[quote=“strop”]What in god’s name did you do to the car to develop 701hp? super expensive high boost turbo?
EDIT: judging by my experience back in my day of dial-up, I’m guessing yes![/quote]
Pretty much.
It’s a flatplane cast iron V8, with the turbo close to its max size, +13 quality to the head and +12 to the turbo.
Had to lower the quality of a few parts and use cheaper materials for the body, but the whole car is under the 20K limit and weights about 1025kg.
The engine is worth over 14k just by itself.
KAX’s S0 has been official approved for ATCC’s second season, here are some pictures for your beautiful eyes on my creation. I wish you all good luck out there folks!
Seishido Motors proudly presents the EGT Rigel 4RE ATCC, a true monster in disguise, wearing on the stock steel chassis a polymer clone of the stock body, almost identical if it wasn’t for the extra air intakes and double rear wing, remember when i told you i wouldn’t go over 450hp or my tameness would drop too much… well… now we improved the engine and suspension settings so much it’s got a slightly higher tameness… and 520hp! This killer machine leaps from 0 to 100 in just 3.2 seconds, got tons of grip and goes all the way to 271km/h, we cut over 5 seconds at Automation Test Track compared to the previous 480hp prototype, admire it’s sleek body and awesome pop-up headlights here
I need to find some tutorials or something, I spent a lot of time on my engine and just barely passed 400hp…
Do these high-power engines have decent power over a range of a few thousand rpm, or does the power graph tend to be more of a sharp peak?
It also depends on how much money you sink into the engine.
I can tell you that a turbo engine worth about 10-12k may have up to 480hp and launch in the power band, with boost kicking in halfway to the rev range (hence my good 0-100 time).
I also built a 520hp NA engine (more expensive injection and valve train, but no turbo offsets cost), and NA engines tend to have a steadily increasing power until the peak, with, depending on can profile, a concavity in the curve and a sharper peak if cam profile is high.
EDIT: oops, hit submit too soon. I also built the 700hp turbo trackpaduser mentioned, that one doesn’t finish spooling until about 7000rpm so much lag!
A 2 door old school coupé, form the saloon version. With a powerfull 3.5 V8 32Valves mechanic injected, with about 440hp @ 7900 rpm and 410Nm @ 7500. The car is very light, just a tonne, because of the polymer-made body.
The VR 350 V8 ATCC version. Not sure about his circuit performance hehe just for fun.
Yeah. Turbo will usually end up more peaky than NA, usually making turbocharged cars faster on fast tracks, but with a penalty to tameness, meaning slower on bumpy tracks.
As for turbo tuning, you don’t want it to be too peaky. Turbos have what I call a ‘‘useable powerband’’, which is fairly easy to see on the power graphs.
On this one for example, we can see that the useable powerband starts at ~7K RPM and ends at ~10K RPM.
This causes a big issue with the gearing, as you want to stay out of that zone, in our case it means short gearing, so you can’t use your power where it’s useful (high speeds).
In this case, just making the turbo slightly smaller, widening the powerband by 1.5K RPM at the expense of 50 horses results in a 7 second gain on the automation test track, which is huge.
There are NA cars with more than 500 hp on this challenge, the recipe to them is very straight forward.
Use a very short stroke and good bottom end parts, then use DOHC 5v and cam profile set to max, the key thing here is to give a lot of quality, therefore valve float, and the drop in power it causes, will happen later. Once you add the possibility of revving higher and a good exhaust, you should be good to at least 470 hp.
Interesting discussion and yes, Leo is right. What I have to figure out now is how to close the gap in tameness for turbo engines without sacrificing too much power. Drag penalty for added cooling on the car still remains after all. On the other hand my best efforts to squeeze the last bit of power out are so far still short by roughly 40 from that mentioned 701 hp, although I don’t know if that engine is more expensive still, so I might try to reach the top, and clever use of quality and funds available, before starting to try to refine the results. Though, all could be so much more easy* if we wouldn’t be forced to use same size turbos even on engines that come biturbo by default.
*For a given value of easy. It would mean 3 more sliders for the second turbo after all and a chance to draw a camels back by boost curve.
Do you know the problem with having a fixed turbo?
Tests.
I would have to spend (even more) time balancing the requirements and how the championship would work. Besides, it would limit the possibilities of the championship, restricting creative approaches and increasing development, with no fun bonus. And the worst thing would be the complaints, they would say that it isn’t big enough or that it is too large, etc, etc.
I based these rules on group A’s original set of rules, but turbo restriction or cooling limits weren’t considered for long.
Part of me is a bit…anxious, even though I’m trying to just simply not be too caught up on one end.
I suppose since this is my first actual entry (sure I’ve tried with engines but not this), that’s one reason, but I suppose since my entry only has just over 450bhp.
I put emphasis on a chassis over an engine, in spite of how reality and expereince suggest that I need to be absolutely on spot in both areas. But I guess we’ll see.
I didn’t go the turbo route initially because apart from what headaches I went through, I didn’t find what I got to be all that ‘useful’ but then again this is speaking more as a (virtual) driver than an engineer. I like a broad power range and low end torque so if say I were to exit a corner in a higher gear than what’s expected, I’m not in as much trouble compared to if the engine in my car, was set more for higher end power.
Then again, apart from how it’s been pointed out to death that the turbos in this game aren’t quite ‘modern’ even if you go up to modern day build years, I likely still suck hard at putting together turbo motors with an ideal power curve (and can run fuel between regular and super unleaded). This is just me rambling though.
One more question…anyone here even bother running catalytic converters? one may say it’s pointless but I partially blame the ‘eco’ mentality in me, but also given my entry represents my car company, and these are meant to have some relation to some road cars in time, I figured I’d both ‘practice what I preach’ and this can be a useful experience for future race cars, even if it means a power disatvantage.
super expensive high boost turbo? 
)
.
