Cleveland 351 based on the source in this thread: 351 Cleveland 2-V recreation
Ford GT engine and the Mustang Cobra R engine it’s based off of:
Both have +3 quality everything. Cobra R cast mid headers and standard mid intake, GT has performance intake but I can't remember if it mid or high.So when I said I wanted to do Barra engines, I obviously mainly meant the turbos, but, it has proven hard as they keep wanting to make way too much torque for the power and I’m wondering if that’s perhaps because they have torque limiters which as far as I can tell, would go along way in explaining the flat torque peaks and the overboast feature. So instead, two N/A Barras, them being the '08 till end petrol and '11 till end LPG:
LPG has no quality anywhere, Petrol only +2 on pistons and fuel system, both have exact same intake, header and exhaust system settings, part of which being standard and cast mid respectively.I wonder what the downside to LPG is in this game, for I was able to get away with like a third of the fuel map (low 70s verse high 20s I think) in the LPG engine and so higher compression would have been an option, LPG is usually way cheaper at the pumps around here IRL and the servicing costs in the game aren’t higher, just straight upgrade it seems lol!
Don’t see myself returning to the turbo versions for awhile, think I’ll start doing some European engines or maybe Japanese next and for awhile onwards to balance out the American ones so far.
So I decided to try the M3 GTR’s engine as my first European recreation, in part inspired by that car I’ve seen made to look like a certain Mustang form a certain game
Wikipedia claimed a rather high 354 lb-ft of torque and so what's what I tried first, +10 quality everything later and still only 333 archived and the cam down to just 30, this was getting ridiculous... at least I thought so, therefore I decided to check the source they linked for the road car, suspecting perhaps the 354 figure is for the race version and sure enough, source gives very different 269 lb-ft and 500 RPM earlier than Wiki does. Started from scratch giving that a go, noticed how the torque curve held fairly strong after the 306 lb-ft peak and so checked how much torque was still being made at the 7K RPM power peak, it was still more than the source claimed 269 which if I'm not mistaken makes those specs mathematically impossible lol! So... yeah... guess I need to find better sources and come back to this one. BTW, not sure when I'll next be able to upload anything again, certainly can't tomorrow but should be back by the weekend.One of if not the very first(, certainly the earliest I’m aware of) fuel injected engines, the three litre six which powered the 300 SL into the record books!
I wanted to make a three cylinder, so what better than the homologated road version of the one currently dominating the WRC? Bit of a funny story with this one, given how I’ve heard the claim Toyota kept trying to the the FIA to nerf the 2nd gen body EVOs since a certain Finn kept winning the drivers championship in the late 90’s, yet they teamed up with said Finn to develop the race counterpart to this!
Made two versions, first with standard intake and second with performance intake, performance was able to get away with one less click of boast and normal ignition timing, though both use super unleaded (which I'd like to think isn't true of the real thing) and that's despite both having 20% less compression than the real thing's 10.5:1 (8.4:1 as per the variant name, boast level also in the name) and running less boast than the "1.4-1.81 Bar" it's apparently meant to have according to the Wiki page, maybe the game's direct injection isn't direct enough, IDK. +5 quality everything.automobile-catalog.com sadly didn’t have any specs for the M3 GTR, though I found another site claiming the same torque but only 350 hp: https://www.bmw-m.com/en/topics/magazine-article-pool/bmw-m3-gtr-strassenversion.html
Perhaps this means 350hp/269lb-ft is the brake figures and the more familiar 380 hp and therefore roughly 292 lb-ft (269x1.086) would be the net figures to aim for in game, those are at least mathematically possible, though the standard quality version was already using just 11:1 instead of apparent real 12:1 compression and so it seems somewhat unlikely it will want to make less than the 300ish lb-ft it’s already making, IDK.
I wanted to try the Carrera GT’s V10 as well and also found it made too much torque, that one I feel more confident would definitely be brake figures however given the Clarkson review back in the day, therefore, would it be best to assume 1.086 times quote ratings and so 655hp and 472lb-ft as the target numbers?
What if I used a straight six instead of a V8 and DOHC 4V? Perhaps something like this would be the result
Compared to Corvette's '95 lineup, we have 1: LT1 level long stroke with cast internal and standard intake.2: LT4 level short stroke with cast internals and standard intake.
3: LT5 level long stroke with forged internals and performance intake, available by '91 for '92 model year.
Pretty much the only real N/A 6 I know of which is comparable to mine in output is the TVR Speed Six.
I made the last engine a straight six fearing a V wouldn’t be smooth enough at such a large size, however, decided to test last night anyway, I was more or less proven right, but, not to the extent I expected.
Similar story with other versions, seems to suggest perhaps it could be doable with decent quality boast, though at same time a quality boast to the I6 by extension would allow longer strokes and more efficiency.Worst idea I’ve had yet? Thought I’d try a small, high revving V8 to compare to my turbo version of a 3.6L “existing” pushrod V6 shown elsewhere in these forums, it certainly didn’t turn out all that great at least.
All: Tubular mid headers, 2 way cat, no damper (with flat plane crank on V8s) and same cam setting.1st: Standard intake DOHC V8.
2nd: Standard intake DOHC V6, turned out better in pretty much every way but efficiency due to stiffer valves.
3rd: Standard intake SOHC V8, to believe I wanted 2.0L SOHC originally…
4th: Performance intake DOHC V8, still less hp than turbo V6 with now less efficiency.
In part for comparison purposes to these, I next intend to try the Ferrari 208 and 308 engines.
BMW M31, the engine from a car I’ve found very fun to drive in racing games over the years:
U.S. 308 engine, has catalytic converter (though real might not have based on automobile-catalog.com):
Wont be able to upload tomorrow, may not be back until Monday.
Maximum drifto?
The King of Africa has demanded a couple of his hearts be shared in my thread, how could I refuse?
After all, an Orangutan confirmed his royalty, so, I know I'm not being fooled, the time for that has passed.Hey… Charger!
Had I not aimed for the almost certainly gross factory ratings and used a more realistic compression ratio, a.k.a. did things more like the L78 recreation, I wouldn’t have needed max quality! Probably should have stopped quality wise once it was making peak power at the correct 5,600 RPM or something like that.
With my last engine being from Chrysler corp, loyal readers of this thread, if there are any who even exist… probably expected a Viper V10 soon, and they’d be correct.
I went with, as sad as it is to say, the final Viper engine :' ( after it's slight 2015 update with an 5 extra hp. Originally, I planed on sharing a 13 quality version with L.ong Tubular H.eaders, though I decided to give M.id another go and was able to get correct outputs with power coming closer to as soon as it's meant to, therefore I shared that instead, though the LH version was better and so I decided to make another version where I retuned the +11 quality MH engine with LH by mainly lowering cam, richening fuel mixture and advancing timing to make the +11 quality LH shown to try and demonstrate that to you, with it probably being a harder sell if the LH engine had extra quality. LH version has a pretty big jump, around 10% in efficiency with the slight reliability drop plus emissions and throttle response increase more due to the timing and fuel richening increases needed to get the torque back up to 600 footpounds. Had torque not been a concern due to recreation purposes, the mixture could be lowered with the cam bumped up a bit for much more power and no loss in efficiency with LH, but LH has too much of a latening effect on the power peak.The Hemiest of all the Hemis!
Unlike what I usually do, I only did +7 quality on family, valves and fuel system with just the tech pool raised on internals to +9 so I can get lightweight forged conrods and they (mostly the pistons of course) only needed 75 damper to handle the 6,400 RPM redline I set which I think is the redline of these engines stock in Forza.
Again, stock 10.2 compression is way too high according to the game for what can be done on Super leaded, so avgas was again used, probably should’ve made a reduced compression version on Super, but oh well.
Chrysler Turbo II as seen on on cars such as the Shelby Omni GLH-S:
1st: Output at 2,200 RPM (claimed start of flat torque which is meant to last until 4,800 RPM).
2nd: Default stats screen.
3rd: Output at 5,300 RPM (claimed power peak, calling into question claimed 175 lb-ft since that would suggest it should be making ~173 lb-ft, just 2 lb-ft lost 500 RPM after it’s 4,800 RPM 175 lb-ft torque peak).
4th: Boast lowered by 33% to show reliability if it had a torque limiter.
5th: Only 1 extra tech pool used from the minimum of a certain (as of posting) currently active challenge…
6th: Compression lowered to 7.5:1 (down from 8.5:1) and boast upped by 0.05 Bar to run on Regular 91.
In the Shelby Omni, this engine’s only meant to output 175 lb-ft, it was quickly obvious that wasn’t happening, even getting just 200 lb-ft looked like it’d be a big ask, so instead I aimed for 200 lb-ft at 2,200 RPM since that’s when the flat torque of the engine (Shelby 175 lb-ft version) is meant to start. (Didn’t prove too difficult.) I didn’t check how the 200 lb-ft version’s torque is meant to be delivered. though if it’s meant to be flat as well, I’d assume it’s meant to have a torque limiter of some kind like I guessed may be true of the Barra Turbos brought up in post 17.
Only quality used was +3 on pistons and +1 on fuel system and Turbo, running on Super since game doesn’t think 12 psi of boast with 8.5:1 compression is all that doable on regular. It uses cast internal parts as Wiki claims Shelby (pre-production) version doesn’t use forged crank or conrods unlike factory Chrysler version, though with no mention of hypereutectic or forged pistons, I felt I may as well try sticking with cast.
view here: CSR154 - Midsize Mania [ENTRIES OPEN] - #147 by Ray_V0lut10n
1988-90 Jeep 4.0 Liter (revised RENIX MPI)
Chevrolet Vega:
In their hey day, General Motors was quite innovative, fuel injection in the 50’s not long after Mercedes-Benz (if I’m not mistaken) pioneered it in road cars with the 300 SL Gullwing, Turbos in the early 60’s on the Chevrolet Corvair and Oldsmobile Jetfire, then as the 70’s dawned, they tried new ideas again.
The Vega had an AlSi block, a material the game doesn’t normally allow until 1996 and therefore even with +15 tech pool only allows you go go back as far as 1981 tech year, so with the extra time needed to account for engineering time suggests Chevy was 3 decades early, but to save a bit of cash, they used an iron head.
I thought it might give funny results giving it a try, given I was fairly sure such mixing would harm reliability, though what effect on reliability it had ended up being negated by the +5 family, valve and fuel system quality I deemed necessary to hit the 121 lb-ft torque output, so I gave the Cosworth version a try as well.
Despite about half an inch less of stroke, the Cosworth version easily wanted to make 120 in both hp and lb-ft thanks to the quadfecta of improvements of Aluminum heads, with double the cams and valves as well as electronic port fuel injection, therefore that gave me an excuse to nuke family and fuel system quality to -10! Reliability would have been even lower if I removed unused tech pool, perhaps that’s a missed opportunity.
It’s a V12, DM any guesses you have as to what it is and I’ll consider a reward of some kind if correct.
If you post the correct answer in a public reply and someone else copy and pastes into a DM, DM wins FYI!
Yesterday’s Cosworth Vega engine inspired me to try some 16 valve Inline 3 designs, so here they are:
All: Mid standard intake and tubular headers, single barrel carb, 333033 tech pool, alloy block and head.
1st: 2.2L SOHC standard quality, most square.
2nd: 2.2L SOHC like 1st but with +3 quality everything.
3rd: 2.1L SOHC standard quality, most over-square, might have hypereutectic pistons?
4th 2.0L DOHC standard quality, hypereutectic pistons (pretty sure this time).
5th 2.0L DOHC like 4th but with +3 quality everything.
DOHC seems more OP than it was in previous versions of the game, I seem to remember SOHC 4 valve being competitive in efficiency verse DOHC 4 valve and so I tended to favour it believing it the better option due to lightness of not having the extra cam and material housing it for non-high performance applications, though that certainly doesn’t seem to hold now, the efficiency gains of DOHC are too strong now to deny.
