Camshaft (custom lift, duration, lifter type)

General Chat Suggestions
1

Hello guys and gals,

I’ve noticed there have been a few threads regarding this topic, and devs have shot it down each and everytime – simply stating that its unnecessary and probably too difficult for the average user. Here’s my response to that:

I, along with many others that I’ve chatted with, believe that is actually NECESSARY… rather than unnecessary. A scale of 1-100 is likely adding equal duration to both the intake and exhaust side, as well as lift at a proportional rate. This is simple, and appears to work well for most users. However, a large % of us are not just ‘average’ joes when it comes to engine building. We are detail oriented, and extremely specific when we build engines in real life.

Here are a few ideas I have, along with a rebuttal to the dev response that it would be too difficult for the average user.

1)A simple on/off switch would toggle the Camshaft Dashboard.
-When switched to off, you’d get a single slider… 1-100. Nothing would change.
-When switched to on, you’d open up a few grayed-out sliders: Intake/Exhaust Durations, Lift, and Lifter type (Hydraulic, Solid, and Hydraulic/Solid Rollers)

2)While its likely ‘more advanced’ than many users need… I would venture to guess that for every 1 person who understands how to properly set up a Twin Turbo system, there’s 10 that know how to pick a camshaft! I respect your opinion on this topic, but it flies in the face of your inclusion of detailed Turbo specs that include Compressor Size, Turbine Size, Area & Radius Ratios, along with Wastegate/Max Boost settings. You then couple all those detailed specs with the following questions, “Do I need a single or twin turbo system?”, “What size intercooler?” “Should I go with a ball bearing setup?” … And suddenly, the guy that couldn’t pick a proper camshaft – is expected to be John Hennessy or John Lingenfelter (perhaps the worlds best Turbo Guys). I could go further and point out that suspension settings follow this same logic. There’s multiple sliders, settings, and menus to tweak the handling characteristics and ride comfort. Again, for every 1 person that knows how to dial in and properly balance both front and rear suspensions. Are we really to believe that those who cant select a good duration and lift, can effectively adjust both front and rear camber, spring rates, dampers, sway bars, ride hide… and couple it with a 3 panel shock/spring setup?

3)The difference between a hydraulic flat tappet cam and a solid roller are like night and day. If each had 300 degrees of advertised duration… there would be a difference of between 20-40 degrees duration @ .050". Redline RPM on the average mid-level performance flat tappet hydraulic lifter would be limited to 6000rpm +/- 500rpm because of valve float. The solid roller, on the other hand, would have its redline limited only by engine durability and the specs of the cam at hand.

4)Devs have pointed out, and fairly accurately, that duration increases with lift, and vice versa. However, this is only the case for those with limited experience in cam selection. Many novice builders will simply just add a cam with 10-15% more duration and lift, and call it a day. However, Theres plenty more options other than simply increases both at proportional rates. Those of us who pay close attention know the following:
----A)The Cam is the heart of the engine. We must pay close attention to it in order to properly manipulate the torque curve.
----B)Simply increasing cam size will do nothing, and can actually hurt the overall power if the specs don’t match the rest of the build. For instance, If I take a low compression 1960 283 2bbl, single exhaust, and give it 50 more degrees duration @.050", and .650" lift . I will have essentially detuned the engine in the process. Furthermore, using another and much more radical example, I’d like to highlight what Lobe Seperation Angles can accomplish. Taking that same 283 from above, and grinding a custom cam that matches the stock duration and lift, we can gain a number of things simply by changing WHEN the valve opens and closes. Increasing LSA will make the engine more peaky, while decreasing it to the 102-106 range will cause much more overlap and make, both, the sound change to a loping rumble and broaden the power band. Keeping the same advertise duration as a stock cam, and switching over to a roller lifter profile will make the 283 come alive (well, it wouldn’t be a beast… but it would def wake it up a bit).
----C)Cams are also important in regards to induction systems. Turbo engines rely on the benefits that come with a dual pattern cam. Because air/fuel is literally being forced into the cylinders, a duration/lift increase isn’t as important on the front (intake) end… as it is the back (exhaust) side. In turbo situations, we need a longer exhaust pattern (usually 8-12 degrees) as well as a bit more lift to help evacuate all the spent/burnt fuel.

The last thing I’ll say is this…

I can’t express enough how much Ive enjoyed this simulator. Its been a lifesaver for me… for real. I’ve been thrown some major curveballs lately, and this game has been my refuge. The amount of time you all have put into this game, the quality , and the improvements has been amazing to watch in real time.

Whatever you decide on this topic, I’m fine with. But I thought I’d offer another angle of approach in making the case for the changes Ive suggested. The other topics I found on this subject were pretty narrow in their reasoning, and left alot of information out that would help bolster the case for the cam tweaks.

I urge you, before you come to a firm decision regarding this suggestion, re-read what I’ve written and solicit others advice and opinions.

I trust that the decision you come to will be the right one and it won’t influence me one way or another in my opinion of this game, nor my recommendation of it to others!

Thanks for hearing me out. God bless you guys, and happy tycooning!

Sincerely,

Mr. Anderson
Hyperformance Innovations
(CEO/CFO/CIO/COO/Owner/Operator/Founder/President/Chairman/Engineer/Legal Counsel/Test Driver)

5 Likes
2

The issue is, with this, you’re asking for a lot more time to be poured into a section of the game that by far has the most development time. Right now there are other aspects that urgently need attention if they’re going to maintain relevance (For example the still-locked-off campaign). As a selling point tycoon games need to balance the difficulty and complexity with ease of access, and right now I feel automation is slap bang in the middle.

Maybe once 1.0 is out of the door adding an “advanced mode” as I’d coin it would be an option, as by then the mass market will be 100% on board with the complete game. It’d open the doors for both more money for development and more time for said development as the no. of people sticking to the game for the long term increases. For now, splitting development time and resources effectively is a must for this early access project. Whilst I feel there might be room for complexity in my eyes, there must still be a balance of “simplify and add ease of access” and “How much preload do we need in the valve springs?”. As it stands that balance is good.

6 Likes
3

I think I understand where you’re coming from but there’s another thing I’d like to add, not just to shoot you down but something to actually consider:

  • our suspension is hardly that advanced, we don’t design the suspension geometry, the bump stop locations, the damper preload or the rebound vs compression nor the toe or caster or a whole load of other stuff.
  • similarly, the transmission is also simplified into just a spacing slider that changes the individual ratios and a final drive, we don’t get to choose individual ratios or final gears for specific sets of ratios etc etc

…and so on - I don’t want to turn this into a massive 1000 word rebuttal, but my point is this basically: it’s not just about ease of entry vs immersiveness, you also have to consider that this is a tycoon game and there needs to be a balance between getting bogged down in micromanagement vs running an entire company with many things happening all at once. Despite how much the game has boiled down car making, if you go and take a look at CSR or countless other community challenges there are still TONS of players (myself included to some extent tbh) that haven’t mastered turbos or suspension. Perhaps the idea of having a simple vs advanced mode is something to discuss at a later date but I personally don’t see the point at the present moment. Turning this into a hairsplitting car creation simulator won’t appeal to the player demographic that a tycoon game has.

6 Likes
4

To build on what @ramthecowy mentions, we aim to provide an at least somewhat consistent level of detail, with a skew towards engines and cars. The cam profiles definitely went to far, there was little added gameplay for loads of added complexity. Same with the gearbox designer we once had, it just played poorly.

Think of the tycoon players’ perspectives in this regard: would you want to set up middle management staff positions for every factory you build?

That is the level of detail you are talking about there :slight_smile: for most people it is just not fun. Automation is about fun / gameplay first, simulation / accuracy second.

Cheers!

1 Like