Favorite engine designs.

[ExarSWG]

I'm curious about other person's favorite engine designs.

Currently I'm in love with OHV valve type, compared to DOHC you have a smaller and lighter engine. Torque is the same in both, but OHV makes less RPM so, less power. You can just dial up the RPM slider and get the same power as DOHC, but in a cheaper, smaller and lighter engine. DOHC is only advantageous if you have the RPM slider very high.

Using OHV, in 1951 i'm producing a pretty good sports car for very cheap price. I started with a 5.7 liter OHV V8 engine, despite the size it only weights 205Kg and it's good for 177 hp and 287 NM, costing only 790 USD. All combined the car weights only 910 Kg so the engine is more than enough to make it pretty fast for 1951, and total cost is only 1597 USD.

[yaraxx]

DOHC only, R4 - cheap, power, good size, uneversal for any type of car. DOHC is best of all

[ExarSWG]

I don't think it is best. DOHC engines are more expensive, bigger and heavier, and the only advantage is higher RPM. In most situations you can design a OHV engine that costs the same, has the same power and torque, but is lighter and smaller.

For example:
V8 - 98 bore, 94 stroke, engine cost: 784 USD
OHV version:
182hp, 290nm, 205 Kg, Length: 36in, Width: 29in
DOHC version:
185hp, 290nm, 221 Kg, Length: 37in, Width: 31in

So for the same cost, DOHC version is 3hp more powerful, but weights 16 Kg more, is 1 inch lnoger and 2 inches wider. I don't think it is the best choice at all.

[TheBear]

R8 SOHC,DOCH or OHV dont matter its a straight 8! king of cool ;)

[plotz]

I had a few very small and efficient v4/800cc and v6/1300cc engines in my last save. In the late 40s and early 50s they were good for 50mpg+ passenger vehicles up to luxury sedans, very cheap and smooth.
They also allow minimizing the engine bay sliders and keep the vehicle weight down, as the required gearbox can be nimble, too.

[Eric.B]

Originally posted by plotz:

I had a few very small and efficient v4/800cc and v6/1300cc engines in my last save. In the late 40s and early 50s they were good for 50mpg+ passenger vehicles up to luxury sedans, very cheap and smooth.
They also allow minimizing the engine bay sliders and keep the vehicle weight down, as the required gearbox can be nimble, too.

Did those engines hit the minimum speed requirements for those vehicle types? Seem about half the size they should be.

[Bubs McKenzie]

Does the game take into account the extra banks of cylinders when adding OHC? DOHC is a lot more of a burden on Vs than Is.

[Eric.B]

Originally posted by Bubs McKenzie:

Does the game take into account the extra banks of cylinders when adding OHC? DOHC is a lot more of a burden on Vs than Is.

Currently it does not. The game does have a flag for the number of banks though. So maybe that would be one great way to increase the costs of various valvetrains. (Which I do have a ticket to do.)

[plotz]

Hi Eric, yes and I can probably still provide the game save with the 'historic' engine designs.

[OliveRilder]

Rotary engines with obscene levels of cylinders are the best. Having a giant radial engine spinning inside your car totally isn't dangerous.

[Refurbished Hamster]

"Rotary engines with obscene levels of cylinders are the best. Having a giant radial engine spinning inside your car totally isn't dangerous"

Bahahah...Eric should make it so that the car becomes a half star on safety at a certain point, and nothing you do with that car with that engine can change that.

[Eric.B]

Sorry for the late reply. Getting burned out from typing.

Originally posted by plotz:

Hi Eric, yes and I can probably still provide the game save with the 'historic' engine designs.

This won't be necessary, but thank you. Sounds like I need to boost minimum speed requirements in mid/later years. And adjust some of the buyer rating stuff. I do believe I already have some stuff planned to work on minimal sliders , but we're see. The game/turn times are getting too sluggish with the improved AI.

Originally posted by Rilder:

Rotary engines with obscene levels of cylinders are the best. Having a giant radial engine spinning inside your car totally isn't dangerous.

Originally posted by ATX Ferret:

"Rotary engines with obscene levels of cylinders are the best. Having a giant radial engine spinning inside your car totally isn't dangerous"

Actually one of my favorite cars that I get a kick out of seeing every time, is an Adams Farwell 40/45hp. I generally use it as an example of REAL rotary engines when Wankel fans become fanboys. :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZmd7k33JWE


If I had stupid money, stupid free time, and well was just a little more stupid than I am. I'd totally consider sticking something like a GNOME in a car. :)

[plotz]

Hi, my last save was outdated. I just did a subcompact with a 1.0L I4, F-Head. Starting Year 1946.
Not mid-50s, but mid-40 mpg, a bigger engine but no improvements on the design, yet.

It's running 60mph+, so not sluggish compared to 2CVs of the same time.
https://abload.de/img/unbenannt37u17.png

[Eric.B]

Originally posted by plotz:

Hi, my last save was outdated. I just did a subcompact with a 1.0L I4, F-Head. Starting Year 1946.
Not mid-50s, but mid-40 mpg, a bigger engine but no improvements on the design, yet.

It's running 60mph+, so not sluggish compared to 2CVs of the same time.
https://abload.de/img/unbenannt37u17.png

Thanks for the numbers Plotz. Looks like weight and drag are the culprits. Which makes sense since we did have to make adjustments to the models...

[plotz]

Looks like you at least already did some improvements :)

[Eric.B]

Originally posted by plotz:

Looks like you at least already did some improvements :)

I made some adjustments to the top speeds for v1.23.2, please try them out Friday and beyond and let me know how they are.