Car Reviewing

[Tycondero]

hhmm, I think cars should be limitless; a Veyron probably costs more than $150,000 to produce for example? An LFA MSRP is $375,000 and Lexus make a loss on each one sold. No idea how much of that MSRP is in material costs though.

Just a question, if a car uses +15 quality sliders on everything, will it automatically get a 5 star rating or will it be normalised to the manufacturing cost? That is, are production costs taken into account? Car 1 costs $16000 to produce and does 0-100kmh in 3.8s. Car 2 costs $32000 to produce and does 0-100 in 3.2s. All other things being equal, will Car 2 be considered the better car? Ie double the cost for %15 increase in performance? Obviously there is a degree of diminishing returns, but still.

I agree. There should even be a special price rating, especially when model comparisons can now be made better as more reviews get added. A badly constructed car can still be interesting to some consumers due to its low price.

[utopian201]

Well my point was it is expected that a more expensive car costs more, but currently there is no way to tell in the review whether one car is better because the user engineered it well, or if they just went crazy with the quality sliders.

Btw Dragawn I just looked at the Dragotec page for your Sagitta, nice effort! There was no way to tell whether quality sliders were used just based on reading the review.

EDIT: it is expected that a more expensive car performs better

[Cheeseman]

I have put this limit of $150,000 because it covers 99.99% of all production cars and it also prevents people from going overboard on quality, because I don't ask for a price for the car when the reviews and going off of total costs isn't ideal. It makes no sense to do this yet, but I will most likely be asking about it when the tycoon aspect of the game arrives.

I did say when the car reviewing started that the entire review will be affected by the price of the car. If a car is a bit worse but a reasonably cheaper than another car, the slightly worse but cheaper car will, most likely, get a better overall result.

Hope this helps

[Dragawn]

Cheese, what about you mention material costs and production units in a small note somewhere during the review? Gives the reader an idea at what price range the car was aimed at specifically.

[Cheeseman]

I think that can be done. I will put it at the end of the reviews to give people an idea. Thanks for the idea

[utopian201]

Also mention the basic information such as engine size. Some of these reviews don't even mention power or torque.

[jhd1124]

2014 AMW Mantis 1.6

Today, we look at the all new AMW Mantis 1.6. This car may look tough, but can this mini match market muscle?



Performance -
Powered by a turbo-charged 1.6L 4-Pot, producing 125HP@ 5500rpm and 140ft-lbs. of torque at 2600rpm, this car won't necessarily take you anywhere sideways, but it delivers just enough kick for it to match or even beat in-class cars. We particularly liked how responsive the engine is. When we punched that pedal the engine was right there with us (and we could tell, what a noise!) We were also pleased with the addition of a turbo. It would have been very easy to just leave it out, but the extra power after accelerating really gave this car a peppy spirit in a class of malaise city cars. If we were to take away anything from the performance, we were not too pleased with the gear ratios. I could have written, produced, and starred in my own sitcom by the time 1st changed to 2nd. But of course, a small city car like this won't be doing that much aggressive accelerating, so we couldn't fault them that much. All in all, a much better performing car than a lot in this segment (The Sitcom would be called Everybody has Mixed Feelings About jhd1124).

Ride Comfort -
The ride comfort on the Mantis is not exactly where we would like it to be. This is not to say that it is an uncomfortable ride, it was quite nice actually, but it wasn't really game-changing. It seemed that in an attempt to try and be sportier, the car lost some of it's comfort. Should you be in a well-paved section of your city, you won't notice this at all, but after a winter of potholes, you may want to get something a bit smoother. The ride itself is really not bad, but given the standards most everything else on this car excels, we felt just a smidgen disappointed. Given that the desired market for a city car these days (and most days) is a younger audience, the firmer suspension should really be quite attractive to those millennials who want something sporty without breaking the bank. The few older folks not already in their Cadillacs or Rovers may wish for a more comforting ride.

Handling -
Once again, this is a segment where that brilliantly responsive engine comes into play. It seems that both the performance and the handling do what's really just enough to distract from that fact that you're in a small, family city car. We were very pleased with how sporty the car was. That 125HP is just enough to make things fun when they need to, with performance and handling. We recorded about 1.14 Max G for the car, which certainly makes this car no boat. It felt quite tight, as well. The body roll was just enough (about 4.7 degrees) to make things interesting without making things suicidal. There really isn't much bad going on here. If I were to make one suggestion, I would have preferred the car to be a bit more tame. At times-- and this is being very nit-picky-- the car did seems to be quite ungainly, most around corners. Once again, one must consider that this car is going to see far more city streets than tracks. Just keep that in mind for your next track day, bro.

Refinment -
Just three stars. This car was very close to getting only two stars. While we weren't expecting much from a budget city-car like this, we were expecting quite a bit more. While the engine sound is quite nice during rapid acceleration, the sound of it idling or slowly accelerating (as it will most often be doing) is rather ungainly. It's not a bad sound, but it's not a sound we want to hear all the time. Both the sound insulation and the loudness of the engine combine to create a noise that was not always to our liking. Yet again, if I were to be nice, I would also have to reconsider the car's market (mentioned above) who may want to hear the engine as a symbol of their coolness. In that case, I understand where AMW was coming from but in any other case, I would prefer a quieter cabin.

Equipment -
I really wanted to give this car three stars. I wanted to give it 4 stars. The safety features in the vehicle are exceptional. It seems like in every crevice and void space there's an opportunity for an airbag (I think I saw one in the glove compartment...) The interior is kept wonderfully safe. Even though the tameness of the car was not where I wanted it to be, I knew that I was well protected in this vehicle. Even further--The Driver Assists: Wow! Rarely on a city car do I see Power Steering, ABS, TCS, and ESP. I was so relieved to see those on the car because the other equipment left me less than pleased. I was really displeased by the baseness of the tech (It's 2014, can I please have an aux jack?!). Given that everything else from this car seems to be centered around tech-hungry millennials, I was surprised to see this car, in a time period where tech seems to be dominating people's car-buying decisions, so void of nice tech. It was there, yes, but really not where we wanted it to be.

Quality -
Once again, I must applaud AMW for its liberal use of Driver Assists in a car class that seldom incorporates them into their cars. With their Driver Assist options, they really captured what it is like to design and drive a city car: Doing anything and everything you can to distract your driver from the fact that they're driving a city car. For that, once again, I say thank you. On the other hand, stepping into this, I was not whisked away into a land of creature comforts. The materials of the car were standard, and that's nice. That's very nice. I was greeted by class standard plastics, and that's nice. It was all nice, but it lacked real excitement. If AMW's goal is to create a fun city car for people to enjoy driving, the interior experience was not where it should be. I suppose, from another alternate view, that this is a car to be seen in, and not one where you're supposed to look around a lot. The car is a city car, after all. But why couldn't it be more than that?

Reliability -
Wow. Unfortunately, I must say more: The AMW Mantis does with reliability what some of the greatest automotive makers can only dream of creating: This is a car you can pass down. Toyota capitalizes on the feeling with every new oowie goowie Camry commercial. This car will run long enough to ensure that your kid can drive this for ages, reminiscing about all the times he got sick in the back seat or the first time he got to sit up front. The best thing about this car being so reliable is that it's also a pretty good car. God forbid a world where the only car reliable enough to make it of the 1980s was a Dodge Aries K. I can't say that this was AMW's intention. They may have just been playing around with an engine and decided it was good. But goodness have they been smart. Buy this car, drive it for a decade, give it to your kid. Magic *tear*.

Running Costs -
I hope you're sitting down (of course you are, you're reading this on a computer. Dumb question, but you get the effect). This car gets...80mpg. Is that possible? To be frank, I'm not even sure, but our numbers guys came back with that figure. I was absolutely blown away from this staggering figure. I hope it has a large tank. The money you will be saving on gas will go directly into service costs. Oh joy. The engine, for all of its quality, is not the cheapest thing to keep running. In fact, you'll be about $2000 out of pocket every year for this one. That's quite a lot, and there's no other way to put it than that. Should you keep regular maintenance on point, however, you'll get quite a long life out of this 4-Pot. Unfortunately, it's just the price you have to pay. This segment is receiving 4 stars due to its stellar mpg. A cheaper-to-maintain engine would have easily garnered a five.

Safety -
Another spectacular segment. We were very pleased with how safe this car feels. We touched on the safety features earlier, but I would like to go more in-depth now. Each Mantis comes with modern Advanced safety features as standard. Expect to be cradled in airbags and seat belts and all the other accoutrements. Again, we must also applaud for the spectacular use of driver assists. The only area the Mantis did poorly on was the structure of the car itself. As Cheeseman described it, when it hits a wall "it goes all mushy." This may not bode well for the driver, but he/she and the passengers are more than well coated in the latest safety features and driver assists. Well done!

Overall -
Yay!: Safe, reliable, damn good engine
Nay!: Unrefined, expensive upkeep

[TheTom]

that's nice to hear, and pretty much 100% what i expected. Keep in mind, though, that firstly this is an older version of the Mantis 1.6, and that in the new one the exterior, the engine and the gearbox have changed (and also some slight suspension changes). And secondly, the point of this car is that it's a small, practical and economical hatchback that feels sporty and doesn't carry any unnecessary weight around (see its kerb weight). However, we saw advanced safety equipment as necessary to justify the price. Anyway, this is a driver's car which not only you can, but also you want to drive every day if you're young and you love cars.
But anyway, thanks for the review, nice job Jhd

Greets,
Tom

[jhd1124]

I was trying to capture the sportiness factor, unfortunately certain grading points are not focused on the market and more centered towards how they do on base information.

[Tycondero]

Would it perhaps be possible to list the total costs (material + manhours) for making the cars in the reviews, so we can also have an idea in which kind of price range these cars would be?

[utopian201]

Would it perhaps be possible to list the total costs (material + manhours) for making the cars in the reviews, so we can also have an idea in which kind of price range these cars would be?

I think it will be included from now on (bottom of previous page).

[aidan7777]

How do you judge "Refinement?" How do i know what the cruising RPM for the engine is? How am i able to know if there's too much road noise?

[Jakgoe]

2010 Pegasus Motors Stinger Twin-Turbo

This steel supercar hails from the beginning of this decade, yet still has some pep in its step to keep up with competitors that are a few years younger. How well can it find a place in today's over-saturated supercar market?


Vital Statistics
Top Speed: 198 mph (319 kph)
Acceleration: (0-62mph/100kph): 3.7 seconds
Power: 503 hp
Torque: 465 lb-ft
Fuel Economy: 32.6 mpg
Material Cost: $20,994
Production Units: 1,175
Weight: 4,166 lbs (1,890 kg)

Performance -
The Stinger Twin-Turbo derives its respectable performance from a 4.0L V8, with, (you guessed it!) twin turbos. This engine is very smooth, and for a turbo, quite responsive. All of this looks good on paper, but when it come time to drive this machine, it is evident that the turbos are quite a hindrance to the smooth delivery of power. Up to around 4,000 RPM, you ask yourself, "Is this really what 500 horsepower feels like?" Then the turbos spool up, and off you go! The turbo lag does not make the car undriveable, but it is a nagging downside to what is an otherwise great powertrain setup. The gearing is right where it should be, and the gated manual (gated manual!) gearbox is a joy to use, with clean, crisp shifts, and a light clutch. Oddly enough, this supercar has VVL, but saving the environment is an added bonus when you are driving an mid-engine, AWD, 500 hp car.

Ride Comfort -
For the market that this car competes in, the ride comfort is above-average, at times even bordering on pleasant. Mind you, this is not a grand tourer, the handling is not exactly what you would expect from the exterior. Don't get me wrong, this is not a luxury coach, but for what it is, the Stinger Twin-Turbo has a very nice ride, and body roll is kept to a minimum. In fact, the body roll is just about two degrees, a very good score in this test of ride comfort. I would gladly take it for a Sunday drive along winding roads, but that would mean there is the prerequisite of owning a Stinger.

Handling -
I can't imagine what this car would be like with a proper aerodynamic setup, but I can only speak on what the car does right now. The car is not a bloated rhinoceros, but no one would mistake it for a razor-sharp track-attack machine. It exhibits understeer characteristic of many AWD cars, but the suspension seems to be rather well done, and the fat tyres allow plenty of grip. It has stability control, as well as traction control, and power steering, so there is no need to worry is you are not fully confident in your driving skills. This car really cannot be compared to many others, and it's lack of aerodynamics does not help. Please, Pegasus Motors, add a wing, a big angled, downforce-y wing. That would make this car something special.

Refinment -
This is a supercar, make no mistake, and we really don't expect it to be that refined... But it surprisingly was! Much better than one would originally anticipate. Like the ride comfort in question earlier, this car is surprisingly tame for a supercar. At cruising speeds, you hear the engine, but not too much that it gets annoying. And when you crack open the throttle, the V8 makes a satisfying sound as the turbos wind up, and the power is unleashed. This car and engine strikes the right balance between refinement and controlled hooliganism. Well done, Pegasus Motors! The only criticism that I have is the car is not really one way or the other. I prefer my cars to either be accompanied by the soundtrack of the engine, or very refined. But in the end, it usually comes down to personal preference.

Equipment -
Here, we get in to the real "meat and potatoes" of the Stinger Twin-Turbo. This car truly has the full complement of features that consumers have come to expect from supercars. From the overwhelming variety of safety features to the various electronic accoutrements, this car is truly worthy of praise in this respect. You do not simply drive a Stinger Twin-Turbo, you experience one! It must be duly noted that the quality of the equipment in this car is higher than is standard, even in the high-end market for cars. The sound system is a Bang & Olufsen, which delivers powerful sound during those moments when a V8 does not suit the mood. Thus, the experience in one of these is second to none. Believe me, once you enter this car, it'll be a while before you get out. Or are forcibly removed by the salesperson.

Quality -
This car exudes quality. While the materials used may not be up to the standards of a Rolls Royce, per se, they are more than enough, and the car feels like it would last through whatever you car to throw at it. There is leather everywhere, and in less visible and used locations, there are high-quality soft-touch materials that would pass for leather at a casual touch. The wood veneer is, well, real wood, and all of the car feels solid, and built for a purpose. Even the body panels are nearly seamless, so there goes one tick on the "obsessive perfection" checklist. The switchgear seems to be perfectly balanced, which is always a good sign. Another tick on the list. Did I mention that the car has 10 airbags. Tick.

Reliability -
Come on, from what was said about the quality, did you think the reliability would be anything less than perfect? It isn't. This car is a car that is not affected by many things, not by wear and tear, not by age, not by use, not by abuse. It is a true shame that most of these cars will not be driven nearly enough for drivers to experience the resilience of them. The cars come with a seven-year, unlimited mile warranty, so if the car even thinks of breaking down, the Pegasus Motors roadside assistance team will have your back. But from what has been experienced, it almost certainly won't.

Running Costs -
Okay, this is a supercar, make a guess how many miles to the gallon this thing gets. Wrong! 32.6 miles to the gallon! With a 500 hp TTV8! This can't be real, can it?!?! Well, it is, and the Stinger Twin-Turbo is living (err, driving) proof. How on earth is this possible? For every up, there is a down, and there is no exception here. Now, guess how much it costs to keep a supercar on the road per year. Yep, nearly $9,000 per year. You could maintain this car every year, or you could buy a used MX-5 every year, the choice is yours. This would be a solid five stars if the costs weren't so damn high!

Safety -
This is where the Stinger Twin-Turbo really comes into its own, in the test of protecting its occupants. The materials used for the chassis and panels are by no means the strongest available, but the build quality more than makes up for that. The safety system is also one of the best on the market right now, despite it being five years old. There are airbags everywhere, and more crumple zones than you can imagine. Let's not forget that the absence of the engine in the front only created more of an opportunity for the engineers at Pegasus motors to reinforce the structure of the car. Believe me, you'd feel very safe knowing what mechanisms protected you.

Overall -
Highs: Very economical, well rounded supercar, wonderful features
Lows: Turbo lag, outrageous maintenance price

[Tycondero]

Great car. It is funny in a way that the car only costs around $21000 in materials, but on the other hand another huge factor will be the amount of Production Units needed to put it together, which is 1175. I do not know how much the game calculations for a Production Units work, but there is also an overall cost displayed I think in the statistics when testing the car. Using this, I believe one 1 Production Unit is about $17,50. So that would make the total costs around $41556,50 I believe. Not bad for a "Supercar" considering that they usually cost much more to put together. Are the game costs that are calculated overall maybe too low? Of course to buy this I guess it would cost at least $55,000?

[VicVictory]

Material cost and production units are only part of the equation, at least when it comes to the tycoon part. There's also operating and engineering costs, which, from the CTC simulations that Der Bayer has been running are pretty monstrous. Especially when the production units gets so high.

A cheap family car may run somewhere between 80 and 120 production units, and 4-7k in material cost. Just for reference.