One of the many aspects people consider, in conjunction with fuel economy, is the tank size.
Or more directly, how far can it go on a tank.
Often cars with more efficient engines can have smaller tanks to go the same distance which saves on curb weight.
I’ve noticed that here in North America, for instant, most people want between 350 and 500 miles or so of range, though in diesels and hybrids they want 650 miles + (500-800 km and over 1000 for diesels and hybrids.)
It would be a neat implement for the tycoon part, as it would reign in some of the overtop designs people come up with.
Sure a 650 horsepower car is fast and great… but if it’s only going to run 100 km between fillups… maybe not so good as a selling point.
Sometimes having a bigger tank offsets poor fuel economy by improving range.
For instance, in this market the average compact car has a 50 litre gas tank, where as a subaru will have 60, so it can go the same range as say an equivalent sized elantra.
Or for instance a Dodge Caliber, has a 55 Litre tank, but the suspension and exhaust modifications on an SRT4 version like mine, reduce the tank to 51 liters, coupled with higher fuel consumption of the 2.4 L turbo over even just the regular 2.4 Range is much shorter (we can JUST make 600 km on the highway if we don’t go over 105 kph)
I just think that range can affect the demographic buying the car. Like in the case with the Ford GT. Great car, but it drinks fuel like it’s free and infinite.
There are other neat ways this applies in vehicles as well. For instance the Ford F-150 in this market comes with a 2.7L Twin Turbo Ecoboost, and a 3.5L Twin Turbo Ecoboost, but also available unboosted V8’s. While the V8’s can tow more, they have significantly lower range due to higher consumption.
Actually towing rating might be a good demographic option for the tycoon part too. Less important on say a compact car, but significantly more important on a Truck or Full Size Van.
I’m guessing that larger fuel tanks would increase costs, decrease usable cargo/passenger volume, increase unfueled weight, and significantly increase fueled weight. It’s definitely an interesting thought - I don’t know how much it adds to the game, though. Greater drivability for greater range?
Aye.
For Instance a standard 1990’s Ford Taurus has a 60 Liter tank, but 70 liters was an option. One I was very glad the original purchaser checked on my thirstier, than the normal model, SHO.
While I agree with most things being said here, you are missing one important point: what selection / slider would you REPLACE it with? We have of course thought about tank size and how to potentially implement it, but it just doesn’t make it onto the “important enough” list of things that deserve precious UI space.
It is up to you and the other developers of course, but I do rather like the idea to select from a couple of differently sized tanks. Could you not add it to the UI that holds the drivetrain type and car colour sliders/selection currently? We do not need a quality slider for fuel tanks I would say and that UI over there should have enough room unless you are planning to add more important stuff there of course.
Thing is, there are plenty of things we could add. I agree it would be a nice addition, that’s not the issue. Feature creep is though, that is why I specifically asked what you would replace.
Seat Count? Change seat count to be a function of interior style: Luxury and handmade interiors have at most 2 seats in the second row, if 3 in the back is the maximum for the body. Sport has only a front row, in a pickup this can replace the bench (3 people up front) with buckets (2 people). Standard and basic crams the full capacity into the car.
To me setting the fuel tank size which determines the range (fuel amount), and performance (total weight, change to weight and balance because of variation in fuel) is a lot more important than explicitly choosing how many people can seat in the back. Clarkson used to recommend the “base” Evo models because the higher performance ones had impractically short ranges because of tiny fuel tanks for example.
I have to say that when I’m evaluating which car I want to buy I’ve NEVER care about the size of the gas tank. More important was for me the boot size and the seats.
As the OP said in the US buyers want a large range in large and powerful cars which requires a large tank. Euro eco boxes still do not sell in the US market. Therefore an internationally sold car will need to either have a large enough range to appeal to 2 hour commutes and weekend warriors (the US market) at the expense of a larger trunk in the Euro market, or have multiple variations in terms of fuel tank sizes.
For reference I drive about 450 miles a week for work, I very much care about a car’s range when in the market for one.
That’s interesting, I never thought about it like that. The way the Australian market seems to have headed, our reasoning is, if you want more range, then get a more economical car or you’ll be bleeding money at the pump. So nobody here talks about range either, only about economy.
Also: cars with greater range by design happen to also be cars that are actually somewhat comfortable being on freeways etc. Things like the Hyundai i20 have good economy, yes, but their range isn’t particularly high, nor would you really want to drive it on the freeway, it’s vague and nervous as all hell
Range matters in rural areas where fuel stations are rare, and also in professional use where time is at premium not to be wasted on fuel stops. But I don’t know if this is a feature this game really needs…
[quote=“stratoroc”]
For reference I drive about 450 miles a week for work, I very much care about a car’s range when in the market for one.[/quote]
Maybe, but for every buyer like you, there are dozens like me or NormanVauxhall who care more about things like seats and boot size.
I still don’t think adding this choice would bring much to the game, especially since I can’t really think of any major inconvenient putting a big ass fuel tank in all your cars would bring.
And it wouldn’t make much sense to give them worse sportiness IMHO. Supercars tend to have very large fuel tanks. The Ferrari 458 has a 86L fuel tank for example, larger than what you find on the majority of cars, excluding maybe SUVs and Pickups.
I’d make it remove comfort instead of make 'em less sporty. You’ll have less space overall if you made a bigger tank.
As for whether I think it’d be worth having in game… Not as a choice you get to make by slider. Have it calculate your fuel tank size by how big your cargo space is, perhaps? Let it tell you in the Detailed Stats screen how big it is. Want a bigger tank? Increase that trunk size.
[quote=“Madrias”]I’d make it remove comfort instead of make 'em less sporty. You’ll have less space overall if you made a bigger tank.
As for whether I think it’d be worth having in game… Not as a choice you get to make by slider. Have it calculate your fuel tank size by how big your cargo space is, perhaps? Let it tell you in the Detailed Stats screen how big it is. Want a bigger tank? Increase that trunk size.[/quote]
Or DECREASE the trunk size in favor of tank size. Range is an important value for me since I do NOT want to stop every 3 hours for fuel just to g across my state, nor does my Uncle who lives 2 hours from ANY semblence of civilization, range is very important for him (hence the fuel tank in the bed as well). But we are still going to run into the UI space issue, I for one wouldnt mind seeing the slider bars go away in favor of a box with up and down arrows next to it, the sliders are just taking up space when we already get a numerical value for our tech points anyway and this extra space can be used for tank size or whatever else.
With very few exceptions tank size is based on the car type and purpose. City cars have small tanks, large cruisers have big ones. Most supercars have pretty big ones, except the ford GT lol, SUVs are a step up from cruisers, full sized trucks a step up from that.
True, maybe only certain models would have tank options such as the pickups and SUVs? I know my truck had several options as did the SUVs based off of my truck. Maybe this could be region based, Euro models get “average” tank sizes whereas North American/Russian spec cars would have “above average” tanks? This might be all too complex in the end though, this is not a simulator afterall, just a tycoon game.
I’m changing my opinion about range as an explicit parameter. I can’t think of situations where I’d do something other than common sense (an F350 with a 100 range anyone?), and the ability to do something silly with fuel tanks will likely cost a more useful feature. Range should be swept under the rug in favor of something more interesting.
While I understand that fuel range is not really needed in the game, where I live range is a consideration.
For instance, there are still a few paved roads where it is litterally 100 miles of nothing. We often tromp arround the back country roads getting half of the rated fuel economy. Then there are the ranchers. When they go out to check their herds hauling a trailer or just loading down their truck, and getting only a small percentage of their fuel economy, many have added custom oversized or additional fuel tanks.
But yeah, not really in the scope of what the game needs.
We have of course thought about tank size and how to potentially implement it, but it just doesn’t make it onto the “important enough” list of things that deserve precious UI space.