Man With a Van Challenge! (Second Review)
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
Leonardo9613 wrote:Okay. I was writing a big text on balance of challenges and stuff, but whatever. TL,DR would be, no one cares about one single thing, and van owners and drivers care a lot about fuel and service costs, as those basically eat away their earnings.
You know, leo, I agree with you. It didn't seem right to submit a van with horrendous fuel econony and expect to do well, given real life considerations. But I saw the rules and the balance stipulated and, surprise surprise, built something for those rules. In fact this would be a challenge that doesn't fall prey to Max's earlier response to certain past challenges (which I'm heavily paraphrasing): that price and economy are valued more highly than stated.
Perhaps we could generate a more transparent calculation by actually using the cargo and utility values offset by the actual running costs etc. That could be a useful discussion for future challenges, but would have been more useful for this challenge if one had discussed that before submitting
Naturally Aspirated
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 3:17 pm
Location: Blue Anchor, NJ / Richmond, VA
Cars: 2013 Ford Mustang GT California Special
2010 Ford F-150 XLT
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (Calculating Results)
DoctorNarfy wrote:14. Boss-Brute- The Quickest and fastest van Held up well as a utility vehicle, but could not keep up with
the regular car qualities.
414.81
What are regular car qualities? Why do they matter with a cargo van?
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
strop wrote:
You know, leo, I agree with you. It didn't seem right to submit a van with horrendous fuel econony and expect to do well, given real life considerations. But I saw the rules and the balance stipulated and, surprise surprise, built something for those rules. In fact this would be a challenge that doesn't fall prey to Max's earlier response to certain past challenges (which I'm heavily paraphrasing): that price and economy are valued more highly than stated.
Perhaps we could generate a more transparent calculation by actually using the cargo and utility values offset by the actual running costs etc. That could be a useful discussion for future challenges, but would have been more useful for this challenge if one had discussed that before submitting
that is why i suggested to add something
that is, a people's choice award. open up all the vans to public, make a strawpoll, let the people choose which are best.
4-Star Beta Tester
Posts: 1270
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:59 am
Location: Curitiba, Brazil
Cars: '15 Ford Ka 1.0 SE
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
strop wrote:Perhaps we could generate a more transparent calculation by actually using the cargo and utility values offset by the actual running costs etc. That could be a useful discussion for future challenges, but would have been more useful for this challenge if one had discussed that before submitting
That is true, however, I didn't think it would be necessary to question the formulas used beforehand.
I have made quite a complex formula that uses several parameters, however, it is a pain in the arse to fill and it doesn't work properly in other computers I tried.
I've no problem with people coming up with formulas of their own, if they work well. But just using a weighed mean is, honestly, one of the worst ways to do this, and the reason why costs usually are too important, because people often divide the mean by the costs, meaning that a small cost difference can become overly important.
Naturally Aspirated
Posts: 312
Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 5:47 am
Location: 'Murica
Cars: My Chevy Cavalier is gone. I am Carless.
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
koolkei wrote:strop wrote:
You know, leo, I agree with you. It didn't seem right to submit a van with horrendous fuel econony and expect to do well, given real life considerations. But I saw the rules and the balance stipulated and, surprise surprise, built something for those rules. In fact this would be a challenge that doesn't fall prey to Max's earlier response to certain past challenges (which I'm heavily paraphrasing): that price and economy are valued more highly than stated.
Perhaps we could generate a more transparent calculation by actually using the cargo and utility values offset by the actual running costs etc. That could be a useful discussion for future challenges, but would have been more useful for this challenge if one had discussed that before submitting
that is why i suggested to add something
that is, a people's choice award. open up all the vans to public, make a strawpoll, let the people choose which are best.
SHHHHHHHH YOU'LL RUIN THE- I guess it's already too late for that huh. There will be a people's choice, after the winners reviews.
Naturally Aspirated
Posts: 312
Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 5:47 am
Location: 'Murica
Cars: My Chevy Cavalier is gone. I am Carless.
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (Calculating Results)
KLinardo wrote:DoctorNarfy wrote:14. Boss-Brute- The Quickest and fastest van Held up well as a utility vehicle, but could not keep up with
the regular car qualities.
414.81
What are regular car qualities? Why do they matter with a cargo van?
I meant more on the topic of drivability, economy, comfort, etc. These vans should not only be good fat what they do, but easy to use.
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (Calculating Results)
DoctorNarfy wrote:I meant more on the topic of drivability, economy, comfort, etc. These vans should not only be good fat what they do, but easy to use.
haha.... btw good fat???
anyway. please to this again. with different themes and build year this time around.
maybe pickup trucks? jeeps? SUVs? anyone else up for it?
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
EDIT: I am going to do a mini "review" of my van though because I think it is interesting.
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:22 pm
Location: California, USA
Cars: 1966 Sunbeam Alpine
1997 Ford Crown Victoria
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
In the states, the avg 1-ton cargo van gets 11mpg.
For reference.
Naturally Aspirated
Posts: 312
Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 5:47 am
Location: 'Murica
Cars: My Chevy Cavalier is gone. I am Carless.
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
4-Star Beta Tester
Posts: 1270
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:59 am
Location: Curitiba, Brazil
Cars: '15 Ford Ka 1.0 SE
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
Lordred wrote:About fuel.
In the states, the avg 1-ton cargo van gets 11mpg.
For reference.
The vans here usually get 2-3 litres diesel engines, with 120-160 hp. They can carry around 1800 kg and yet get over 10 km/l (under 10 l/100 km, or 23.5 MPG US, 30 UK MPG).
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:22 pm
Location: California, USA
Cars: 1966 Sunbeam Alpine
1997 Ford Crown Victoria
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
Then there are all the studio accounts and equipment shops we have out here, the avg 1ton rated peice of equipment out here gets about 11mpg all said and done
Now 1/2 ton equipment is pushing 22-25mpg now adays.
Naturally Aspirated
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 3:17 pm
Location: Blue Anchor, NJ / Richmond, VA
Cars: 2013 Ford Mustang GT California Special
2010 Ford F-150 XLT
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
Lordred wrote:Real world experience. Just had to rent an E450 which was equipped with a 6.8l V10. We hauled 6700lb pof stuff in it. Maintaining 55mph and driving gingerly netted me 11.6mpg.
Then there are all the studio accounts and equipment shops we have out here, the avg 1ton rated peice of equipment out here gets about 11mpg all said and done
Now 1/2 ton equipment is pushing 22-25mpg now adays.
I guess my van would count as a Heavy Duty van because I'm much closer to the E450.
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:22 pm
Location: California, USA
Cars: 1966 Sunbeam Alpine
1997 Ford Crown Victoria
Re: Man With a Van Challenge! (23-6 Revealed)
Return to Community Challenges & Competitions
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests