[quote=“Rossriders”]would overall costs include what’s shown on the market’s section?
I ask since prior to posting, I had trimmed to right at $12,000 for my would be entry (so far) in regards to how it’s priced when it’s under the market section. But also given with the body I’ve worked with and what I’m aiming for, unless there’s something else I’m not following. F
Far as I know, no sliders on the body or trim (or rather interior), but I don’t see any thing regardling sliders with engines. But I guess my priorty question is what you mean by ‘overall costs’ or should I just disregard the market’s pricing altogether?
To be honest though, not sure if I’ll bother much but…screw it, may as well at least throw it out there and see how it’ll do.
[attachment=0]hothatch draft.png[/attachment]
Still working things out far as looks goes, but…whatever.[/quote]
The cost thing is for the total material and engineering cost of the car, not what it costs to purchase, (why would I ask for the market price? Seems like a really random thing to do )[/quote]
Well, I wasn’t sure. I wanted to be certain and now that I do know…I’ve got a bit more room to work with (more so if I decide to further work on my turbofail motor that I may or may not talk about in the engine sharing threads rather than the 1.4 4 banger I am working with).
I went naturally aspirated V8 and pulled power figures of 160 to 172hp. I tried putting more into it with reliability and the mpg. The engine is high revving so I got that going for it.
means i can put the assist at -15 right?
is that on purpose? or did you missed that?
edit: wait. it doesn’t matter. i’ll leave this post as is, as proof of my derp
[quote=“Smokiegun”]
I went naturally aspirated V8 and pulled power figures of 160 to 172hp. I tried putting more into it with reliability and the mpg. The engine is high revving so I got that going for it.[/quote]
lol. my first trial engine. i tried the 800cc one. puny little bastard had rev limits of 10.100. but, actually i could crank it up to 11.100RPM because the power curve was flat from 8500 upwards. that was literally the highest revving engine i’ve ever made. and it made more power than yours… but the car overall was even slower than the benchmark car (1:27.8 on the top gear track). so… to the bin it goes…
means i can put the assist at -15 right?
is that on purpose? or did you missed that?
edit: wait. it doesn’t matter. i’ll leave this post as is, as proof of my derp
I went naturally aspirated V8 and pulled power figures of 160 to 172hp. I tried putting more into it with reliability and the mpg. The engine is high revving so I got that going for it.
lol. my first trial engine. i tried the 800cc one. puny little bastard had rev limits of 10.100. but, actually i could crank it up to 11.100RPM because the power curve was flat from 8500 upwards. that was literally the highest revving engine i’ve ever made. and it made more power than yours… but the car overall was even slower than the benchmark car (1:27.8 on the top gear track). so… to the bin it goes…[/quote]
This is the highest revving engine i’ve made too, I tried turbo but the costs skyrocket the way I design the turbo. Its a paing but I decided on Natirally Aspirated. I might even resubmit a jew engine if thats allowed.
I’ve finished conducting tests on NA engines. Given their power curve is easier to deal with, more power is good. With this I was able to crank out a satisfactory amount but needed to put in big gobs of dosh to keep reliability up.
I was able to eke out more power with a turbo but drivability was terrible. I’m going to dial back the AR ratio and see what happens. Also, the more booscht, the more cooling and drag. That’s a real pain for the Panda body. The larger more rounded body has a far better coefficient but is also much heavier.
This is the highest revving engine i’ve made too, I tried turbo but the costs skyrocket the way I design the turbo. Its a paing but I decided on Natirally Aspirated. I might even resubmit **[size=150]a jew engine [/size]**if thats allowed.[/quote]
This is the highest revving engine i’ve made too, I tried turbo but the costs skyrocket the way I design the turbo. Its a paing but I decided on Natirally Aspirated. I might even resubmit [size=150]a jew engine [/size][/quote]
if thats allowed.
[size=150]OH GOD PLEASE DONT[/size]
[/quote]
OH MY GOD LMAO. New engine* how did I miss that lol.
To those of you who are asking about re-submissions, its fine up until the deadline. Also I found that i6 engines tend to be quite good decent, as for the benchmark I managed to push out 193 hp with effectively no tuning, and high reliability. Both V8’s were a bit iffy, and turbo’s are annoying to deal with. I didn’t test the i4 and V6 which I guess would have made more sense than going for the longer/wider engine types.
)[/quote]
That aside it’s in no way bad as long as you follow the regulations.