Kepos Sharing

[Kepos]

2004 Kepos C 30

information

intended market: premium
type: four doors, four seats
specifications: 2,590 millimeter wheelbase, 4,446 millimeter length, 2,093 millimeter width
chassis: aluminium semi space frame, partial aluminium panels
drivetrain: front longitudinal longitudinal rear-wheel drive semi space frame
gearbox: six-speed sequential
suspension: double wishbone in the front, pushrod in the rear
weight: 1,533 kilograms, 58% in the front, 48% in the rear
power: 257.1 horsepower at 6,500 revolutions per minute
redline: 6,700 revolutions per minute
bottom end: aluminium silicone 2,658 cubic centimeter boxer 6
top end: aluminium silicone direct acting overhead cams, two per cylinder
compression: 10.4 to one
fuel system: turbo charger direct injection
economy: 7.16 percent, 1,074 pounds per horsepower

Comfortable electrically adjustable seats, 471 liters of cargo volume, leather interior surfaces…Does your car have that?

1995 Kepos Swish SE

information

intended market: convertible sport budget
type: two doors, two seats
specifications: 2,330 millimeter wheelbase, 4,085 millimeter length, 1,748 milimetter width
chassis: steel monocoque, partial aluminium panels
drivetrain: front transverse transverse front-wheel drive monocoque
gearbox: five-gear advanced automatic
suspension: double wishbone in the front, pushrod in the rear
weight: 1,103 kilograms, 60% in the front, 40% in the rear
power: 203.4 horsepower at 7,400 revolutions per minute
redline: 7,900 revolutions per minute
bottom end: aluminium 2,243 cubic centimeter inline 5
top end: aluminium dual overhead cams, five per cylinder
compression: 10 to one
fuel system: naturally aspirated multi point electronic fuel injection
economy: 15.69%, 490.3 pounds per horsepower

At one minute and 27.18 seconds around the Top Gear test track, it’s fun in the sun.

1974 Kepos Hallelujah Limited

information

intended market: luxury premium
type: four doors, four seats
specifications: 2,959 millimeter wheelbase, 4,845 millimeter length, 1,695 millimeter width
chassis: corrosion resistant steel monocoque, aluminium panels
drivetrain: front transverse transverse front-wheel drive monocoque
gearbox: three-gear automatic
suspension: double wishbone in the front, double wishbone in the rear
weight: 1,133 kilograms, 65% in the front, 35% in the rear
power: 156.6 horsepower at 6,300 revolutions per minute
redline: 6,300 revolutions per minute
bottom end: cast iron 2,997 cubic centimeter boxer 6
top end: cast iron overhead cams, two per cylinder
compression: 10 to one
fuel system: naturally aspirated mechanical fuel injection
economy: 13.77%, 558.6 pounds per horsepower

Handmade seats, a refrigerator, automatically opening and closing doors…Does your car have all three?

1975 Kepos Mozzana SE

information

intended market: super
type: two doors, two seats
specifications: 2,230 millimeter wheelbase, 3,954 millimeter length, 1,813 millimeter width
chassis: corrosion resistant steel monocoque, aluminium panels
drivetrain: rear longitudinal longitudinal rear-wheel drive monocoque
gearbox: five-gear manual
suspension: solid axle coil in the front, double wishbone in the rear
weight: 910 kilograms, 37% in the front, 63% in the rear
power: 216.3 horsepower at 6,300 revolutions per minute
redline: 7,100 revolutions per minute
bottom end: aluminium 2,997 cubic centimeter boxer 6
top end: aluminium overhead valves, two per cylinder
compression: 7.5 to one
fuel system: turbo charger mechanical fuel injection
economy: 10.02%, 767.9 pounds per horsepower

Where does one minute and 24.13 seconds around the Top Gear test track get you?

[HybridTronny]

@Kepos

Comfortable electically adjustable seats, 471 liters of cargo volume, leather interior surfaces…Does your car have that?

[Tzuyu_main]

What type of car is this intended to be? By that I mean, what market is it intended for, and are there any real life examples that you were basing this car off?

[Private_Miros]

• Huge fender flares;
• Exhaust pipes in the fenders;
• Too large wheels;
• A side indicator that… nevermind;
• It smiles like it’s having a bad trip;
• No front or rear fixtures except a grill/license plate area and lights;
• Strangely placed (and chosen) door handles;
• A hothatch/sedan with pushrod suspension and semi-space frame and sequential gearbox coupled to a strange turbo boxer six with direct injection, bad efficiency, and despite highly advanced materials only 2 valves per cylinder that does make sense whatever way you look at it;

Why does your car have that?

No one expects a first ever car on Automation to be good, there’s at least that. You should look at real life examples and base yourself on that for the fixtures and the mechanical choices. Take a look around the forum for other users’ cars. In some threads you can even download them and see how they placed fixtures. Although for that, I’d recommend you install the mods on the Steam Workshop, as some of those are quite extensively used. You don’t need mods to design a realistic looking car though.

[07CobaltGirl]

Sounds like someone’s internet girlfriend broke up with them today.

[Aerisautos]

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

[Private_Miros]

@07CobaltGirl

Sounds like someone’s internet girlfriend broke up with them today.

What do internet girlfriends have to do with advising to look at real life examples to make your cars look like cars?

[strop]

Knowing how much Kristina hates the Discourse UI and hasn’t said anything for about 3 years, she may have been replying to a completely different post.

Or it could have be yours and I have no idea lmao

[CorsicaUnknown]

Well it was only a matter of time before aeris got into some drama here.

Anyways, I would just like to say one thing however to certain people - calling obvious beginners ‘noobs’, ‘terrible at designing’ or any variation of those without any suggestions for improvement is very discouraging and only stops people from wanting to improve. This also applies to everyone on Discord who spams :myfirstdesign: as soon as they see a car which hasn’t been fixture spammed 'til death.

I can tell for a fact that no one was an incredible designer from the beginning with no need for criticism. Just because you vomit fixtures over your cars now doesn’t excuse you for being an asshole to newer and less experienced designers. Get off of your throne and offer help to those you can tell need help.

Not directing this to anyone in particular.

[Lava_Cake]

Drama aside, the car does have potential as a design, a tip of advice that i commonly do is to just copy IRL cars and then modify them for your own needs. Making car designs entirely on their own is hard, so I think it would be a lot easier for you to just copy designs first, THEN work creative exploration.

For instance, you can copy something like a Civic to get a general idea of how the car type looks, then modify it to really make it your own. I hope I’ve helped you, I know it can be hard to start out in this game!

[Ezdmn]

Technically you could go the other way round too. You can make uniquely wild designs, and then gradually make your designs more and more realistic by looking at real cars of the same period. That way you can better develop trademark shapes you want to have. That’s the way I went, and it seems to be working so far!

[07CobaltGirl]

No, I responded to exactly the post intended. But, it is also true (and well known) I am not a huge fan of this UI. hahahaha

The response was just ruuuuuuuuuude, regardless of how much they disliked the car design. Constructive criticism is always expected, but that critique was just simply being a dick. Hence the remark about him being rejected by a fake internet girlfriend. You know, because I can also be RUDE.

[Private_Miros]

What?

The only thing somewhat rude about my post was the “Why does your car have that?”, which was a jab at his “does your car have that?”

Literally all the rest is pointing out why the car is not good and what he can do to improve those issues.

And it is a bad car, technically and in appearance. That is not rude, that is just true. You should follow that up with suggestion to improve, and not all designs should be awe-strikingly good, but there’s no use in applauding it either.

[Rise_Comics]

Not bad for a first design. The taillights could be made bigger tbh,

[balkanski_brat]

Okay with the… drama now cleaned up, lets get to some real discussion on your design. I’ll just touch on the engineering since everyone else discussed styling (in more or less polite terms). The design choices, are quite frankly, all over the place, which is understandable for a new player just experimenting with different combinations of engineering choices out of curiosity. But from reading the stats, I don’t see a clear goal of what market the car is attempting to participate in.

type: four doors, four seats

Here, you get a sense of a rather luxurious car, with this configuration popular among premium/luxury cars meant to be driven by a chauffeur

specifications: 101.97 inch wheelbase, 175.02 inch length, 82.39 inch width

The dimensions, however, puts it right in the compact segment, something more populated by entry level cars, and not luxury cars (which would be at least mid size, mostly full size)

chassis: aluminium semi space frame, partial aluminium panels

Frankly, I think that if you were willing to put money into an aluminium frame, you might as well go with full aluminium panels? Don’t really have much to say here, other than aluminium semi-space frame is a construction for premium cars, such as Audis (in fact, this tech was pioneered by the A8 sedan)

drivetrain: front longitudinal longitudinal rear-wheel drive semi space frame

FR drivetrain is always fun, would make sense for any premium or luxury car of any size or price range

gearbox: six-speed sequential

I guess for the 2000s, the sequential transmission was the next big thing, but usually reserved for high performance vehicles (with Ferrari’s F1 transmission or BMW’s SMG transmission being infamous examples). Assuming this is a sports sedan, this choice makes sense for the highest level of the car.

suspension: double wishbone in the front, pushrod in the rear

The double wishbone up front is
The pushrod in back doesn’t make sense, as that suspension is basically exclusive to supercars, hypercars (and it is derived from the suspension used in F1 race cars). A much superior choice for a premium sports sedan would be a double wishbone or multilink rear, as these suspension types still preserve good handling character, while having far superior comfort, load capacity, less expense (engineering, production and maintenance), and more range of ride heights. Generally pushrods only work on cut-throat performance cars, and a sports sedan could never reach performance of a proper supercar.

weight: 3,379 pounds, 58% in the front, 48% in the rear

chuncc lol, i guess it makes sense for all the luxuries crammed into the car? Although the IRL Hyundai Elantra (which the car’s body is based off of) comes in at a 2900 lbs (don’t know if thats a good benchmark so take this with a grain of salt)

power: 257.1 horsepower at 6,500 revolutions per minute

Power output sounds good, competing sports sedans of the early 2000s were pulling 200 to 300 hp (for example, BMW M3 E46 was at 338 hp, Infinity G35 was at 298 hp, Lexus IS300 was at 227 hp). Of course, it also depends on how your car’s price point compares to these examples (I do not know what your car costs)

redline: 6,700 revolutions per minute

Sounds cool, although those examples I cited were pulling 7k to 8k. Although for giving the engine a little extra usable RPM after peak power

bottom end: aluminium silicone 2,658 cubic centimeter boxer 6

Sounds nice, I do love my boxers personally. AlSi block makes good sense for a new engine from the 2000s, used in sportier cars. 2.6 litres is a bit small compared to the 3.0 + litres of the previously cited examples, but you made up for that with a turbo. Although, I’d expect a 2.6 litre to be capable of higher RPM than 6700

top end: aluminium silicone direct acting overhead cams, two per cylinder

Not gonna lie here, this ain’t it chief. DaOHC is pretty useless tech in the 2000s, its something you’re more likely to see in much older small engines instead. Any self respecting sports car of the 1990s or 2000s would be sporting dual cams, 4 valve per cylinder (like nearly all modern cars, great for a broad power range - adding VVL would further broaden the powerband and help a bit with efficiency), or 5 valve per cylinder (better for pursuing peaky high RPM power, found in Audi sports sedans from the early 2000s actually)

compression: 10.4 to one

nice

fuel system: turbo charger direct injection

some newfangled tech that fits right in for a sporty premium sedan of the time

economy: 7.16 percent, 1,074 pounds per horsepower

ｏｏｆ

7.16% efficiency is honestly piss poor, to be expected of giant carbureted engines from the 50’s or 60’s. Its especially bad considering you are using GDI fuel system and 10.4:1 compression. Might have plenty to do with how the cam is setup and how rich the AFR is

Edit: forgot to include this, but I’d expect about 25 % efficiency for a sporty engine of the 2000s with high comp ratio and direct injection

I hope this actually helps you to improve the engineering of the car instead of just coming off as pointless criticism, as that is my intention. We all had to learn the game ofc, and this community taught me plenty

[07CobaltGirl]

@Private_Miros This is what constructive criticism looks like. Study it. Learn it. Be better at it. I wonder what you would say about my cars?

[Private_Miros]

If someone is interested in getting detailed criticism, @balkanski_brat’s is exactly what you want.
However, to many that are convinced that their work is the greatest that’s just a lot of effort that runs off them like water off a duck.

I don’t know what I would say about your cars. Show me, and I’ll tell you. If they aren’t going out of their way to look horrible and aren’t a complete mess technically, I’d probably ask you for one to review.

[Kepos]

Introducing the new 1995 Kepos Swish SE. At one minute and 27.18 seconds around the Top Gear test track, it’s fun in the sun.

[Kepos]

Introducing the 1974 Kepos Hallelujah Limited. Handmade seats, a refrigerator, automatically opening and closing doors…Does your car have all three?

[desperatedonut5]

I don’t think automatic doors were a thing till the 80’s-90’s but if you mean automatic door locks then yeah that’d be a more luxurious option in 74