Timeline Issues

General Chat Developer Questions
1

I’ve been playing Automation a lot lately with a focus on starting at the start (1940) then evolving my choices until the end (2020). I noticed when I did this that there are a number of inconsistencies with real world automotive practice.

So, starting from the top of my list… :ugeek:

Fuel Injection systems

Mechanical fuel injection has been commercially available since 1955. It first appeared on the MB 300SL and then appeared on the Corvette.

EFI has been around since 1957 and the first commercially successful variant came out in 1967, the Bosch D Jetronic. The VW Beetle was the best known application but Volvo and Isuzu also used this system. in 1974 both K and L Jetronic became available and was popular on many Euro cars as well as Toyotas and Nissans. All these systems are MPFI and the MPFI concept has been continuously refined since those early days by Bosch and Mitsubishi.

Single point fuel injection came about in 1980 as a low cost alternative to MPFI and cars which are meant to be cheap or to extend the life of a carby engine design will use this setup.

Direct injection as we define it today (computer controlled) was first trialled in the late 70’s by Ford but it wasn’t until 1996 when Mitsubishi debuted the first DI system (GDI) on the Galant.

Engine materials

All aluminium engines debuted in 1960 (Buick 215) and were a commercial success with over 300K units produced in 3 years! Then Rover bought the engine and used it from 1967.

Valvetrain stuff

OHV designs can rev very hard. in 1969 Corvette and Camaro had an engine option (ZL-1) which revved to 8,000rpm! The current LS series of engines have variants which rev to over 7,000rpm…

The distinction between direct valve actuation and the rocker arm type heads is an artificial one. Toyota (for example) make all their engines with direct valve actuation. I have had personal experience with the 18R-G, 4A-FE, 3A-FE and 3S-GE and they all have direct actuation of the valves. The 2/3T-G, 4A-GE, M series, G series and JZ series also use this tech. Other manufacturers I know of are the Alfa Romeo Twin Spark (2v in GTV etc) and the CA18DE from Nissan. The rocker arm DOHC system was implemented for reasons of cost and maintenance (hydraulic rockers are self adjusting). So direct valve actuation should come in at least 2v, 4v and 5v setups with both DOHC and SOHC options.

Not all DOHC systems are created equal. Earlier DOHC heads had a large space between the cams (Wide angle) which allowed for big valves and big bores. However Narrow angle head designs appeared during the eighties, namely the Toyota “F” head variants. These designs saved materials and were better suited for fuel efficiency than the wide angle design. Early types didn’t rev harder than about 6,000rpm but higher tech, VVT and VVL made this design capable of high revs as well. I don’t know for 100% sure but I believe this is just about the only design used today as high demand for fuel economy and tight engine bay packaging make the wide angle design redundant.

Gearbox time-frames

There are a number of inconsistencies in the gearbox selections which is true for both manual and auto transmissions. The first dual clutch sequential transmission was debuted in 2003 but single clutch types were available since the 70’s.

Manual transmissions

  At the 1940 start date there are 2,3 and 4 speed gearboxes available with the 5 speed arriving in 1948, the 6 speed in 1986 and the 7 speed in 2011... The craziest item is that there was an 8 speed gearbox available from 1960!

Automatic transmissions

  At the 1940 start date the 4 speed 'box was in use. The 2 speed debuted in 1947, the 3 speed in 1950, the 5 speed in 1989, the 6 speed in 2002, 7 speed in 2003, 8 speed in 2007 and 9(!!!) speed in 2013.

So the transmission choices offered by manufacturers is less a part of availability and more to do with market expectations and engine power and torque delivery

Platforms

Monocoque construction was available at the 1940 start time (1934 debut) and there is no spaceframe or superleggera options at all!

As at 1940 the FR, RR, MR, Off-road 4WD and FF (both Longitudional and Transverse) all were available. But innovation was stifled by WW2, so the ultra cheap ladder chassis/leaf spring FR setup was the most common. I feel that despite how common this package is at this time, we should still get the choice (aids in roleplaying our favourite manufacturer and what if? situations). On-road 4WD debuted for the different styles at different times; Longitudional type in 1966, Transverse type in 1968 and MR type in 1985.

There should be a standard aluminium option for chassis materials as the glued aluminium type is confined to the Lotus Elise and related variants. All aluminium cars like the Honda NSX (which debuted in 1991 but was conceived in the 80’s) are unable to be made currently. :frowning:

A big part of monocoque car design centres around sub-frames. These start off being made of steel but later cars use aluminium and even magnesium for various parts to save weight and unsprung mass. I’m not sure if this can be implemented but it would aid in model differentiation and simulation accuracy

Miscellaneous items

The first LSD was used in 1955 and was a cone type (from memory) with later ones using clutch packs, gears (torsen) and even fluid (viscous)!

Antilock brakes first debuted in 1966

Traction control came about in 1970

Stability control started in 1995

Turbo’s were first used in 1962 and superchargers have been around since before 1940! (this is commercially available, NOT just prototypes)

Wheel material choices such as steel, aluminium, and magnesium.

Exhaust material choices such as mild steel, stainless steel and titanium(!).

Brake disc options such as vented, slotted, cross-drilled, aluminium centre and carbon fibre

Conclusion

First of all I’d like to say that Automation is a great automotive simulation game which is really fun to play. With tech being available when it was first commercially introduced will only enhance the accuracy and replayability of this simulator and it is with this in mind that I have written this post! As with many other industries, car manufacturers have reasons other than availability of tech to delay improvements or changes; the chief of these being cost and the second being legislation. Players, I feel, will benefit from being able to make choices from many options as the manufacturer would have had to. This will make the player have to balance between personal preference and in-game success, leading to greater insight into the automotive industry as a whole as well as why cars today are made the way they are…

Hopefully you’ll be able to make use of this info to make Automation an even greater experience than it already is :sunglasses:

2

The important thing to note, is that tech is currently available ingame at the point where it’s considered “public knowledge”.

In other words the availability dates ingame are the ones that you’d get if your company did no R&D work of any kind. If you’re someone like Mercedes for example, and have a massive R&D budget, you’d be unlocking things a lot earlier, making your R&D investment pay off.

So in your example with EFI, if you wanted to be one of those guys doing very early EFI systems in the late 70s/early 80s you’d need to invest immense R&D effort to do so, or you could just wait until the early 90s where it’s so ubiquitous you could buy a cheap and easy EFI system off the shelf with no problems.

Regarding the rocker arm actuation of DOHC designs, I know it exists but it didn’t fill an interesting enough gameplay/design niche to be worth adding as an option in my opinion. But there were some fairly interesting performance/design differences between early SOHC rocker type engines and the cam on bucket ones.

There are a lot more possible differences in head design than we’ve modeled, but we have to draw the complexity line somewhere. Sorry.

Improvements/changes are coming to OHV, including a “modern OHV” choice to represent the quite a lot more advanced engineering of modern LS style V8s.

So basically

Timeline wise, that’ll be handled by the fact that you’ll have to research ingame.
Detail wise - We have to draw the line somewhere at how much detail we’ll have in design choices.

3

Almost all those things are planned, but just not in game yet, because car design isn’t done yet :slight_smile:

4

[quote=“Daffyflyer”]The important thing to note, is that tech is currently available ingame at the point where it’s considered “public knowledge”.

In other words the availability dates ingame are the ones that you’d get if your company did no R&D work of any kind. If you’re someone like Mercedes for example, and have a massive R&D budget, you’d be unlocking things a lot earlier, making your R&D investment pay off.

So in your example with EFI, if you wanted to be one of those guys doing very early EFI systems in the late 70s/early 80s you’d need to invest immense R&D effort to do so, or you could just wait until the early 90s where it’s so ubiquitous you could buy a cheap and easy EFI system off the shelf with no problems.

Regarding the rocker arm actuation of DOHC designs, I know it exists but it didn’t fill an interesting enough gameplay/design niche to be worth adding as an option in my opinion. But there were some fairly interesting performance/design differences between early SOHC rocker type engines and the cam on bucket ones.

There are a lot more possible differences in head design than we’ve modeled, but we have to draw the complexity line somewhere. Sorry.

Improvements/changes are coming to OHV, including a “modern OHV” choice to represent the quite a lot more advanced engineering of modern LS style V8s.

So basically

Timeline wise, that’ll be handled by the fact that you’ll have to research ingame.
Detail wise - We have to draw the line somewhere at how much detail we’ll have in design choices.[/quote]

Thanks for the reply but I have one issue with the comment on the EFI; Bosch had already developed it in the 60’s! Car companies bought the Bosch designs and applied it to their cars. VW and Volvo and Isuzu didn’t develop their stuff separately, they bought pattern parts/designs off Bosch. The only independent developer of EFI was Mitsubishi who chose to make their own gear from scratch (and they were big enough in the 70/80’s to afford to). So any car builder could buy D-Jetronic after it was developed and the same for K and L Jetronic. This is the same system as with gearboxes (Borg Warner and Getrag) and carburettors (Solex, Mikuni, Weber etc.). So moving the dates forward would actually reflect what is done in the automotive world…

Fair enough on your position re: design choice except that having a bucket/shim SOHC and a standard SOHC seems to be overkill when you could instead have, for example, narrow angle DOHC and wide angle DOHC and drop the reference to rocker arms so that there is no more reference to specific valve actuation methods. I left out that OHV was only developed in 1949 and that technically you’d need side-valve heads for the first nine years of gameplay for the same reason; uninspired design choice that was swiftly made redundant.

I suspect the lisencing fees, not the technical know-how was what was stopping some manufacturers from going the fuel injection route (not to mention lack of legislative incentive).

5

[quote=“Daffyflyer”]

Almost all those things are planned, but just not in game yet, because car design isn’t done yet :slight_smile:[/quote]

Sweet! Also, torsion bars were used as a front suspension type as well; Honda Civic in the 80’s and lots of Light Commercial Utility’s like Triton and B2600/Bravo to name a couple :slight_smile:

6

Probably true, but we’re kinda glossing over that a little, and having it be a case of those who invest in R&D get first go at using new techs, but it costs them a lot and is potentially less reliable, but late adopters can spend less research effort and just use techs that other makers have already pioneered.

7

[quote=“Daffyflyer”]

Probably true, but we’re kinda glossing over that a little, and having it be a case of those who invest in R&D get first go at using new techs, but it costs them a lot and is potentially less reliable, but late adopters can spend less research effort and just use techs that other makers have already pioneered.[/quote]

Sounds like a plan then; it’ll be really interesting to see how it all pans out when the first tycoon game mechanics are implemented! :smiley:

At least I can now stop feeling irritated as to why I have to wait soo long for EFI!

8

but wait…

D, K, KE are mechanical injections with a high pressure pump and non/some electronic control
L is MPFI

and only Mono-Jetronic is EFI/SPFI

9

[quote=“xABSOLUTIONx”]but wait…

D, K, KE are mechanical injections with a high pressure pump and non/some electronic control
L is MPFI

and only Mono-Jetronic is EFI/SPFI[/quote]

Well, technically speaking, all fuel systems which inject fuel after the throttle assembly and before the cylinder itself are MPFI systems (so long as there are more than one point where fuel is injected). MPFI stands for Multi Point Fuel Injection and doesn’t state explicitly that it requires a computer and sensors to run it. The line drawn between mechanical and electronic is a blurry one as computer control gradually phased in and items such as electrical fuel pumps replaced engine mounted mechanical units. However, by your own reckoning, MPFI should start in 1974 (When Nissan and Toyota first adopted it) and SPFI in 1980 when it was first invented.

It’s a moot point anyway since the devs have already stated they’re using early adoption as a game mechanic and I was unaware of that fact when I first posted my list of things that seemed out of place :slight_smile:

10

One of the big new features in the next release is the addition of a more advanced OHV.

11

as far as i’m concerned MPFI is full electronic control, like Digifant, Bosch Motronic etc.

mechanical injection still works more like a diesel engine then anything else

12

Our MPFI is full ECU controlled type, and the Mechanical is something like Kugelfischer

13

The Bosch D-Jetronic was the first electronical Injection-System - thats correct. But it has nothing in common with a real EFI System - despite being driven with 12V. The D-Jetronic was a analogue System that measured the inlet manifold pressure, temperature and engine RPM, the fuelinjection, ignition and throttle were all actuated mechanically. The D-Tronic wasa somewhat reliable but very unflexible and had to be very specific thanks to the Analogue System.

The first real EFIs were the Bosch Monomotronic in 1990 (SPFI), Bosch Motronic 1979 (MPFI), Digifant 1985 (VW) and Motorola/Ford EEC-III in i guess 1980ish. The first Motronic was (from what i know) very expensive - the first car using it was the BMW 732i - and it was one of the only ones back then. But it was fully digital with its microprocessors!
And thats why in the 80ies and early 90ies modern/real EFIs got popular - microprocessors started to get way cheaper and more common. And thats what Automation does in the Sandbox - it unlocks stuff at a time it started to get common! You always can do some massive R&D to get it earlier - but you wont use it for the cheap hatch for sure.

The same is for ABS, TC, SC and other stuff. It was available/debuted early - but not affordable for normal cars and very often they even were option in highly expensive cars.

TL;DR: First commercially introduced does not mean it was affordable, ready for the market or common. Automation only introduces tech when it started to get common that time. If you want to unlock stuff earlier, invest some good moneys in R&D in final game.

14

[quote=“Jakgoe”]

[quote=“HighOctaneLove”]
Valvetrain stuff[/quote]

OHV designs can rev very hard. in 1969 Corvette and Camaro had an engine option (ZL-1) which revved to 8,000rpm! The current LS series of engines have variants which rev to over 7,000rpm…

One of the big new features in the next release is the addition of a more advanced OHV.[/quote]

OMG! I. Want. This. NOW! :slight_smile: nom nom nom pushrod ohv nom nom nom

15

[quote=“07CobaltGirl”]
OMG! I. Want. This. NOW! :slight_smile: nom nom nom pushrod ohv nom nom nom[/quote]

I knew you would… :stuck_out_tongue:

16

[quote=“Daffyflyer”]

[quote=“07CobaltGirl”]
OMG! I. Want. This. NOW! :slight_smile: nom nom nom pushrod ohv nom nom nom[/quote]

I knew you would… :stuck_out_tongue:[/quote]

:smiley: :smiley: :laughing:

17

Jumping in on this discussion, will it be possible in the future to get this R&D unlocking in the sandbox through the use of tech points? I remember reading somewhere that tech points effectively move that section of the engine you’re building up one year per point, but if I’m building say an engine in 1965 and put four points into the bottom end tab to bring the effective year for that section to 1969 it doesn’t unlock aluminum as a block material. I know some of the scenarios have this as a feature, but is it planned to be available in the sandbox designers as well?

18

In the sandbox, there is nothing stopping you from making the year the desired year, and working from there. In the campaign, you will have a unlocked-tech year for each of the tabs of the engine designer.

19

I think what he’s trying to say is being able to build an aluminum-block engine in Sandbox mode in 1965. Sandbox doesn’t unlock tech early (unless it’s different for the version Beta testers use).

For instance, (and this may not be the greatest example in the world, because boxer engines haven’t been unlocked yet) – I couldn’t create the 1985 Subaru EA82 motor with the either MPFI or SPFI versions available that year because they don’t exist until later in the sandbox. but I could (assuming I could choose the block) make the carbed version.

I think what he’s asking is why in sandbox mode upping that slider doesn’t allow you to unlock future tech to make it available for an earlier year of production.

20

I get what you are both trying to say, but in the sandbox, all you need to do is to move the tech year forward to unlock what you want, and compensate with the quality sliders. The quality sliders do just what the name suggests, which is to increase the quality of the parts.