Why does front longitudinal increase comfort compared to front transverse? It doesn’t decrease interior space at all, and the comfort base increases a few points, for unknown reasons.
Why does high throttle response hurt drivability and comfort? In real life, cars usually offer the option to change throttle mapping, so you can have a less sharp response when you want to. The way it is currently unnecessarily penalizes direct injection.
Longitudinal vs. Transverse, that could be balancing against torque steer, which is not very comforting when experienced.
As for throttle response… Not sure.
@PottoGadd That’s what he said, front transverse vs front longitudinal, or FR vs FF, obviously only FF cars experiment torque steer.
About throttle response, when I drive my girlfriend’s car, I suffer from a condition that I call heavy right foot, so my girlfriend always complains I accelerate and brake to hard (but I think that’s all in her mind). And that’s similar to what happen with high responsive cars, we petrolheads get excited but mundane people just don’t appreciate it (and we are still a minority).
Yes, it penalize a lot modern engines, but we have a lot of driver assists to counter weight that.
Maybe a good idea will be that the stats thresholds change over the years, in a post killrob IIRC said that 15 is the best number of throttle response, and that is good in the old carburetor days, maybe it should go higher as you progress in the game, so by 2016 the norm would be 40 in throttle response.
Good design can mitigate torque steer. That’s why often you’ll see one of the CV shafts will be a two piece design. My Taurus is the SHO version which has a fair bit of pickup to it. But even under hard acceleration I haven’t noticed any torque steer.
SAAB 9000 had equal length driveshafts, just to minimalize torque steer.
Makes for easier spareparts as well. 
My best guess is that front longitudinal adds weight, which generally helps comfort due to better damping. But the fact that the driveshaft doesn’t reduce interior space is inaccurate, in my opinion.
It doesn’t penalize modern engines in general, only direct injection engines. Basically, all else being equal, a MPFI engine will be more drivable and comfortable than a DI engine, which seems off to me. Yeah, a sharp response isn’t always better, but my point is that modern engines can change throttle mapping so you don’t get a sharp response when you don’t want it.
Just tested the comfort thing, make sure the comfort increase isn’t caused by the rear suspension switching types by itself.
If you have Torsion beam rear selected for the FWD car, switching to RWD will select double wishbones, and if you have double wishbones for the FWD car, it will switch to multi-link for the RWD car. In both cases that would cause a decent increase in comfort just because of the suspension type.
If I make sure I have DW all the time I get pretty much no difference.
Still, I do think that transverse FWD should get a minor interior space bonus compared to the other layouts.
But the wheel houses take up much of the space for the front seats in a transverse FWD car.
And you still have a rather large tunnel running the length of the floor.
20-30cm wide and 15-20cm high is most common.
They do? I was under the impression that most mass-produced cars followed a “you get what you get”. I mean my Civic has an “eco” button that does remap the response, and other cars have a “power” button that amplifies it, but I didn’t think that was the norm.
Well, even if the customer doesn’t have to option to change throttle mapping, the manufacturer should. Like if I want to make an engine for a econobox there’s no need for a sharp response, so it’d be nice to be able to ‘detune’ throttle response to optimize for drivability and comfort.
Oh yes I see. Aside from the anaemic low end of the i-VTEC, Honda seems to do this. I find some companies similarly seem to ramp up the throttle response to pretend they’re sportier than they are (I’m looking at you, budget Holden models).
I assume this is something unique to drive-by-wire and ECU tech, so would only be available past a certain year. Where would you put such a thing on the interface, if at all? It wouldn’t make sense to make the car then have a range of comfort levels…
Hmm, well I’m not exactly sure how this could be implemented, but the simple solution would be reduce or remove the effect of throttle response for direct injection in drivability and comfort. Say, all DI engines have a ‘hidden’ throttle response of 25 for those categories. The current drivability penalty for switching from MPFI to DI is around 5%, which doesn’t sound like much but is actually pretty significant when you consider how heavily drivability is scored. Frankly, I don’t think this really makes sense; DI already has a hefty cost and it isn’t necessary to penalize it further.
Indeed that doesn’t make much sense. For modern fuel injected, ECU controlled engines the drivability factor should always be set to the maximum. I will put that up on the ToDo list for the next rebalancing.
caution, translated by google !!
So, I have a toyota yaris (sometimes called toyota vitz) with drive by wire. the accelerator is completely synthetic. First I want to mention that the car is nice to drive. not just in athletes but as everyday dare he Like me.
targets for the car:
good for the typical housewife
low consumption and
low emissions
solution for the housewife:
the minimum of gas that can be given, the motor rotates at 1100 - revolutions 1200th so he turns up at once, even with little gas to less quickly choke off when you drive off.
disadvantage:
when congestion or where one can engaged gear the first when
maneuvering, you can not give something gentle gas that leads to jerk
away.
low consumption:
to reduce short changes to the gas setting (for example on uneven
flooring), he tries to ignore such vibration-like movements on pedal. only the method for this is poorly resolved. it reacts easily delayed. although the motor is extremely manoeuvrable, it reacts disastrously to dictate. in everyday life realize that not even necessarily. more than the fact that you can go from gas shortly before inserting the next higher gear or even should. otherwise he is still short in the disconnected state gas which sounds quite ugly.
it is even so that you can very briefly fully stand on the pedal,
which is more like a short kick, and the motor responds not because it
is assumed to be unwanted detail.
but he wants to work in no case to be weak. So for the immediate gas for the housewife, first nothing happens. then on a very small area of the accelerator pedal, an estimated 80% of the power can be regulated. there
you drive normally and there we registered noticeable changes in engine
power at the accelerator in small corrections, one has the feeling that
there are still hidden huge power reserves. it effectively helps so only enough gas to give you during acceleration, which improves the usage.
then very little happened. until the pedal touches the ground. he is still the last reserve dates.
The pedal reaction improved rotations at about 3700th he as no longer emanates from everyday driving. he also ceases to pay attention to the consumption and putting some dates more power. feels like an old v-tec although it can regulate continuously.
all these measures help but very to improve the consumption and the driver, who is not familiar with an optimal driving fashion.
you go ahead and little traffic, brings you the consumption down very far. agree the conditions, I come to 3.6 to 4.2 L / 100km. in everyday life, with highway and without stress, I am with
5 to 5.5 L / 100km. air conditioning, loading and a high share of highway, brings the consumption to 6.2 L / 100km.
This is fantastic! This would actually solve another problem I have with engine drivability, that the torque curve seen in modern turbo engines (sharp rise, wide and flat peak, then dropping off) gets terrible drivability in-game. I get much better drivability with weird-looking torque curves that rise and fall all over the place (but not sharply). I would definitely appreciate it if we can build realistic turbo engines without getting like -8% drivability!
Also, any word on the transverse vs longitudinal comfort issue?
I put the comfort issue on the list too. Anything with a driveshaft under the passenger cabin should have a little penalty to cabin space.
This is in fact something that affected @Madrias’s CSR17 entry. I retuned it to give a flat torque curve lost drivability, most likely due to the sharper rise in torque when the turbo spools (something that can be mitigated in modern turbo). But the turbo revamp itself is coming later.
Sounds very much like the Civic throttle mapping. The pedal feels so dead for the first two thirds of travel with Eco mode on.
A ECU slider to sharp or smooth out the torque curve ?
But I wonder how could we implant different “mode” for one car.