Here is my engine and car. I’m not expecting to be in the top 10% but am hoping to have done decently.
Its at least a relatively efficient design.
Sadly I am not at home I am at college and this laptop does not have automation BUT I do have the files since the PM was sent via the chat PM. But I am only going to post that if others do.
As far as my cars. The engines are very cheap and only use iron for the lower and upper end of both cars. Makes for a heavy engine but it was well within the cost and manhour limits required for the contest. The BRC 1100 engine produces 498HP and has a usable power range of around 3k or 4k of RPM with a redline of around 10,500 RPM. My S1000 car has around 148HP with a similar powerband range and a redline of just over 11,000 RPM.
Both cars are made using the absolute lightest materials possible as a result I just started adding adding safety gear and so on to both of the cars to reach the weight limit. So my drivers are some of the safest in the contest. The S1000 car ended up so light that I had to add a hand crafted interior, premium safety, a standard entertainment system, and halfway up the sound proofing just to get it to the weight limit (even using engines 20% to 30% heavier then anyone else). So yea… a 200kph, 0-100 in 5.7 seconds, and 1.25g at 89kph luxury sitting room. Comfy 
The engine for our Super 1000 class entries ended up to be quite heavy, as did the platform, so I couldn’t get my team’s models down to anywhere below 900+kg… 
I opted to go with a very torque-y V8 with a flat powerband, just to hopefully make good use of the V8 power, whilst keeping some driveability.
Seems like some really interesting concepts everywhere.
Some interesting engines in here…
This is a prototype V8 I tested for my BRC 1100 car… Despite looking decent on paper, It just couldn’t match the I4 I posted above. It was like 9 seconds slower on some of the test tracks I tested my cars on.
Looking at it now, I think the main problem is despite having a higher redline and better top end power curve, the torque drops off too quickly and this might be causing slower acceleration at high speeds. In comparison my Inline 4 has a rather flat torque curve from mid-high RPM.
EDIT: Lol, I just realized it has 450, not 550HP… no wonder it was so slow… Hmm, I must have done something wrong in the design to get such weak power.
Very interesting engines indeed - I’ll be very interested to see how the turbo 6 or turbo 8 engines compare on the track. My contribution, focusing on drivability. This appeared to give the best times overall on a variety of slow and fast circuits. This is the engine I submitted however because of too many revisions to go through I was meant to submit another inline 6 with higher power and a similar powerband - I’ll organise my filenames better next time.
Here’s my entry
sorry for the size but I can’t take screenshots of automation in fullscreen mode for some reason.
[quote=“esseresse”][attachment=0]Screenshot (9).png[/attachment]
Here’s my entry
sorry for the size but I can’t take screenshots of automation in fullscreen mode for some reason.[/quote]
How does your car have twice my cars tameness but corner slower?
[quote=“GenJeFT”]
[quote=“esseresse”][attachment=0]Screenshot (9).png[/attachment]
Here’s my entry
sorry for the size but I can’t take screenshots of automation in fullscreen mode for some reason.[/quote]
How does your car have twice my cars tameness but corner slower?[/quote]
I don’t know. I just kept changing things till i found the max corning Gs i could get 
Definitely not the most powerful engine out there, but we’ll see how it does. N/A 3.0L I6 for BRC 1100.
This one was a lot tougher for me. Super 1000 is an I4. Hopefully it isn’t dead last at least. haha
[quote=“esseresse”]
How does your car have twice my cars tameness but corner slower?
I don’t know. I just kept changing things till i found the max corning Gs i could get 
[/quote]
My car could turn at 1.25gs at 55.3mph compared to your cars 1.16g at 53mph. My car is significantly faster then yours in the corners and got a tameness rating of 20 while you got 47. Maybe there is something about those numbers I am missing.
Granted, my cars engine nearly rips the tires free of the pavement in 3rd gear.
Strangely both my 1100 car and my 1000 car have the same EXACT turning performance.
Post an image of the tameness page, the details should be there. Also did you pick a front, rear, or all wheel drive?
Tameness is not all about how fast it is cornering, that’s just one base value. It’s also about how it is cornering (understeer is more tame than oversteer). But probably the biggest difference in tameness comes from an engine with massive turbo lag compared to an NA engine.
hi, this is my car , engine and track time of ‘through the hills’ 
my engine output is not too good , i saw some is 600+hp, and my engine turbo lag is too much,
i will make it better next time.
@ doom_ho : Thanks man, you have confirmed my suspicions… Bottom of the field is in bag haha
My car is overweight and underpowered, at least its cheap and the tameness + sportiness was bang on (dunno what that actually means but it something eh)
Well I know I wont be anywhere near the top or even the middle but I will certainly help you guys cover the bottom places! (This all assumes that it passed inspection…) I just would not want this as my daily driver, dont think the engine will last too long 
Oh and it has suicide doors so a crash would be interesting.
I don’t have the game here (its on my computer at home, not my college laptop in my college room). I do have the car file and I could send that to you.
Also its all wheel drive. I don’t think it would be possible to get the power to the ground any other way.
Send it to me and Ill take a look, but my understanding of tameness is how easy/hard is it to control your car. Higher means easier to control, possibly more forgiving.
and as i understand, higher tameness/sportiness ratio is needed for bumpy & curvy tracks, where flat and fast tracks are more forgiving?
Speed does not matter (I just made the faster tracks less bumpy), but you are right with the tameness/sportiness ratio. The smaller this ratio is, the more of your acceleration, braking and cornering potential you loose on the current (more or less bumpy) track section.