Engine Designer Questions/Suggestions

A friend of mine asked me to post this on his behalf:

Cylinder deactivation: Used on a number of Chevrolet and Chrysler’s V8s, this technology deactivates cylinder banks during light engine loads as perhaps you’re already aware of. It’s a great way for naturally aspirated engines to remain competitive compared to turbo engines in the economy department, especially pushrod NA engines like the Chevrolet and Chrysler V8s known for the tech which in the game, can’t even use VVL.

Advanced gearbox: Unlike with individual quality sliders for bottom end parts, I can understand why some would find detailed gearbox sliders too complex and micromanage-y. I mean, I personally kinda feel that way about suspension in-game, but you added the presets to please both crowds. Therefore, I propose two like-minded solutions for gear boxes. The first is to keep it the way it is currently for casuals, but add an advanced button which when pressed, reveals a new tab with the sliders for proper gear ratios for each gear including one for final drive like in racing sims.

If for some reason that’s not possible, then a probably less pleasing for casuals, but definitely possible way would be to do exactly what you did for suspension. In other words, have the advanced options right there on the main tab, but have presets for the casuals like maybe “short”, “medium”, “long”, “economy short”, “economy medium” and “economy long” (the economy ones having a the last gear be super long just meant for highway cruising) and have them use the final drive slider the same way they do the current top speed slider.

MOHV made available from 1955: I hope you’re already aware of my usual complaints here so I don’t have to repeat them, but as much as those complaints still are and always have been true, MOHV has always had the potential to be a great and much needed addition to the game. That being if it was available from the mid 50’s to replicate the high performance American pushrod engines of the mid 50’s to early 70’s, and given my experience, it seems to me that MOHV as it is currently might be offering just the right amount of performance necessary for those engines. I think you guys said MOHV has basically identical performance to DOHC 2 valve, so I guess I could even put it to the test in video form and link the results here if you’d like. Sure it probably wouldn’t be as simple as moving the date it becomes available back, you may have to tweak things here and there, but these are things you should’ve done before you even added MOHV.

For seriously even some of the earliest small blocks require max 15 quality and are still a little short, meanwhile I’ve always found modern ones possible and this is all easily provable, I can link to examples of it being true in older builds and make a video showing it’s still true now. And if you guys think MOHV was necessary to replicate modern LS engines, then there’s absolutely no way you guys can honestly say it isn’t necessary to add a valvetrain to replicate those classic muscle car engines. And since it’s related, please add VVT for regular pushrod again… you most likely removed it as a failed attempt to make MOHV well, less completely unnecessary, it didn’t work.

Minor engine designer changes: The first is something that’s always kinda bothered me about the game, the fuel efficiency of the engine being called “Economy”, I think it should be changed to “Efficiency” or “Fuel EFF” as it’s meant to be the thermodynamic efficiency of the engine or something right?

Single and Multi-point Injection I think should be changed to the names I’m more use to and think are more common, Throttle-body and Port or Sequential Injection, I think it would fit better too. Mechanical Injection, Throttle-body Injection, Port Injection and Direct Injection. Also, add multiple throttle bodies for Single-point/Throttle-body Injection? Such configurations existed such as Chevrolet’s Crossfire Injection. Apparently American car makers used the same intake manifolds for it as their carburettors, so you could do the same with the new intake designs your incorporating in the revamp.

Less minor, but still, I think single barrel eco carbs are both OP and the opposite of that. 3 of them together outshine a 4 barrel efficiency wise and aren’t much more expensive if I remember correctly, I don’t think that should be the case. And what are they meant to represent anyway? My first thought was like how American economy engines (or at least cheap family ones) often had 1 barrels, but they’re way too restrictive for that, I think carbs might need to be recalculated at some point IDK.

1 Like

I’m gonna ask… is this “friend” not allowed on the forum anymore?
I’m no expert on the technicalities, but… (always the best way to start an argument)

Didn’t I read somewhere that cylinder deactivation MAY BE considered at a future point in development (might have been hallucinating).

If you want to have a MOHV-type setting on your “classic muscle car engines”, let’s call it “POHV” (for “performance”)… not an idea I dislike… maybe ask the devs nicely?

Having “fixed” ratio presets for gearing wouldn’t be viable, because the torque/power curves for engines are so widely variable that you’d just be clicking 'til you got what you wanted… which may not match the “economy” etc setting eg: “long economy” for a hyper car.

No 1 Grammar Nazi moment :- 1) Missed 2 commas, 2) “changed to the names I’m more use to” should be " changed to the names I’m more used to"
Correct me if I’m wrong… but the throttle-body would be a single point…no? Soooo, multiple single-points would be …multi-point? Unless, maybe, you’re just complaining about the art assets?
No 2 Grammar Nazi moment :- it’s not " your incorporating ", it’s “you’re incorporating”.

I had a car that had multi-point port, but most DEFINITELY NOT, “sequential” injection (Bosch K-Jetronic system, half dose per crank revolution)… so renaming that won’t fix anything.

There is an explanation somewhere about Eco carbs… that one I’m SURE of.

Feel free to put me back in my place, just sharing my thoughts on… your thoughts.

I know there was a huge thread over a year ago on that topic, where both a gearbox designer and individual ratios where discussed. I’ll try to find it later.

Edit: I think it’s this one Transmission things - #20 by PMP1337

While I know from tests done a while ago that valve float tends to kick too early to make clones of some earlier engines, just be aware that the power figures for a lot of pre-1972 stuff are quite inaccurate as they were using SAE gross at the time.

IMHO MOHV should be axed, and OHV balanced in a way that makes most engines doable with a reasonable amount of quality. Hopefully they will work better with the engine rebalance.

I agree on that one considering what the stat represents.

Single barrel eco carbs where introduced not long after the first batch of demographics cars because multi-barrel carbs proved to be overpowered, as they were the optimum choice for pretty much anything including small I4s.

Their overrestrictiveness is a feature as they aren’t meant to be used for performance at all.

As for the balance with 4 barrel, that’s defintiively something that needs to be verified since running triple eco carbs does give results that are very similar to running a 4 barrel.

Aren’t multi-carb setups generally burdened with a reliability penalty compared to single multi-barrel setups.

1 Like

Why not just a solid lifter cam set up instead of MOHV introduced earlier, which trades off reliability for performance? IIRC 60s ultra high performance muscle car engines used them (to be fair I only know the ZL1 motor does) , and MOHV is more of an advanced hydraulic lifter cam capable of minimizing friction and maximizing RPMs due to advances in tech.

I would imagine that the 3 single barrels operate similar to a 3x2 barrel setup in that the centre carb acts as the primary and the front and rears act as secondaries.

I have no complaints regarding the OHV setup, I’ve made some pretty wicked performance engines in those early years without excessive quality slider abuse.

As for Cylinder Deactivation I would support a system in the early 80s that you could apply. (Cadillac had one for the 1982 Fleetwood which was sadly unreliable at best) Obviously it would be more reliable later on.

I would like to see a difference between multiport and sequential fuel injection. A setup could also be used to determine electronic ignition vs. a distributor.