For the record, that is the farthest I have gotten in any of these challenges.
Either some things got lost in translation, or he overlooked the rules. I think itās the latter.
Yes, I remembered that, but this point is not in the star rating criterions.
two things
first; as Stig pointed out, i did put a realism clause in the original post, not my fault you didnāt see it.
second; i told you that i wouldnāt be taking a resubmission after you messaged to tell me that you forgot the naming scheme to your entry, as i had already gone over it at that point.
same tbf hahaha!
Well, I must say that I sort of reacted against having realism bins for 60 degree V8s, they have been very unusual throughout history, yes, but there has been a few examples, mainly the Taurus SHO unit and the Volvo/Yamaha V8.
Yes, there is none in production at the moment, but thatās more due to the design being unusual, than being obsolete. Thatās because mainly two reasons exists to make one, it can share some of the tooling and parts with a 60 degree V6, and it can fit in a narrower space (which came in handy in the transverse engined Taurus and Volvo), other than that a 90 degree V8 is a better and more logical design. The main reason that we probably never will see one again is that the ICE engine is a dying breed, not that the design has aged, and I would not object against an automation company still running it, for as example, lore reasons, and especially not now when we have the option of balance shafts.
But thatās just my own reflection, you might agree, or not.
7 Likes
Not to go completely into the weeds here, but Iād consider the 60 degree V8 and even more extreme example of a design of dubious benefits that was used heavily by one company, like VWās VR6.
The Taurus SHO V8 is the Volvo Yamaha unit, so itās still just one example. It was used specifically in transverse applications and, in my opinion, like VR6, itās got benefits that make sense on paper, but had it been really a good option, there would have been more than one example in history. (And yes before people start playing the Got Ya! game, I know the VR6 was not the only V engine with a single head, Lanciaās V4 being the only other notable example.)
But pulling back to the real topic of this thread, as a host you often will look at design decisions that are hard to justify realistically as not the reason a car is eliminated, but rather something to tack on to a list of reasons why. Or alternatively, looking at two cars that are similar in quality, the one with less realistic decisions will lose out. I suspect the car that kicked this all off was not scoring well enough in the prioritized categories to be considered further, regardless of realism concerns.
5 Likes
Ok.
I think some people get the realism clause confused because they think of it as ādo we have the technology, could we realistically make this partā rather than āis it actually being used in real lifeā. Sure we have the technology in 2020 to machine a 60 degree V8, but on in the same vein we also have the technology to put a phonograph in the dash. Fact is that in real life, neither of those two things is done. Knowing whether we have the tech to do it is easy (the game will basically tell you so), but knowing whether itās realistic to use takes some research and knowing real life cars.
3 Likes
All good, dudes, points made, points taken. Iāve researched the 60 deg V8 extensively and they will continue to be used in my brands. Yamaha engineering has always been a guide for me, so if people donāt get it, I will ignore them. Itās like Teslaā¦ people who know, know
If people want to bin let them, when I run a challenge I guarantee it wonāt be similar. A spec runout of all cars will be shown, so true comparisons will be made, power BI style.
3 Likes
Good for you.
5 Likes
I look foward to your excel spreadsheet, good luck! 
BTW if everyone sends me either their stats or their car file so I can get the stats, I can run a comparative analysis. Doesnāt have to be this challenge, could be this or another one. But data will be useful collectively. Thx
1 Like
This was my entry, compare yours. That would be interesting.
You fought well for points.
Iāll upload mine shortly. Iām curious too. 
I think DMing the stats would be better since it wouldnāt clog up the thread with a different challenge completely irrelevant to this one.
5 Likes
Yes, DM, Iāll make a thread later and start collecting data points for comparisons in Google Sheets or something public. Sorry to clutter the thread. Guys feel free to delete those posts above as I have the data points storedā¦
edit - I need ALL the specs to properly chart things, so please DM the entire spec list (cost, mpg, etc, all the lines) and it might be good to compare engine specs because that does give a more granular understanding of all engineering points. Iāll chart what I have up to this point though.
edit- Automation Stat-Tracker - Google Sheets
Final edit: Hereās a thread so we can explore the statistical side of the game. This will be an objective comparison tool for those interested in volunteering data. Automation Stat-Tracking Thread
1 Like
TMCC17- Phase 2/Semi-Finals
Lunascura Adula SuperTurismo- @Xepy
First up is the Lunascura Adula SuperTurismo. The studio liked the design for the most part, and they were blown away by the interior. After doing some research, the studio agreed that the Adula should get a chance to be The Courierās new ride.
(End result- finals. design was solid inside and out, though the front is just a little off for me personally but not objectionably so. Engineering was good too, with only a few minor objections, but the rest of the car ultimately made up for it, and for those reasons, itās going to the finals.)
Zephorus K - SL- @Riley
Next up is the Zephorus K - SL. The studio first heard about the specs and performance, which for the most part intrigued them, but when they saw the design, they knew it wouldnāt be the right fit, so the studio set it aside.
(Reason for elimination- engineering is for the most part solid, but fuel economy was low relative to other semi-finalists, and I found the choice to use a single turbo V8 both a hair unrealistic and on the min-maxxy side of things. However, what really did you in was the design, which debonair and I both agreed didnāt work well, with a very spread out and awkward looking front design, and a rear design that was both too low and too wide. For that reason, we couldnāt take it any further.)
Suisei Zeitaku LX576- @Falling_Comet
The next car is the Suisei Zeitaku LX576. The studio loved the sharp and modern design, which carried all the way through the car. Upon researching the specs and performance, they learned that the Zeitaku was supremely drivable despite being RWD, and it was lavish and comfortable. Seeing no reason to count it out, the studio put it in to consideration as The Courierās next car.
(End result- finals. Design is rock solid just like the Adula, engineering is equally good with impressively high drivability despite being RWD, and great stats otherwise. For those reasons, itās an easy shoe-in for the finals.)
Dafeng Visios GT- @mart1n2005
Next up was the Dafeng Visios GT. The studio for the most part found the design fine, but lacking excitement. However, after reading up on the specs and performance metrics, the studio decided against the Visios.
(Reason for elimination- design was okay, but it was on the flat side, and I didnāt care for the way the front lighting elements came together. As for engineering, it was all mostly solid, but low comfort, prestige and sportiness, in conjunction with a slow 0-62 time and 1/4 mile time relative to other cars, ultimately keep you from going into the finals.)
Baumhauer 544RS- @S_U_C_C_U_L_E_N_T
Next up is the Baumhauer 544RS. The studio liked the design, as it reminded them of a car The Courier drove in one of the films. They also found the interior very plush looking and modern, and after doing some research on the specs and performance, they decided to give it a shot.
(End result- finals. Design is good, engineering is good, I donāt really have any major objections that would keep it out of the finals, so it definitely gets a shot.)
Saidenki SC500- @EnCR
Next up was the Saidenki SC500. The studio for the most part liked the design, but they found the rear a bit weird. As for engineering, the studio didnāt find much wrong, but there were a few things that ultimately pulled them in another direction.
(Reason for elimination- design for the most part is good, but I found the rear just a little off personally. As for engineering, it was all okay, but I found the choice to use ITBs a bit unrealistic, and you had low relative drivability, comfort and prestige compared to other semi-finalists, as well as low sportiness. For these reasons, I couldnāt justify taking it further.)
Tiburon Torino S550- @Kyorg
Next is the Tiburon Torino S550. The studio had some reservations about the design, especially regarding the front, but they enjoyed the rear design and the interior. After doing some research on the performance and specifications of the Torino, the studio decided to put those reservations aside, and give it a chance.
(End result- finals. While Iāll be the first to admit the design is weird, it isnāt at all bad, and showcases your talents with 3D and intelligent sculpting well. Engineering is all pretty good too, with the one sore spot being the slow 0-60 time, but at the end of the day it represents a good package and earns its spot in the finals with ease.)
Bellomont Vista Abrams- @LS_Swapped_Rx-7
Next up is the Bellomont Vista Abrams. The studio werenāt the biggest fans of the design, but they didnāt immediately write it off for that. However, after the studio did some research on the specs and performance, they decided to look elsewhere.
(Reason for elimination- design is fine but I wasnāt a fan of the gigantic taillights, and the weird divot under the headlights/grille didnāt do much for me either. Most of the engineering was good, with decent drivability, comfort and prestige. However, low sportiness, trim reliability, and somewhat low fuel economy knocked you down some, as did the moderately high body roll and comparatively long 62-0 stopping distance. I also found the choices to use ITBs and magnesium rims somewhat unrealistic, and for these reasons, we couldnāt justify taking it further.)
Seikatsu Prince 50GT4 HF- @Tzuyu_main
Next is the Seikatsu Prince 50GT4 HF. The studio were immediate fans of the design, both inside and out, and loved that it was aggressive but still understated. Upon reading some information about the specs and performance, they found a small issue, but couldnāt resist giving it a shot at being The Courierās next car.
(End result- finals. Design is solid on both the interior and the exterior, with clever fixture usage and the best handling of the tezdaās gigantic ass. Engineering was all solid too, the one negative being the low safety. That said, it definitely deserves a place in the finals.)
Mercer-Blackwood C SV10A- @NamedByAFish
Next up is the Mercer-Blackwood C SV10A. The studio liked the design for the most part, but found that the front and rear were a bit too slanted. Looking into the specs, they realized that the Mercer wouldnāt be the right fit, and set it aside.
(Reason for elimination- the design is for the most part solid, but I found that the front and rear ends of the car were too slanted and gave your car a bit of an awkward look. Engineering at a base level is decent, but the engine itself revs borderline unrealistically too high, which also affected engine reliability. Comfort and trim reliability were also low relative to the other semi-finalists, and you also had the highest service costs in this group of cars, and for those reasons we couldnāt take it any further.)
ZENDAI Nagakaze KHO- @Urke101/@SpeedyBoi
Next was the ZENDAI Nagakaze KHO. The studio, much like they did with the Tiburon Torino, had some reservations regarding the design, but seeing the rear and the stunning interior, they put those concerns aside. The studio did some research on the performance and specs, and found the Nagakaze to be a very tempting package, so they ultimately agreed to put it on the shortlist.
(End result- finals. Iāll admit that Iām not the biggest fan of the front design, but you just have this way with shaping a body that ultimately brings the whole thing together. The interior is beautiful too, with lots of clever fixture usage and a good attention to detail. Engineering is good too, the only major negative being that the engine is a little peaky. However, itās a solid car and definitely deserves a place in the finals.)
Valens 816 Vitesse- @pen15
Last up is the Valens 816 Vitesse. The studio was taken by the design, however they felt that some parts felt unfinished, and that the hood bulge gave the car a forehead of sorts. Upon researching some of the specs and performance stats, the studio ultimately decided to go in another direction.
(Reason for elimination- the design is solid, but itās very apparent that you ran out of time to 100% realize your vision, and the hood bulge over the grille gave your car a bit of a forehead. Engineering all made sense, but low relative drivability, comfort and prestige, as well as fairly high service costs (second highest in this group of cars) combined with the unfinished design are what ultimately keep it out of the finals.)
Finalists
@Xepy
@S_U_C_C_U_L_E_N_T
@Tzuyu_main
@Urke101/@SpeedyBoi
@Falling_Comet
@Kyorg
18 Likes