Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 265: A Prime Pairing

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 265: A Prime Pairing

Now that I've finally completed the car that I've shown in my previous post in this series, here it is:

Above, from top: Meet the 1995 Trieste GT - a big, powerful front-engined grand tourer that has massive presence from every angle, inside and out.

The 1995 Trieste GT is my first attempt not just at making a fully detailed Automation build based on the '96 Kompact in any size, but also a fully detailed build with a 3D fixture roof and pillar set in place of the stock item on any body set. Built on an all-aluminum body/chassis with a front/mid-mounted 6.0-liter V12 delivering 480 horsepower to the rear wheels via a 6-speed manual gearbox and helical limited-slip differential, its all-independent suspension (A-arm front and multi-link rear) strikes a balance between comfort and agility that covers all bases, from daily driving to track work. With a full luxury interior/CD and cassette stereo system, plus ABS-assisted large-diameter vented disc brakes gripped by multi-piston calipers, and dual front airbags as standard, it's not all brawn and no brains either.

Above, from top: Working with the door card and dashboard/central spine fixtures I chose for the Trieste GT was a real challenge, but I was able to puil it off, albeit with difficulty.

Inevitably, the Trieste GT is a top performer by contemporary standards, including a 198-mph top speed and 4.3-second 0-60 mph time, among others. But all that power and prestige comes at a price ($62,500 AMU when new in 1995), and besides, as a two-seater, even with its large trunk, it doesn't have room for more than one occupant other than the driver. So what would a customer for this kind of car have driven if they wanted to take more than one other person with them?

Above, from top: In anticipation of an upcoming Discourse challenge, I updated the HPG HL6 (itself originally intended for an earlier competition) by revising its mechanicals and making it more detailed inside and out.

The HPG HL6 (now revised to have both a model and trim year of 1995, with a matching engine family and variant year) could be that answer. At $50,000 when new, it was well-built for its segment, thanks to a hefty dose of additional quality points across the board - and more reliable than it was in its earlier incarnation. Crucially, though, as a five-seater, wealthy families can take themselves along for the ride in one go, although the basic ingredients (including a front-mounted V8 driving the rear wheels via a 5-speed automatic transmission and an A-arm front/multi-link rear) remain mostly unchanged, albeit beefed up to match its mission statement of combining contemporary luxury with surprisingly good reliability and build quality.

In short, there are few better suggestions for a mid-90s modern classic 2-car solution with a 20-cylinder limit - and this one fits that bill perfectly. Of course, swapping the Trieste GT for a Macale Imperia from the same model year could also work, but you'd struggle to use it every day, although if you save it for special occasions, you'll get an even bigger buzz out of it.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 263: A Sporty Daily Driver From 30 Years Ago

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 263: A Sporty Daily Driver From 30 Years Ago

As part of my entry into this Discourse Challenge, I made the EMR EL3 3.0 GT (an adaptation of an earlier contest submission) with the intention of positioning it as a sporty daily driver that was still comfortable enough for everyday driving. Here it is:

Above, from top: With its 240-horsepower, 3.0-liter straight-six powering the rear wheels via a 5-speed manual gearbox and a helical limited-slip differential, the EMR ML3 3.0 GT is a potent performance machine, And expertly tuned 4-wheel independent suspension (strut front/multi-link rear) combined with high-performance tires surrounding 16-inch alloy wheels and vented anti-lock disc brakes keep it planted and exciting in the corners, Combined with a premium interior/CD stereo sound system, advanced safety kit, and a sportier (and functional) aero kit, it's as close as you could have got 30 years ago to a one-car solution for more than two people - especially at its $28000 AMU in-game price.

Although I have plans for lesser trims below this one, the 3.0 GT is a fitting flagship for this particular generation of the model line. In short, it's an ideal one-size-fits-all machine.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 258: Generations II Five Years On

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 258: Generations II Five Years On

Five years after wrapping up the Generations II challenge on the Automation Discourse, I began wondering how I'd rewrite the history of the Hampton Motor Group (my representative in that tournament) as a separate thread in the car design subforum using the current Al-Rilma stable release (in contrast to the obsolete pre-Ellisbury 4.24 build I was using at the time) if I were to do so. In fact, a remake or reimagining of those earlier designs would be a necessity in such a scenario, since all of my designs from the 4.24 version are incompatible with any 4.27 game build and are thus not transferable.

The original series had 12 rounds in total, so it would make sense for me to spotlight 12 critical years (each of which are 3-7 years apart, to set it apart from the source material where intervals between rounds were no more than 6 years long) in the company's history. To keep these "milestones" as close to the ones used in the original thread, I would suggest these model/trim years, with their respective company-wide combined techpool allocations (trim + engine) as follows:

• Round 1 (1955): $15m
• Round 2 (1962): $20m
• Round 3 (1967): $25m
• Round 4 (1970): $30m
• Round 5 (1975): $35m
• Round 6 (1982): $40m
• Round 7 (1987): $45m
• Round 8 (1992): $50m
• Round 9 (1999): $55m
• Round 10 (2002): $60m
• Round 11 (2007): $65m
• Round 12 (2013): $70m

This means that the combined techpool budget for the company would increase by $5m each round. However, budget (lower-priced) and prestige (higher-priced) segments could receive less and more techpool budget, respectively, than other segments, as follows, to align more closely with their price ranges:

• Rounds 1-6: -$5m (budget)/+5m (prestige)
• Rounds 7-12: -$10m (budget)/+$10m (prestige)

In addition, market segments could be classified according to price as follows, in keeping with my policy of making their positioning commensurate with their pricing:

• Budget: Lower-priced cars (compacts and subcompacts, regardless of body style) and lower-end performance cars of any kind (including sport compacts, which should ideally be a separate trim of an existing budget model). Smaller SUVs/crossovers and pickup trucks also belong here.
• Prestige: Higher-priced premium and luxury cars (including any high-performance variants of either), as well as trucks, crossovers, and SUVs. This also includes (usually) higher-end sports cars and grand tourers, in addition to supercars and hypercars.
• Standard: Includes mid-range family cars (sedans, wagons, hatchbacks, and minivans) and performance cars of various types that are priced between the budget and prestige brackets (including muscle/pony cars). Mid-priced utility body styles (trucks, SUVs, and crossovers) fall into this category.

Also, to avoid excessive min-maxing, the maximum techpool point allocation for any tab would most likely be set as follows:

• Rounds 1-4: 6 Points
• Rounds 5-8: 8 Points
• Rounds 9-12: 10 Points

Finally, unlike Generations II, this budget and class system would also cover specialist manufacturers, which could focus on just a few segments per round (sometimes as few as one, but usually no more than three), in contrast to a full line manufacturer, which would need to be represented in at least three segments per round (as in the original).

In short, looking back on Generations II shows how far the game and I have come since its conclusion, and gives me an insight on how a car company thread on the Discourse forums could evolve over time, based on the tournament's principles, but adapted to account for the changes introduced in the Ellisbury and, in more recent times, Al-Rilma game builds (along with the future Terso build) that have debuted in the years since.

Update (August 7th, 2026, 10:35 am, UTC+7): I am proposing adding four more rounds, bringing the total to 16; however, several changes must be made to accommodate this.

Any item defined as "advanced technology" (which requires at least 5 techpool points to use in the current round) could be treated like an extra-cost option as follows:

• Rounds 1-8: Base price of $2000 + $500 per techpool point
• Rounds 9-16: Base Price of $5000 + $1000 per techpool point

This should prevent overreliance on these items throughout a company's entire lineup; in addition, the cost of using advanced technology could be halved for specialist manufacturers (to reflect their generally smaller output and/or real-life trickle-down effects).

In addition, using a body set with an unlock year that is at least one year newer than the car's model year (which I would've treated as any other form of advanced technology, but instead decided to give a smaller price penalty by comparison, given that using such items is much more commonplace than I thought), may incur a base price increase of $1000 AMU per year relative to the current model year, regardless of the current model year - another measure that could deter overuse and/or abuse of such items, although specialists may get to use such items at a 50% discount compared to other brands.

Finally, if, as I suspected, 14 rounds turns out to be insufficient, it may be possible to extend the competition to 16 rounds, with the new techpool allocations as follows:

• Round 1 (1946): $5m
• Round 2 (1952): $10m
• Round 3 (1956): $15m
• Round 4 (1962): $20m
• Round 5 (1967): $25m
• Round 6 (1970): $30m
• Round 7 (1975): $35m
• Round 8 (1982): $40m
• Round 9 (1987): $45m
• Round 10 (1992): $50m
• Round 11 (1999): $55m
• Round 12 (2002): $60m
• Round 13 (2007): $65m
• Round 14 (2013): $70m
• Round 15 (2017): $75m
• Round 16 (2020): $80m

This would necessitate an adjustment of price-dependent techpool bonuses and penalties, as follows:

• Round 1: No changes
• Rounds 2-8: -$5m (budget)/+5m (prestige)
• Rounds 9-15: -$10m (budget)/+$10m (prestige)
• Round 16: -$20m (budget)/+$20m (prestige)

Moreover, the maximum techpool point allocation per area would also have to change, as follows:

• Rounds 1-4: 7 Points
• Rounds 5-8: 8 Points
• Rounds 9-12: 9 Points
• Rounds 13-16: 10 Points

This extended season would not only be 33% longer than the original, but also cover the entire Automation timeline from 1947 to 2020 inclusive, giving a broader range of aesthetic and technological evolution than before, and thus providing a more representative snapshot of the game's scope.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 256: An Agile Albatross

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 256: An Agile Albatross

Migrating to Al-Rilma for the latest stable build of Automation created a few problems, to say the least. In particular, many of my Ellisbury-era builds were either unviable or needed major revision. The 1962 AMS Albatross was a clear example of the latter, being largely based on my earlier KMA KS20 aesthetically, but with a fiberglass body and a smaller engine to cater to the requirements of a Discourse challenge. Its 1989 namesake, meanwhile, is now called the EMR ECT4, and has also been revised accordingly.

As for the 1962 Albatross, its lighter weight helps it more easily leverage what little power its smaller engine develops - and vastly improves the driving experience. Being quicker off the mark and through the corners was an inevitability, but in the context of the challenge in which it was submitted, where it was one of a few cars with at least 100 horsepower, it was enough to justify its $18,000 AMU price (the highest allowed) with ease. Key to its performance is the fitment of tubular headers and dual DCOE carburetors, yielding a 110-horsepower output harnessed using radial tires (again, to meet challenge requirements) and a 4-speed manual gearbox (to save weight, and also because a fifth gear would've been overkill given the era in which the car was launched). I had toyed with submitting a lighter mid-engined car in its place, but felt that it wasn't enough of an improvement over a single flying lap by comparison to deem it worthwhile.

Above, from top: Reimagining the AMS Albatross as a 1960s sports car with a fiberglass body made perfect sense, since it more closely aligned with its avian name.

On the other hand, the EMR ECT4 was more faithful to its progenitor, retaining the steel/aluminum body it once had, along with a turbocharged iron-block/alloy-head 16-valve straight-four driving all four wheels via a helical center differential.

Above, from top: The first car that bore the Albatross nameplate is now called the EMR ECT4, with extensive mechanical revisions to make it suitable for Al-Rilma.

In short, both of these cars may have come from different eras and aimed at two distinct market segments, but they are united in their quest to put smiles on drivers' faces at reasonable prices.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 254: A New Take on an Old Flagship

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 254: A New Take on an Old Flagship

With the deprecation of the body set that underpinned my earlier 1987/1992 KMA KX12 in the Al-Rilma update (which added the '87 Bossa Nova body sets in its place), I decided to reimagine it from the ground up - as an even more upmarket flagship supercar. However, I realized that it would make even more sense as a hypercar considering how much more expensive it would potentially end up being. Taking my earlier 1984 Wolfram Warlord as a basis, I adjusted the morphing zone settings and reworked the aesthetics (for both the interior and exterior), while also adding 50 horsepower and a six-speed gearbox, along with a full carbon-fiber chassis/body and inboard pushrod-actuated suspension to improve overall performance, with the interior being a fully hand-made item (complete with a high-quality CD/cassette stereo audio system) to further justify its top-tier market positioning.

Above, from top: Reimagining the KMA KX12 and KF12 as a fully hand-built flagship hypercar made more sense with the Al-Rilma update - using the '86 Rosso was the only option given that the '87 Bossa Nova's closest equivalent in size had an engine bay that was too small for the engine I chose to use.

At $100k AMU before options, such excellence doesn't come cheap, but you get what you pay for, which in this case is a lot. Then again, this was never meant for large-scale production anyway.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 253: Of Warriors and Warlords

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 253: Of Warriors and Warlords

Reimagining the Wolfram Warrior and Warlord in 1984 for the sixth iteration of the Automation (or should that be Aragan?) Legacy Challenge wasn't the work of an afternoon - but I made it look like it did by repurposing some of my preexisting designs. By taking my earlier WM Warrior and revamping it to align with the Wolfram brand philosophy, I ensured that I could create two trims of it: the GT (with 275 horsepower and a premium interior) and the GTS (with 300 horsepower and a sports interior, plus forged wheels and wider tires, in addition to a hood-mounted scoop fixture, a taller rear wing, and dual exhaust tips on each side in place of single items). Positioned further above the two was the Warlord, whose mid-mounted 48-valve V12 displaced six liters and cranked out 550 horsepower - good for 218 mph (almost 40 more than the Warrior GTS) thanks to a ground-effect undertray. Having a luxury interior helped justify its upmarket positioning even further, which was justified considering its whopping $80,000 AMU base price (nearly three times as much as a base model Warrior).

Above, from top: While the 1984 Wolfram Warrior GT (red) and its track-focused GTS sibling (yellow) were great sports cars in their own right, thanks to a high-displacement V8, neither of them had the true supercar status and presence of the larger, mid-mounted V12-powered Warlord (black).

All in all, this sports car and supercar blitz, despite being a necessary evil to compensate for the fact that their earlier iterations were based on deprecated or less desirable bodies, was an enjoyable experience for me, as it tied into the company's later history more easily.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 251: A Duo Reimagined

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 251: A Duo Reimagined

Having created the 2013 AAA Crusader, I began asking myself a question that had been on my mind for weeks: Would this have made even more sense as a 2000s build? To that end, I decided to use it as the basis for the 2005 Wolfram Wolfclaw - and I intended it to be the successor to the WSC-95 concept I'd made in Ellisbury a few years earlier.

Above, from top: Although aesthetically derived from the 2013 AAA Crusader, minor exterior changes helped set the 2005 Wolfram Wolfclaw apart from its inspiration, and a 32-valve dual-overhead-cam-per-bank V8 displacing 5.0 liters replaces the overhead-valve 16-valve 6.0-liter unit the Crusader had, thus guaranteeing WES 9 compatibility. The basic mechanical layout (front-engined, rear-drive, with a 6-speed manual transmission/helical limited-slip differential combo as standard) remains unchanged, however.

Broadly similar in performance to the Crusader, the Wolfclaw is slightly lighter, but more expensive due to a greater use of positive quality points, although given its more premium positioning, this extra quality is justified - especially given the increased redline (7500 rpm instead of 6500). In addition, the two-seat interior was retained - a 2+2 would've been too heavy, cramped, and therefore self-contradictory. Moreover, to more closely align with 2000s aesthetic trends, the roof and pillars are now color-coded instead of being finished in a contrasting color. The result is an even more cohesive and competitive offering for its time. However, it wasn't the only car I recently reimagined as part of my two-pronged plan.

Shortly before I finalized the 2005 Wolfclaw, I dusted off an old manufacturer name from my Kee engine days and created the Macale Manta, a mid-engined, V8-powered supercar with 500 horsepower, peaking near its 9000-rpm redline. This, however, wasn't the original specification - as originally built for a forum challenge, it delivered a more conservative 480 horsepower, and lacked the electronic limited-slip differential and adaptive dampers found in the final version on cost grounds, instead using a simpler helical unit with monotube dampers. Also, the color scheme was changed from a red exterior with a red-on-black interior to a deeper blue exterior with a blue-on-cream interior. Finally, its techpool was increased to a uniform +7 in all areas (except for +8 on the gearbox and suspension), which the Wolfclaw matched.

Above, from top: Duplicating the 2005 Macale Manta I'd previously made for a forum challenge to unlock its full potential was a no-brainer - but I had to increase its techpool allocation to what the Wolfclaw would use just to make that possible, especially since it gave me additional headroom left in the budget for more advanced components compared to the original design.

While the Wolfclaw is a better everyday companion due to its superior reliability, drivability, comfort, and safety ratings, the Manta's more exotic mid-engined look, combined with its slightly higher prestige score and greater sportiness rating (helped by taking 3.5 seconds to reach 60 mph from a standstill compared to the Wolfclaw's 4.1, among other things), make it more of a supercar than a grand tourer by comparison, and in an era and segment where competition was as fierce as it had ever been in real life, this is what would've mattered most to customers.

Above, from top: They may not have been direct rivals, but the Macale Manta and Wolfram Wolfclaw were among the most competitive options in the premium sports car/supercar segment in 2005 according to my lore.

In short, envisioning the 2000s Wolfram Wolfclaw as a brawnier, more refined counterpart to the contemporary Macale Manta (which itself underwent significant revisions after a cheaper, rules-compliant version of it had been submitted for a forum challenge) made a lot of sense for me - and allowed me to make direct comparisons between the two, to more easily justify their place in a highly competitive market. There is also growth potential in both model lines that could lead to additional trim levels - track-focused variants, convertibles, and even actual race cars come to mind - but for now, the base model for each of these cars will suffice.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 250: A 21st-Century Crusade

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 250: A 21st-Century Crusade

It's taken a while, but finally I've felt confident enough to attempt a fully detailed Automation build on anything made after the 2000s. The 2013 AAA Crusader is proof of that. It's based on the '09 Jackal body set (2.57m wheelbase) in 2-door configuration, so it's not the first time I've tried using it as the basis for any fully detailed build (the first one was a mid-2000s premium convertible sports car). However, this one is especially notable because it arose from an aborted plan to create something for a Discourse challenge - a pony car called the Arbalest. I backed out at the last moment after realizing that it would make even more sense as a 2-seat aluminum-bodied out-and-out sports car, rather than a cheaper, steel-bodied 2+2 pony car.

Above: The Arbalest may have been tempting on paper, but it was never a realistic proposition as a 2+2 pony car - it was just too small.

Turning the Arbalest into the Crusader was relatively simple on the outside compared to the mechanical upgrades I fitted. By extracting 100 more horsepower from the engine, I was able to fully utilize the weight reduction that resulted from using a 2-seat configuration in an all-aluminum body/chassis. Widening the rear tires by 40mm (with wider wheel arches front and rear, thus widening the track) and fitting 19-inch forged alloy wheels (in place of the 18-inch cast-alloy items) also helped, as did using uprated brakes and an aerodynamic undertray. With the suspension and gearbox (now incorporating adaptive dampers and a manual setup, respectively) retuned accordingly, I was able to maximize my performance improvements even further - 193 mph flat-out and a 0-60 mph time of 4 seconds were proof of that.

Above, from top: The Crusader made even more sense than the Arbalest, being a pure two-seater, but it was still a powerful front-engined rear-driver as before - and lighter to boot.

With that out of the way, I then added a fully detailed interior - but with only two seats due to the Crusader having a different seating arrangement. It took several hours spread out over several days to get it right, but I pulled it off.

Above, from top: It may have been my first attempt at adding a fully detailed interior to a post-2010 Automation build, but this one for the 2013 AAA Crusader turned out better than I thought it would.

In the end, I was satisfied with the results of this build, but there may be more to come. A more extreme supercharged variant positioned above it could follow, as could a convertible based on both it and the base model shown here. But for now, the base Crusader represents all the premium sports car a mid-2010s enthusiast could want or need.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 249: Sharpening the Knife

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 249: Sharpening the Knife

As a continuation of my work on the 1992 Kodai Kunai, I started looking into what a more highly tuned version of it could be. However, since the donor car was already a highly capable sports car, I knew I had to make the new trim more like a supercar, at least in terms of power output. So I took the GT trim (which I had just made) and created the GT400 trim out of it.

The engine received the most comprehensive changes, developing 400 horsepower on 98 RON super unleaded (up from 276 on 95 RON premium unleaded) thanks to increased boost pressure (1.0 bar instead of 0.5 bar) and larger turbochargers, as well as a high-flow intake and exhaust (catalytic converter/muffler). A shorter final drive ratio (to better harness the increased output) yielded a significantly faster 0-60 mph time (4.2 seconds, down from 4.7), but it wasn't the only factor. Staggered tires (245/40R18 up front and 265/35R18 at the rear) wrapped in 18-inch forged wheels (to accommodate 350mm vented front disc brakes with 4-piston calipers - the rear brakes are 325mm-diameter vented discs with 2-piston rear calipers) also account for the quicker acceleration, and extra grip to go along with it. Also, by setting the weight optimization slider to its lightest setting, I saved 70kg even after installing an aerodynamic undertray (to generate additional downforce in conjunction with a front spoiler in place of the lip fixture, which was moved to the rear). Finally, I retuned the suspension to maintain the base car's sporty feel, albeit sharpened.

Above, from top: The GT400 trim takes the standard Kodai Kunai and turns it up to 11 inside and out.

Aesthetically, this new trim was distinguished by different interior materials (to better match its performance-oriented positioning), hood vents, larger frontal air intakes, a taller rear wing, wider wheel arches, and deeper side skirts. However, such giant-killing performance doesn't come cheap - with the base car having a price of $40,000 AMU, adding the GT400 package resulted in something that cost half as much again ($60,000) when new. Then again, when you consider that its performance figures put it in the top flight of its era (with only very the fastest hypercars remaining out of reach), all that extra money is guaranteed to be well spent.

Above, from top: A side-by-side comparison of both trim levels (with the GT400 now being yellow) reveals how much more aggressive and overtly sporting the GT400 is compared to its progenitor.

There could, in theory, be even more potential lurking within the platform - probably in the form of an even more extreme road-legal trim level, or an actual race car - but for now, the GT400 serves as the ultimate expression of the Kunai line, blending agile handling with addictive turbo thrust in a shapely package that can compete with the best that the rest of the world can offer. And it does all of this at a lower cost than others in its class, in both stock and tuned forms.

What next for the Kunai line, then? As good as it is, pitting it against a Parana P600 would be too much of a stretch, given the Parana's far greater prestige. However, it might be possible to throw it into the lion's den of a future group test featuring at least one other factory or aftermarket tuned car from the same year - and if anything like that were to occur in the future, I'd be looking forward to it.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 248: Eastern Winds

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 248: Eastern Winds

With the Automation Beam Championship currently on hold, even though I've successfully submitted an entry for it, I decided to turn my attention to another Discord challenge. This one was themed around 1990s JDM cars (a favorite of mine since childhood), but was hosted on the official Automation Discord channel. No AI-generated/enhanced imagery was permitted, nor was use of anything that had already been used in any previous design competition, but otherwise, I had free rein as to what I could enter.

This time, I created something completely from scratch - the 1992 Kodai Kunai - and immediately set about getting it ready for the challenge. Built on an AHS (advanced high-strength) steel unitary chassis with some aluminum panels, its dual-wishbone front/multilink rear suspension, tuned for road-biased performance, endowed it with sporty handling and a surprising level of compliance. Combined with large ABS-assisted vented disc brakes at each corner, it could also perform repeated hard stops from highway speeds with no fade whatsoever.

Regarding propulsion, I settled on a 2.5-liter twin-turbocharged flat-six (chosen to simulate a rotary engine as closely as possible within the game engine's limitations) developing 276 horsepower, sent through a 5-speed manual gearbox and helical limited-slip differential to the rear wheels. Other standard equipment included a set of front and rear spoilers (specifically, a front lip and rear wing), 17-inch forged alloy wheels wrapped in high-performance tires, a premium interior with a 6-speaker CD/cassette stereo sound system, variable-ratio hydraulic power steering, traction control, and dual front airbags.

Above, from top: Although originally intended for a Discord challenge, the 1992 Kodai Kunai also serves as a passion project in that it serves as my idea of a contemporary Asian performance car - small and light, with a modest output by today's standards - that can go toe-to-toe with Western equivalents.

In short, the Kunai may not be the most powerful car in its class, but its light weight and small size make it very wieldy and agile on the road, where it's most likely to spend its time.