Hello everyone, after i gained some experience i have a couple of engines which i would like your opinion and suggestions about.
First three are high performance engines, which i must say were the easiest to make. The other three are eco ones which i tried to make their peak power in the lowest rpm i could get with the amount of power i wanted.
The thing i find hard most is setting the rpm in which the peak power at. Though it looks like i control it well, i dont realy know what im doing, its just trial and error, finding the cam profile and ignition timing combination that will make me happy about the position of the peak, and i have obsession to this
So any technic on controlling the peak is welcome!
I uploaded all the lua files so you can improve those engines KD14 Engines.rar (56.3 KB)
All the engines are 2013 manufacturing year
The first one is inspired by the Subaru BRZ (or Toyota GT86 ), the boxer engine has direct injection but i decided to use multi point, sort of a budget sports car engine.
I guess the only rough figures are the fuel efficiency and the man hours? http://imageshack.us/a/img20/3281/v48l.jpg
quite nice, but first you need to lower the fuel used, 95 octane AKI is race gas. nobody in the real world would use that for anything less than 1000 hp monster.
90.3 is a good balance. the weight is a non issue unless its a FWD motor or over 300 Kg and to have a sporty car you need to have the torque peak a lot lower. example your “GT-86” engine the torque is in the moon literally (5800 rpm).
here I reworked your 2.0 “86” motor I made it cheaper and torquier the torque is no longer a curve like you had it but it is more of a plateau also it runs 90.3 AKI octane fuel.
Thanks for the comments!
Notice that im working with the RON method and as far as i know 95 RON octane is the most common fuel at least in the western countries.
About the engine, first of all i will be greatful for the lua file to see what made that beutiful torque curve and the engine so much cheaper
Though its more torquier then mine, the rev limiter cuts the peak power where in mine is well over the peak so you can stay on the power band between gear changes, and i cant tell for now but maybe the MTBF will be lower if the engine will rev higher?
besides that your engine is more fuel efficient. I dont wanna to sound lordy but your engine uses sport intake which raises the service costs way higher (btw, why it does?) and its 20kg heavier
By the way, is it right to make the RON\AKI lower then the target fuel to make room for air temprature and fuel condition or ect… variations?
[quote=“KD14”]Thanks for the comments!
Notice that im working with the RON method and as far as i know 95 RON octane is the most common fuel at least in the western countries.
By the way, is it right to make the RON\AKI lower then the target fuel to make room for air temprature and fuel condition or ect… variations?[/quote]
Yep, 95 RON is very common (at least in Australia).
No need to have any safety margin on RON, though that may change when we do the final reliability calculations in the finished game.
I tried to make 1.2TSI 63kW (as from my own Fabia) but the problem is, that I wasn’t able to reach the torque maximum at low RPMs. In reality this engine should have about 160Nm of torque at 1500-3500 RPMs and Automation turbos deliver the boost after 2000.
This is graph from my favourite engine-tuning company, where you can see the torque and power curves. The lower ones are standard, the higher (torque of 230Nm@3000-3500. 92kW@4000) are “Tuned by Cimbu”.
you’re welcome. the point of a forum is to help each other out.
I think I understand kind of what you wanted with this motor so I changed a couple of things and made it closer in idea to the original.
as for the sport intake it makes minimal difference. I made the engine go on a diet and found some extra horses hiding around, it drinks a little bit more fuel than the previous one
and my version is still 8 KG heavier but I offset those kilos by getting more power out: 221 HP and 165 ft/lbs.
last but not least you exaggerated the bore in relation to the stroke. I know you need to have a rev-happy motor, but you are paying way too much in material cost. check the response between both, yours gets a 42 and mine gets 47 part of the reason is ignition timing (more advanced=more responsive.).
having a buffer between your engine octane threshold and the fuel utilized should increase MTBF. octane rating-XX.2, should give you a good balance. when building an all out engine it’s okay to extract more HP from the fuel by being more aggressive with timing or compression or both.
About the TSI engine, yea the turbo’s are less realistic at least for now as mentioned by killrob, the turbo makes strange curves on the graph and cannot work below 2000rpm (though i think we can tolerate those 500rpm). Im also wondering why VAG makes it only 8 valves.
headache, the lua files are located in ‘my documents’, then in the posting stage, below you have Upload attachment tab.
Im glad you mentioned it, the aim of the engine is to make a badget sports car but more to the quality side, therefor i want it to be light so the weight distribution will be better, and you will still be able to squize the engine in track days and sometimes on the road without having to rebuild it after 100,000km, and a little bit of economy so it will make sense to use it as a daily car (which is what i couldnt achieve. Am i too ambitious? )
Though your engine now produces 20hp more its still disturbs me seeing the redline cuts the peak XD
The reason you can’t get the same low down boost as the TSI, is because they are twincharged. That means it has a turbo and a supercharger. The supercharger kicks in at low RPM, then as the RPM builds up the turbo kicks in. Also I think they use Variable Geometry Turbos which kick in at much lower RPM as well (I’m not 100% sure of this one, but I assume they do as most modern turbo engine, petrol and diesel, use them).
As far as I know twincharging and variable geometry turbos are both planned for the final release.
Hope this helped
[quote=“krispage”]The reason you can’t get the same low down boost as the TSI, is because they are twincharged. That means it has a turbo and a supercharger. The supercharger kicks in at low RPM, then as the RPM builds up the turbo kicks in. Also I think they use Variable Geometry Turbos which kick in at much lower RPM as well (I’m not 100% sure of this one, but I assume they do as most modern turbo engine, petrol and diesel, use them).
[/quote]
The 1.2TSI (VW CBZA/CBZB) is not supercharged, but you are right it has Variable Geometry, so it might be the reason. So I have to wait until final release to create my Fabia engine.
The twincharged TSI is 1.4TSI which is in Fabia RS.
The 1.2TSI (VW CBZA/CBZB) is not supercharged, but you are right it has Variable Geometry, so it might be the reason. So I have to wait until final release to create my Fabia engine.
The twincharged TSI is 1.4TSI which is in Fabia RS.[/quote]
The 1.2 TSI hasn´t a VTG Turbo.
imho the only Petrol Engine with a VTG Turbo is build in the Porsche 911 Turbo 997
headache, first of all, after i checked your engine i checked my original and found that i some how forgot the conrods made of titanium and capt on designing the engine lol!
I tuned your version a bit to my taste and this is what iv got:
I noticed that the weight went up by approx. 10 Kg I thought lighter is better…
MTBF means that the engine would ago about XXXXX before something breaks like a timing belt for example which the engine has, but nothing serious like internals.
Performance intakes don’t filter out quite as much dust as normal ones, and race intakes swallow your babies. So you need to change oil much more often.
oh right so thats what I will use to make that Squirrel eating Prodrive P2 engine then…Race intakes -Laughs evilly- no squirrels are safe now from the turbocharger muhahaha
), the boxer engine has direct injection but i decided to use multi point, sort of a budget sports car engine.
)
