Presenting the 1971 Diamond Azure Gold! Uncompromised power and luxury.
I am entering!
The Rado L-50 was b orn out of the company executive John Jake (now 50 years old) realizing the Rado L is out of taste for modern luxury buyers, at least ones wanting a coupe.
The L-50 was not meant to completely replace the 40s sedan, but to contemplate it (many in the company wanted the former)
They designed a coupe within 2 weeks, and begun building the first prototype.
The engine was essentially a variant of the one found in the Rado L, and the chassis too, but the suspension and the interior were from the ground up.
Quick, Quick, Quick! went the employees, as the project was finished in mere months. The result: A Ladder body slushbox 8-track inline-6 2-door luxury coupe.
Need I say more?
[X]
As of this post, we have 16 valid entries.
You guys are revealing photos and stats way too soon. You do know there are still 5 days left to enter, right? 
It looks like the same body is being preferred for several of the entries.
[quote=“ArnRno”]Ugh… I spent a ton of time on this contest, perfected my cat for days (349.9 PU), only to find out that since I don’t think in metric, my wheelbase has been a few inches short all along.
…and now the forum says I can’t upload pics because screenshots direct from Automation aren’t valid… It’s like Automation hates me.
Pics anyway: imgur.com/uKrxyu7
Unfair, I completely love this cat.
EDIT: GT cars of this era seemed to range from 2.2M to 2.6M for wheelbase… Too late to mention, I know, but damn![/quote]
That’s a nice looking car!
[quote=“ArnRno”]Ugh… I spent a ton of time on this contest, perfected my cat for days (349.9 PU), only to find out that since I don’t think in metric, my wheelbase has been a few inches short all along.
…and now the forum says I can’t upload pics because screenshots direct from Automation aren’t valid… It’s like Automation hates me.
Pics anyway: imgur.com/uKrxyu7
Unfair, I completely love this cat.
EDIT: GT cars of this era seemed to range from 2.2M to 2.6M for wheelbase… Too late to mention, I know, but damn![/quote]
I am sorry, while I cannot let you enter the competition with that car, if you would like I can allow you a honor spot in the blurb section for the time spent on the car. You would for all intents and purposes, be in last place automatically, unless all 16 who have entered so far decided to allow you to enter that car.
That will be my official stance.
I for one vote yes. What was the actual wheelbase? (I also forgot to check mine until the car was finished, then found that it just scraped through LOL)
Oh wow, my car has a tiny displacement V12 compared to some of the behemoths here. At a mere 284bhp, I think I’m going to get spanked in a drag race 
That being said my car is actually pretty quick off the line, and handles remarkably well for a car from 1971, thanks to its specially developed tyres.
Exquisite all around, the very definition of all things super in a car.
Yeah, mine barely meets the 2.5m requirement as well. It’s…2.50m! I actually chose it because of it’s wheelbase, however. There were two others under consideration, and this one was exactly the right length. I will abstain from voting to allow/disallow the efforts, but if 15 say yes, I won’t say no!
@07CobaltGirl - Thanks! I sure as hell agree.
@LordRed - Thank you for the offer, or, the offers - I have begun work on another cat, which I hate (original motor wouldn’t fit, ugh). I’d love to enter the original cat if everyone clears it, I like it a lot more - looking at all these other entries, it’s not going to win anyway. I can send you one, or none, or both.
@Strop - Thanks for your vote - Wheelbase is 2.34 meters, about 6 inches short of legal for this competition. Also, wow, I’m running a big iron 5 litre with a lot less power than that… and I thought I had a ton… When this is over, I’d be curios to see your drag race results.
Might still be here after all. 
I am running a small block aluminium V8 with over 400hp at the crankshaft. I can say more than 350 of it makes it to the rear wheels.
Welp, I’m farther from the pack than I thought - out of all the builds I did, the best one I put together was right on 230hp, and I thought that was overkill. Looking at some figures really quick from cars of the era, wow, high 2s to mid 3s, a lot more than I expected - my cat is no slouch, though, even by modern standards.
The potential replacement car I just drummed up has even less power, and though it’s a completely different car/chassis/engine/trans/etc., somehow the quarter-mile times are identical to the tenth… That’s weird… New car loses half its cylinders, and a third of its economy… Laaaaaaame.
Alot of the Supers, and very high end GTs were as you said, high 200s to low 300s.
And on the other side of that same coin, alot of American pony cars were pushing into the 400s SAE Gross
My latest try… Looks like some strange Australian Mustang II… Woof.
It doesn’t look it, but it’s like a foot longer than the last cat I made - it’s also better in every metric, except that I hate the way it looks and feels.
@LordRed - No doubt there, but look at the size of the motors we used back then - Europe could make the same with half, and would look and sound a lot better on the way there. Always hated the muscle/pony cars, America in the late 60s/early 70s was about the worst time for automotive design if you ask me. GTs and euro cars had so much more… everything… that’s why I really got into this contest…
I’ll enter this if all else fails.
Yes, a lot of variance between what American performance cars were defined by vs. what European performance cars thought were important characteristics. By 1971, the Muscle/Pony cars were in the high 400s if they were big block V8s (yes they still used SAE then, which is a bit higher than the net used today) and high 300s to low-mid 400s if they were small block V8s.
250 bhp in a lightweight car design is brutal, however, so they aren’t anything at which to sneeze! By comparison, those 400+ hp cars produced in America weighed in at 2 tons (4000 pounds or 1800kg), so the power was definitely required to move them.
@ArnRno - I disagree. They were great times for American cars!
I’ve got very little perspective on what car weights were like in the 70s. The American muscle, obviously, was one thing (and I’d argue if we didn’t have their gross, lumbering excesses back then we might not be reaping the benefits of inspired engineering to recreate the inspiration of that past today, so I’m all for that bit of our history).
I would have personally gone with a standard radio, sports seats and standard safety, if not for the fact we were making a GT Premium car. I’ve got pretty solid stats all across the board, but the car blew out to about 1280kg, giving me a power:weight of 222bhp:ton, which is, I guess, alright for the purpose.
Only gets about 12mpg though.
Behold! The poor-to-horrendous (depending on what you ate for breakfast) performing Vinter Jarn!
It has an engine, and a gearbox… in fact, a WHOLE drivetrain! That’s right! And seats… Stable, bolted-in seats that won’t go anywhere when you turn a corner - now that’s pure luxury.
Buy now! (Only if you want to, you know… ).
Excuse the design room… As you can see, things around here have been… “Better”.
Finally got around to participating on these forums .
I put together a car for this contest yesterday, decided I didn’t like it, scrapped it, and built a new one today which I ended up submitting The old one scored better in the GT premium market category, but the car I’ve submitted is a bit more balanced. My first crack at this challenge had some pretty laughable performance, but made up for it with spades of everything else. It looked alright. I was much more proud of the looks before I put together the car I submitted which IMO looks MILES better. The new car has pretty significantly improved sportiness at the cost of everything else; however, I feel it strikes a nice balance. The stats on my submission are much more even than its predecessor, and while it doesn’t fare as well in the GTP category I am much more proud of it. Not too concerned if it doesn’t place well. I’m much happier submitting the car I went with than the car that was more competitive in the market.
Who knows, it may make up for what it lacks in marketability in looks and performance, ending up equal to my first creation. Also, since last time I checked, it appears I may be the only one who went with a little V8 for this challenge 
. I went with a 3.6-ish (Can’t remember exactly, I deleted the car, lol) liter I6 that was detuned quite a bit for the first car. I swapped power for a smoother torque curve with plenty of low-end grunt. I went in a different direction and plopped a 3 liter flatplane V8 in the new chassis, tuned for more revs and with a high-end focused power band. I’d describe my submission as quite a bit more Italian inspired than it’s predecessor. I may get some more details on my submission and pictures into this thread sometime tomorrow at the earliest.
Considering what I know about the competition so far, I’m not entirely sure I’m going to place well 
. I’ve been lurking in these forums for a while and I’m very impressed with what some of the regulars in here can cook up. Oh well, I’m quite proud of my submission. That’s good enough for me.
what fuels did you guys picked?
since there’s no rule about that
I went with regular unleaded, my company is going to try and be an early adopter of environmental responsible.