The Car Shopping Round (Round 9)

[Speedemon]

Where did I place Asdren?

I haven't done any ranking, because ranking 17 entries on subjective criterias would have been quite difficult for me.

Yea, it probably would. I probably was near last though.

[carskick]

According to the Miriam Webster dictionary:

"any of a group of American-made 2-door sports coupes with powerful engines designed for high-performance driving."

Doesn't say RWD, doesn't say V8.

However...

I have heard a million times that a "TRUE" Muscle Car has a V8 and RWD.

So I guess a 400HP Turbo I4 RWD American Coupe is not a muscle car in this definition, nor is an AWD V8.

That being said, how powerful was his V8? Was it designed for "high-performance driving?" Whatever that vague statement means =D

But can we trust the dictionary? This is their definition of a ricer:

"a !SPAM! utensil in which soft foods are pressed through a perforated container to produce strings"

I don't see how a poorly tuned Civic is defined by this...

Okay, I'm done trolling now...

Ready for the next competition!

[strop]

as for the integra, you don't simply built a legend as good as that

via Imgflip Meme Maker

Had to be done. Also, precisely my point

Back to the original point: this discussion over whether a car might be technically 'better' or superior in key quantifiable aspects yet lose out because it failed to conform to certain preferences is the key to the premise of this thread itself. Automation does go quite a way to quantifying desirability with a range of metrics, and in Muscle, particularly, it does put some weight on being RWD (but not very much weight, which is why in Automation terms, you can build... a Honda Integra, and it will outperform the existing vanilla competitor pack i.e. steal customers who want a Muscle car, which is precisely the desired result). That's why I said it would be useful for us if we posted the screen shots of the market tab along with everything else: it shouldn't sway one's personal decision, but it will give us a little pool of points of comparison as to how we personally stack up as customers, against the Automation desirability measure.

[koolkei]

well, irl the ecosport mustang is somewhat-a-muscle-car. and it's really not bad at doing that.
and i believe that my approach is still at least acceptable. but in the end, we are catering to our customer's unknown-to-us taste.
and that i think is fair enough.

but on the other hand, i do not agree with the market tab being helpful here, at least not fully. it's measuring desirability to a certain category in a general market.
and we are trying to cater to a single person preferences, not a category of a market. it's possible the preference of this said person is between 2 market in-game, and excelling in one market according to the game's calculation, might not be up to the competitions standards.


and your example, the honda integra stealing potential customers who wanted a muscle car, doesn't make the integra a muscle, it just changes the preferences of said customers. i forgot the term for it, but packbat used this formula on her '55 PCTChallenge. where if a car is REALLY good, it might just attract potential customers that was looking at another car from another market.

[strop]

Yes yes, you do realise you're not actually agreeing with me, or at least, you might be missing my point.

My point was that the market tab is useful by way of contrasting the calculations with our own desires and expectations. That's why I want to see them, not to influence the buyer.

and your example, the honda integra stealing potential customers who wanted a muscle car, doesn't make the integra a muscle

I've been over this a few times already, and I think you'll find that I'm the last person who would misunderstand how the system is to be interpreted The only reason I bring this up is because I don't want people misunderstanding what I've said based on what you've said, so let me reiterate:

a Honda Integra, and it will outperform the existing vanilla competitor pack i.e. steal customers who want a Muscle car

Nothing in there about a Honda Integra being a muscle car!

[koolkei]

okay then. i did not remember how i came to the conclusion of
"the honda integra stealing potential customers who wanted a muscle car, doesn't make the integra a muscle"
derp on me.

and yes i guess i kinda miss understood your point. if the market tab is for contrasting the calculation against the standards here, then i agree.

sorry bout that.


moving on, sebesseg. the next challenge please?

[AirJordan]

Since the newish brc is in nonbeta, I would vote for this to be in non beta also, so we do not have to switch al the time...

[DeusExMackia]

Since the newish brc is in nonbeta, I would vote for this to be in non beta also, so we do not have to switch al the time...

I agree.

[KLinardo]

well, irl the ecosport mustang is somewhat-a-muscle-car.

You do know that the EcoBoost Mustang is still RWD, right? It actually makes more HP and Torque than the V6 entry model (with a little computer limiting on the V6's HP).
That little tidbit doesn't really get to the overall discussion, but I thought it needed to be pointed out.

[BobLoblaw]

How about the Buick Grand National GNX? 3.8l twin turbo V6 RWD. The most powerful GM to come out of the '80s, would that count as a muscle car?

[carskick]

lol, what a discussion!

IMHO, a muscle car is in the eye of the beholder. It's not a well enough defined term to get too specific.

I think any powerful coupe-like car that provides at least a small "out of control" sense constitutes a muscle car. Piston count or drive-train type really do not directly matter.

A great example is the modern Eco-boost Mustang. Compare that to a 1986 Trans-Am and tell me which one is more of a "Muscle Car"

In all honestly, I never really liked the term. When I hear it, I think mostly about the classic muscle cars, which I respect, but don't really like for myself. Horrible brakes & suspension in a massively over sized body with a huge low economy engine. That's what I think of first when I hear the term. At least some, like the corvette, weren't too big, but they weren't really piratical, either.

Moving on, next competition please

[strop]

This discussion may be a bit off topic for the thread, but there's no need to move on quite so quickly when the current Round Master hasn't reached a decision on whether to use Open Beta or not. Espeically not when you've heaped more fuel for the fire with an opinion like that What are you trying to do, hit and fade?

That being said, I would like to see a decision and the new rule set on that sometime today. If (and when) that happens, we should definitely get going.

[Sebesseg]

Terribly sorry for not providing input sooner! The last couple of nights have had me working/researching late (by choice because I love what I do), but I have been silently stalking the thread via my phone. As my desktop is at my home and I can't do my work at home (for reasons) I've not been able to opt in to the beta and check the changes myself. Totally on me for that.

BIG SHOUT OUT to UMGaming for the strawpoll. Very helpful. Since it has been nearly 48hr (right? sure) and the current standing is 76% Beta and 24% Stable, I will call it for the Beta folks. If I can be allowed a short play with the Beta for my idea/ruleset (Beta is loading as I type) I will have rules up and ready in less than 24hrs for sure and possibly within 30mins-2hrs (fingers crossed).

Edited Below:
---
OK, with a bit of playtime down and some reconsideration I think I've got it.
---

The Future is NOW. 1985

It’s 1985 and the world is weird. The Cold War still gripes the world. President Ronald Reagan and General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev meet for the first time in Switzerland. Meanwhile, Coca-Cola just released “New Coke”. A US and French coalition found the titanic. Symbolics.com becomes the first registered “.COM”. Microsoft releases the first version of Windows 1.0, and compact discs are introduced to consumers.

Perhaps most importantly, the movie Back to the Future gets released.

This is, of course, where I come in. I’m a 20-something year old business associate who just got put on the fast-track . I’ve got a college education, a great paying job, but I’m sorely lacking something that screams me. I started small time and "inherited" a 1976 AMC Pacer, but now it’s got to go. I need a fancy car to show off to all those losers at my high school who said I’d never be anything! Super, Sports or Muscle. Whatever it is it’s got to be powerful, fast and make a statement.

Rules & Suggestions:
-Trim year should be 1985. Model and Engine year should be no earlier than 1975 and no later than 1985. Older bodies are fine as long as the model and trim years are correct.
-My budget is roughly $32,500 with at least a 5% profit for the main company. I mean FINAL NOT ESTIMATED. Do whatever with the new engineering tabs as long as the FINAL list price is around $32,500 (5%). Going over budget will be considered, but will receive a proportional level discouragement penalty during final considerations.
-I’m looking for something I can drive every day. It needs, however, to be sporty and capable on the track and strip. It’s got to show that it can respect the streets, but can also destroy them.
-That being said I do like my back so it’s got to have some level of comfort.
-I also really like my tapes so a cassette player is a must.
-I don’t have any kids and this is my car. 2 seats is fine, but if you can manage more my friends and girlfriend might appreciate it. Their opinion matters a bit to me, but a cool coupe could capably cease their chats. That said if a 4 door is as capable and better I won’t hesitate.
-I plan to own this car for a while so it should be reliable with a minimum overall reliability of 60.
-It’s got to be fast with quick 0-100km/h (or 0-62mph) and the faster the better.
-I’d also like a minimum of 300HP; the more the better (but know there should be limits to madness)
-No catalytic converters are necessary. Moderately loud and proud is preferred, but my neighbors might complain if it’s too much (No more than 55 loudness)
-95 premium gas is fine, but no leaded gas please. Efficiency wise I don’t care too much, but the less I have to stop to fuel up the happier I’ll be.
-I want this car to be easy to handle because I’m a businessman first and not a racecar driver.
-Prestige is pretty important to me. It has to look the business and be the business.
-I have no preference for manual or automatic. (FYI in this era irl, at least as far as I recall, automatics are light luxury features so automatics will receive a slightly perceived prestige bonus)
-Exterior looks are weighted HEAVILY. This is the 80s. The future is NOW!

I feel with the year and budget there should be enough room to play (sorry for no new bodies as far as I can tell), but also require some tight choices. I also think we can see a good variety because the character isn’t picky assuming all the suggestions are appropriately considered. I know this may not satisfy the itch for everyone, but I hope you enjoy it nonetheless as I tried to go for a year that hasn't seen much attention to my knowledge (for better or worse).

I’ll set the due date as March 29th as the upcoming weekend is Easter. I know people travel and I don’t want anyone to worry about that. So this upcoming week + Monday (and the weekend) should be more than enough time. I’ll try to answer any questions or concerns as I can.

Good Luck Guys & Gals

[strop]

Ok, good to know! We can get the next round started whenever you're ready.

[Vri404]

The 1985 Facciamo Cars Harrticalia Base 2.2.2

Now, Do you want an Italian Stallion? A true beast? Then the Harrticalia Base 2.2.2 is the one for you!.

Now, Base 2.2.2 is broken down like this:
Base = Chassis
2 = Spaceframe
2= Mid-engined
2= Rear-Wheel Drive

So, You're getting a MONSTER of a Car.

The Harrticalia makes over 300hp, and rockets on to 262km/h, so... Have fun!

You don't need to be a true Race Driver to handle this Stallion!

Coming ONLY in Phantom Blue, with it's 3.4L Crossplane V8, this is a real beast...

At only $32,300. This is the Stallion for you!

Harrticalia - Base 2.2.2-1.png (244.47 KiB) Viewed 15964 times

~Vri