Can’t seem to get existing car to below around 15.2, so I would like to withdraw the Triton and submit the following instead;
Kudos on a really awesome challenge by the way, I’ve learned so much about tweaking things for performance due to this, its very handy for general design stuff too!
Help! I’m surrounded by all these TURBO LOVERS! hahaha
My car really sucks balls…but it’s still an N/A!!!
i got some 1:15 with a na engine
Well, I didn’t say everybody was using a turbo. But the vast majority are. haha
We are xD by the way i got a pretty busy day today ill update the leaderboards tomorrow sorry for the inconvenience.
Not a submission (I decided I would stick with the front-engine when I started this), but I was curious just how much better a mid-engine body would be.
As it turns out, a lot.
[quote=“Elouda”]Not a submission (I decided I would stick with the front-engine when I started this), but I was curious just how much better a mid-engine body would be.
As it turns out, a lot.
[attachment=2]2015-05-03_00005.jpg[/attachment]
[attachment=1]2015-05-03_00003.jpg[/attachment]
[attachment=0]2015-05-03_00004.jpg[/attachment][/quote]
change you submission to this it beats strop
That’s a very odd downforce distribution!
If that’s the case I’ll tune up my submission and see if I can match/better it so you can keep the front engine 
[quote=“strop”]That’s a very odd downforce distribution!
If that’s the case I’ll tune up my submission and see if I can match/better it so you can keep the front engine [/quote]
Always so helpful!
Okay so I played around with it for a bit. Turns out I was being way too lenient on the boooooscht.
I think these figures are wrong… the new engine displacement is actually 2374cc. Higher reliability engine because I’m actually stealing reliability from the crappy plastic body panels LOL.
When I haven’t wrung every last bit of power out of a car setup, you know that I’m half-assing it a bit. In this case, i’m quite certain there is still some more time to be gained from it, I simply don’t have the time to find it.
So for now, this will have to do!
The reliability requirement is indeed one of the hardest criteria here in my opinion. Personally managing it by keeping the boost tolerable.
Alright alright, keeping me honest I see 
I’m still amazed at how your car is so front downforce heavy. There’s something in that somewhere, given that its straight line performance is a bit slower than mine, presumably due to taking longer to get off the mark due to comparatively little downforce.
In addition, you’re using costlier, lighter materials for the engine, meaning that you’re allowing it to be heavy elsewhere, I presume in the chassis. But given the weights, I’m still willing to bet you’re using polymer panels.
p.s. ok matched it… but the approach is still very different! This front heavy downforce with active wing still boggles my mind and makes me wonder, does the graph actually correlate to what the active wing does?
I didn’t notice much of a shift in the graph when I toggle it, so I guess no, atleast not fully?
My chassis is Aluminium + Polymer, if you were curious.
What I really wonder if how on earth you get that 60+ reliability on the engine!
That makes sense, that’s the best setup for this price range (anything steel is way too heavy and loses you at least 1.5s). The stroke is only as long as it can be without reducing reliability, that is to say, my engine is fairly oversquare. I had no interest in trying for a 2500cc displacement.
Update for the 50th anniversary Com Star.
1:17:78, still a 1667cc OHV 
http://pumpgasracing.homestead.com/Screens/automation/SSCC/11778.jpg
Okay, here we go again.
Again not really deviating from my basic setup, which is still fundamentally different costs wise from elouda’s. Also note, even less displacement, even more turbo! And since I switched to a lighter engine, even more ludicrous power to weight ratio 
Seems to be a lot more room to move here.
If I may ask, what quality are your tyres? That’ll be an important factor, and I tend to put mine up as far as is affordable (in this case, +8).
[quote=“strop”]Seems to be a lot more room to move here.
If I may ask, what quality are your tyres? That’ll be an important factor, and I tend to put mine up as far as is affordable (in this case, +8).[/quote]
Mine are at +9, which is the most I can afford. Next step is like 550 cost. Dropping them to 8 without any other changes looses me 0.13 seconds.
