FINAL

Quiz/1999 Vauxhall Frontera Fanboy

Vanovo 379 (A40) "Fantastisk"

Exceeds the loudness rule (52.9)

Transverse FWD space frame, cast heads and an alu block which is reverse from how mixed materials are done in real engines, zero traction or drivers aids but variable EPS (???)

Looks like an 80s GM product, which entirely misses the point of the brief. Hard pass.

The custom bowler hat badge is nice. That's pretty much the only nice thing about the car though. Why would you submit something inspired by a volvo, but one from the 90s and not a volvo from 2005?? Has a fake exhaust tip also. Misses the brief

4 words- Transverse FWD space frame. More words- it doesn't excel in any of the priorities, the engineering is a mismatch of random bits and pieces that don't make any sense, it ultimately makes for a very poor showing. Overly restrictive single exit exhaust.

Rule break aside, the engineering is bad, the design is a dated clone of an 80s GM product, and overall just kinda misses the point.

AMS Antares 5.0 V8 GT Coupe

Nothing here stands out as too egregious, engineering choices all make sense to me, but there's some arguable cheese by cranking the weight optimization slider to 0 in order to boost reliability and comfort.

The design isn't bad, but I do find it perhaps a little simple. The front is missing some depth for me, and i think the rear badging is entirely too large. I would've also moved the taillights and plate area up more and more dramatically changed the shape of the rear bumper to fit. All around a decent, if not terribly exciting design.

The fit and finish of this design just isn't quite there- there are good foundations to build on but it needed more time in the oven. I appreciate that its fairly period correct and there's some alright design features, but the side profile looks a bit awkward and it definitely could have used a little more time.

Engineering as a whole is solid, but I have two issues - One, I think you could've tweaked how you invested your techpool a little better, right now it skews a little heavily towards the engine side of things which i think keeps your car up towards the top of the budget ultimately. Two, I understand the reason behind cranking the weight optimization slider to 0, but I find it slightly cheesy. There are better ways to manipulate the game into increasing reliability and comfort - to me, that isn't one of them. All around solid, though.

Overall a decent entry, but the design lets it down and there are some tiny quibbles with the engineering, relating to some minor cheese and poor cost optimization.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

All seems well from a realism standpoint, but for this year and segment I'd expect ESC, it's producing perhaps a little too much downforce, and single exit exhaust for what"s supposed to be a performance vehicle is a bit of an odd choice to me. Apart from that, there"s not much I can outright object against.

Not bad in any way, but I think it lacks shape, the wheels are too far inset and could be larger, and I don't love the color choice, makes it feel kinda downmarket.

The design has some nice shapes and I like the line that continues from the fender lip to the rocker, but the two tone and enormous wing make the car look a little too much like an aftermarket tuner for a boy racer type and loses a little visual prestige. Definitely not a bad showing but unfortunately it just doesn't quite look the part.

Decent engineering, but the single exhaust for a performance car is a bit of a weird choice to me, the lack of ESC is an interesting choice, a 60mm stagger seems a little excessive, and i think the budget was poorly manipulated with quality in some spots where it's not strictly necessary.

A solid entry, but the design leaves something to be desired for me, and the engineering while largely good, has a few small problems.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Nothing sticks out as particularly unrealistic, it feels fairly balanced from an engineering standpoint.

The front is... peculiar, with a lot of the details being too exaggerated for my tastes. There's a good attempt at depth, but the fixtures you used to achieve depth feel haphazardly placed, almost with no intention. The wheels are too inset, and the design you chose feels downmarket for the brief. All in all a decent attempt, but missing some subtlety and focus for the details.

I think this needed a lot more care in execution and a clearer vision for what the final design was supposed to look like. Every aspect of the car is diminished by very limited fixture use. The grill looks like teeth and those teeth being set against black plastic makes the car visually cheap. I'm not a fan of the one fixture dodge taillights or the front indicator placement. The name badge is also on there twice for some reason? Suffice to say this is a pass from me. Some potential as a future competitor but it could definitely have used more time in the oven. The one positive note I can add is that I enjoy the detail of the fender vent branding, but that's about where it ends for me.

Generally speaking - it isn't bad. However, the suspension tune is a little weird, the narrow square tire setup limits sportiness and needs to be pushed out further than they are, techpool is slightly underutilized, but on the flip side reliability is decent, comfort vs sport tradeoff is good, more than acceptable drivability despite being RWD, and reasonable fuel economy to boot.

Overall a solid effort, but with design being a top priority, it's hard to take this one much further.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

I can't find fault with much, but balancing mass at 0 for better responsiveness and non-progressive springs despite having farily advanced suspension otherwise jump out at me as odd.

There are some good ideas here, but I'm not the biggest fan of the star shaped front grille or the doubled up headlights, the taillights fight the otherwise very square and angular rear, the rear diffuser is perhaps too modern and the reflectors/exhausts poke out weirdly, but despite all that - the greenhouse work is very clean, the fender vent is neatly integrated, and some good surfacing work. Overall one of the better designs we've gotten thus far.

There are a lot of things about this design that I like that are weighed down by a few things I don't. The front fascia is coherent and sleek, and I appreciate making that star shaped grill fit the shape of the body without looking like a mess. It has a balanced front design. Unfortunately the front is let down by the rear. The taillights are a strange shape that doesn't really fit the shape of the rear. The diffuser would be a good touch but its a little ahead of its time in the segment and the exhausts and reflectors on the diffuser are sticking out in a way that isn't particularly attractive. With a decent rear end this could easily have been an 80+ design score. Also, it's kinda big

All around solid, with some of the highest scores in the field at the time of submission, just the small quirks of non-progressive springs and the balancing mass slider at 0 being the only things I could take you to task over.

Generally a very good effort, but some small design quirks and a few engineering things that could be remedied stand in in its way, not to mention being at the maximum budget and having the highest service costs of all cars submittted at this writing. Looking beyond that though, it easily clears all the other cars currently submitted in nearly every stat, makng for an overall enticing package.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Can't say there's anything too weird here, most of the choices make sense and seem realistic enough to my eye.

There are some attempts at a good design here, but I feel that the front is too narrow and "squished", for the lack of a better term, the orange reflector by the leading edge of the front fender looks random and out of place, the rear is better, but it does little to defeat the bulbousness of the body you chose, and the rear reflectors are too high up. The wheels could also stand to be pushed out further, for a sports car it's generally better from a visual standpoint to have the wheels at the very corners of the body to make it appear more menacing and sporty - this just looks soft.

The sculpted lines of this body are not well suited for the early 00s. The bodywork is that of a 2015 car that has been accosted by 00s anachronisms- the simple rounded plastic indicators don't pair well with the sharp lines or the triangular side markers. It's a shame that this design was put on this body because I can appreciate several aspects of it and I actually like the way it looks. It feels very SLK-adjacent in styling in ways that I enjoy- the upper fascia looks quite good, and if the indicators had been placed inside the headlight fixture, the front end could have been more cohesive. The front indicators just feel like an afterthought. The rear looks good and does a decent job of hiding the baked in lines on the ND miata body.

Generally okay, but the VVL kick-in is rather aggressive for me, you left a fair bit of techpool on the table, the suspension tune is confusing at best, and I find that the quality distribution is a little off for me. A good effort, but missing some important details to take it one step further.

In a vacuum, it isn't a bad car, but a quirky design that misses some important attention to detail, engineering that's not quite there, in addition to largely middle of the road to below average stats for as expensive as it is, ultimately seal the FurnACE's fate.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Fails to follow the naming scheme.

Nothing too crazy here, but billet engine internals are a little out of place and unnecessary.

While there are some good ideas here, the whole thing is very flat and missing depth, the wheels date the design, and the vertical vents on the rear are unnecessary. Just not a great showing unfortunately.

The wing looks tacked on. It's clear that there was a vision in mind for the front fascia, but not enough time was put in to realize that vision. The rear cannot share that critique- it looks really slapped together.

Not bad, but the billet engine internals are slightly overkill, and I think you left some potential on the table by not using very much quality, the one advantage to that being that you come in a solid 5 grand cheaper than any of the other cars submitted thus far.

Failing to meet the rules aside, the design leaves a lot to be desired, especially in a challenge where design is such a high priority to begin with. Engineering for the most part is pretty good, but if the car had met the rules, the design would have almost certainly kept it out of the top.

Everything seems good to me, nothing really stuck out as particularly unrealistic.

I like the direction you went in, but if I had any notes, it would be that the side skirts feel a little underdeveloped for me, the side vent is a hair rough looking, the exhaust cutouts are too large, i'm not a fan of the taillight shape, and the hood vents are too large. I should also mention that I feel as if the design is maybe alittle too replica-y of an actual TVR - despite that, it generally is a pretty good design, just missing a little attention to detail.

There are too many vents on the hood and fenders. It looks very aggressive and I can appreciate the design, it looks fairly decent. The roof bulges and side treatment could have been better executed. Also, maybe a little too insistent that its british- three flags??

On the whole engineering is solid, but comfort and safety are some of the lowest submitted at time of writing, thanks to basic level choices for both. Brakes are slightly overpowered, but still reasonable. Service costs are also on the high side, but the purchase price is significantly less than other submitted cars, reliability is very good, and it's reasonably efficient to boot.

By and large a very good entry, but some engineering choices hold it back, as does a design missing some attention to detail, but a good effort regardless.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Generally all seems realistic, the only things I can say feel weird are the rather small engine with fairly restrictive exhaust and the lack of power steering despite having other driver's assists.

Not bad, but compared to some of the other TVR-inspired designs I've gotten, this feels like the least developed one, particularly when you look at details like the roof shaping, the toy-like side profile, and some of the rough moulding fixtures over the front and rear. A solid effort, but I do think some extra attention to detail could have carried it further.

This has a great side profile, and the rear looks pretty good, but the front end looks a little bit odd. It has some good angles, but I wish that the lower area of the front bumper sloped backward more. The patchwork is a little messy, but I appreciate the effort put in and this is a solid looking entry.

It's a bit of a mixed bag- on one hand, reliability is the best at the time of submission and it's very competitive from a performance standpoint. On the other hand, the very low drivability and comfort, as well as a weird engine setup (a super small, relatively low-powered V8) and the lack of power steering hold it back quite a bit. Not a bad effort, but not as good as I think it could be.

In general, a decent car, but it misses some attention to detail on the design, and I think the engineering is sort of a mixed bag. All in all not bad, but hard to say if it's deserving of a higher placement.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Nothing too crazy about this one, but a space frame is a bit of an odd choice, and the lack of progressive springs is also something I would've changed. Beyond that, though, everything looks good.

All around an okay design, but i think it's missing some definition, the wheels don't fill the arches nicely, and the rear doesn't make great use of the space. Aside from that, not terrible but far from perfect.

I really want to like this design. The ad does a great job of highlighting its best feature, which is its rear- and from a rear 3/4 view, it looks fantastic. Unfortunately, the front fascia is a huge letdown. With a little more attention to detail at the front, it could have come out as a really strong contender visually.

Largely engineering seems fine, but the lowest sportiness of all non-instabins at time of submission, middle of the road reliability, a few engineering quirks, and relatively high service costs being some notable flaws. However, it's very easy to drive, comfort is some of the best, and a reasonable purchase price being some notable highlights. In general- decent, but could be pushed a little further.

A good effort all around, just missing some of what we're looking for on the design side of things, and some negineering choices I might have rethought, as well as perhaps being skewed a little too much towards the comfort side of things add up to a car that misses the mark just by a hair.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Everything seems good to me, nothing really stuck out as particularly unrealistic, I think it just pushes slightly beyond what the challenge actually wants. Probably could have gone without pushrod suspension though.

A very good design, but I think for this challenge it kinda misses the point. It reads more like a GT3/GT3 RS type car, but the brief explicity says that isn't what's desired, so it sorta flies past the point. I think a less extreme version of this same design, with a smaller, perhaps ducktail-style wing and a less dramatic color combination could have suited the challenge better. It still scored high becaust it's a thoughtfully put together design, it just isn't the *right* design for this challenge. Also, the body choice kind of dates it, and makes it seem more like a restomod than a properly new car for 2005.

This looks very good, if a little derivative. It definitely looks a little too 'tuning house' for the purposes of this competition. Does a really good job looking the part for what its trying to be, but misses the point.

Looking through the scope of the actual challenge, I think it's simply too extreme. seeing as it's nearly two seconds faster to 60 compared to the other entries, it has SVC that's almost a full 1000 dollars more than the next most expensive car at time of submission, with the third-lowest safety and the third-lowest comfort of all cars submitted at time of writing. Reliability is just average, fuel economy is on the lower end, it's right on top of the budget limit; however, drivability and sportiness are very good, and safety is decent. If thnis challenge was looking for a more extreme vehicle, I do think this would do very well, but for the challenge at hand it's simply not what's desired.

It does nothing wrong, but in the context of the challenge, it misses the point for me. I think it's simply too extreme, and more like a track car, rather than a balanced sports car that offers perfomance but some semblance of livability as well, unfortunately this misses that balance.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Everything seems fine from a realism standpoint, but the complete lack of quality on the engine, and the enormous amount of tire stagger being two slightly odd things.

An attempt was made, but the design feels somewhat slapped together, the front and rear don't feel very cohesive, it lacks surfacing and depth, and the matte plastic hood bulge cheapens it. I think with some more time and effort this could have been better, but as it stands it just doesn't work for me.

This just looks really wide and awkward. The build doesn't do a good job of hiding the strange looking features of the body- the headlights don't line up well with the very upright front end, and the plastic hood bulge looks cheap and out of place. Overall, far from the worst thing we've recieved but also very far from the best.

I can see the effort applied to the engineering, with very good comfort and just okay drivability despite having both RWD and a manual transmission, but reliability is the lowest of all cars submitted at time of writing (partially because of the utter lack of quality on the engine side to boost the engine reliability, and thus the overall car's reliability), SVC is the second highest of all submitted cars at time of writing, and fine but not exceptional performance stats despite being at the top of the budget, and it doesn't really utilize that budget well either, probably due to the relatively fancy suspension options and +4 advanced safety stealing quite a bit of budget. Generally an okay effort, but some of the choices you made ultimately hold the entire car back.

Not a bad attempt, but both the design and engineering miss the mark, the design being the biggest flaw. With design being such a big priority, it's hard to see this one going much further.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

Nothing seems off, though I find the choice to run solid rear discs and have a detatchable hard top despite being what looks like a fixed roof coupe being the only weird things out of note.

Out of all the TVR-inspired designs this is easily the best, with a good amount of detail work and excellent reshaping of the original body. That said, I'm not the biggest fan of the headlights, the plain black plastic that's used extensively around the rear cheapens it some for me, and I think some of the moulding is a hair rough. All told, a very good effort.

I love the front fascia, side treatment, vents, and especially rear treatment. The cabin just looks too tall to need that roof bump, and its just slightly too low to the ground. This is a really great looking build and a good use of the body. Definitely my favorite of the TVR esque builds we have recieved. I know that the teeth are a brand feature and that's been consistent throughout this brand, and while that's a nice detail and I can appreciate the heritage, the fangs still look a little odd. Big fan of the fascias though.

Generally not bad, but reliability is the third lowest and SVC is the third highest at time of writing, safety is the second lowest at time of writing, comfort is below average, and fuel economy is below average. Looking beyond the stats, I find the choice to run solid rear discs in a performance car strange (even if they work, which they do, to your credit.) and having a detatchable hard top despite being what seems to be a fixed roof coup being particularly baffling.

Generally a solid effort with a great design, but it falls behind from an engineering standpoint, which ultimately holds it back.

Nothing seems too weird, but a light AHS monocoque and a billted engine block seem unneccessary.

I see glimpses of a good design, but the bright silver trim with the extensive flat black plastic clashes with the paint too much, the wheels are way too small, the rear is weird and incongruent with narrow and awkwardly stretched taillights, a very square and too simple rear diffuser, very wide front fenders in comparison to the rear, and ultimately looking a little too downmarket ultimately keep me from scoring this one higher.

There are some great shapes here, with some terrible material treatment. This just really needed some more time in the oven. The chrome is just a weird anachronism on what would otherwise be a convincing looking entry level sports car.

One of the brighter spots on this car, with a very reasonable purchase price and service costs, excellent fuel economy, good drivability and comfort despite a manual, good reliability and the highest practicality of all non-instabins at time of writing. Despite that, it's not very competitive from a performance standpoint, with the lowest 0-60 of all non-instabins, very low cornering grip (yours was 0.862, the next lowest is 0.93) and a relative lack of power compared to other entries. A solid effort, but outmatched in this class of car.

Overall a decent entry, but the design leaves a lot to be desired, looking both too simple and too downmarket. Engineering is better, but it just isn't very competitive from a performance standpoint. Ultimately though, the design is the bigger problem.

Round 1 - General Elimination

Doesn't totally follow the naming scheme, no username was listed.

You seemed to make reasonable choices for the most part, but I question the choices to not use techpool whatsoever, the choice to run standard springs despite semi-active dampers and active ARBs, and the small and underpowered V12.

Hard pass for me design wise, the round lights up front and random silver trim don't work at all, the lower fascia is too low, the rear is random and has lots of conflicting shapes - in short, I can find basically nothing positive to say about this design.

It looks like a test mule body shell. The fascia can only be described positively as "meeting legal regulation". The rear is a disaster, with exposed carbin fiber in places that just don't make sense, and high mounted exhausts that end up looking a lot like a pig snout, all combined with taillight internals that are both nonsensical, too modern, and awkward. Just a really unfortunate looking design.

Much like the design, hard to find anything too positive to say here either. Techpool is completely untouched, leaving you at a fairly large disadvantage, the V12 seems unnecessary given that it's producing less power than some of your competitors who are running engines with fewer cylinders. Stats wise, it doesn't excel in any category, ether being well below averag or just on the cusp of average, ultimately making for a wide miss of an entry.

It misses the mark by a lot, both in terms of design and in terms of engineering. Rule break aside, this wouldn't have made it much further.

Rear tires end in 0, rules explicitly state that tires must end in 5

Tires that end in 0, steel wheels on a performance car, turbo quality despite not having a turbo, rear wheels smaller than the fronts, -5.0 on the fuel map slider meaning it runs on 95 but misses out on its full potential, solid rear brakes on a performance car - the list goes on from there. Don't have much else to say here.

Blinding white paint, C6-wannabe styling that doesn't translate well, tires that are too far inset and a random front fascia design all add up to a poor score here. With some more practice I think it could be better, but as it stands it's well off the mark.

I repainted it yellow so that I could actually look at the design. The fixtures are pretty randomly placed. there are some cool features, like the side exit exhaust and the hood vents, but they just don't save the car from looking pretty bad. Tiny carbon fiber mirrors and randomly placed vents, along with an underdetailed upper rear fascia would have doomed this design as much as the rule breaks did.

Not great here either unfortunately, with the worst overall fuel economy at time of submission, the worst overall safety, the second highest SVC, and just mediocre stats from there. There's also some weirdness with the tires, like that they don't follow the ending in 5 rule, and the rear wheels are larger than the front for some reason. Generally just not a great effort unfortunately.

Rule break aside, it misses the point of the brief by a lot, and doesn't make up for that fact with good engineering or good design. Overall, a poor showing.

Can't say there's a lot that off in terms of realism, everything looks good beyond choosing to run 91 octane fuel when it wasn't explicitly necessary, and the odd techpool arrangement.

There was an attempt, but between the super far forward upper A-pillar, the narrow front fascia that doesn't need the extra lower lip grille, the chintzy-looking blue accents in the headlights, and a somewhat underdeveloped rear end, it's hard to say that this is a particularly excellent design.

I like the overall shape of this car. The lower front fascia is too narrow though, and the headlights are too big. The spoiler looks tacked on, and the taillights are too low. Not terrible, but not great either.

Overall very solid here, with above average stats and competitive performance figures, though you didn't need to run 91 octane fuel, so you're losing out on some performance there, the techpool distribution is odd at best and leaves a fair bit on the table for as expensive as your car is. Generally a very good effort, but not without its issues.

Overall a good effort, but the design holds it back from its full potential, and there are some small engineering quirks I probably would have rethought.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

The lack of even variable assist hydraulic power steering, variable geometry turbos for no real reason that are also poorly tuned, etc etc. All told, not a great effort from a realism standpoint.

The design, especially around the front, is very busy, with clashing and nonsensical shapes. The rear is comparatively underdeveloped, and the side lacks detail as well. Not a hugely strong showing, I'm afraid.

With a mere 36 fixtures, this car is just very underdetailed. With oversized headlights and a disjointed front fascia, it wouldn't have stood much of a chance in this competition even if it had met emissions regulations.

Hard to find anything good to say - not even variable assist hydraulic power steering in a premium 2005 car, the highest SVC out of all cars at time of submission, a very late spooling ingine for as low as it revs, well below average sportiness and drivability, and more to the point it misses the WES9 emissions compliancy rule. Generally a poor effort.

All around a poor effort, with an overwrought design and underthought engineering, ultimately making for a car that strikes out, even before the rule break.

Everything on paper seems good, but I'd argue that it's maybe a little too quick for the era/type of car that the brief was asking for, other than that nothing stands out as too weird.

I like this one a lot, there was clearly a good amount of thought and effort applied to the design, and if I were to change anything, I/d make tow small adjustments-One, I'd have tilted the headlights downward, so that the part of the headloight closest to the wheels was more upward to make the front a little more dynamic, and I would have both lowered the ride height and given the tires a little less sidewall- that's it. Overall a very solid design, and I don't really have anything overtly negative to say about it.

A very clean design that is technically impressive to pull off. If I didn't know better I would not recognize the body this was made on, and I made the body it was made on. Overall, it has nice lines and good depth and is detailed in a convincing way. Only held back in any way by looking very slightly too modern in the front fascia.

Unfortunately, this is where it starts to come apart. Drivability is among the lowest, despite having AWD - I blame the very wide tires on all 4 corners (Note- adding some toe to the front wheels would have both increased reliability and increased drivability, with minimal impact to your other stats.), SVC is very high (the second highest of all non-instabins at time of writing), sportiness is solidly average, comfort and fuel economy are less than optimal; however, reliability, prestige and safety are very good overall. Performance wise it's good, but I'd argue that it's too quick for the era and target segment, being a second or so faster to 60 than most of its competitors. Overall, a good effort, but some mistakes along the way ultimately hold it back.

Overall a very good car, with an excellent design, but with some glaring ewngineering deficiencies that ultimately pull it out of the running. A strong showing.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Nothing is too weird here, all the engineering makes good enough sense, and I can't find much that's too weird.

For the first mid-engined submission, it's not too bad, but the front and rear both lack a lot of detail, the wheels don't fill the arches out enough for me, and overall it just doesn't look very exciting.

Lackluster, underdetailed fascias hold back a design which would actually work quite well with a little more care. License plate placement at the front is unfortunate as it hides what would be the most exciting part of the design, and without the plate the front fascia looks halfway decent.

Very good overall, with very competitive performance stats, excelllent drivability and reliability, good comfort, a reasonable purchase price and service costs, but low prestige and safety are some drawbacks. All around a good, if minorly flawed effort.

Overall a solid effort, with good overall engineering, but the design is too simple and lacks detail, and with design being a high priority, it's hard to move this one further.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

Nothing is too crazy about this one, but I question the standard springs gien how high tech the rest of the suspension is.

Overall one of the best designs submitted, the front is great and looks solidly era-appropriate, I love the the attention to detail on cutting the seams across the door shaping, but if I had any major complaints, it would be that I find the rear just a little basic compared to the rest of the design. Despite that, it's an easy favorite.

Incredible looking car. Technically impressive, shows no sign of body molding despite torturing the famously terrible body its built on. Even beyond the limitations of automation though, this is a really clean build with a lot of care put into it. Looks very realistic and of the era. I was excited when I saw this in progress, and it definitely lived up to my expectations. Deceptively simple, elegant, and beautiful. Definitely a top contender.

Solid here too, coming in well underbudget with very competitive performance stats, solid drivability, sport and comfort, excellent prestige and good reliability, but saferyy, service costs and fuel economy are some drawbacks. However, there's a lot more good to say here than there is bad.

One of the best cars submitted, with excellent stats, a very affordable purchase price, and a solid desgin to round it out. Weak spots are few, safety and service costs being the two biggest drawbacks. Regardless, a very good entry overall.

Nothing is particularly odd or weird about this one, but a 60deg V8 is a little weird.

Not a fan of this one, the body is short and stubby, which makes it look awkward, the wheels don't fill out the arches well, and the rest of the design just lacks excitement or anything to make it stand out. It lack shape, it lacks creativity, it just isn't very good, unfortunately.

Tiny wheels and a mere 25 fixtures just don't cut it. Especially when the chosen headlights and taillights use technology that doesn't exist yet in 2005.

It's all fine here for the most part, but i question the 60deg V8 over a 90deg, and the brakes are both overpowered and fade somewhat??? Performance wise it's somewhat competitive, but it has the lowest reliability out of all entries at time of writing, below average fuel economy and very high SVC. Overall, it misses the mark for me.

A decent enough entry, but the design and the engineering both have problems, and with design being such a high priority, it's hard to justify moving this one forward.

Round 1 - General Elimination

Does not follow the naming scheme.

A 3.5L V10 that makes a whopping 275 horsepower, hydropneumatic suspension and solid rear discs on a performance car - just a lot f choices that don't make sense or were otherwise unnecessary. Not strong in the realism department as a result, unfortunately.

I can count the amount of fixtures on one hand. Design was a high priority, and to be quite honest it doesn't feel as if you made any effort on the design at all here. Bad showing.

Were you taking this seriously? I'm not saying you have to but... this has football jersey lettering on the side next to a 70s vinyl decal, and those features make up nearly a 1/5th of the fixtures placed on the entire bulld. Just a really unfortunate showing. This car could not and would not ever exist in real life.

Teeny-tiny V10 that makes less power than cars with fewer cylinders, fine if not exceptional stats, but ultimately not very competitive due to the choices you made while engineering. Mixed bag here, as far as I'm concerned.

Rule break aside, it 's barely a design, engineering has some major problems, and ultimately it doesn't do enough to place better than the first round. A big disappointment, I'm afraid.

Nothing too crazy here, all the decisions that you made make good enough sense to me.

Not bad, but the front lacks shape and it's too squished together, the front indicators are gigantic and silly looking, the rear is kinda basic, and has a bit of a weird side profile. I also think it looks a little downmarket for the brief. Overall a solid effort, just not quite there in terms of polish.

Adorable, but too modern. The front fascia is cramped and could use to be larger all around. Beyond that, could have used a little more detailing.

Everything is solid here for the most part, with good sportiness, above average reliability, average drivability and reasonably competitive performance, but safety is rather low. Decent package otherwise.

By and large a good entry, but a downmarket design that lacks a little polish weighs down a solidly engineered entry. With design being a high prioirty, I have trouble moving it forward.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

Nothing weird here that I can see, but I question the use of solid rear discs on a sport/performance car, as well as the standard springs despite having semi-active sway bars.

Fine overall, but I think all of the lights as a rule are just too big, the front lacks some polish, and I think the surfacing isn't particularly well integrated. Solid for the most part though.

If the taillights were mounted higher on the rear it would instantly have made this a 70 instead of a 63. There are plenty of nice looking angles on this design, but straight on from the front or rear it just looks odd.

Nothing seems too off here, but performance isn't super competitive, prestige and safety aren't great, and the turbo spools kinda late. Good parts are the very high reliability, the good fuel economy, and the good price. Bit up and down, but a decent effort.

Overall a decent entry, but marred by an imperfect design, and a few engineering quibbles.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Does not follow the naming scheme/does not meet WES9.

Treated steel panels, fully cast iron engine yet it has direct injection?? lot of strange decisions here that ultimately work against you.

It's fine, but it feels very deriviative, and lacks some polish, especially when it comes to details like completely omitting glass covering over the headlights. Decent enough, but it can use some refinement and its own identitiy.

Extremely clean design that I would enjoy a lot more if it wasn't 1:1 a BMW or, perhaps an Ubermacht from GTA. 75 is as high as I am willing to score something that is practically a replica. There's technique at play here but it needs an identity of its own.

The fully cast iron engine is weird and inconsistent with the high tech nature of the engine otherwise, the techpool distribution is wonky at best, the suspension tune is probably the worst one I've ever seen as a challenge host, performance wise it's perfectly average, and the rest of the stats are either at or below average. Not a solidly engineered car, unfortunately,

Engineering is bad, design is derivative, overall not a solid effort, even if we took the rule breaks off the table.

Partial carbon panels for some weird reason, standard springs despite a fairly high tech suspension set up otherwise, but as a whole nothing seems to be too weird here.

A very random design, with fixtures just kinda slapped on without much further consideration, not to mention lights that wouldn't feasibly exist in 2005 - overall it doesn't really work, and the fixture slop unfortunately just makes it look messy.

The front splitter and rear diffuser are way too modern for this car. The fascias are flat and underdeveloped. I like the continued motif with the side vents and the taillights being placed in triplets. But beyond that, there's not much good to say about this design.

Engineering is.... fine, but below average reliability, a moderate purchase price , in addition to some random choices like the unnecessary partial CF panels and the standard springs despite the fancier choices for dampers and sway bars all add up to a car that has some pretty significant deficiencies, and that is what keeps it out of the top.

A random and messy design in conjunction with a mixed bag of engineering choices ultimately make for a car that doesn't place very high.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

Authie et Dallier 8/25 Cabrio 2+2

Nothing seems weird here, all of your choices seem decently realistic for the era.

Not personally a fan of this one - proportionally it doesn't look like an FR design, the moulding is kinda haphazardly places, the pseudo-fish mouth grille doesn't really work for me, neither does the way that the wheels fit inside the arches. I can see glimpses of something good here, but it needed a lot longer in the oven to fully flesh it out.

I like some of the finer details on this build, like the custom badging and the taillights, but the overarching design is a little awkward and the body molding could definitely have been given more care. By no means a terrible looking car, but it doesn't stand out as being particularly beautiful either. Definitely has character, just needed more time in the oven.

A lot of the engineering choices are fine, but well below average drivability, comfort and safety, in addition to just average performance stats all work against you, as does being only 100 dollars off the price cap. With some fine tuning, it wuld probably place better, but as it stands it's easily outclassed by even cheaper cars.

A flawed entry, both in terms of design and in terms of engineering. With more time applied to both, this would likely do better, but as it stands it's far off the mark.

Round 1 - General Elimination

All of the choices made make good enough sense to me, hard to find any fault here.

Generally a good design, but I think there's entirely too much chrome on the design, especially on the greenhouse. Other than that, I don't find much else wrong with it.

Generally a decent looking car but the overuse of chrome really cheapens the design. It looks a bit like someone used those autozone chrome trim kits on the entire car, which isn't a great look. The vent design and the overall fascia shapes are well done and look quite good, but it just has too much chrome.

Engineering largely is good, with competitive performance figures and solid stats, but drivability is on the low side, SVC is kinda high, and it's right on the price cap. Overall a decent effort though.

A good entry with fairly minor flaws, but flaws nonetheless. Those flaws however are relatively small, so it's hard to fully discount it.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Nothing too weird here as far as I can tell.

A decent effort (and a huge improvement from your earliest designs), but the front is kinda random and doesn't totally fit together for me, the white roof is weird, the rear shape-wise is mostly fine, but too modern, and the stretched grille textures don't look nice at all.

There's some decent shapes at play here but they're not well executed. The headlight internals don't work super well in body color when the inside of the headlight itself is plastic. A little more detail would have been nice across the board. The white roof doesn't make a ton of sense. All things considered though, not a terrible showing.

The basic engineering is fairly solid, but reliability is among the lowest of all submitted entries, comfort and sportiness are solidly in the middle, drivability is decent and the performance is reasonably competitive despite the relatively low power engine. Not bad, but far from perfect.

Overall a good effort, it's clear that your skills have massively improved since I've last judged you, but low reliability and average stats elsewhere, combined with a design that misses the mark ulitmately keep this one from making it any further.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

Despite a tire size that I literally don't think exists at all, nothing seems too off.

Overall fine, but the rear is messy and I don't care for the way that it's shaped, the wheels look awkward inside the arches, and the whole thing gives off a kit car vibe that I'm not personally a fan of.

There's an attempt to use some techniques but the practice isn't quite there yet. The fascia is a little bit wide and the headlights are a bit too far apart for my liking. The lower fascias are quite good though, and by no means is this an unattractive car, just one that lacks refinement.

Performance is decently competitive but i'd expect more power from a V8 this big, comfort, fuel economy and SVC are among the worst, drivability is good, sportiness is just above average, but overall kind of a mixed bag.

A messy and kit car-like design that doesn't work well for me, and a mix of okay to below average stats ultimately keep me from placing this one higher.

Round 1 - General Elimination

Nothing's too crazy here, but I'd argue that it's borderline too quick for the era.

Fine, but not a fan of the flat and bright orange paint, don't like the supra reject taillights, the side intake is messy, and the whole thing looks too boyracer-y to me.

While this is a decent design at face value, it looks a little too brash- it ends up having somewhat toyish proportions and elements, like the rear wing, that don't do it service. Not a bad design, just not one that feels elegant in the way our client would want. Also IS THAT A SUPRA??? (why did you do this)

Overall it's fine, with most stats coming in either slightly above average or solidly average (sportiness being an exception, as it's among the highest submitted so far.) It's perhaps too quick, comfort isn't great, and SVC is quite high. Decent effort generally speaking.

Solidly engineered, but the design doesn't quite do it for me, and ultimately that's whit I have trouble advancing it further,

Round 1 - Design Elimination

Nothing too weird here, you're very good at making realistic cars so I would expect that.

A totally competent design, that feels relatively realistic for the era and thaat is well styled, but to me it lacks something to make it stand out in a field of fairly exciting cars. Not bad in any way, but it does feel outclassed to a certain extent.

Exactly what I wanted this body to be used for when I made it. The only drawbacks to this design are that the molding could be slightly cleaner- the ducktail is not very well integrated. It would also score better if it was a more dedicated coupe- as the coupe version of a sport sedan, it feels like it falls very slightly outside of the brief, or at the very least the inspiration. Ultimately a very well made car that I enjoy looking at.

Another area that's perfectly complacent, but out of step with the competition. Drivability is very good, fuel economy is borderline unrealistically good, safety is good, as is reliability. Looking beyond that, SVC is on the high side, sportiness and comfort are on the lowe end, it's fairly understeer-y which limits its sporting potentia, prestige is just okay, purchase price is average, and performance stats are not particularly competitive. Overall very good, but not in keeping with the competition.

A totally compliant car, that with a different brief, would likely wi or place near the top. But in a field of true sports cars, it feels out of step with the cars its trying to compete with, which ultimately seals its fate.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Falling_Comet, variationofvariables, yurimacs, Portalkat42, Speedyboi

Nothing is too crazy in general, but the 8AT and 10s safety are two minor marks against you.

A nearly perfect and expertly detailed design - I know it being modern is part of the schtick, but I would be remiss if I didn't say that it's perhaps too modern. Despite that, it's a stunning car to look at, and if I had any real complaints with the design - it would be that I think that there's just a little too much silver trim on the rear. Wicked minor flaws.

Gorgeous car with genuinely deranged attention to detail. hatsune miku sweep. In all seriousness, very strong build taking advantage of the specialties of all of the designers involved. All of the classic Sendo details are here- the meticulously produced analog clock, the skulls in the trunk; A nearly perfect car. I may have done the taillights slightly differently, but it does a decent job of capturing the era if looking just a couple of years modern.

Another area that's nearly flawless - all of the choices are good, even the slightly unrealistic transmission choice and safety level. Flaws are minor, the biggest being the relatively low reliability, the slightly low sportiness, high SVC, and being on the maximum price cap. Despite that, it scores very well in other areas, beating most, if not all other submissions. Very, very nearly perfect, with a few blemishes.

Far and away one of the best entries, easily besting most cars in the objective stats, and in my subjective opinion one of the best looking cars submitted. There are some flaws, but they're relatively minor all things considered. A very strong effort.

Montiel Torrige Coupe 497

Nothing is too out of whack, I just wouldn't have used standard springs,

A clean and focused design as I'd come to expect from you, if I had any complaints it's that the wheels are a hair too small, and the way the taillights wrap up around the top of the trunklid is a little awkward, as is how far inset they are. I'd have also used a different fixture to surround the exhaust tips/use a different exhaust tip, but a solid effort regardless.

I really like the rear of this car, but the front looks a bit awkward to me. The headlights look great, but the catfish grill doesn't well suit the front of the car and the hood vent would be better if it wasn't split. All that said, I still very much enjoy the overall design. The sweeping beltline and the entire rear look incredible, I just wish the front was up to that level.

By and large very good, the reliability is astounding (and borderline unneccessary but alas), the high priority stats are very competitive, SVC is solidly in the middle along with purchase price, and all of the choices generally make sense, though I would have gone wih progressive springs instead. I'd also argue that it's borderline too fast for the era, but still exceptional.

A very solid effort, with minor design problems and very good objective stats. Hard to see this getting dethroned.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

One of the better parts of your car - everything makes good enough sense from an engineering standpoint.

Welp, you asked for it - a 3 in design. It lacks effort, it lacks cohesion, it lacks any sensibility - I could go on but I don't think it really matters at the end of the day, it isn't good.

The rear is too low. the front fascia is both edgy and curvy and none of the shapes make sense- it looks like a confused fish. Just about the only thing I like is the door handle placement. The body is far too modern and nothing is done to hide that. 3 in design is right I think.

Probably one of the only good parts of the car generally speaking, but it isn't competitive in performance, many of the stats are okay if not record-breaking, and there are unneccessary and weird choices that I just wouldn't have made, like adding AED, or a teeny tiny NA I6 that makes 150 to 200hp less than most other entries. Overall better than the design, but it doesn't move the needle too far.

A decently engineered, if not terribly exciting entry, marred by a truly bad design.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

Front biased AWD on a sports car is weird and bad, otherwise it's pretty normal.

I don't like how much of it is plain flat black, the headlight tech that you used literally wouldn't exist irl, and as a whole it just doesn't do it for me.

Not necessarily ugly but certainly not pretty either, and just not very intentionally designed. The taillights are a single fixture and the fixture chosen doesn't look good. Why is the font on its badging a generic military stencil font? It's not a terrible attempt but it could be much better in many ways.

Solid, but the front biased AWD us unrealistic and a weird choice done to boost drivability, the other stats are fairly competitive but SVC is decently high, sportiness is on the low end, and it's a little expensive. Far from the worst car I've gotten though.

A fine entry, but a few realism knocks, and a below average design keep it from progressing further.

Round 1 - General Elimination

Other than being a little quick for the era, I can't say there's anything too weird or off here.

I respect the amount of effort and the eye for detail, but I just can't say i'm a huge fan of it. I don't like designs that feel overly retro-y as a rule and this is that for me. I also don't like the black plate holder, the moulding bumps on the front and rear, not personally a fan of the split glass, nor am I fan of how the wheels are finished. The whole thingfeels vey dated, which considering it seems to be a mid-90s car originally, shouldn't be a surprise. It's just not for me, I'm afraid.

I love retromodernism but this is not it. The chrome trim lines on the intakes, the strakes, and the exhaust surround don't feel like a retromodern nod to the past, they feel strange and anachronistic on a design which otherwise has very nice shapes. The key to nailing retromodernism is knowing when to stop- and this could have used a more minimalist approach. I can tell a lot of work went into this, and it shows in some places- the front fascia is quite pleasant. But the overall final product feels somewhat disjointed and overdesigned.

Not bad, but slightly too fast for the era, low comfort, average prestige, poor safety and fairly hgh SVC/purchase price work against you. The good is very good drivability and sportiness, decent reliability, decent fuel economy and reasonable practicality for a mid-engined car. I'd also argue that it's a litle fast for the era. As a whole solid, but with some issues as well.

Very acceptable engineering, but a design that's dated and too retro throwback-ish for me, in addition to some less than ideal stats stick out as problems.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Nothing stands out as too weird.

Not bad, but it feels very outclassed. It's basically an RSX, and while that isn't inherently a bad thing, it's just not the right thing for this challenge.

I actually appreciate this design quite a bit, but it feels like it makes a lot more sense for a different brief. It lacks the elegance this brief is asking for. It does a good job of capturing the Acura look, and much like the BMW replica from SupraWip, it just falls flat in being too replica-adjacent. If this amount of effort had been put into something more original that was a little upmarket from this entry, it could have been an actual contender. The skills are there but this was not the car for the client.

Overall engineering is fine, but comfort is the lowest out of all submited cars, performance is competitive but not groundbreaking. Much like the design, it isn't bad indepenent of the challenge, but inside the context of the challenge, it misses the point.

A fine entry overall, but both design and engineering miss the point, feeling a class under what we were actually looking for.

Round 1 - General Elimination

All seems well on the realism front, overall a very sensible entry

A very good design, with great attention to detail and thoughtfulness in every aspect. I love the greenhouse, the front and rear both look very contemporary for the era. If I had to find fauly with anything, I feel that the rear is just a little flat, and the wheels are a little small for the arches.

Extremely nice and well produced design, with excellent detail, that is only held back from a higher score by tiny nitpicks like the LED indicator rings in the headlights and a rear that could use a little more bumper. Truly a beautiful car.

For the most part very good, performance stats are very competitive, sportiness and drivability is in the higher range, it's very reliable, and prestige is quite good. Downsides are that it's right on the price cap, SVC is kinda high, and comfort isn't the best. All told a very decently engineered car.

Solid on most fronts, with minor weak spots in the engineering. Hard to find much that's wrong with it.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Nothing seems too weird here, surprisingly.

Again, surprisingly good, but I think it feels a little downmarket, the wheels could be pushed out further, and for me it's just not very exciting. Far from the worst, but imperfect regardless.

Not a bad design by any stretch, but could use a little refinement. The way that the headlights and taillights wrap around the front and rear is a little messy, and the lower fascia on the front could use to be set lower on the bumper. I'm a big fan of the rear diffuser, and the wing doesn't feel out of place. It's definitely not elegant though, which sets it back in the eyes of our client. You should have entered the top trim, rather than the plastic trim.

Surprisingly decent, but very low reliability, high SVC, a kinda high purchase price and poor fuel economy are the biggest issues. Positives are the reasonable drivability, sportiness and comfort, competitve enough performance stats, and decent prestige. Bit of a mixed bag, but overall not bad

Overall a pleasantly surprise of an entry, but some engineering flaws and a downmarket design keep it from placing higher in my eyes.

Round 1 - General Elimination

Somervell SBP Switchblade

Everything makes good enough sense to me, I just wouldn't have chosen standard springs personally.

Considering it's almost exclusively a vanilla design, it's very impressive, with only a few flaws in my eyes - One, I would have moved the headlights closer to the front wheels, right now they're a little close to the hood and it makes it seem squished, and two -some of the moulding, especially around the rear intake is a little bulbous. The rear is also a little awkward, wih the very square and vertical taillights fighting some of the other shapes on the rear, and the rear is a little flat. Overall a very good effort though.

The front fascia looks excellent, and is well proportioned- the only thing truly holding this design back is that the side intake is too far back and it exentuates the length of the wheelbase in a way that looks slightly awkward in profile. I'm a big fan of the T-Top, and it's well detailed. With a different intake and a slightly tighter rear fascia, this could have scored in the 90s.

Overall decent, with very good sportiness, good drivability, very good prestige, a very reasonable purchase price, and competitive performance figures. Downsides are the very high SVC and the low-ish comfort. I also wouldn't have ran standard springs, but that's just me.

Overall a solid budget entry, with a few minor weakspots, SVC and comfort being among them. Hard to find a ton wrong with it.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Wouldn't have gone with a 60deg V8, but everything makes good enough sense otherwise.

Not a fan of the color combination, nor the purple on the wheels, the wider fenders make it look a little bubbly for me, and a lot of the details are just too large and cross into uncanny valley territory. Not a bad effort, but could stand to use a lot of refinement.

I don't particularly like this design unfortunately. The headlights are too modern while the lower fascia looks too old, and all of the fixtures on the body are flat. The purple and white two tone is just not a good color combo also- in a single color, this design would have fared much better. The chrome trim just looks kind of gaudy. Not the worst but I'm certain it could have been much better.

Weird engine layout, but decently competitive performance stats. However, the wheels kinda come off the wagon past this point - Drivability is among the lowest, comfort is very low, safety is near the bottom, and it's very expensive to service. Sportiness, prestige and reliability are all decent, however.

Ultimately a design that misses the mark seals this entry's fate but some engineering flaws only dig that hole deeper. Not terrible, but missing refinement.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

Nothing too crazy here, all of the choices more or less make sense to me.

Fine, but inherently dated due to body choice, and it just looks like a middle of the road NSX clone.

Looks a bit 90s, and I really wish that it didn't have those hexagonal grill inserts. A very good showing, and not at all an ugly car, but a few missteps just hold it back from scoring higher.

Astronomically high SVC, mediocre sportiness, poor drivability, middling reliability and just okay safety. More flaws than positives, unfortunately.

A design that lacks identity and looks dated, in combination with largely poor engineering make for a car that ultimately doesn't advance much further than this.

Round 1 - General Elimination

All of the choices make sense to me, nothing weird going on here.

A solid design that perfectly exemplifies simplicity. All of the shaping is solid, the all of the lines work really well together, hard to find a ton wrong with it, other than it looking a little modern.

Extremely clean molding, nice details, and a generally cohesive design make this an incredibly strong showing from an incredibly strong designer. The only fault I find is the simplicity in the side duct, but the shape of that side duct flows nicely into the front bumper and fender lip, and there's just really good line flow throughout the entire build. The taillights are ever so slightly too low, but the front end is perfect. All in all, an excellent design.

Everything is pretty solid all things considered, with good drivability, reliability, comfort and sport. Performance is competitive, and the only weak spots are the slightly high SVC and relatively high purchase price.

A solid, if slightly too modern design, with good engineering to back it up. A few minor flaws here and there, but the good outweighs the bad.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Ventus Kingsman Grand Sport

Nothing seems off to me, makes good enough sense for the era.

A pretty decent design, but it lacks depth for me, and feels kinda simple. The three small exhausts at the rear are a bit weird, but overall it's just not very exciting to me.

Clean, but feels like a toned down version of the Tioro Tanaro submitted by Ivan and Oreo. Its also a bit modern, and a little too close to its inspiration. This is a very good early showing, and I'm sure future cars will be quite good- this is a decent stepping stone on that path.

Engineering is largely okay, but the air suspension is a slightly cheesy way to boost prestige - I think a different engine could have achieved the same thing. The other stats for the most part are okay, reliability is good, drivability and sportiness are decent, fuel economy is good, but it's kind of expensive and SVC is on the high end. The performance is pretty competitive as well. Overall not bad, but some flaws here and there.

Not a bad entry, but a slightly boring and simple design and some minor engineering flaws hold it back a bit.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Nothing is too weird here for me, seems like a pretty realistic entry.

A nearly flawless design, with expertly done shaping. An exercise in simplicity, with very clean and focused lines. The only thing I can say feels off to me is how smort the greenhouse is in relation to the beltline, but that's an exceptionally minor flaw. It, much like the sendo, does feel a little modern, but that's not a bad thing. Truly an excellent design.

Perfect design that reshapes the body its on in ways even I don't understand. Front fascia is beautifully creased, the rear treatment is elegant and gorgeous, and nothing feels too modern or out of place. I struggle to find a single flaw- maybe I would have made the headlights closer together, but I don't feel strongly enough about that to dock points. Looks much better in game than in photos. A masterpiece.

By and large very good, with good sportiness and drivability, competitive performance stats, a very good purchase price and good comfort, but reliability, safety and prestige are all on the lower end. Service costs are on the high end too. Overall very well put together though.

Aesthetically my favorite entry, beautifully done and beautiful to look at. Engineering is pretty solid as well, but there are some flaws on that front. Overall a very good "budget" entry that punches well above its weight.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

All seems well from a realism standpoint, nothing too notable here.

I don't like the transparent yellow plastic, all of the lighting elements feel too large, and the entire thing lacks shape. A quirky design, but quirky doesn't make it good.

I like the shape of the headlights a lot, but they're too big. The transparent plastic makes no sense though- sure, 2005 was the peak of that trend, but it was a trend in technology and not cars for a reason. The yellow plastic just makes it look concepty, and not in a good way. There are some high points in this design- I like the lower front fascia, and the side treatment isn't bad, although it is a little modern. Not an awful car but its just a little too odd for my tastes.

Largely fine, performance is relatively competitive, but most of the stats are pretty solidly average, with reliability and service costs being high notes. The biggest issue is that none of the higher priority stats stand out enough to justify it being nearly at the max budget, as cheaper cars outclass it.

Not a bad entry, but a quirky design that's flawed, and perfectly average engineering keep it from progressing much further.

Round 1 - Design Elimination

All of the choices make good enough sense to me, can't point to any major flaws from a realism standpoint

It feels too much like a Porsche clone, the silver bar running across the front is wierd and doesn't look very nice, the side is bare and the intake looks tacked on, and the rear is weird and to be quite frank, is ugly. More to the point, it looks too boy racer-y, which feels discordant with the relatively tame engineering. Not for me, I'm afraid.

The side intake is such a mess. I like the rake of the front fascia, and it would almost be genuinely good (if a little derivative) if not for the silver bar splitting it all up. The rear with the giant round lights and the lightbar is simultaneously anachronistic and modern and just feels very discordant. The rest of the design does not suggest retromodernism at all. There's also just several smaller design decisions, like the diagonal vents(?) on the corners of the rear bumper or the reverse diamond cut wheels that really take a lot away from this design. I wish Karhgath had had more say in the design.

Engineering is overall very solid, with high average to above average scores in the highest priorities, and good scores in the mid-level priorites. Being right on the price cap and slightly above average SVC are the only real faults from a stats point of view. Solid effort here.

A very well-engineered entry, significantly hampered by a bad Porsche clone design. With a stronger design, this would have very easily been a finalist, a shame.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Pretty realistic overall, no particular flaws here, but I find the on-demand AWD slightly strange.

A solid design, with clean surfacing, and some creative fixture use (like hiding the third brakelight in the gap created by the custom roof), but it's a little messy up front, and parts feel a little simple. Solid for the most part, though.

I love the overall shapes of the front fascia, but wish it had more depth. It's a very solid showing, but I know it could have been better with a little more time. The sparse rear end and lack of taillight internals suggest to me that it was a little bit of a rush job, and given that, its very successful- but I wish I got to see what it would have looked like if it had been given all the fit and finish some of your other CSR entries have recieved. Also, I wish it wasn't painted bronze.

Engineering is very good as I'd expect from you, but sportiness is among the lowest, but it scores very well elsewhere. Beyond the low sportiness, the slightly high SVC and sub-optimal fuel economy are some other cracks in the armor. On-demand AWD is a bit of a weird choice to me - I'd expect full time or just RWD instead, but that's a relatively minor flaw.

Very well engineered overall, with a nice design on top, but a few minor flaws here and there stick out.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Volaro Verlyn Coupe 3.7 GT-S

Nothing too unrealistic here, but I seriously doubt this would hit 200+ MPH, and the steel wheels are a little weird.

The design is mostly good and of the era, but the front is a little awkward and chunky for me, and I don't care for the way the reflectors and reverse lights are setup. The side is a little simple as well.

There's a little too much space between the features of the rear fascia, and a little too little space between the features of the front fascia. There's real potential here, but the C Pillar badge detail just doesn't make a lot of sense as a shape looking at it from most angles. That said, it looks of the era, and is by no means a bad looking car- just between the minor flaws and its basic shape as a sedan-derived coupe, it gets outshined by its competitors.

Good overall, everything is relatively competitive, but the steel wheels are a weird oversight and the top speed seems improbable. The one major flaw is that it's nearly on the budget cap, and other cheaper cars are besting it. Not bad, just a little too expensive.

A decently engineered entry, but an unexciting and somewhat imperfect design lower its potential.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals

Tarske SW630 Final Edition

Everything seems pretty realistic, no significant flaws here.

The front is messy to me, a lot of the details are rather large and there's a lot going on. The rear is the same way, and I don't like how the top of the trunklid points upward and gives the taillights a weird downward slant. The side is simple, but by far the biggest flaw is that it just looks dated, seemingly being a 10 year old design.

I like the front of this, but the whole car just feels somewhat off. The top of the rear bumper being sloped further back than the bottom gives the rear surface a strange rake that does bad things to the side profile of the car. Plenty of aspects of this that I like, but it looks older than 2005, has slightly strange proportions, and the spoiler is too far back. Not a bad showing.

All of the choices make sense, performance is decently competitive and sportiness and reliability are good, but drivability, safety and comfort are among the lowest, prestige is average, and SVC is on the high end. Somewhat flawed here, much like the design.

Overall far from the worst entry, but a messy and awkward design in combination with just mediocre engineering ultimately keep it from progressing further.

Round 1 - General Elimination

Nothing too unrealistic, I just wouldn't have gone with standard springs.

A very aggressive design that still feels of the era, I like the front and the exaggerated FR proportions, the side is nicely sculpted but the green accents on the wheels are kind of weird, and the rear is comparatively simple against the front, but still very good. Overall a strong design.

This car looks fantastic. Very of the era, very sharp and very aggressive. Hits all the right notes for me- I only wish that it had a little less flake in the paint and the exhausts were a little bigger. Overall, easily one of my favorite designs submitted to the competition. I love the top wraparound on the taillights, the surfacing is great, and its well proportioned. If it was a hardtop convertible (Not possible on this body) it would be nearly perfect.

All of the engineering is pretty good, the highest priority stats are among the high end of things, the mid-level stats are very competitive, the price is good, but SVC is kind of high and fuel economy is on the lower end of things. Performance is very competitive, the only thing I would personally do different is just use progressive springs instead of standard ones.

A solid car, a few minor flaws here and there but overall very competitive, and an easy shoe-in for the semi-finals.

Round 2 - Semi-Finals