FAQ  •  Login

Car Reviewing

<<

USDMFTW

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 397

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 5:00 pm

Cars: 2000 Saturn SL2
Look i have DOHC :P

Post Sat Jan 17, 2015 10:56 am

Re: Car Reviewing

*Suspense builds for hot hatch comparison*
<<

EnryGT5

User avatar

Turbocharged
Turbocharged

Posts: 753

Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2012 2:30 am

Location: Seishido HQ, Ebisu, Tokyo.

Cars: '01 Ford Focus 1.8 TDdi
'10 Citroen C3 1.6 HDi

Post Mon Jan 19, 2015 2:49 am

Re: Car Reviewing

I'm sure the Proxima is going to be the least powerful car in the comparison, please fuel economy save me! :geek:
CEO of Seishido Motors.
Forum Thread: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=8343

Suddenly, a temporary logo appears.
<<

Janekk

User avatar

Turbocharged
Turbocharged

Posts: 161

Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:16 am

Cars: Few Matchboxes

Post Mon Jan 19, 2015 3:42 am

Re: Car Reviewing

Since entries are already sent in it's not much of issue to reveal (some of) the cards.
I got 205 HP in mine. Does Airfield lap in 1:28.71. Looking at AutomationHub I'm guessing Caliente ought to be faster with the super wide tires and a lot more power thanks to turbo charger. I do have him beat on economy and service costs though and again I'm guessing my car could end up more comfortable too. Can't say much about Proxima other than that it indeed doesn't have a lot of power (still 181 hp isn't bad number at all). Could be winning approach depending on criteria. Hot-hatch is a daily driver not dedicated track machine so imho sporty feeling should be somewhat more important than pure straight line speed. Comfort as well, you know daily driver and all that.
I'll leave the rest for Cheeseman review ;) .
<<

Speedemon

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 678

Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2014 3:41 am

Cars: A Birel Go Kart. I can't remember the full chassis name. 4-stroke, Honda GX160, makes around 5-hp (With limiter)

Post Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:28 am

Re: Car Reviewing

I hope one of my cars get's reviewed. And if it does get reviewed I hope its a good one! No one wants their car to get a bad review!
"I don't care how fat I am, I am getting in that car and I am going to win" -Speedemon
<<

USDMFTW

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 397

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 5:00 pm

Cars: 2000 Saturn SL2
Look i have DOHC :P

Post Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:33 am

Re: Car Reviewing

My biggest concern is the weight since i choose the 4 door renault looking body, i have 226 hp and i run a 1:29.04 on airfield.

The 2.0 limit forced me to use a turbo engine or i would have went NA but i disliked the lack of power.
<<

vmo

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 1178

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:29 am

Location: Spain

Cars: A undestructable Toyota with 1ZR FAE engine, Honda Civic VTi EG6, Mazda RX7 fc

Post Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:35 am

Re: Car Reviewing

And the review?
Company: Montes Cars
Company ID: 1940001
Visit the brand models http://automationgame.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=3995
In AutomationHub.net: http://www.automationhub.net/company-ca ... mpanyID=18
My YouTube Channel: https://goo.gl/1MtRpd
<<

YugoSpy

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 173

Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 7:04 am

Cars: 2005 Saab 9-3

Post Mon Jan 19, 2015 8:45 am

Re: Car Reviewing

My car (the Caliente) runs the airfield track in 1:27.66 but the other cars in the comparison will probably have better fuel economy and service costs. I kind of regret putting a performance intake on it. And hopefully, the seats of the car are soft enough to make the ride comfort acceptable at least. I made the suspension quite stiff... :/
Name of Car Company: Kungliga Automobilfabriken AB.
Owner of company: YugoSpy.
Website or Forum thread: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=10069
Established in 1945.
Company ID: N/A.
<<

utopian201

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 382

Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 11:12 pm

Post Mon Jan 19, 2015 9:09 am

Re: Car Reviewing

YugoSpy wrote:My car (the Caliente) runs the airfield track in 1:27.66 but the other cars in the comparison will probably have better fuel economy and service costs. I kind of regret putting a performance intake on it. And hopefully, the seats of the car are soft enough to make the ride comfort acceptable at least. I made the suspension quite stiff... :/

I do believe the reviews here penalise heavily on the bump test and rightly so.
Aurora Motor Company: Nothing Comes Close | Youtube ads: Aurora Manticore - "Dyno"
Auto magazine plus directories - list your car in the appropriate directory to be considered for a magazine cover/article.
<<

Tycondero

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 235

Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 10:36 pm

Post Wed Jan 21, 2015 3:22 am

Re: Car Reviewing

utopian201 wrote:I do believe the reviews here penalise heavily on the bump test and rightly so.

I don't fully agree. Though everything matters of course, so also the bump test it should really matter. However, what kind of car one will design should be taken into account as well to determine which parameters count more and which count less. The bump test is more important for a sedan, but less for a sportscar for instance. Not saying that it isn't important, just that it is not the only factor. Also keeping the overall confort score in consideration is more important that just the bump test. At least that is how see it.
<<

Cheeseman

User avatar

1-Star Beta Tester
1-Star Beta Tester

Posts: 497

Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:23 pm

Location: Southern Spain

Cars: 2007 Ford Focus 1.8 TDCI Ghia

Post Wed Jan 21, 2015 6:12 am

Re: Car Reviewing

The way ride comfort is rated is pretty much the same for each class of car (it does depend on the person reviewing as well, as I can't always keep an eye on everything that is being done). Yes, if I were to review a supercar, I would be a bit more generous than if I were to review a luxury car. Instead, when it comes to the overall verdict, ride comfort has less effect. Simples :)
Image
<<

utopian201

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 382

Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 11:12 pm

Post Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:19 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

To tide us over till the next cover is finished; it has been a while since the last one and had this one almost completed, but I have something very special planned for the next one which has been in progress since early December. Keep your eyes peeled!

Image

Gryphon Gear Nightfury: http://automationgame.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=34037#p34037
AMW Tiger: http://automationgame.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=48808#p48808
Necronia Agyros: http://automationgame.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=58113#p58113
Astana City Dweller: http://automationgame.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=58047#p58047
CJR Aspire 3.0T: http://automationgame.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=56915#p56915

Thanks go to titleguy1 for photoshopping the AMW Tiger twins.
A bit different in that this cover does not have a single car dominating the cover; it was originally going to be for the small hatch comparison, but there was already a cover for that so I changed this one. In the future I'll probably only make covers retrospectively instead of in anticipation!
Aurora Motor Company: Nothing Comes Close | Youtube ads: Aurora Manticore - "Dyno"
Auto magazine plus directories - list your car in the appropriate directory to be considered for a magazine cover/article.
<<

TheTom

User avatar

Turbocharged
Turbocharged

Posts: 1080

Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:33 am

Location: Austria

Cars: Vw Golf 3 TDI

Post Sun Jan 25, 2015 5:52 am

Re: Car Reviewing

Hey guys, today i'd like to present you another review that i did, and it is the


Energent Stallion ST

Image Image
Image
Image




This big 4-door saloon attempts to rival the likes of the Mercedes S-Class. By looks alone, I’d much rather have the Mercedes. That being said, I’m here to give you a review as objectively as I can, so I’ll ignore the exterior and talk about the characteristics of this car instead.

Performance (3 stars) ImageImageImage
This car is limited to about 250km/h, just like most cars today. The acceleration, however, is far behind an S-Class or an A8. This car takes 7.6 seconds to get from 0-100km/h, same as the 2.2L I4 Turbodiesel version of the S-Class. But that Merc will only use about 4.5l/100km in return. Back to the Stallion ST, its engine is very smooth thanks to the Inline 6 configuration. It’s also highly responsive, maybe even a bit too responsive for a large cruiser like this? All in all, the biggest letdown is certainly the drivetrain. A 3.0L naturally aspirated I6 with 252hp is just not enough these days when you’re trying to move a 1.7 ton luxury saloon, especially when most of the torque comes after 4000RPM. On top of that, this car only has a 6-speed automatic. Now here’s the thing: when you don’t have much power, why not go for an 8-speed with short gearing so that you can use what little power it makes more effectively by allowing the engine to stay in its power band after every gearshift?

Ride Comfort (4 stars) ImageImageImageImage
The Stallion ST rides very well. The suspension is about as comfy as it gets, and the engine smoothness is remarkable. That being said, the tires could use more profile and the car rolls a little bit too much for me to give it the 5 star rating in this section.

Handling (4 stars) ImageImageImageImage
The Energent Stallion ST handles decently well. It is quite tame and the maximum cornering of over 1g make it fairly responsive, and so does the engine. But the body roll and the overall pretty poor sportiness due to the high weight (and low power) will remind you that this is not a sports car, despite the responsive steering.

Refinement (4 stars) ImageImageImageImage
With 76/100 sound insulation and a fairly quiet engine, the Stallion ST is nice to sit in and feels very refined. But then, that’s what you’d expect from a car in this class.

Equipment (5 stars) ImageImageImageImageImage
This is where this car really shines, on the inside. There’s pretty much every single toy and gadget you can imagine, but the safety equipment is “only” Premium, though that’s good enough for me.

Quality (5 stars) ImageImageImageImageImage
Again, this car is very impressive inside. You get all the best luxury interior and all the gadgets in the world, except for a device that pays out with money every time you press a button. And that could come in handy when you buy this car, as you’ll see a little bit later.

Reliability (3 stars) ImageImageImage
For a car with a price tag like this, one would expect it to start every time you need it. With this car, though, I wouldn’t bet my house on it. It’s fairly reliable but not convincing enough for a car in this category.

Running Costs (2 stars) ImageImage
The Achilles heel of the Stallion ST. Like I said before, the straight line performance is about on par with the weakest S-class currently on sale. But the Stallion ST will use 8.4l/100km which makes it just a tiny bit more economical than the S500, only that the S500 makes 455hp instead of 252. Plus, the annual service costs of this car are roughly 2400$ which is not too bad but still quite expensive.

Safety (4 stars) ImageImageImageImage
With Premium safety equipment and all driver aids known to man, one would expect this car to achieve 5 stars in this section easily, but the Aluminium body panels and corrosion resistant steel chassis are just not safe enough for a 5-star rating by today’s standards.

Overall Score (4 stars) ImageImageImageImage
The Energent Stallion ST is a good car. But it could be much better if improved in the right areas, mainly the drivetrain. If the engine made like 150hp more while managing higher reliability (turbo + lower rev limit maybe?), people would overlook the high running costs and let’s be honest, what kind of person goes to their Mercedes dealer, buys let’s say an S500, and then complains about the running costs?

Pros:
- Comfortable
- Easy to drive
- Safe
- Well-equipped
- High quality

Cons:
- High running costs
- Not enough power
Last edited by TheTom on Sun Jan 25, 2015 7:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
<<

aidan7777

Turbocharged
Turbocharged

Posts: 24

Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 11:23 pm

Cars: A mountain bike, And a BMX.

Post Sun Jan 25, 2015 2:53 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

Looking forward to when my car will be reviewed.
<<

utopian201

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 382

Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 11:12 pm

Post Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:14 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

I thought any reliability score above 70 was quite good without quality sliders; I think it is difficult to get above 75 without quality sliders.
Aldo range rovers have steels chassis and aluminium panels and they get 5 star NCAP ratings
Aurora Motor Company: Nothing Comes Close | Youtube ads: Aurora Manticore - "Dyno"
Auto magazine plus directories - list your car in the appropriate directory to be considered for a magazine cover/article.
<<

nialloftara

User avatar

Supercharged
Supercharged

Posts: 1983

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 2:07 pm

Location: Northeast USA

Cars: 2006 Scion Xb

Post Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:05 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

Yes, but AHS steel would be better to off set the aluminum panels. Or some quality points to chassis.
Chief designer and CEO, Centauri motor works, Centauri Performance Vehicles (CPV)
"Centauri: The Stars Are Within Your Reach."
Centauri engines Centauri cars
CPV engines CPV cars
Company ID: 1943047
PreviousNext

Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests