Used Car Shopping - All Scoring Areas Out!

Edsel · 21 January 2022 22:03

SCORING AREA #8: DRIVABILITY

Nathan has only ever driven 3 cars: his parents’ 2013 SUV, his parents’ other 2017 SUV, and the driving instructor’s 2014 Sedan (the latter only for a handful of hours). All these cars have been front or all wheel drive, all of them overflowing with ESC and driver-assist features, and almost all of his time in them spent with a better driver helping from the passenger seat.

Now, in the middle of winter, he has to learn how to drive an entirely new car, which he will spend most of his time alone in (or with friends, who can be a pretty big destraction). Let’s not make this any harder for him than it has to be.

Most Drivable Car:

1993 Seneca R200 RS Turbotop - 69.1

I know, this car doesn’t really scream “accessible” from the photo… though to be honest, I’m not sure what it screams. But its small, has very grippy tires, and comes with a lot of assists (TC, Power Steering), so it’s very maneuverable and well controlled. Its suspension is also tuned for drivability

This is in spite of its front-biased staggered-tire setup, poor performance in the circle test, and viscous LSD, which all apply minor penalties to the Seneca’s drivability score.

Least Drivable Car:

2007 Wells H1 Track Edition - 28.6

Wow, you really love the spotlight, don’t you?

Well congratulations on completely undoing your progress from last round! The Wells scored 3.1 points behind the runner-up worst car in drivability thanks largely to its difficult handling characteristics (hard to steer, lots of wheelspin) and complete lack of driving aids, with its RWD-manual configuration not being much help either. At least the suspension is well tuned, however.

Drivability Scoreboard:

10.0 pts: 1993 Seneca R200 RS Turbotop
9.9 pts: 1998 Valiant 18AR SR 2 4
9.8 pts: 1992 Armor Valencia GT
9.6 pts: 2000 Etherea Sunburst
9.5 pts: 1994 Denison King Snake DM-HP
9.2 pts: 1997 Autodelta Auriga by Gelera
8.9 pts: 1990 Aim Swallow H8T
8.7 pts: 1995 Kumos Garto
8.1 pts: 1992 EHH 270ESiA
8.0 pts: 1995 Neko CiX-2 X-Series
7.9 pts: 1992 MAHG Psi Rapide
7.1 pts: 1995 Vulcrum LB-5
6.7 pts: 1998 Ibis Phoenix
6.4 pts: 1994 Montebianco 42-130 20V Ultima Edizione
6.3 pts: 1994 VULKAN Kanna GTZ
6.2 pts: 1993 Manda Tuono DX8 Z-line
5.4 pts: 1998 Schnell L20 SLX
5.3 pts: 1992 Swanson 225Pf
5.2 pts: 1995 Mantra GT 5.0i S8
5.1 pts: 1992 KPS K30 3.2
4.6 pts: 1991 Saarland Ambrosia ES-24
4.3 pts: 1994 GSI Phantasm XR4
4.2 pts: 1997 AZLK 2152
4.1 pts: 1990 Stockholm 525B
1.0 pts: 2007 Wells H1 Track Edition

Current Scoreboard:

(Other fun facts)

The mean drivability rating of an entry (rounded) is 54.9, which would earn a score of 6.8. No car got that score; the closest car was the median-scoring Ibis Phoenix at 6.7, with a rating of 54.1.
If the Wells H1 is taken out of the average as an outlier, the mean drivability becomes 56.0, and the resulting score works out to 7.1; the Vulcrum LB5 got that rating exactly.
The second least drivable car, 3.1 points ahead of the worst, was the Stockholm 525B with a rating of 42.6.
With one round left, it is now impossible for any car less than 9 points behind the leader to win this competition. Thanks to the lead car’s exceptional performance this round (The Etherea Sunburst, already the leader last round, scored a 9.6), there are only 3 cars that can possibly catch it, compared with 22 that could’ve after last round.

Next up: Practicality. It’s a little-known fact that cars are significantly more useful if you can put stuff inside them.

GassTiresandOil · 22 January 2022 00:30

All the way up to 3rd place! Last category is going to be a nail biter for me.

Odyssey_Fan · 22 January 2022 00:35

“Impracticality is a form of luxury.” -Jason Cammisa, taken slightly out of context.

Sky99 · 22 January 2022 00:44

Nail biter? I’ve chewed through the first half of my fingers by this point! That armor is looking pretty practical

DuceTheTruth100 · 22 January 2022 04:04

Im just as shocked as anyone else. I took my inspiration off the cool wall, aimed squarely at the subzero section. I wanted to build like an old school Lac, like the black Fleetwood Brougham, but my math sucks, so I went with the example year.

You say I “misunderstood” yet understood the challenge…

Maybe I shouldve asked this before but, sub-zero…does that mean super cool? That’s how I took it. That’s why I kind of in a sense tried to emulate a Miata of some sort.

The car was actually MUCH MUCH better before the cost cutting team got involved.

@Edsel I’ve only been here for about a year, in that time, I’ve got shit on for my designs time and time again…which is ok because I believe in constructive critism. Shit on for engineering choices(I had no clue what I was doing, but I’m learning, THANKYOU CSR!!!). I appreciate your approach while doing this challenge. I love this format, andcant wait to see your next challenge, @Knugcab you as well.

@S31 Aren’t you the one that did the video for csr144?.. Whoever did it, it’d be nice to see video versions of all these challenges. Maybe I should try it …hell nah

And as far as doing a car car together, I’m down, lets go. The cars in question are not in my realm at all, but I’m down to work with you for sure. At the moment, I dont do interiors

@Ludvig I appreciate you!!!

@GassTiresandOil I think you got this one bro!!

Respect to everyone in this challenge, good luck to you all PEACE!!

Edsel · 22 January 2022 04:55

SCORING AREA #9: PRACTICALITY

The last, and possibly most anticipated scoring area. This one addresses the fact that Nathan might actually want to do things with the car; such as, y’know, putting more people than himself inside it. Or maybe, taking things with him.

Most Practical Car:

1994 VULKAN Kanna GTZ - 55.4

And I present, our most useful sedan. Or… it has 5 doors, so that would make it a hatchback. Or a Wagon?

Whatever it is, it’s practical. 5 doors, 5 seats, arranged in a convenient and efficient manner. It also boasts good load capacity, and a large, accessible design. On top of that, Automation literally has nothing bad to say about it in this segment. Its unlikely his needs or wants would ever exceed what this car could provide him.

Least Practical Car:

2000 Etherea Sunburst - 24.2

Oh dear. The car that’s been in first place for the past, what 5 rounds?

2 seats, 2 doors, in what’s already a small (if well organized) package. And while the space that is there is very accessible, the load capacity is too low to really get much out if. Could it meet his most basic needs? Sure, it’ll get him to school and stuff. But its prospects don’t get much further than that.

Practicality Scoreboard:

10.0 pts: 1994 VULKAN Kanna GTZ
9.7 pts: 1990 Aim Swallow H8T
9.4 pts: 1998 Schnell L20 SLX
8.1 pts: 1992 EHH 270ESiA
9.2 pts: 1992 Armor Valencia GT
9.1 pts: 1994 Montebianco 42-130 20V Ultima Edizione
8.7 pts: 1998 Valiant 18AR SR 2 4
8.7 pts: 1990 Stockholm 525B
8.4 pts: 1995 Vulcrum LB-5
8.1 pts: 1995 Neko CiX-2 X-Series
7.8 pts: 1993 Seneca R200 RS Turbotop
7.8 pts: 1991 Saarland Ambrosia ES-24
7.7 pts: 1997 Autodelta Auriga by Gelera
7.2 pts: 1992 Swanson 225Pf
6.3 pts: 1998 Ibis Phoenix
5.8 pts: 1995 Kumos Garto
5.6 pts: 1992 KPS K30 3.2
5.4 pts: 1997 AZLK 2152
5.4 pts: 1992 MAHG Psi Rapide
5.3 pts: 1993 Manda Tuono DX8 Z-line
4.8 pts: 1994 GSI Phantasm XR4
2.8 pts: 1994 Denison King Snake DM-HP
1.2 pts: 1995 Mantra GT 5.0i S81.0 pts:
1.1 2007 Wells H1 Track Edition
1.0 pts: 2000 Etherea Sunburst

Current Scoreboard:

(Other fun facts)

The mean practicality rating of an entry (rounded) is 43.8, which would earn a score of 6.7. No car got that score, or anything near it actually; the Ibis Phoenix scored 6.3, with a rating of 42.4, and the Swanson 225Pf scored 7.2, with a rating of 45.8. Both cars scored lower than the median, which was the Autodelta Auriga at 7.7 (47.4).

Congratulations to the Armor Valencia for winning the competition! A sharp-looking sedan that scored well in some of the most important areas, and had no real weak points.

But overall, thanks to everyone for showing up! This was a really interesting competition, even for me since I calculated all the scores as I went, rather than in advance (~~I may have been secretly rooting for the Valiant…~~). I’m glad I got to see all these cars, and pull off my second ever competition so well.

On the topic of this being my second-ever competition, if ya’ll have any more feedback on this, I’d really appreciate that. Especially if you notice an error with my math; I did a lot of math for this competition, you never know what could’ve happened… (:

DuceTheTruth100 · 22 January 2022 05:03

I called it!!

Nice win bro, and like I said before, this is definitely the car I would’ve purchased!!

My second choice was the Swanson 225PF…That looks pretty cool too in my book.

Edsel · 22 January 2022 05:04

Thx for the compliments, mate. Having been here for only about half a year, I’m in much the same boat with my designs being repeatedly, deservedly mocked- but hey, we need to learn somehow! And I will say, I do think you’re way better at doing modern design language than I am. (:

Also, yeah, “Sub Zero” means super cool; I was doing a recreation of Top Gear’s cool wall, since I figured most people here would recognize it.

(Also #2, I think it was SenseiB12 that did the video in CSR, given that they plan to do another one in their Arstotzka challenge. My memory’s pretty fuzzy too, though.)

ldub0775 · 22 January 2022 05:34

Yeah, he said he planned on doing video reviews, presumably alongside standard write-ups

S31 · 22 January 2022 05:54

Lost by ONE SINGLE POINT!!! Aaaaah!!

Well done to the Armor Valencia, taking victory on the last moment!

Sky99 · 22 January 2022 06:06

Amazing competition Edsel! I absolutely loved this format of competition Thanks for hosting!

I think it was one of the best formats for a competition on this forum. Congratulations to GassTiresandOil for a splendid car!

Looking forward to another competition (I think knugscab was looking into hosting something similar), and you know what I’ll even throw another curveball entry into the mix if it happens! But I do hope to continue building in 4.1 as it just seems more fun. 4.2 is currently a bit of a PITA to build on.

Sky99 · 22 January 2022 06:10

Hey man! Congrats though, it was a good car and I also noted it was very efficient which gets a thumbs up from me

Out of curiosity, how many seats did you actually dump in the car?

mart1n2005 · 22 January 2022 07:42

Well done for the winner and @Edsel on running the challenge, probably the last one on 4.1 too.

If my car had just got more points in the first category I could have made a bit of a better place in the end.

Knugcab · 22 January 2022 08:23

TBH, I (and maybe many other people too) actually appreciate that you did dare to pull a wildcard, instead of playing it safe like most of us. To see your car end up either first or last in something that feels like most of the rounds have been hilarious. Kudos to you for that.

interior · 22 January 2022 09:11

I enjoyed this round a lot, impressive to see a track car get submitted

voiddoesnotknow · 22 January 2022 09:51

hey, 6th isn’t bad for a car i expected to go out in the first round. I guess reliability and service costs and safety were always going to be the downfall of a lightweight, cheap “sports car”. and at least it did surprisingly well in drivability and fuel economy (something i wasn’t expecting but was probably likely from a small turbo I4). and i have nothing really to say about aesthetics lol, i like the kind of so-ugly-it’s-beautiful look.

all in all a good end to a very good challenge. is there ever going to be a round 2? i really enjoyed doing this, something surprisingly fresh and interesting to watch and enjoy play out.

Knugcab · 22 January 2022 09:53

I am going to make a similar challenge in a not so distant future, since I have had something similar in mind for a long time but Edsel made me realize how I should set up the scoring system.

lotto77 · 22 January 2022 11:05

[In The End plays]
Was sure practicality would be my strongest showing damn it! :^)

Excellent challenge man, really fun and laid-back with a quick turnaround too! Hope you do more at some point because it was a real fun time.

interior · 22 January 2022 12:14

Just about went on top 3 in practicality with a relatively basic hatchback

S31 · 22 January 2022 12:56

Yeah with 4.1 it’s easy to get good power and fuel efficiency with a turbo!

With 4.2 it’s not that cheaty so better be NA!

I don’t really remember since I went 4.2 right after building it but I think it was 2+2.