i think this game has to give a step improve as soon as we have come to year 2013. A new technology, or something like that. have you thought about that?
I found this article about the 6.36 engine of maserati in internet, and i think this improvement can to be an example.
Really, it isn´t a new technology, because it´s from 80´s decade. But there isn´t an standarized tech today, i think there are only a few hondas with 6 valves/cyl. how i have read in another article.
In game, it can be aplied to v6 and v8, for example…
P.D. And talking about future and finishing year… i think the game will be ¨short¨ when we arrive to our days… are only seven years… i think it has to be a little more long, perhaps to 2025 or 2030.
I agree with this , but i think its going to fall into the “were going to add it at a later date” killrobs already mentioned that there maybe an expansion at some point to extend the finish date on the time line assuming the game all goes to plan.
I’m pretty sure its only ever been done by Maserati and it turned out not really to be worth it. Even most manufacturers who used to do 5v engines have come to the conclusion that its not worth it (Ferrari, Toyota, VW etc.)
It would be a fun addition (post game launch, of course) to have an ‘experimental engines’ pack with some oddball and theoretical engine layouts… oval cylinders, jet turbines… plenty of nonsense that the player could attempt to market and sell.
I have to say… that is a very attractive looking design. From what I’ve seen, an extra set of valves usually gives a motor an extra 5-20 ft-lbs of torque due to better flow and larger total valve area, all other factors staying constant. It’s also a fairly straight forward design… either another cam shaft, or just more rocker arms.
I find it interesting that manufacturers chose variable valve timing systems over more valves; which gives a similar result. It seems more complicated and expensive to me, but I guess I’m wrong… or it’s just the fuel economy craze. Though it does supposedly optimize the motor to run more efficently at any given speed range… that may be the main reason.
A smaller turbo spools up faster, yes? So why not have three small ones that spool up really fast rather than one gigantic one which doesn’t spool up very fast, yet will flow just as much air as three smaler ones put together?
More turbo = better, the only downside is that there is less exhaust going into the turbos themselves, thus decreasing the flow per turbo, (but the same flow overall) and the more restrictive intake and exhaust routing. Which doesn’t reeeeally matter in a low-revving diesel, for example.