not disappoint. The exterior was plainly pleasing and I think the simplistic and functional look suits the truck well. I was surprised when I opened the hood to find a 6.9L (6852cc) OHV turbocharged I6 that gets 16.7 MPG. Look out when the diesel comes out hints this version of the Rhino. All you hear is turbo whistle when you hit the accelerator. 528 Ft-Lbs @ 1800 RPM is nothing to joke about. The Rhino has all the grunt you need all the time. It’s not even that difficult to control because the 10 PSI of boost is almost instantaneous arriving at 1600 RPM and staying constant until the 4600 RPM redline where the engine registers its highest 379 HP. The quick-spooling turbo is what cost this truck valuable spots however, with a drivability penalty coming with the design choice. Tires might also be a challenge to replace with 385/50R16 rear OEM tires. This 5-seater premium diesel wannabe will set you back $36,225.
[size=150]10th[/size]
Carskick, Skarlet 2500 - 711.76 Points
Fire the designer. That’s all I have to say about the fixture choice and placement. Moving on, this thing is in 10th for a reason. That reason was that it excelled in places where the other competitors slacked off. Safety, Prestige, and Comfort didn’t earn too many points, but scoring really high in all those categories, especially safety, pushed this truck above and beyond some of its closest competitors, even though it may have scored just a tad lower in the highly weighted stats. When fractions of a point separate the competition, I admire the choice to compromise on the heavy hitting areas in search of more overall accomplishment in the other venues. The engine department left nothing to be desired though with a 6.8L (6848cc) twin-turbo, all-aluminum MOHV V8 that made 386 HP @5000 RPM and 553 Ft-Lbs @ 2800. (I would love to see this engine and the one from the Rhino in a head-to-head match-up. Just look at the similarities!) The power was sudden and short-lived, but if you were in the sweet spot, this baby delivered and still managed 11.8 MPG.
[size=150]9th[/size]
KakarottSajyajin, Taurus - 712.84 Points
In 9th we finally find the LuxoTruck with an MSRP of $59,325 and a 3-seater with 2 doors, all the driver assists, luxury interior, premium entertainment, advanced safety and high quality everything. I was amazed at how light the truck was given how nice everything was. It didn’t even register 4,000 lbs. which helped achieve the 20.2 MPG rating which kept the truck from suffering too big of a penalty in the cost of ownership department. It was comfy, decently quick, and very drivable, but it lacked in safety, utility, and practicality. All the expense in the body and interior left little for the engine department. The engine was a relatively small 4.2L V6 that made 257 HP @ the 5900 RPM redline and only 282 Ft-Lbs @ 2600 RPM. It was also a very loud V6, which didn’t fit the mold of luxury truck at all. Perhaps they couldn’t afford to spend some more money on a better exhaust that didn’t choke the low powered engine any more. In the end, this truck kept the weight down, but just didn’t have enough power to do any real work with it. The nice interior will attract some, but 9th place seems like a generous placement for our metrics.
[size=150]8th[/size]
Puffster, ABR Mule - 721.75 Points
In 8th we finally make the points jump from average and above average trucks to solidly good vehicles. The only drawback with the ABR Mule is that is has too many forward facing lights to be operable in most states. Luckily, there’s an auxiliary switch that one of our testers used a piece of electrical tape to amend the labels a little. Instead of Off - Low - Med - High it was amended to Legal - Questionable - Blinding - Alternator Destruction. For $59,325 you expect to get some good stats pretty much everywhere. This truck was drivable, it was comfy, it was practical, and one of the most reliable. So why was it only 8th? Well 1) the top 7 trucks are just really good, and 2) it has the second worst utility only being beaten out by the Conqueror Rockefeller way back in the standings. It also only has standard interior while still tipping the scales at almost 6,000 lbs. The engine is a 6L all iron V8 that makes a flat torque curve that peaks at 391 Ft-Lbs @ 2500 RPM and 379 HP at the 6100 RPM redline. You would think it would be more practical, but the transmission has 8 gears, it’s an automatic, and there’s no towing mode or way to lock out some gears, so it shifts too often and cannot use its torque. It’s a shame to see a good motor limited by a transmission in the search for fuel economy which was a not jaw dropping 13.2. With so much weight on board the brakes were also questionable with brake fade showing up during regular driving. This is a case of the money could have done better elsewhere, but so much was thrown at it that it couldn’t not score well on paper.
[size=150]7th[/size]
BlastersPewPew, El Ranchero - 723.32 Points
This was one of the first trucks we tested and it scared me a little. It looked like it came straight from the 40s or 50s. It was an old school 2011 truck. I wasn’t sure if people would buy it or if Blasters got the model year memo. This truck is a sleeper in every sense of the word. First off is the fact that under the hood lies a 7L V12 and not your 1940s-need-a-V12 because the car is so heavy and the power per liter is so low. No, this was a 2011, get work done, high torque, efficient, naturally aspirated V12. I was impressed. A nice torque curve produced 460 Ft-Lbs @ 2600 RPM and 348 HP @ 5300 RPM with a 6200 RPM redline. You could satisfyingly wind out the gears in this old school, new rules truck. Those extra cylinders and usable 8-spd automatic helped place fuel economy at 14.9 US MPG. This truck excelled everywhere except comfort with a standard interior, practicality and safety with an older design, and price with an MSRP of $59535. Those setbacks were enough to offset the wonderful motor and smaller design choice that helped keep weight down and utility up.
[size=150]6th[/size]
strop, Canyon - 726.70 Points
As soon as I saw the shaker hood scoop I was 99.9999999% sure I knew who had submitted this truck. That being said I was also not surprised to see it do well in this competition, even though we weren’t taking these to Green Hell. I loved just about everything about the design of the body and appreciated the time that went into it. The suicide doors were a nice treat, but may cause a slight issue in tight parking lots and garages. Solution from the Hercules rep: take two spaces. I like that logic. Moving on, the Canyon was powered by a 5L all-aluminum, twin-turbo V8. It was rated for a rather modest 315 HP at the 5100 RPM redline and an impressive 431 Ft-Lbs @ 2100 RPM thanks to the turbos. This truck was a great all-rounder. It scored well everywhere except reliability where it was on par, but a little low for this level of the competition. Even drivability was high with the quick spooling turbos and that was a nice touch. $34545 is not a lofty price to pay for a good all-round truck and it’s sure to be serviceable in the field with a fuel economy rating of 15.8 MPG. A little less weight and a little more power could have placed this 5-seater premium truck into the Top-5, but you’ll soon see that those 5 trucks took it to a whole level above where the Canyon wound up, although this truck gives you plenty of bang for your buck.
Reviews for 5th-1st forthcoming.
[size=85]At 10.5th: KLinardo, Boss FTC Benchmark - 711.41 Points[/size]
Great reviews! Shame post doesn’t include pictures (I know I am pushing a bit, sorry) but still very nice and enjoyable 
thanks for taking your time!
If someone was willing to take screenshots I took and upload them to an image host I would have no problems sending the images to them and then including them into my post.
I don’t know how to do all the fancy picture stuff. The full reviews of the top 5 are coming. These are just blurbs.
I’ll admit, I enjoyed seeing the little blurb about my truck. Figured the Double Wishbone was gonna kill me in the end, but I just couldn’t bring myself to use a solid axle. Still, I’m glad the V12 did the trick when coupled to that wonderful automatic transmission. 21st isn’t too bad, at least in my opinion.
Ooh I did better than I expected. Not bad for never making these vehicles. Maybe I should have gone a bit harder on the costs (it seems to be on the inexpensive side), and perhaps gone NA, but I just couldn’t bring myself to think I needed to increase it any more compared to real world conditions. We’ll see
7th!!! How the hell did my “truck” manage to pull that off???
Huh, Least Reliable! F*CK YEAH!
Best on the drag strip? Shit.
My rear tire choice reflects the lack of dually rear axle, same as my engine reflects a lack of diesel, my entry was designed for aspects we just don’t have in game, yet. Still I’m glad I managed to score so high.
Wow, very nice reviews!
Can’t wait for the rest 
I think you’ll see that I caught on to the diesel theme. I also figured you intended to go with dual wheel setup, since your fronts were only 235s.
I don’t know. That’s what scared me at first lol. I thought I completely botched the rules.
I hope you enjoyed it. I went a little fanboy on it for 21st place.
I did enjoy it. Wasn’t expecting it’d be a big hit, but I did what I did for a reason. Big V12 means I could make lots of power without revving the nuts off of the engine or blowing stuff up with turbochargers. Double wishbone front and rear for comfort, though if I’d have thought for a moment more, I’d probably have put either Multi-Link or Semi-Trailing Arm under the rear. Reasonably high-end interior because no one wants to spend that much on a truck to get crappy cloth seats and a cheap radio.
Honestly, I wasn’t expecting my truck to do well. I built it with a series of compromises, some that I do regret. I forgot for just a moment that we were building trucks, so I ended up building a comfortable car with a large amount of room to carry stuff in. As for Stage Two, I’m not sure what I’m going to do to the poor thing to make it quick, because I know for sure it won’t be fast.
Great blurbs, really give the competition so much more life and makes you a little proud of your truck. Pretty happy with the results, aiming even higher for the next part, but really stiff competition.
Awesome challenge so far!