Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 42: Rock 'n Rollin'

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 42: Rock 'n Rollin'

CSR76 marked another milestone in my "career" as an Automationeer. It was the round in which I proved that I could design a practical car which not only had plenty of cargo capacity, but also room for several passengers instead of just one. Ultimately, I could hold my head high from my final placing, even if my entry's aesthetics left something to be desired. So, without further ado, here is a brief summary of the round.

Some time in 1978, heavy metal band Eagleheart, consisting of bassist Buddy Earl, lead guitarist Jack "Ledsaw" Page, rhythm guitarist Steven Dare and drummer Mac "Dustin" Lee requested a new vehicle to carry them on their upcoming US tour. It not only had to be street-legal, but also capable of running on regular (91RON) unleaded. More importantly, its pre-markup price had to be no greater than $10,000, and its cargo capacity had to be at least 3,000 litres, plus 200 kg of towing capacity (or 1,000 litres of cargo capacity and 1000 kg of towing capacity). There were no limits on production units or engineering time, however, which left me with free rein to build something which would not only meet these requirements, but also be sufficiently safe, easy to drive, comfortable, economical, and reliable to merit the band's consideration.

After a brief period of deliberation, I decided that the most suitable vehicle for Eagleheart would be a passenger van, but with two rows instead of three to allow for more cargo space. That van was called the Genra GVC Combi, in reference to its ability to carry large numbers of people and goods at once. I never considered a pure cargo configuration with only two seats, or an eight-seat setup; the former could not carry enough passengers, while the latter had insufficient cargo space.

My CSR76 submission: the Genra GVC Combi.

Thanks to close gearing and a torquey engine, the GVC Combi also had more than enough towing capacity for the band's needs. Speaking of engines, the one found under the hood of the GVC was nothing special - a 2.5-litre straight-four with two carburetors and one overhead camshaft - but it was powerful enough to get the big, boxy van going, and fairly economical for its era to boot. On the outside, I opted for an all-black exterior color scheme, in keeping with the heavy metal vibe of CSR76.

The GVC also had relatively simple underpinnings. Its engine was transversely mounted, drove the front wheels, and was mated to an automatic transmission. The suspension setup was also fairly straightforward - struts up front and a leaf-sprung live axle at the rear, configured for increased load capacity. Brakes were four-wheel discs, hidden behind durable steel wheels shod in high-profile tires for comfort's sake.

As time went on, I remained optimistic about my entry's finishing order. The fact that there were only 18 submissions for this round - the smallest field in a long time - merely gave me more confidence; more competitors would have made it less likely for me to make it past the first round of judging. Some of the entrants couldn't be bothered to actually submit a van, and had chosen to build something else, but even so, passenger vans made up the bulk of the field for CSR76.

Eventually the time came to determine a shortlist of finalists, with Eagleheart themselves evaluating the cars. If it had fewer than five seats, couldn't carry enough cargo (including that which was loaded onto a trailer) or was too complex mechanically, it was immediately rejected. So many cars fell foul of these selection criteria that there were only six finalists left to choose from after the first phase of judging. But there was still some work for the band to do - namely, a brief test drive of all six finalists, followed by a final verdict for each one of them.

Above from top: The other five finalists in CSR76 - Bush Cargo, Albatross V200, DAAG SW20T, IP Highway Star and Anhultz Mimas.

The final round of judging was surprising, to say the least. The IP Highway Star was the first to go; it was too difficult to drive and not safe enough in relation to the opposition. Next to be dismissed was the Bush Cargo, whose lack of comfort and drivability more than outweighed its affordability. My Genra GVC Combi was also criticized for lacking comfort, but was easier to drive and similarly easily on the wallet, hence its fourth-place finish.

As for the top three cars, the Albatross V200 was the most expensive entry (not just to buy, but also to maintain, especially considering its rear-engined layout); even so, it was quite easy to drive, which made the extra outlay more justifiable. The DAAG SW20T was also pricey, with less reliability and load capacity than the other finalists, but made up for it by being comfortable and economical, thus ensuring that it would take the runner-up spot. That left the Anhultz Mimas to take the win. Even though it was not a van, but a liftback sedan (and a sluggish one at that), it undercut the DAAG and Albatross on price, while retaining a high degree of practicality.

Thus ended one of the most surprising CSR rounds ever to have been held, and one whose compelling backstory and conclusion defied its low turnout of just 18 entrants. Given that I don't usually have much interest in building a combi van capable of carrying 5 passengers and some cargo (or a highly practical car with a high tow capacity, for that matter), I left this competition with my head held high. Still, I could have focused a bit more on comfort and styling for this round; had I done so, the GVC would easily have finished higher, if not won outright.

That just about wraps up this rundown of CSR76. But rest assured, I will be back soon to report on the next CSR round worth making a recap of. Until then, see you next time.