Nope, it only has a MIGHTY 112hp. Pushrods, in traditionalist style ‘LHE’ style, all three versions of the car use the same engine family.
Pushrod and SPFI! Crazy! D:
What’s your performance index? Because you have more torque and almost as much power as the PAW Fizz-T 1.3L OHV MPFI engine in the Murina NE, which has a performance index of 82.5.
(The key performance stat for my car is the 814.6 kg curb weight.)
SPFI was quite common even on eco sports cars in the early 90s. Don’t forget, I took 2nd place in the Eco part with that SPFI Pushrod 
[quote=“Packbat”]What’s your performance index? Because you have more torque and almost as much power as the PAW Fizz-T 1.3L OHV MPFI engine in the Murina NE, which has a performance index of 82.5.
(The key performance stat for my car is the 814.6 kg curb weight.)[/quote]
79.6 for the performance index, and 1014kg
Yeah - I basically designed my entire car around reducing weight (although I screwed up and picked a four-door body, so I was stuck with four seats come race day). That was actually why I went pushrod: because those engines are lighter per displacement.
That said, I wasn’t even thinking about the lightness of my car when I decided 114 hp was enough for the sport tune - I was just comparing the total power to my sense of what other contemporary cars would have. I just looked up the '92 Civic Si for an example, and it had 125 hp, weighed 1071.4 kg, and did the quarter-mile in 16.3. We’re basically a bunch of speed demons, here.
Here are some more charts with the stats of all sports cars. I didn’t include any of the performance related ones, because this is what you were expecting me to do 
. They will come tomorrow.
1 Like
So practical, much loud.
Almost as practical, much quiet. 
The loudest car wins right?
Actually, when I started the challenge the idea was to replicate the Eco scoring, where the quieter the car, the more bonus it had. But in the end, I felt this mechanic wouldn’t be right for the sporty cars, as a loud car would gain on sportiness, but lose on comfort. Therefore, I gave loudness zero weight, it’s up to you to see what you want.
Didn’t realize how much less powerful I was than the field, but low weight and tight handling are making up for a lot of that.
Wow, I’m still not sure how some users managed to get such good stats. Did I spend my money in the wrong place and fluke a decent result? Or is it something else?
Ardent: The Pinnacle of Mediocrity. 
Sweet! I’m feeling okay about this - I’m underpowered relative to the field, but not grossly so. I think I have the pace to get a top-five here, and better on the more technical tracks. (My car seems to have very good acceleration.)
P.S. wow at biafo131 and Der Bayer - what kind of engines do you have in those beasts? Those fuel consumption numbers are ludicrous!
Probably a whole lot of TUBROOOOOO BOOOOSCHT
If I recall I used a torsion beam and MacPherson setup, and I also used a naturally aspirated i4. I can’t say, looking at these results, that I’m going to be particularly competitive! But all the times at the top degrade pretty sharply as the tyres wear, so I guess we shall see.
In the big picture, I’m also looking forward to the reviews!
Qualifying Results Race 1
Here are the results of the first qualifying session: youtu.be/fcqS-S3lKM4
All right!
If I were making book on this race, looking at the effect of fuel weight, I’d have to put myself down for a 6th or 7th place finish - ahead of Der Bayer and biafo131, behind strop and possibly Riso. I don’t know who would be favored to win between pHanta and Absurdist, but my money’s on one of those two; I’m guessing TrackpadUser for third, but Leonardo9613 could surprise me.
Looking at DerBayers fuel consumtion an 10+ km/h faster topspeed than anyone else, i’m guessing afterburner.