Highest Efficiency Possible?

[Ryan]

After seeing a few threads recently - mostly filled with restrictions for what they're after - I decided to chase efficiency while keeping it reasonable with production cost and time, along with giving it enough power. (Aiming toward the more prestigious end of the car market with the company.)



But I wonder, what is the highest you've ever achieved with an engine that is viable for production and with an engine created as a technical exercise?

Here's that very engine placed into the 2014 Drivers Academy* car:



*The drivers academy car is an affordable car aimed at track day enthusiasts and low budget race teams to allow them to get track day action at a fraction of the cost, and not a fraction of the performance or excitement.

A one make series will support multiple touring car series around Europe.

[EnryGT5]

That's just INSANE, my eco production 1.1 liter N/A barely scratches 34%

I haven't really tried for max economy, once i did hit over 36% but it was really bad for normal use

[utopian201]

When posting engines, is there an accepted standard on the forum when it comes to quality sliders and the tech year? Because if you moved the quality slider to the maximum on all tabs, obviously the efficiency will be higher.

[Jakgoe]

You might want to look at this:

viewtopic.php?f=34&t=2694

[Ryan]

Some of the things in there are rather good but it seems they'd never be viable for production. Efficiency of over 60% is very good though.

edit: Just gave it a few revisions; changed the tyres to 165/165 Hard Long Life, gave it a slightly revised seven speed gear box, with it now reading 104.1 MPG. When diesel makes its way in, the VW XL1 will have a competitor.

[mtm84]

Nearly 130 man hours isn't really viable for production either! Not a bad engine though.

[vmo]

Use this one:
2.0 S-4 NA engine without sliders (máx. 1-2) and efficiency around 39-40%.

2.0L 16V DOHC ultraeconRev2.lua

(40.39 KiB) Downloaded 303 times

[Ryan]

After the original concept idea, a new viable product has been produced:



In the same specification as the 104Mpg concept, the vehicle can hit 89Mpg.

[strop]

For a writeup that can be found on page 1 of my personal company thread, I also played around with economical engine formats. I found that an engine suitable for mass production in a budget car that was economical, balancing material costs, useable power and servicing costs, this format comes out to be the best balance of all those factors. Little surprise that it's similar to the format used in FF hatches these days.

I too came up with very similar power, reliability, costs and economy figures. It's not hard to get the economy up to about 60% but nobody would ever bother doing that because it'd be heinously expensive and there's no market for a car with such an engine in it.

[Ryan]

Exactly! When it comes to it, over 40% is as high as it would need to be as there are more factors than just the engine, such as the aerodynamics of the car and tyres chosen to reduce friction.

But when it comes to outright power...

[nialloftara]

I'm curious, why go for aluminum? you can get a bit more power and economy from iron for cheaper and in transverse setup it keeps the weight on the drive wheels better

[Ryan]

That car has a longitudinal configuration! Plus, with it being so light, the AlSi alloy really keeps the weight down. (No expense spared for premium!)

But I will try it out later and see what I get from it and an FF version of my Academy car.

[vmo]

Look this one:

2.0L 16V DOHC ultraeconRev2.lua

(40.39 KiB) Downloaded 290 times