automationgame.com

Hey! After seeing your many amazing engines, I wanted to give it a try as well.



SimTech is an upcoming car company based in Germany, using the highest technical standards for both engines and cars, always looking to find a good compromise between power and efficiency wth a true passion for cars and technology.

Model: SimTech Ibis (small hatchback with either a very economic 1.0 engine or for those who want more, a 1.4 L NA engine with 123 bhp

Engines:

1.0L Turbo




1.4L N.A. moar power, but still efficient with fuel, speeding up the Ibis




Model: Ibis Coupe (based on the smaller hatchback, but his big brother clearly aims at the more sportive driver

Engine: 1.9 L Turbo or 2.3 L Turbo 6 cylinder







Last but not least, the Ibis Sola is the car for the elegant. Engines are currently in development.

The engines are pretty nice but holy crap, those man hours are really, really high! The 1.0L engine would cost approximately 11983 USD to manufacture if we assume that each man hour costs 20 USD. That's not really economic in my opinion. You shouldn't set the "quality" sliders to the highest possible quality since that adds loads of extra man hours.

Holy crap, good point! Thanks a lot, YugoSpy!

No problem I'm glad that I've helped you a bit.

There is another issue that needs to be eradicated other than the mind boggling costs and huge man hours completely preventing mass production. These are very good engines being hampered by the rev limit. The power is still going up at the rev limit and you could probably find a fair few more horsepower from some of your engines. The 1.0-litre turbo makes little sense to me as I have developed a naturally aspirated engine of that size with better efficiency and more power. The turbo just doesn't seem right.

Hey cheeseman, I tried with my own 1.0L normally aspirated engine and here is the result so far:




A few things bother me here though and so far I haven't found a workaround to them. I did reduce cost and working hours, without losing any power. Yet, the torque is much lower, peaks only at 4000 and I am sad that it is probably impossible to tune the engine with great efficiency for normal fuel instead of super. Also I am not yet happy with the efficiency.

Nonetheless, I am thankful for your contribution as it gave me the inspiration for improvement!

25% efficiency is very good so I wouldn't be disappointed. Max torque at 4000 rpm is also rather normal when it comes to the peak in torque an although it may not be as much as your turbo engine 75% of maximum torque is available throughout the entire rev range. Also your engine is still capped by the rev limit. You might find another few hp if you increase the rev limit by 500. Keep on fiddling around a bit and you should make a wonderful engine. If I was to give it a rating out of 10, I would give it an 8.5!

The turbo fights back! Of course the disadvantages of high costs and relatively high man power remain, but I like the torque output and development much better.

A few hundred dollars in material costs, higher man hours, higher service costs, less responsiveness and a 50% hike in weight is not worth the extra bit of torque an power. The performance of the N/A will be just as good as the the turbo one with fewer issues.

Actually, you're right... I would hire you as a first engineer, to keep me on the floor..

I would happily do so but I have my own company to manage and I haven't got round to it in ages. I will send you some of my engines tomorrow when I can (should I say if?). Keep up the good work!