automationgame.com

Added.

You have 2 number 1 spots in the OP

Might as well throw another production car into the mix.

Name of car: PAK Gold Standard 400-17
Intended use: EXTREME MUSCLE/Hypercar
Year: 2017
Power & Torque ratings: 1514hp @ 6900 rpm / 1693 nm @ 5100 rpm
Price (prod. cars only): $350K
Turbo or NA: Twin Turbo
Weight: 1575 kg
Format : F-AWD




"Hey, let's build a premium muscle car."
They built 3. In one. What a mess.

The power wars are escalating! I feel very un-me-like, having a car surrounded by things 1.5-2 times more powerful on the board

The V6 is certainly a good choice, strop. I imagine you could zoom past all of us with some more tinkering.

I'm not going to be tinkering with that car any further, because that's how (at least in this version), the car is going to be sold. I'll add that the calculated fuel economy of Salamander is 11.6L/100km, it uses sport compound road +8 tyres, it comes with standard entertainment, and its price tag of 250000 Automation Money Units is with a 40% markup on a Tiny factory because my company is tiny and Australia has significant car taxes for high performance and luxury vehicles

As you can see, I've no problem making the car go fast (see Race car leaderboard where I pretty much abused the sliders to the maximum). And I'd love to put my F-AWD car on the board too (the PAK looks really good, I like it and the fact it'll be a competitor), but... I've already made it several times in the past with a V8 and I'm waiting for V16s with quad turbo supercharging to come out, because that's what it was always meant to be

Haha! Both my PAKs are really unoptimized powerhouses. Massive gas guzzlers with little regard for anything else. Amped up super tyres and a robust suspensions keep them in check. Wish I could do what you did with 800hp.

I gave it another shot, with a smaller chassis and the same engine as before. This may be my last race submission, as I plan to stick to front engine vehicles; Though I might try a forced induction route.

With this, it feels like I am approaching the limits for front engine vehicles. Though it feels as if a tad more could be shaved off here too.

Race car airfield submission 2;
Original larger images; http://imgur.com/a/HCHdL
Time; 1:02.80
Name of car: DXM - Wyvern RS
Intended use: Race
Year: 2020
Power & Torque ratings: 1460hp, 976ft-lbs
Turbo or NA: NA
Weight: 1181.0kg
Format: AWD

Was the tech year limited to 2017 or not?

It technically is in the OP, but hey, the screenshot's helpful. That's a lot of g in the small circle test!

Tech year is limited to 2017 for production cars, 2020 for race cars.

Name of car: Hasszahn Platsch R
Intended use: Race Car
Year: 2020
Power & Torque ratings: 1116 HP@9200RPM/1044NM€6500RPM
Price (prod. cars only): -
Turbo or NA: Turbo
Weight: 1118.6Kg
Format (MR, F-AWD etc.):Mid engine/AWD
Picture of lap time:

Gemina Fuglia XRP - the testing platform for Gemina XIII's new Customer Assisted Performance Development program is a track exclusive machine made in very limited edition.

It features a naturally aspirated 4.6 liter V12 mounted mid-ship, derived directly from the 3.0l used in the AGP Series. Because of the broad torque curve a 4 speed sequential gearbox was deemed adequate. Aiming maximum driver involvement, the 760PS are sent solely to the rear wheels.

I reckon you'd have a good chance of making your car faster if you went for a 6 or 8 cylinder engine.

You may have a point. I was limited in engine size because of the engine's length. Also, better weight distribution maybe? I'll give it a try. Thanks.