Top 10 finish for the Penonez, so proud. 
My first points in ATCC!
Exactly in the middle of the pack, not bad at all for my first turbo competition car, in a track with more high-speed corners it would place a lot better though
FIY TrackPadUser also is using a turbo l6, and Mer_At told me that he regrets going for a V8, as a inline 6 would be faster and cheaper. If you are talking about the 60cc deficit, Iâm pretty sure that doesnât matter at all.
As I had told before, the overall level of the inscriptions this time is a lot better. The difference between 3rd and the middle of the pack is smaller than ever.
More high-speed corners than Suzuka? I donât think there are many tracks, other than Silverstone, that will fit the bill.
[quote=âLeonardo9613â]
FIY TrackPadUser also is using a turbo l6, and Mer_At told me that he regrets going for a V8, as a inline 6 would be faster and cheaper. If you are talking about the 60cc deficit, Iâm pretty sure that doesnât matter at all.[/quote]
Nope, not talking about any of those things! Iâll clarify:
Itâs true that when I was doing 5 minute experiments with V8s, they did turn out less balanced and there was very little role for them outside the fastest tracks, of which most of them donât feature in this tournament. As Iâm learning, i6es are often a superior choice.
But the reason I was limited by power wasnât the i6, it was the fact I used iron block and aluminium heads (replicating the original RB20DET engine), meaning I had to sink a few hundred more dollars into the block for reliability over performance. If I switched it to cast iron, I gain 5 reliability points, free up a couple hundred rpm, some more turbo power, about 15kg I can shave off elsewhere, and of course, with all of that, several hundred dollars in the budget. A quick test of this gains me 20hp and several tenths in the faster tracks (but I imagine at the cost of time on the slower tracks).
Main reason to run a V8 is if you have size issues. Built a quick 450hp 3.5L I6 and it doesnât fit longitudinally in quite a lot of bodies, while the V8 fits in everything.
Even my 2L turbo I6 has issues fitting in some cars like the not-MR2, the '65 compact and the smaller '40 body.
@Leo.
Since you probably wonât have the cards for every car, do you plan on having a table instead, that lists all the cars, their drive-train configuration and the body used?
I also wonder if anyone is using an I4, or the carbon fiber chassis.
[quote=âtrackpaduserâ]
@Leo.
Since you probably wonât have the cards for every car, do you plan on having a table instead, that lists all the cars, their drive-train configuration and the body used?
I also wonder if anyone is using an I4, or the carbon fiber chassis.[/quote]
Iâm not using an I4 but I did a quick test to see what I could do with an I4 engine (my car uses an I6) since you brought it up.
I was able to easily get an I4 NA engine to about 430HP using quality sliders and I was tweaking it to see if I could do more when a skyp notification popped up and caused automation to minimize which crashed it (that really needs to be fixed). So a I4 in a small car âmightâ be viable. The game crashed before I could put it into my car and run comparisons and I dont have time to rebuild the engine and do it again at the moment.
With some tweaking I might be able to get it up to 440HP or 450HP which is close to my I6 and its 466HP. Problem is the I4 is an incredibly rough running engine, but I dont know if engine roughness makes a difference.
Wow, 6 places up in Suzuka and even a glimmer of a chance to score a point on one of the other fast tracks. Thatâs a very pleasant result.
Iâm wondering about I4 as well. Smaller than I6 but as NA with 3,5 a bit large. Roughness should be more a matter of comfort but it might have an effect on the responsiveness rating with requiring a larger flywheel.
[quote=âtrackpaduserâ]Main reason to run a V8 is if you have size issues. Built a quick 450hp 3.5L I6 and it doesnât fit longitudinally in quite a lot of bodies, while the V8 fits in everything.
Even my 2L turbo I6 has issues fitting in some cars like the not-MR2, the '65 compact and the smaller '40 body.
@Leo.
Since you probably wonât have the cards for every car, do you plan on having a table instead, that lists all the cars, their drive-train configuration and the body used?
I also wonder if anyone is using an I4, or the carbon fiber chassis.[/quote]
My Rigel 4RE does run an I4 Turbo,520hp, but no carbon here, i donât think thatâs a viable option with that budget
Just outside of the top 10 for my first race, thatâs a very pleasing result. I only had around 490 horsepower and was over 100 kg on the weight limit, so Iâm glad all the time I spent on the aero and suspension didnât go completely to waste.
hahaâŚdead last⌠not bad for a first attempt i guess⌠who am i kidding? it sucks :\
Donât beat yourself up. It takes a while to figure out how all the variables fit together. Automation is a pretty complex game and the vast majority of entrants in this tournament are not first timers, and many of us have been playing for months if not years 
Also if you like some of us are always happy to look at models and provide pointers.
[quote=âstropâ]Donât beat yourself up. It takes a while to figure out how all the variables fit together. Automation is a pretty complex game and the vast majority of entrants in this tournament are not first timers, and many of us have been playing for months if not years
Also if you like some of us are always happy to look at models and provide pointers.[/quote]
I could make the power no problemâŚFinding the balance was the major issue. I designed about 3 different cars but only that one fit within the specs⌠I guess it will just take some more practise, i.e. trial and error, but tips are always welcomed 
I, for one, could give you a few pointers if you passed me your .lua file (in the documents/automation/models folder) via PM.
Awesome
[quote=âdoncornaldieâ]
[quote=âstropâ]Donât beat yourself up. It takes a while to figure out how all the variables fit together. Automation is a pretty complex game and the vast majority of entrants in this tournament are not first timers, and many of us have been playing for months if not years
Also if you like some of us are always happy to look at models and provide pointers.[/quote]
I could make the power no problemâŚFinding the balance was the major issue. I designed about 3 different cars but only that one fit within the specs⌠I guess it will just take some more practise, i.e. trial and error, but tips are always welcomed [/quote]
I have been playing for 3 months and more often the not I end up in the bottom middle-ish of the pack. Its all about the fun and the process man!
Yay. Like the outcome so far.
[quote=ânp1993â]
I could make the power no problemâŚFinding the balance was the major issue. I designed about 3 different cars but only that one fit within the specs⌠I guess it will just take some more practise, i.e. trial and error, but tips are always welcomed 
I have been playing for 3 months and more often the not I end up in the bottom middle-ish of the pack. Its all about the fun and the process man![/quote]
Thatâs true but being competitive is more fun, and sparks creativity and progression 
If you want to see âprogressionâ⌠HighOctaneLove used to be the guy who was always dead last. Heâs gotten a lot better, even if his designs started out being completely non-competitive.
Also bear in mind that this particular championship is INSANELY competitive. Like, to the point where my personal goal this time around is to get a point. One point. SOMEWHERE in the championship.
[quote=âVicVictoryâ]If you want to see âprogressionâ⌠HighOctaneLove used to be the guy who was always dead last. Heâs gotten a lot better, even if his designs started out being completely non-competitive.
Also bear in mind that this particular championship is INSANELY competitive. Like, to the point where my personal goal this time around is to get a point. One point. SOMEWHERE in the championship.[/quote]
And thatâs why I wonât stop trying 