Evgenis Automobiles is a British-based car manufacturer, based near Sevenoaks, Kent. Evgenis products are designed with one key ethos in mind, “Premium, standard.” We make customer’s input our top priority. What a customer desires in a certain category of vehicle is certainly what we shall offer them, while staying true to our brand ethos. Evgenis is not the sort of car manufacturer that cuts corners, meaning there is also no characteristic in our offerings that is prioritised, be it performance, quality, fuel efficiency, driving experience etc. as we strive to do the best in every way we can.
I like the front end, well done! But when i first saw the rear i thought it was from another car. It looks good but it doesn’t have any of that sporty/aggressive presence of the front.
Thanks for the feedback, it is most appreciated! I have updated the photo of the rear end on the post. I wasn’t that happy with it either and I have only made a few small changes, but hopefully now it matches the aggressive front end a bit better. (ignore badge difference, the front one is wrong)
I can possibly see where you are coming from with this and it is all really market dependant. This car and most of the cars the company will make will be solely intended to be sold in the European market. In order to explain this take the example of the Ford Fiesta. The only difference between the Fiesta in Europe and the Fiesta in North America is that in North America you can get it as a sedan too whereas in Europe the sedan is not available. The Fiesta in North America is only available with a 1.6-litre engine producing either 120 bhp in the base/normal versions of the car and 197 bhp in the ST version. In Europe there is a wide range of engines from the low powered 1.25-litre 60 bhp engine all the way up to the 125 bhp 1.0-lite 3-cylinder ECOboost engine in normal version and then the same turbocharged engine from the NA version of the Fiesta ST for the European one but with a bit less power. In Europe the majority of Fiestas sold are either the 75 bhp diesel or the 82 bhp petrol, which would never sell in North America.
I was referring more to the fact that the max power RPM is much lower than the engine’s redline on all your motors. Wouldn’t you have a serious drop in power at max RPM?
Its only several hundred more. Besides, isn’t the point of having a red line past peak power is so that the power produced on the way down is matched when you shift up, but this time on the rising part of the power curve?
If you have max rpm too low, there will be a drop in engine power when shifting, whereas if the shift point is moved into a higher rpm, power would be the same or only slightly lower. Higher RPM also means the engine can hold a lower gear for longer, helping acceleration.
Nope. Between max power and the redline of the smaller engines there is about 400 rpm and there is a 2-3% drop. On the sport engine where max power is at 7200 rpm there is a minute, almost unnoticeable drop to 8000 rpm. The power curve is literally flat from 7200 to 7900 rpm.
Nope. Between max power and the redline of the smaller engines there is about 400 rpm and there is a 2-3% drop. On the sport engine where max power is at 7200 rpm there is a minute, almost unnoticeable drop to 8000 rpm. The power curve is literally flat from 7200 to 7900 rpm.[/quote]
Flat torque good, therefore flat power is bad. If you have flat power, acceleration is constant, whereas increasing power means increasing acceleration. Decreasing power means you will feel the seat pushing into you less and less as you accelerate.
Basically, you can assume that you will accelerate faster at 80% max power in 2nd gear than at 100% max power in 3rd, so yes, what he is doing is correct, also for some other reasons explained.
So basically what you mean is if the redline was the same as the max power RPM you would be wasting the engine’s power because you would constantly be stuck at a lower RPM? (I’m awful at explaining things )
Actually that part it not true. Due to the fact that P = v*F, when power you have now is less than power after you shift up, than you’ll accelerate less than if you shifted up.
This also means that the rpm value when the current power is equal to the power you’d have if you shifted up is the optimum shift point. Obviously, if you are at peak power rpm, you’ll always have more power than if you shifted up, and therefore, the optimal shift point must come after the engine peak power rpm, and that’s the reason why there should be a gap between the peak power rpm and the redline.
That formula does not apply in this conversation; it would only if we were talking about BHP.
What I said is most certainly true. Look at the chart I(daffy) provided. In terms of power applied to the wheels, not power applied to the flywheel, your gear ratios definitely have an affect on your acceleration. If you look at first gear on that chart, the acceleration is never lower than the 2nd gear’s acceleration. This is in spite of the engine going well past max power rpm, and going lower than the power that it would be at in the next gear (seeing how the shift point is just about in line with the next gear’s max power.)
You cannot put it that way. Think about it in terms of electric cars, where that would still apply since you are using a physics formula. Were you to have, lets say, the two speed transmission in the tesla they were planning on using, you would not shift up into the next gear at the point when the electric engine’s power starts dropping off; even though the power being put out is higher at the motor, power being put at the wheels is lower, with the first gear ratio being about 9.3:1 and the second about 6:1. Since actual power has a direct, linear relationship to the gear ratios, that means that 412 HP at 6:1 gear ratio is still less power applied to the wheels than 300 HP at a 9.3:1 ratio.
What you said, however, is true if we are talking about unconverted power to the wheels . Since we were talking about this in relation to the engine’s power, not BHP, it does not apply.
Please, don’t confuse your terms. The chart you are providing does not depict power at the given gear in relation to rpm, it depicts the acceleration, which (assuming the constant mass, and the lack of losses such as aerodynamic drag, your chart does not provide the latter) is proportional to the torque at wheels, not the power at wheels. Torque gets converted by gearbox, power does not (it can only get lost as heat). The formula I mentioned still applies - You can see the power at wheels chart, when you go to test track screen in Automation (after loading a car), and go to the power tab. It’s not perfect for demonstration, as it only shows the power in optimal gear, but it can show how the optimum shift rpm value is when the power at the current gear and the power at the next gear are the same (given constant car’s speed), and how having the redline too early can change that.
