|
Dance Officer posted:You can find it in the last tab of the engine builder. Look for economy. I've found this to be generally true. I'm really struggling to come up with a decent Group C design though
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 12:23 |
|
|
# ? May 8, 2024 05:50 |
|
slothrop posted:I've found this to be generally true. I'm really struggling to come up with a decent Group C design though Aye I am also having problems with group C as well. There's a very limited amount of bodies that can take the engine I want to put in, and only the Porsche allows for really fat tyres.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 14:55 |
|
True to my desire for finding weird gimmicks, I designed a very... questionable car. Small fuel tank, big power, tiny tires. It might not be good, but I'm sure it will be fun for the driver to deliver a burnout every time he comes out of a corner or changes gears. It seems fairly fast too. Just probably not for very long. Let's just say the engine burns the maximum amount permitted by scrutineering according to the game, but when it gets up in the revs, hoo boy does it not. I'm not entirely certain if it will do two laps of the Nurburgring without a refuel.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 15:41 |
|
The Boston Globe posted:LOWELL - New England Motorworks today unveiled their new Kancamagus GT supercar today, stating they already had sold out the first year's production of the hand-built, mid-engine all wheel drive coupe, designed to go 215mph. The company will also be campaigning the model in the upcoming SASC championship, in both the Group B (as the Kancamagus GTB) and in the Group C (as the Kancamagus GTO) classes.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 15:47 |
|
Dance Officer posted:You need the economy number of the engine. You'll find it in the final engine tab. It's expressed in g/kWh or p/Hph. Yeah, I hit that too, I accidentally designed a Group B engine for teh group A car first (oops, read wrong BSFC figure) and I was able to adapt it to all the classes. Dance Officer posted:Aye I am also having problems with group C as well. There's a very limited amount of bodies that can take the engine I want to put in, and only the Porsche allows for really fat tyres. Are you morphing the body around? It's necessary. Kilonum posted:*Kancamagus GT stuff* Oh man, I'm curious to see what the race version looks like... I might be in trouble if you have near that BSFC on the race versions with the maximum power. (brb, making street version of the Salope to obfuscate actual performance.)
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 16:05 |
|
Autosport Weekly posted:Responding to critics, Equipe Mardre Sports released details of the production Salope 3.6. "See, it is a real production car, that one can drive on the street and fuel with normal, premium fuel," explained President Jean-Luc Ledgédale. "I soundly reject all criticism that we never intended to make a street version. Er. Normal version. I in fact drove the Salope to this press conference and did in fact not die." Asked if there was, or would ever be a second street example made, Ledgédale rolled his eyes, replied"oh piss off," and refused to respond to any further questions. Meta: Why yes, a thinly disguised lashup street version! At only about 110hp/L, it's a pretty pale shadow of the racing version, but cest la vie.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 16:49 |
|
Dance Officer posted:You need the economy number of the engine. You'll find it in the final engine tab. It's expressed in g/kWh or p/Hph. I too do not see any actual fuel information on the engine modification screens, in the EU4 version. The final readout when you're assembling a car has it listed under the the 'Design' tab, but mine only lists lb/hph. On that note... is the UE4 version bugged? I cannot for the life of me make an engine with less than ~350 lb/hph fuel burn despite easily matching the spec requirements in the original game version. I feel like maybe the display says lb/hph but really means g/kwh. Unless it's normal for an engine with burn rates of literal tonnes of fuel per hour to have 28ish mpg? e: Yes I am sure of it, it must be a display bug. The economy % matches the g/kwh numbers. Whew, I was wondering how everyone was pulling off 200hp off of what had to be weed-eater motors. e2: Actually, is anyone else using the UE4 to actually build a car? It seems to be missing too many parts at the moment to work for the competition. It is missing body styles, they cannot seem to be messed with, and you cannot play with much besides suspension, gearing, and lights. Plek fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Sep 10, 2017 |
# ? Sep 10, 2017 20:07 |
|
mekilljoydammit posted:Are you morphing the body around? It's necessary. As far as I know morphing the body does nothing for engine bay volume. I am running a much older version though, so it might be a new feature that I simply don't have. @Kilonum, you have fitted your group B entry with something other then AWD, yes?
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 20:57 |
|
Actually, does 4x4 count as AWD by the rules? I initially planned on using the Saab Sonett chassis because it's cool, but despite it being able to do some pretty great lap times, I figure that uh... 40% ish wheelspin might make it uncompetitive as far as tire wear goes. Now I'm actually struggling to find a way to handle the torque my engine is producing, even with other chassis. I haven't touched the game for 2 years so maybe it's just me being terrible, but I can't figure out a way to do a low specific fuel consumption engine that doesn't also produce a mountain of torque.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 21:44 |
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:Actually, does 4x4 count as AWD by the rules? Torque will (almost) always be higher than hp. The only exception I can think of is an extremely high revving engine with an extremely aggressive cam profile. If you have really high wheelspin you should get bigger and wider tyres and lower the spacing on your gearbox. edit: You can probably also fiddle with torque engine-side. To my knowledge stroke affects torque more than power, while bore affects both equally. So reduce stroke and up bore to compensate for the loss of power. Dance Officer fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Sep 10, 2017 |
# ? Sep 10, 2017 21:54 |
|
wargames posted:I am having trouble finding fuel consumption in UE4 automation. Plek posted:e2: Actually, is anyone else using the UE4 to actually build a car? It seems to be missing too many parts at the moment to work for the competition. It is missing body styles, they cannot seem to be messed with, and you cannot play with much besides suspension, gearing, and lights. Just a friendly reminder, everyone - we are NOT using the UE4 version of Automation for this challenge; instead, we are still using the old, familiar Kee Engine version. As I've outlined before, there are no modding tools for it yet (which is why there is such a lack of content at the moment for it), it uses a file format for the cars that is (for the moment) unreadable to my simulation model and, really, it's still very much an experimental build. I've updated the rules and criteria page to reflect this Zeppelin Insanity posted:Actually, does 4x4 count as AWD by the rules? Yes 4x4 counts as an AWD system, but it is pointless to use in this context. In Automation, 4x4 simulates a part-time, manually selected all-wheel drive system, like what you'd find in an old Ford Bronco, Jeep or similar vehicles, where the driver would (possibly) have to come to a complete stop, manually select two- or four-wheel drive (and often a range too), possibly manually lock the wheel hubs, then continue. On a related note, manual lockers are also pointless to use in this challenge; they simulate a manually-locked differential, which in Automation at least defaults to an open differential in normal operation, and only serves to improve your vehicle's off-road score, and not its performance.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 22:02 |
|
Dance Officer posted:As far as I know morphing the body does nothing for engine bay volume. I am running a much older version though, so it might be a new feature that I simply don't have. I don't know about version revisions and I built an engine around the engine bay, but you can morph the fenders to get more tire, was my point. Dance Officer posted:Torque will (almost) always be higher than hp. The only exception I can think of is an extremely high revving engine with an extremely aggressive cam profile. If you have really high wheelspin you should get bigger and wider tyres and lower the spacing on your gearbox. Define "extremely"? Even the street version I made and posted has more HP than torque. Free hint - there's more to life than just fuel burn / power - it's all a balance. There's some huge downsides to chasing best efficiency (and thus power) at the expense of all else.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 22:41 |
|
mekilljoydammit posted:Define "extremely"? Even the street version I made and posted has more HP than torque. don't act like a cocky butt.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 22:56 |
|
Dance Officer posted:don't act like a cocky butt. Sorry, wasn't trying to be. I went through about a dozen car and engine families in the last week trying to optimize for lap time and I'm honestly really excited to see other people's interpretation of how to do things and or if I did something silly.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 23:05 |
|
mekilljoydammit posted:Sorry, wasn't trying to be. I went through about a dozen car and engine families in the last week trying to optimize for lap time and I'm honestly really excited to see other people's interpretation of how to do things and or if I did something silly. K. How did you get to an engine with more torque than power without tanking reliability, anyway? As far as I know, that's 7500+ rpm stuff.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 23:16 |
|
Dance Officer posted:K. Larger displacement engines tend toward having more torque than displacement. They're not without issues, though; packaging them in a car can be a challenge, in addition to dealing with the weight of a larger engine spoiling, well, everything.
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 23:22 |
|
Dance Officer posted:K. I posted the street version above - even that has an 8500rpm redline and i feel it's obvious enough to say that the street version has the lowest redline of all the versions. It just got to picking where QP went and sometimes skimping on some parts (I think one version has a cast iron crank for example) to put quality points where they needed to be to stay under the total tech points. *edit* Also I think I hinted at this in the RP fluff, but I started basically started with Cosworth DFV (the 60s-80s F1 engine) dimensions, so almost every variant is really oversquare. It's hard to make good efficiency that way though and in truth I'm worried I'm giving up too much. The reliability points may be lower than they should be ideally but I saw mention in the last season wrapup that some were in the 20s for reliability and I'm above that on everything. BTW don't assume much of the performance numbers from the street version I posted. mekilljoydammit fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Sep 10, 2017 |
# ? Sep 10, 2017 23:23 |
|
Dance Officer posted:As far as I know morphing the body does nothing for engine bay volume. I am running a much older version though, so it might be a new feature that I simply don't have. yeah, my group B has RWD and only slightly more horsepower (though produced more efficiently). I've also made a Group A, here is the road legal variant (shockingly, same time on the Airfield test track as the 2004 BMW M3 CSL got on TGTT)
|
# ? Sep 10, 2017 23:56 |
|
Kilonum posted:yeah, my group B has RWD and only slightly more horsepower (though produced more efficiently). Welp, that's concerning. Oh well guess I'll see how the test day goes before I panic.
|
# ? Sep 11, 2017 00:39 |
|
MrChips posted:Larger displacement engines tend toward having more torque than displacement. They're not without issues, though; packaging them in a car can be a challenge, in addition to dealing with the weight of a larger engine spoiling, well, everything. Yea and I'm all about those big engines. If I could get an enormous v12 to fit in a decent body, that would be my group C submission.
|
# ? Sep 11, 2017 01:11 |
|
(performance redacted from racing models) Wearing ear protection around my racecars is strongly advised. Kilonum fucked around with this message at 05:22 on Sep 11, 2017 |
# ? Sep 11, 2017 02:11 |
|
Hm, shoot, I may not have a competitive prototype. Edit, because I feel like being a tease, every engine I have is from one family that's a flatplane V8 with weights of either about 170kg or 215kg depending on class. I'm a little proud of that because the Cosworth DFV, which I was cribbing some dimensions from for fun (won't say which ones heh heh)is right around 168kg. mekilljoydammit fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Sep 11, 2017 |
# ? Sep 11, 2017 02:53 |
|
mekilljoydammit posted:Hm, shoot, I may not have a competitive prototype. You can always bolt on a turbo Dance Officer fucked around with this message at 11:03 on Sep 11, 2017 |
# ? Sep 11, 2017 07:36 |
|
Dance Officer posted:You can always bolt on a turbo Yup, that'd be the 215kg version. The prototype version is a bit of a stretch and efficiency suffers. Going on my "whole package" stuff from before, the prototype leaves my hands tied on parts of the package such that I can't really compensate for making less power. *edit* Hm, I forget if Top Gear as I think of it was a thing in 1990 - it'd be fun to write up a pseudo-review to further legitimize the idea that the Salope is a production car. *edit again* Looking at it, boo, it's not. Anyone care if I ignore that and do a writeup? In the mean time, have the performance test for the street version! mekilljoydammit fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Sep 11, 2017 |
# ? Sep 11, 2017 11:23 |
|
Both of my road cars going around
|
# ? Sep 11, 2017 16:15 |
|
MrChips, could you say a little more about the tire life simulation? Specifically, could I get a rough estimate of how much of an effect wheelspin of 5-10% have on tire life?
|
# ? Sep 11, 2017 16:46 |
|
Top Gear posted:*voiceover* “It’s a mid engine coupe weighing just over 1100 kilos, with unequal length wishbones on all four corners, the rear actuating Formula 1 style pushrod dampers. It’s powered by a 3.6 liter flat plane V8 also tracing its roots to Formula 1, redlining at a stratospheric 8500 rpm and producing 400 horsepower. The latest product of Maranello?” *edit* I'm having fun with this.
|
# ? Sep 11, 2017 17:11 |
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:MrChips, could you say a little more about the tire life simulation? Specifically, could I get a rough estimate of how much of an effect wheelspin of 5-10% have on tire life? Well, a good part of the tire wear model is found in the Challenge Handbook (as you've no doubt found), but for some reason I didn't comment on wheelspin. Basically, for a car with either front- or rear-wheel drive, the effect of wheelspin on tire life is basically a square root function. A car with 10% wheelspin, for example, the tires will wear at about 105% of the normal rate. For a car with all-wheel drive, it's fundamentally the same, except the wheelspin is distrubuted front and rear based on the power distribution. In a car with 50/50 power distribution and 10% wheelspin, the tire wear would be 102% of normal.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 01:52 |
|
So I've been looking at a few real life engines for some inspiration and it looks like you can't replicate really short stoke designs? The bore and stroke seem to be linked in such a way that you can't do say a 80mm x 55mm design. Is there any way around this?
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 13:02 |
|
slothrop posted:So I've been looking at a few real life engines for some inspiration and it looks like you can't replicate really short stoke designs? The bore and stroke seem to be linked in such a way that you can't do say a 80mm x 55mm design. Is there any way around this? Not really. You can make the family to the minimum stroke it'll let you for the bore, and then destroke variants of it, but you can't do anything too absurdly oversquare. Of course, if you're looking at F-1 stuff, most of the stuff that got really oversquare went to pneumatic valves anyway.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 14:05 |
|
Oversquare designs end up having some really screwed up combustion chamber and flow problems too. There are lots of compromises to make motors breathe at 20,000rpm. Preserving tumble, and having a combustion chamber that doesn't look like a 3d ink blot test are really quite hard at that point. .... not that I'm sure the game simulates that :-) I'm still doing the tutorials.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 14:50 |
|
The game doesn't allow you to go past 12000 rpm.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 14:56 |
|
Nerobro posted:Oversquare designs end up having some really screwed up combustion chamber and flow problems too. There are lots of compromises to make motors breathe at 20,000rpm. Preserving tumble, and having a combustion chamber that doesn't look like a 3d ink blot test are really quite hard at that point. I find it funny the extent to which Duckworth figured it out in the 60s - if you look at it, the stuff he did with ports to generate tumble survive for drat near every purpose built racing engine since (except for some in the 70s and 80s where other manufacturers hadn't figured out hte trick yet)
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 14:57 |
|
Race Pace Magazine, 1990 Geneva Motor Show special edition posted:There's a curse well known among people doing any sort of journalism. You come into it bright-eyed and ready to make your mark, looking down on the chainsmoking old men in your workplace. You think they're uninspired or lack passion. But over the years you realise that the longer you cover a subject, the more jaded you become. That's true of motor shows as well. A major publication cannot miss one, and we need to cover the glitzy parts of it, but when the glamour fades you start exploring further. You look for the weird things tucked away in a corner, you search for the fascinating characters who try to run a boutique manufacturer. You always hope to find something others missed, something actually quite brilliant.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 16:33 |
|
De tuf tuf club posted:De tuf tuf club, a small Netherlands engine manufacturer and motor vehicle enthusiast club, has released a press statement announcing it's intention to join the SASC '90 racing championship. The announcement comes as yet another surprising turn in the club/company hybrid's history. De tuf tuf club started out as a gentlemanly motorist club in the early 1900's with as it's defining feature a private garage and manufacturing shop with professional staff for it's members. In the 1920's the club took a turn to the dark, as several members took the view that "the road is for motorists", and they began a campaign of terror to get all other road users off the road. Antics included speeding, dangerous driving, tailgating, and outright vehicular manslaughter while the perpetrators wore white hooded robes similar to those worn by the KKK. Some would even compete for points; 1 point for every elderly person killed or maimed, 3 for every adult, 5 for every child, and a full 10 for every infant. Dutch police, not equipped with cars throughout the 1920's, was initially powerless to stop them. However, by 1925 an official policy was adopted "to shoot any white hooded indivual seen driving an automobile on sight". Due to this policy and vigilante action, by 1926 two dozen Tuf tuf club members were killed, some had been arrested and trialed, the club lost most of its membership and disappeared out of the public eye. Dance Officer fucked around with this message at 17:20 on Sep 12, 2017 |
# ? Sep 12, 2017 17:08 |
|
Good lord, I love the styling, and one of my fluff ideas was similar to that but less well executed than what you did. That's... uh, a background. I'm torn - I did a variant of my Group A car where I went from a small displacement version of the engine family with a buttload of revs to a relative tractor motor (the redline's down to 7800rpm FFS) and it's just... so much faster because of the extra power. But 7800rpm is practically a tractor engine! Ugh.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 17:24 |
|
mekilljoydammit posted:That's... uh, a background. I adapted it from a Suske & Wiske comic called De tuf-tuf club. Basic premise is they go back in time(staple of the series) and run into a gang of white hooded fellas trying to run over people in their bumper cart sized model T lookalike cars. Turns out a witch put them under a mind control spell to made them do that, for reasons I forgot. In the current day de tuf-tuf club is also a lobbying group that wants to remove all speed limits and speedtraps. What the name stands for should give you an idea of how much of an rear end in a top hat the current president of the club is.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 18:13 |
|
Dance Officer posted:I adapted it from a Suske & Wiske comic called De tuf-tuf club. Basic premise is they go back in time(staple of the series) and run into a gang of white hooded fellas trying to run over people in their bumper cart sized model T lookalike cars. Turns out a witch put them under a mind control spell to made them do that, for reasons I forgot. In the current day de tuf-tuf club is also a lobbying group that wants to remove all speed limits and speedtraps. What the name stands for should give you an idea of how much of an rear end in a top hat the current president of the club is. So you get to make "the person in charge is an rear end in a top hat" jokes and I get to make "French workers striking" and "French cars not meeting the letter of regulations but this being ignored because of French rulesmakers" jokes?
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 19:06 |
|
I went and did some looking into an engine for the scorcher. I ended up building a 400hp engine (without a turbo)that had the scorcher do 2:00 flat on the test track, without any gearing, aero or suspension tuning. Tuning those will probably shave 1-3 seconds off the lap times. I have no interest in running a prototype entry as well, though.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 23:04 |
|
|
# ? May 8, 2024 05:50 |
|
I think the "you must be this fast to be competitve" line for the prototypes is at least in the 1:56s anyway with the new tires. I'm still optimizing to try to shave time.
|
# ? Sep 12, 2017 23:09 |