Wow, that’s amazing TheBobWiley! Really well done on the tuning there, getting that body down so much in time to be competitive 
The best I managed was around 2:42 on the ATT. Also, that power curve is indeed a masterpiece!
I don’t find it discouraging, but maybe because it’s my first competition and I haven’t seen all the cars breeze past me yet 
But I do agree, I find it really funny how I spend 45 minutes trying to get .5 of a second off my time whilst others are doing 9:25’s on the Green Hell and sub 2:40 on the test track.
I agree that it can be severely discouraging for people to put in a huge amount of effort, thinking that they nailed it with 2:42 on the test track and then finding out that other people are showing off claiming to get sub 2:40s on the same track.
However, I also think that this is part of the game called racing. For me I’m happy to get a good show with the car I’m entering with, which I consider finishing top 10. Of course, everyone who tries to participate wants to win, but don’t forget that it is more about the journey and experience getting there.
I agree with BobWiley that you actually do get better at these challenges when you actually try, and to be honest eventhough I can be dissapointed by the feeling of not being there yet when people post faster times I’m also more eager to give it another try as I know that if they done it, it should be possible. I have learned a lot by doing these competitions, a great deal more than just playing by myself. Before I didn’t even consider making the powerband as wide as possible, as I thought that cutting off the engine when it reaches peak power is best. Now I know better thanks to these competitions and experimenting. Yesterday I found new ways that improve performance, so every time (eventhough it can take hours to find the small things that can make a difference) I still improve.
Somebody earlier said that there is, given the restrictions, a fairly singular approach that is best for the challenge… Or, well, I might have paraphrased that incorrectly, because its both true and untrue. A lot of different approaches will work… But having now built multiple sub 2:42 bodies, I can tell you all good solutions lie on a spectrum of the same principles.
Basically, as bob’s power curve shows, you need to match your engine torque profile to your car’s weight. That’s number one. Number two is getting the handling just right, and there’s a pretty quick method for that which others have seen elsewhere.
I’m fairly confident that my sprite build is close to as fast as you can get on a single lap around AT (but also GH, its cornering is simply phenomenal). But it’s slightly slower in midrange acceleration than its heavier competitors, so whether it’s the best for an actual race is very debatable. I’m going to see what tyre wear and drivability is in these trials and then review.
Care to explain more concerning the amount of torque for a car, which would fit better and where to find instructions to the “quick” method? I’m getting quicker myself as I now know much more how to tune, but knowing of a more systematical way would be better.
Also I agree that good fast lap times are not everything. For one, the race is except for the start only flying laps, also tire wear will affect some races a lot, as you could see the the recent 1945 BRC Races. Furthermore, reliability can have huge impacts on your race. I had a more unreliable engine for 1945 and I regret it, as I sometimes lost a huge amount of time that way and was effectively out of the top 5 because of that.
I don’t want to ruin it for everybody, but I’ll just say this: the more weight over the driving wheels there is, the more torque the wheels can take. But how do we increase torque when high end Max power is limited…?
Thanks for the info. I know enough, going to test it later today. Though it is somewhat into the the torque doesn’t matter discussion (though sometimes it does).
Well I’ve been at my car for ages! I’ve changed EVERYTHING so many times to get it just right. Now I’m pretty happy to say I’ve knocked off a massive four seconds off my time around the Automation track. Off which time, you ask? Well that’s my secret haha
The moral is if your one of the companies who is withdrawing from competition because your car doesn’t seem as fast as the rest, KEEP AT IT! There is always something to change and from the experience I’ve just had, it’s in places you’d lest expect. Chase down those fractions of a second and celebrate each one because they add up!
Also what’s great about this particular competition is you don’t really know what’s going to happen. Between now and when that chequered flag falls… anything can happen!
@ tycondero
Well, actually, that discussion revealed that torque doesn’t matter if it’s offset by less HP (to oversimplify it I think of it as an area under curve thing, which is kind of the way the game calculates PI). But if HP is the same… That changes a bit!
Damn guys, stop waffling on about torque 
you should know better by now that “torque” doesn’t matter at all. Power at the wheels does. The power curve is what is important, a wide power band is easier to achieve with a heavier, higher-capacity, lower-revving engine. The extra weight does lead to worse cornering though. So it can be said that you want to get as high a performance index as possible for a given maximum power. That is what performance index was made for in the first place!
Sorry Killrob, that’s my laymans (mis)nomenclature for you Basically what he said ^
My car in the 1945 BRC I used the exhaust to choke down the engine so I could widen the power band and still be under the power to weight ratio. I’m not sure how much it helped as far as my times.
Coincidentally, I just tested this.
The problem is that the car’s fairly excessively heavy, so it suffers somewhat in terms of cornering, and also, fuel consumption and tyre wear. It’ll possibly help you a bit on Monza, though if we ever raced on something like Green Hell it will definitely not like the corners!
Yeah, my car doesn’t like the corners as much as was witnessed in one of the races.
Its part of the ballancing act in getting the best times.
I’m obviously keen to know what the balance of the tracks are. Brands Hatch is known to have some technical corners especially with all the elevation changes, and corner speeds are a little lower than average. But Monza has a lot of freaking huge high speed sections but a couple of rather low speed corners too, which is why my peaky little torqueless racer surprisingly didn’t go too far behind my rather healthier but slightly heavier car. There seems to be a bit of a sweet spot when it comes to balancing power:weight:drag, and it’s a matter of finding it.
Otherwise known as black magic and voodo. 
Otherwise known as black magic and voodo. [/quote]
is known as non sprite with mini v8
!
anyone else using a ‘large’ four?
Starting to get really pissed at the bugs with saving in Automation. Just lost 4 hours worth of work on an I6 trim I am trying out…
I have used a 2L 4 cylinder in both the '45 and the '55 race but it depends on what you call “large”. I consider a 2L as a mid sized engine (2.4 is large and 1.5 is small) but I consider petrol 4’s over 2.5 to be extreme! 