Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Mon Jul 20, 2015 12:51 amby chlumsky
Made for Derrick. Derrick MK1, 355 HP (266kW), 30 MPG, $45,000. Most fuel efficient engine produced for cars made at chlumsky corp so far.
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Wed Dec 30, 2015 10:39 amby chlumsky
30 DEC 2015 "Chlumsky F1B1" 137020 US MARKET
- F1B1.png (1.29 MiB) Viewed 7225 times
- F1B1 2.png (594.91 KiB) Viewed 7222 times
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Wed Dec 30, 2015 11:07 amby nerd
Those brakes are probably no bigger than those found on a 1970's economy car.
I would increase the size of the rims significantly. Probably to 17-18 inch.
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Wed Dec 30, 2015 11:10 amby chlumsky
nerd wrote:Those brakes are probably no bigger than those found on a 1970's economy car.
I would increase the size of the rims significantly. Probably to 17-18 inch.
it wouldnt let me get bigger brakes so I went with the best ones. Plus they are lighter!
Also I think I omitted that info, how can you see the brakes? lol you must see them through the rims. Don't worry, they are carbon ceramic.
Also the tires are like that because of the superior grip.
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Wed Dec 30, 2015 11:19 amby squidhead
All you need to figure the brake size is to see the wheel size. You can't fit big rotors in those wheels.
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Wed Dec 30, 2015 11:20 amby chlumsky
squidhead wrote:All you need to figure the brake size is to see the wheel size. You can't fit big rotors in those wheels.
I already thought of this and changed it to say 21 inchers, it wouldn't let me go past 170mm for the brakes. I usually go with regular rotors, but the ceramics were a godsend.
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Wed Dec 30, 2015 11:23 amby nerd
chlumsky wrote:squidhead wrote:All you need to figure the brake size is to see the wheel size. You can't fit big rotors in those wheels.
I already thought of this and changed it to say 21 inchers, it wouldn't let me go past 170mm for the brakes.
That's odd. I can go over 170mm just fine on 21 inches.
Even the default size is bigger. (200mm)
It's going to be a deathtrap with those brakes.
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Wed Dec 30, 2015 11:26 amby chlumsky
nerd wrote:chlumsky wrote:squidhead wrote:All you need to figure the brake size is to see the wheel size. You can't fit big rotors in those wheels.
I already thought of this and changed it to say 21 inchers, it wouldn't let me go past 170mm for the brakes.
That's odd. I can go over 170mm just fine on 21 inches.
Even the default size is bigger. (200mm)
It's going to be a deathtrap with those brakes.
60-0 is 88 ft 11 inches...
The US average highway stopping distance for passenger vehicles is 193 feet (55-0 MPH).
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Wed Dec 30, 2015 11:36 amby nerd
chlumsky wrote:60-0 is 88 ft 11 inches...
The US average highway stopping distance for passenger vehicles is 193 feet (55-0 MPH).
Brake fade also matters. If you threw that around a track with a lot of long straights and tight corners for many laps, the brakes would wear out from the heat and become unusable.
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Wed Dec 30, 2015 11:50 amby chlumsky
- F1B1 3.png (104.4 KiB) Viewed 7057 times
Brake fade has been eliminated, it was -1.6% and now it is zero.
New price is 132,625 US on F1B1B
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Thu Dec 31, 2015 1:43 pmby strop
The impressive time on the Airfield caught my attention, as did the price tag. It makes me want to know a few more things, as a potential direct competitor:
1) What's the car's average reliability?
2) What's the cited fuel economy figure?
3) What are the car's basic stats? (i.e. drivability, sportiness, prestige, comfort, safety)
4) Are these cars selling for much/any profit?
Re: Chlumsky Corp.
Posted:
Sat Jan 02, 2016 11:50 amby chlumsky
149877 is new price for 2016