Iron verse aluminum heads, 1 year on...

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

I've been away from the game for many months and yet you still imply that companies like BMW, Chevrolet, Chrysler, Ford, Nissan, Toyota and many, many more no doubt are run by incompetent fools by claiming that aluminum both reduces power and efficiency. Why would these companies time and time again for decades use aluminum heads on performance variants of otherwise all iron engines if they LOWER performance?

According to you guys, iron heads/aluminum block would be the better option than aluminum heads/iron block due to:
More power.
More efficiency.
Lower weight.
Better emissions. (<- I think you guys use to give Aluminum blocks less emissions than Iron equivalents, not sure if you still do.)
With barely any cons other than price. Which clearly isn't what's stopping real manufacturers from doing this, as they're perfectly happy to do all aluminum which costs even more!

Last time I showed you this article: http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/ccrp-0602-iron-versus-aluminum-cylinder-heads-test/

In it, they tested "functionally identical" iron and aluminum heads on a stroked chevy small block on both "91-octane pump gas then" "Rockett Brand 118-octane fuel", "first at 110 degrees, and second at 185 degrees" and "a steady-state test at 190 degrees" "holding the engine at peak torque for 10 seconds and capturing data 10 times per second".

Like you, they've heard what they called "the old bench-racing line" of "iron heads make more power because they keep the heat in the chambers." over and over. Daffyflyer said last time he heard "iron heads kept slightly more heat in the combustion chamber, translating to a slight efficiency increase" and therefore that's what you guys went with. What was their conclusion again?

"As in zero difference anywhere in the power or detonation characteristics of the iron versus aluminum heads. Even the optimum total ignition timing was the same at 36 degrees. Regardless of coolant temp, rate of acceleration, steady state, or through a sweep, the dyno curves for the two styles of heads were identical. If anything, we could squint and guess and mumble that maybe aluminum heads were better by 2-3 hp. But the one thing we could never say is that the iron heads retained more heat and made more power than the aluminum. Maybe it's different on some engines with a drastically different water-jacket design, but we'll stand up and say that the old bench-racing line just ain't true."

But perhaps there is truth to Daffy's "iron heads kept slightly more heat in the combustion chamber" line, maybe iron heads generally run hotter after extended use and therefore tend to run closer to the optimal temperature? That's something that article's test didn't test out, but if true, then we're talking about a cooling requirement difference and not a power or efficiency one. If irons heads keep the heat in more and tend to run hotter, then logically they should require more cooling for the same power. Well, I guess I'll just have to wait and see if you guys man up and try addressing any of the things I've brought up recently. Or maybe, you'll do the same thing as last time.

[TrackpadUser]

While I do agree with a lot of the points you are making, I would recomend presenting them in a way that makes you sound less like an ass. The devs are quite nice but I know some people I work with who would ignore your comments just because of the way you are presenting them.

Still, to go back to the original subject, I do agree that cast iron engines are currently a bit too good in general, and not just the iron head + alumnium block example you gave.

They give better performance for cheaper costs, and the weight penality doesn't change much in the end. Same for the emision penality.

I thought they had higher cooling requirements from what I remember way back before the steam release, but after doing some testing, it seems to make no difference in the current version, so either I remembered wrong, or it dissapeared for some reason at some point during the last year and no-one noticed.

[Daffyflyer]

Yep, that is something we should look into further, as right now iron heads do seem to be a bit better than they should be in a few ways. Hot Rod's test does seem to imply they're pretty similar in performance aspects I agree, although that may not always play out with every design of head.

I'll see what our various automotive engineering textbooks say on the matter too, and see if I can find any good research papers on it. I'm sure someone has done some serious math on it somewhere.

It's nothing to do with "Manning up". And everything to do with the fact that as far as priorities go this is a very low one, the high priorities are A: Finishing the Tycoon side of things, and B: reworking the much bigger problems with the engine designer, like a poor simulation of the interaction between cam profile/valve size/head design/flow etc, a poor simulation of heimholz resonance effects, and a really broken model of turbo performance.

I'm sorry this oversight is so frustrating to you. We will look into it again, but it remains a reasonably low priority compared to more important problems/features.

[Daffyflyer]

Also, whilst I appreciate the feedback, and you raise a valid point. I'd recommend giving feedback to developers in a less "You guys are awful and have no idea what you're doing" format.

Developers much more likely to read and pay attention to feedback that isn't wrapped in insults ;)

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Daffyflyer:

Also, whilst I appreciate the feedback, and you raise a valid point. I'd recommend giving feedback to developers in a less "You guys are awful and have no idea what you're doing" format.

Developers much more likely to read and pay attention to feedback that isn't wrapped in insults ;)

Funny, because it's not until I did those things that you actually responded... irony perhaps?

Why haven't either of you responded to any of the questions I asked here?: http://steamcommunity.com/app/293760/discussions/2/357286663686825188/

Ursprungligen skrivet av Daffyflyer:

Yep, that is something we should look into further, as right now iron heads do seem to be a bit better than they should be in a few ways. Hot Rod's test does seem to imply they're pretty similar in performance aspects I agree, although that may not always play out with every design of head.

I'll see what our various automotive engineering textbooks say on the matter too, and see if I can find any good research papers on it. I'm sure someone has done some serious math on it somewhere.

It's nothing to do with "Manning up". And everything to do with the fact that as far as priorities go this is a very low one, the high priorities are A: Finishing the Tycoon side of things, and B: reworking the much bigger problems with the engine designer, like a poor simulation of the interaction between cam profile/valve size/head design/flow etc, a poor simulation of heimholz resonance effects, and a really broken model of turbo performance.

I'm sorry this oversight is so frustrating to you. We will look into it again, but it remains a reasonably low priority compared to more important problems/features.

That thread I linked before had already been up for over a day with both of you ignoring it and you didn't respond to my engine family one despite responding to another thread after it was posted, seemed to me like you guys were ignoring me. I wasn't sure what the reason was, whether maybe you still had something against me perhaps because of our past, maybe because they're old issues that I and possibly others have brought up before and therefore you didn't feel was worth your time addressing, or maybe you weren't man enough as I went with. And by "addressing" I meant respond, not fix at next possible opportunity.

Anyway I'm happy to see a responce and that you said you'd look into it again even as a low priority.

I guess the next thing I should do as far as this game is concerned is recreate some small blocks and prepare to talk OHV again, going to be hard to not make that one not "wrapped in insults" for me considering how much that infuriates me.

[Daffyflyer]

Dude. We can't always respond to every bit of feedback right away. When we have a busy week on the game it can take a few days to get to. Its nothing to do with who posted it.

If you can't post without insults, maybe reconsider posting.

We are well aware of of the OHV issues, and engine design is getting such a heavy rework that any issues we have now are unlikely to still exist in that version (different ones might though, hopefully lesser problems)

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

My main issue with OHV is that you haven't made an advanced version dating back to 1955, yet added MOHV despite it being unnecessary as I've demonstrated before. Those insulting reasons either you or Killrob gave me for doing so back in the day, ugh still find it hard to believe.

I guess I'll just have to take your word for it that one of you will reply to that other thread when either of you have the time.

[Killrob]

Yes, we all agree that the world revolves around you and your feelings, as does in fact the creation of this game. Whenever you feel something is off we need to bow to you and and change it immediately. Everything we do wrong is of course meant to insult you. Indeed, we revel in the fact that we are making a game that insults you on such a deep level, and every morning I personally look forward to continuing to do just that with utmost glee.

On a more serious note: cut that entitled authoritarian crap. We do listen to what people have to say and the better worded it is and the more data that is given to support the argument the more weight that person's voice has. The more entitled and emotional it is, the less we care about it. You do provide some good info on things we actually ARE taking on board, and certainly that is not because you act like a whiny (insert word of choice here).

OHV will be revisited in the engine designer revamp, for now it is completely irrelevant as we have more important things to do.

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

http://automationgame.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=5844

Ursprungligen skrivet av Daffyflyer:

Modern OHV is there because everyone was complaining that it was impossible to replicate really well designed modern pushrod engines

Oh really Daffyflyer? Hypocrite much? Though harder than perhaps I'd like, I found it very much possible to recreate "really well designed modern pushrod engines" in all versions of the game I tried with normal OHV (unless you guys don't count the modern LS engines as such). Wanna know what pushrod engines were REALLY impossible to replicate? Classic muscle car engines from the late 50s to early 70s, yet you didn't add a new OHV option of those engines now did you? And I saw a lot of people bring that complant up, I bet a lot more than those complaining about the modern ones.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Daffyflyer:

It may need some further balancing and tweaking on it's stats though

You mean that it was an unnecessary waste of time, time that would've been much better spent doing other things right? Which would include but very far from limited to, what you should've done in the first place if you were going to add another OHV option which is one based on the solid lifter style used in muscle car engines of the 60s and early 70s.

http://automationgame.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=422&p=4685&hilit=OHV#p4685
In responce to: will we be able to choose between solid push-rods or hydraulic lifters when we use OHV ..... ?

Ursprungligen skrivet av Daffyflyer:

This was originally planned but got cut to simplify things a little

Huh...

http://automationgame.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4679&hilit=OHV
Indirect responce to: With the 2006 LS7, it's the pistons that can't handle the pace, the LS7 is a 7 litre slightly over-square V8 that revs to 7,000 RPM and has I beam Titanium conrods and Hypereutectic cast pistons, why? I guess so they could run 11:0 compression and still have it meet emissions regulations and since the bottom end quality is for the entire bottom end, the LS7 in game has unrealistically high production units, so please add individual quality sliders for the bottom end just like in interiors.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Daffyflyer:

Considering the clever designs of modern LS V8s etc. with very short and stiff pushrods etc, I think that's kinda almost a different thing to the traditional sort with long floppy pushrods and no ability to run high revs.

*facepalm* Does this man even know how to read?

Ursprungligen skrivet av Daffyflyer:

We used to have individual quality sliders per part, it got overly complex, micromanage-y and just all around painful.

Well now you've got a testing screen showing exactly what bottom end part is failing and for what reason, so I don't see how it would be "overly complex, micromanage-y and just all around painful". Forged pistions and I-Beam Steel conrods are the only parts with high RPM tolerance, yet they don't have matching RPM tolerance, why must we always be forced to increase quality on pistions, conrods and crank when we only need it on the pistions?

Ursprungligen skrivet av Killrob:

It is impossible to recreate russian tech and american pushrod tech engines from the same era (~60s) in the game. So we settled somewhere in between and added the Modern OHV which is distinctly different though its use of titanium valves and all kinds of fancy tech. The starting point of Modern OHV is set to be the arrival of this tech in production cars.

I see you took part in this BS as well. "We can't do this for some unexplained reason, so we'll waste our time adding this unnecessary unrelated thing instead of putting that time towards that tycoon demo we must finish before we can start adding stuff like I3s, then V12s, V6s and so... guess we muddled that up abit."

Guess it wont be long before my ban now, right?

[Killrob]

I really admire your dedication, dude! If you manage to put that energy into something other than bickering on the internet you'll be super successful.

There are good reasons for what we did, but laying that out would be "Perlen vor die Säue geworfen" as we say in German.

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

So you've got the good reasons that therefore should prove me wrong yet... nothing.

[Killrob]

Correct! :)

[WhatWillTheNextDowndateBring?]

Sure you do... oh well, guess you and Daffy's colective hypocracy will have to remain at large. Anyway, you've got better things to do with your time than replying to me right? I suggest you do those other things, or not, you've got free will.

[Daffyflyer]

Everything you've discussed is going to be improved with the revamp of the engine designer.

It's not that we are hypocritical, its that we, as time goes by, work out better ways to solve issues, rearrange priorities and generally learn more about how to make the game better.


Wondering why we said something was one way, and now we say differently? That's the process of game development, designs evolve as you learn from earlier versions.

I am appreciative of your technical feedback, but if you can't provide it in a calm and reasonable manner like an adult, please leave. We have plenty of technical resources to draw on, from professional automotive engineers to engine builders to textbooks.

Your feedback is entirely good and relevant, but as you've proven yourself unable to comminicate calmly, enjoy your ban.

[SpacesuitSPF9000]

and nothing of value was lost that day

[Daffyflyer]

Ursprungligen skrivet av SpacemanSPF9000:

and nothing of value was lost that day

*Chuckles*

Actually, a little bit of value was lost, he made some very useful observations, which we will investigate.

But if folks can't behave like mature adults it's not worth having them around to drag down the otherwise awesome community :)