Home | Wiki | Discord | Dev Stream | YouTube | Archived Forums | Contact

66TAR [Race 4 Virginia Qualifying Results]


Question about the reliability calculations, do you have hard numbers you’re going to base that off, or will it be scaled according to the stats you get from the entries?

Like is a engine reliability of 30 going to be the same final chance of a breakdown if you get some with scores in the 20’s and some in the 40’s?


Breakdown chance is scalled with the reliability of the engine and the trim. The more reliable your car is, the less likely it should be to breakdowns. (Given there is always a chance a highly reliable car will breakdown anyway as the calcs include a randomized component)


The Russians are Coming!^

The Driver:
Ian Bykov.

Driver and owner. A Canadian born of Russian parents. Ian was raised with, and has always held, a feeling of national pride towards his ancestral home, despite the unpleasant tensions between nations over the last few decades. After a few shrewd business decisions and a couple of risky, but ultimately successful gambles, Ian was in the position to buy into an existing automotive racing team, and forge ahead with his dream of showcasing the potential of Soviet cars.

The Car:
1966 Bechov F3084A.

The F3 series is the third generation of Bechov large sedans, which was exported to western markets with a number of variations. Ian being one of the few people in the west that has regularly bought the latest of every offering exported, Bechov has assisted with the modification of this car, including lending one of their factory AVTOPROBEG engineers to modify the vehicle from standard. The F3184 that this specific TAR car was based off was optioned with a 4.2L V8, albeit fairly low powered. That being said, there have been enough improvements (including being bored out to 5.0L) to ensure it develops over twice the power output from standard, leading Bechov to official sanction a name change to F3084A.

^ not actually guaranteed to make it however, reliability and speed probably aren’t their strong suit here…


@findRED19 I think what nialloftara is asking is if (for example) a car has a reliability of 30:

Is the chance of breakdown the same no matter the reliability of the other competitor entries?


Is it more likely to break if the average reliability of the field is 35, compared to if the average was 25?


1966 Chrysalis Rampage T/A

In 1966 Chrysalis Motors made it’s debut in the Trans-Automation Racing Series. Their weapon of choice was the Rampage T/A, a short wheelbase coupe with a small 4.3 litre pushrod V8. The car was fairly simple by Chrysalis standards to fulfill the race regulations. The only advanced technology on the car was the 4-wheel disc braking system.
Chrysalis racing driver John Redman drove 3000 testing miles with the Rampage before the season. The first couple sessions were disappointing because the rear live axle setup combined with a heavy V8 engine and a short wheelbase made the car nerveous when exiting corners.
The engineers had an idea to build an aluminium engine but this way the car wouldn’t be legal for the race regulations, so this plan had been canceled shortly. Instead of the aluminium engine they went for a more simple intake system to loose some unwanted weight - and also to make the car more reliable.

The car was still a challenge to drive but in the experienced hands of John Redman (Gasmea GT Champion in 1961 and '64) become more and more quicker.

The team loaded the Rampage and the parts into the trucks and headed for Sebring where the opening race of the '66 season took place. The car felt quick and strong but they were in complete dark about the performance of the competition. At least their home testing track is somewhat a similar character to Sebring, so maybe there won’t be new problems with the handling of the car.


Oh, gotchya!
I will tweak the calcs as needed so roughly half of the field will have a chance of a minor breakdown assuming the majority of the submissions are running engines with reliabilities around 35.

Trim reliability will also be a part of the breakdown calcs, and should be the bigger equalizer here, so even if you’re running an unreliable engine, if the rest of the car is mostly reliable (i’m guessing mid 50s) you should be less likely to break down.

Again, i will stress that after i close submissions, i will tweak the calcs as needed.

Back to work for me…


Okay thanks, that was what I was looking for, I was caught between the “fuck yeah racecar” urge to get maximum power, and the “slow and steady wins the race” endurance mindset of keep it extra reliable. I think I’ll favor the endurance mindset a bit, and trade that extra topend power on the straights for the peace of mind that I can push the engine as hard on the last lap as I can on the first lap. Seeing as I’m going with the big and beefy 110in wheelbase body compared to some of these smaller featherweights I’ll probably need the extra midrange torque anyway.


How much will fuel economy play a part? I’m getting dreadful efficiency for these engines when I tune a pushrod engine for speed


Most of my test engines were in the 12% range.

But note this:
If you’re too fuel efficent and tire efficient, your brakes will not have time to cool down, and your race time may suffer from brake fade more severely.

I’ll answer any more questions when I get home today, and give the pit stop times and some other things all should know.


after success in the UK with their Abingdon sports brand Knightwick motors took the steps to compete in the Trans-Am racing competition. The new Henley model was chosen to compete using the tried and tested 4.2l inline 6 from the top DX6 Henley model

shots of just the race car




What mods are you using to create the sponsor labels?


The Sponsor Decals are in these two mod packs.


And some race number decals are in this pack.



Thank you! I am sure that you just helped more than me.


Give and Take

Fuel economy - Tire wear - Brake Fade

These are the 3 main factors you need to balance with your race cars, as being too light or too heavy on one of them will affect them all.

What are the absolutes?

  • Each car will get a 20 gallon fuel cell for racing and fuel calcs.
  • Each car will have No Less than 1% Sportiness Brake fade in the calculations (so even if you manage to build a car that has say 0.6% sportiness brake fade, I will calculate it at 1%).
  • Gas only pit stops will take 32 seconds. (32 seconds is added per each gas only pit stop to your total time)
  • Tire pits stops are 75 seconds long each, and are simulated by adding that time to your total time. (these pit stops also act as fuel stops because if you need to change your tires, you might as well top off your fuel)

Ok, so how does that triangle of Fuel - Tires - Brakes work then?

Well for braking:
I use the sportiness brake fade stat in brake fade calculations, and every pit stop you make I “reset” the brake fade (IE: Brakes cool off).

So pit stops are important to cool off your brakes, especially if you have high brake fade.

For Tires Then:
I use the sportiness ratio and the TSCM value with a modifier to calculate tire wear just for pit stop times.

So tire wear affects how often you will have to take pit stops (nothing more though, that gets complicated.)

Alright, The Fuel Now:

I calculate a racing fuel mpg based on some factors that go into your mpg stat and average engine economy with a modifier.

So a thirsty car will require more frequent pit stops.

Now, your job is to balance this with your racing car. Too heavy on the tire wear, and you might be making too many long pit stops. Fuel efficient and tire efficient but having bad brakes will lead to a lot of lost time in brake fade. Thirsty car but efficient tire wear may mean you left performance at the table with your suspension tuning. Etc.

With this last bit said, I will no longer give the direct or straight-forward advice. I will instead take on the roll of the event organizers and some commentary.

And submissions are officially open! Deadline is December 4th at 5pm cst (central standard time).


Psst… December 4th I think you mean, or November 24th though that’s pretty short.


oops… December is next month already wow
fix it.


“Let me get this straight, you want to race a Fantasia in the upcoming Trans Am series?” The Owner asks this new fellow who shows up. “Absolutely, I think it’s size will be an advantage.” With a furred brow of minor confusion.“It has a 1.8 liter straight four cylinder, where do you plan on cramming the other 3.2 liters?” The owner asks. “Well it is not exactly perfect fit, I believe it is doable to put one of your Airstar 305 cubic inch aircraft engines in, specifically the brand new one you introduced a few weeks ago at the Dalil air show. It is not certified for flight yet, is it?” Rob Doley has a point, there is much fanfare over the fuel injected aluminum block, but it has not passed all testing to be used on aircraft. “That motor only revs up to 4 thousand something, you do know that, right?” “Yes I do, which I can make up for by using the transmission from your older Villin racer, and coupling it with a narrowed rear end from one of your military trucks. Those should all handle the stress of your Airstar engine, and every part fits the specifications laid out by the TA series sponsor.”

At this point the owner realises that he can be in this racing series for no extra than what this fellow can pick up from out in the finished cars lot and a trip to an engine plant and warehouse, but as with all great minds, why get such a good deal when a great deal can easily come out of it?

“I can supply you all of this but with a few small requests, we keep the Fantasia badge and the Yinzer ornaments, with the addition of an Airstar label and engine displacement stickers?” Rob easily nods in agreement. It is a Fantasia, after all - there is no escaping that name. “Before you continue, why is it named Fantasia if I may ask?” “I mean…” he continues “It is a modern design that is rigid, and frankly I am ripping out a better rear differential and suspension setup than I am putting in. My neice bought one for college, and that is why I am here, it is a fine automobile. You do know there is a stigma with that name, right?”

At that point the owner looked out the window at a Fantasia in the lot, his actually, and said “This was supposed to be an everybody type of car but two things happened between the time we designed it and today, the design curves took much more of a cutting look, and manufacturers purposefully built larger more powerful cars and gave them masculine names to chase each other between the street and the showroom. This car is too small to sell in that market, so we turned it over to our design research team that found it appeals much more now to women then men because of its size and shape. So it was pretty easy a decision, we were already tooled up, we changed the paint options and renamed it from Honeybadger to Fantasia, which brings me to another request, you can cut and flare the body, but I want the paint colors to remain Fantasia brand. In our business it is about the customer being happy until they return a decade later, and I want them all to recognize these cars on the track, hell if it some other brand loyalist I want them to be sure they know we are out there racing. They will be reminded by it passing by Fantasias on their way about their days.”

Rob readily agreed to the request, as long as it was up to the design team to come up with the paint scheme. “You are willing to really let them loose? They might come up with something way out of the typical racing look.” “Hell it might be an advantage for me.” Rob replied. Rob always had single color race cars because Rob is colorblind.

“Well it sounds to me like we are almost to a deal, how many cars are you planning on building for this series?” Rob replies “Four would be ideal, but we can make it with two”. The Owner takes one more look into the parking lot at his cuppochino colored Fantasia, reaches in his pocket, and with a smirk tosses Mr. Doley his car keys. “Build five - bring that one back.”


This isn’t necessarily true. Sure, they can cool down very slowly when they aren’t being used, but stationary is actually fairly bad for brakes as they don’t have any air flow. This is why in modern Formula 1, whenever a car is wheeled into the garage, what are essentially high powered leaf blowers get hooked up to each brake duct so that the brakes don’t just weld together.

I’m not saying this can’t be used in the calculations, and I’m not entirely sure what would be a substitute, but this usually is not how you cool the brakes. Brakes would cool in endurance races during safety car periods (Which I don’t think is really applicable for 1966) or if the driver is doing lift and coast laps to conserve brakes and fuel.


Is the material cost limit necessary with the other limits in place? Top speed has a large impact on this so while tuning I have to make sure i’m keeping top speed below the threshold before it spikes material costs up $700, it’s making it a pain to fine tune the gearbox


This is just how I went about claculating it in a way that was easier for me to do without a full blown brc simulation. I know its not entirely correct.

The racing officials released this statement:
“We aim to keep the racing series competative for both private racing teams and factory-backed racing teams. In testing we found with high powered motors the material costs did not restrict top speeds (gearbox tuning) to a significant degree. Furthermore, we would suggest taking a look at other options that affect material costs to make sure they are efficent if a team is having trouble with that. We would also consider raising them in future years to ensure a competative field.”