FAQ  •  Login

Nineties Econobox Challenge. *revisions and reviewing*

<<

Oskiinus

User avatar

Posts: 577

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:49 am

Location: Tarnów, Poland

Cars: Not a car, but I own Arkus Classic Junior in black ;)

Post Fri Jan 29, 2016 10:42 pm

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

nialloftara wrote:It's okay, you're new and I should have mentioned it in the op.


Have you accepted my entry or I have to do something to correct, Niallo? I ask because I want to do some advert and I don't know if I should.
CEO of Airborne Automotive, Airborne Motor Group and Co-CEO of it's sub-brands :D
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5895 - Thread!
<<

Oskiinus

User avatar

Posts: 577

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:49 am

Location: Tarnów, Poland

Cars: Not a car, but I own Arkus Classic Junior in black ;)

Post Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:18 pm

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

Anyway, an advert :D

Image

Don't kill me, I found random logo of ship in the internet.
CEO of Airborne Automotive, Airborne Motor Group and Co-CEO of it's sub-brands :D
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5895 - Thread!
<<

strop

User avatar

3-Star Beta Tester
3-Star Beta Tester

Posts: 3462

Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:31 pm

Cars: Honda Civic VTI-S MY13

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 12:49 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

lol! I saw the same logo when I was looking for "ship logo", and I also saw that background when I was looking for a good road :lol:
<<

Oskiinus

User avatar

Posts: 577

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:49 am

Location: Tarnów, Poland

Cars: Not a car, but I own Arkus Classic Junior in black ;)

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:08 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

strop wrote:lol! I saw the same logo when I was looking for "ship logo", and I also saw that background when I was looking for a good road :lol:


Oops
CEO of Airborne Automotive, Airborne Motor Group and Co-CEO of it's sub-brands :D
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5895 - Thread!
<<

NormanVauxhall

User avatar

Assistant Lead Beta Tester
Assistant Lead Beta Tester

Posts: 920

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2013 2:22 am

Location: Italy

Cars: 2002 Mazda Mx-5 1.6l NBFL
2008 Toyota Prius
1971 Fiat 500 L

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:26 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

I suggest to change the name from Andreas to Andrea. Andreas is not a very italian name.
ŽM-Automobili Group
Born by the fusion of Blue Marlin Motori Auto and Žnoprešk Avto in 1972.
BMMS Dolphine Mk.II and Žnoprešk Zest (1974)
Žnoprešk Z217 (1963)
Žnoprešk Zap! (1981)
<<

Oskiinus

User avatar

Posts: 577

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 3:49 am

Location: Tarnów, Poland

Cars: Not a car, but I own Arkus Classic Junior in black ;)

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:48 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

NormanVauxhall wrote:I suggest to change the name from Andreas to Andrea. Andreas is not a very italian name.


Well, you got me there. This s is just a typo :p
CEO of Airborne Automotive, Airborne Motor Group and Co-CEO of it's sub-brands :D
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5895 - Thread!
<<

Absurdist

User avatar

Supercharged
Supercharged

Posts: 279

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:03 pm

Location: Melbourne - Australia

Cars: 2006 Civic

Someone stole my bike :c

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 3:21 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

I'm having serious trouble trying to get to 17kn/l. Any tips?
"Anything happens in Grand Prix racing, and it usually does." - The great Murry Walker.

I'm on Steam!
Absurdistx
http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198041832277/
<<

koolkei

User avatar

Posts: 947

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 10:35 pm

Cars: a mini 2 wheeled single cyl car :D

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 3:44 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

the priority to getting lower fuel consumption in order:
1. lower weight.
2. lower cam profile, lower than 30 preferably. (yes you will be getting low specific output)
3. engine overall efficiency.
4. transmission efficiency.
5. long life tires also gives a little bit
6. aerodynamic usually effects only a little bit. except if you have lips and/or wing
<<

Absurdist

User avatar

Supercharged
Supercharged

Posts: 279

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:03 pm

Location: Melbourne - Australia

Cars: 2006 Civic

Someone stole my bike :c

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

Cheers for that. Damn I am bad at this. XD
"Anything happens in Grand Prix racing, and it usually does." - The great Murry Walker.

I'm on Steam!
Absurdistx
http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198041832277/
<<

Dragawn

User avatar

Turbocharged
Turbocharged

Posts: 391

Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 1:02 am

Cars: A high tech sportscar consisting entirely of air!

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 3:58 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

as for cam profile: 35 seems to be a sweetspot for fuel consumption, and sometimes around 20 is an even better sweetspot. You also can eco turbocharge your engine. Due to lack of turbo tech you can't get good power AND economy, but you can one of those. Squeezing your muffler slightly too tight helps with low end torque and thus economy aswell.
<<

koolkei

User avatar

Posts: 947

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 10:35 pm

Cars: a mini 2 wheeled single cyl car :D

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:07 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

oh. ofc there are some extra trick that you could use. super restrictive exhaust, although limits power and ups the octane requirements, usually end up giving quite a significant bit of more economy.

as for cam profile, i usually dont aim for a specific number but i usually aim for around 30-70HP/liter depending on the year. sometimes going less efficient cam setting but lower profile anyway can still give quite a boost of economy.

as for turbos... i don't know what im doing. it's just trial and error for me.

and if you're feeling brave and have the extra budget, VVL does wonders. give you the economy of a lower cam profile with the performance of a higher ones. but they're quite a bit more sensitive with the settings, and the reliability penalty, as well as the extra weight, means youre getting only about 80% of the lower cam profile effect and 80% of the high profile effect.
<<

Sebesseg

Posts: 100

Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 9:38 am

Cars: '15 Charger Rallye

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

@Koolkei: Wait VVL? You mean VVT, right, because I'd be all over VVL. I don't think I'm getting a VVL option when I do it (I'll have to check again)

Also...I started typing and thinking a lot about getting fuel econ up and you guys beat me to it (I need to refresh more) but I wrote this up:

It involves stuff you’re probably already familiar with, but maybe to extremes you may not be comfortable with, which was the biggest headache for me when trying to get my sedan to make the cut.

I guess first things first is check out your engines efficiency and horsepower. Power is the tradeoff for efficiency so if it’s too powerful it’s not going to be remarkably efficient. A HP range of 50-80 (with 50 being low power high efficiency and 80 being high power low efficiency) is probably where you’ll be. A lower cam profile will hurt HP output but will save on efficiency, around 30 is probably best. Also consider making the exhaust smaller, again it will kill HP but the efficiency will go up. You can also up the quality sliders on the fuel injector or compression ratio tabs to eek out some more efficiency.

You will probably have a low power engine. You can produce a more powerful engine (although for general efficiency the 70-80 HP range is probably pushing it for this challenge given the constraints so shoot for 50-70), but then it comes down to weight. Make sure your engine isn’t too large. Anything under 1.5L can be made to work, assuming its 4 or 6 cylinders (though 6 is heavier, generally), but it can be difficult and since making the engine out of aluminum is probably out of the question you have to make it smaller in order to not be too heavy.

Which leads to the second part of weight. If the car weighs too much the powerful engine while being strong enough to push it around will find its fuel economy lacking. Now you can try to push the gearing past the estimated top speed which does have the effect of increasing the fuel economy, but only to a point. Once you reach that then you just have to strip things out. Remove seats, remove the radio, a less intricate safety package, choose a lighter front and rear suspension set-up, choose lighter brake pad options, use standard suspension springs. If you do all that and you’ve not hit the range then begin to lower quality sliders, I’d begin with seats. Lower that slider all the weigh down (-15). Then move onto removing the undertray (or if Full switch to semi, and if not enough then remove, this will effect fuel economy too). Then return to the very first model tab and lower the slider there to reduce weight. Read the sliders to make sure it lowers weight, if it doesn’t specifically say “lower weight” don’t touch it, it probably won’t help. You can also lower tire width (say 165mm instead of 175mm).

So a more itemized list:
-Increase engine efficiency: roughly 30 cam profile, small exhaust, increase fuel tab sliders [last]),
-Manage weight: remove extra seats (then lower sliders), remove the radio, lower safety (then lower sliders), lower sliders on first model tab, make a smaller engine, use lighter suspension, and choose lighter springs

Be careful with upping sliders b/c that will increase production units, which are something to keep an eye on in this comp.

To get my sedan to work I had a lot of -15 quality sliders. I probably missed some, but that should be a lot of things to consider…

edit: fixed the hp range
<<

koolkei

User avatar

Posts: 947

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 10:35 pm

Cars: a mini 2 wheeled single cyl car :D

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:06 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

no. i really meant VVL. although its not available in-game on year '93. that was just in general.
(VVT are a no brainer, i'm always tempted to use high-tech high efficiency, high quality engines, which always end up being too expensive.)

also, we have quite the different approaches dont we. quite the opposite.

you say engine efficiency is more important.
i say weight is more important.

because as i see it. a 1.5l engine making 70HP vs 1l engine also making 70HP will probably get similiar fuel economy, but i think the 1l has the edge. because even when it need to be pushed more, purely the engine weight itself is lower. not to mention cornering performance will of course improve.


and i blatantly REFUSE to use any negative quality slider to lower weight, unless it's necessary to pinch every dollar, due to the reliability penalty it comes along with.
(i think this is why my 'economical' cars usually end up being slightly more reliable than average. but only the 'cheap' cars)

and on the engine tab, the fuel tab sliders are always the first one to get any quality points for me.
reasons? it gives the best bang for buck. gives highest reliability per points, lowers octane requirements quite a bit, and gives an acceptable efficiency boost. the highest being valvetrain tab, which usually is the second tab i give quality to, after that, exhaust also often gets a little bit, just because they're cheap, i usually gives what budget leftover to exhaust.

and suspension setups are just pretty much doesn't effect economy enough on this challenge. it's another matter if you're using hyrdopneumatic, or active suspensions

and tires are the sensitive ones. too thin and your stats get quite a bit of penalty, too wide, your economy gets a penalty. although it's not as dramatic of an effect on long life tyres than it is on sports compound.

and. aero... just give at least +1 on all your cars. it only cost a penny and gives up to 0.1km/l depending on the car.

@nial i just remembered. i think i forgot to rename my cars to NEC-***** and it's retaining it's actual name. sorry. do you want me to resubmit with the correct name, or can you just make an exception? or something else
Last edited by koolkei on Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
<<

nialloftara

User avatar

Supercharged
Supercharged

Posts: 1983

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 2:07 pm

Location: Northeast USA

Cars: 2006 Scion Xb

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

Small update: I have not had much time for reviewing cars yet, I had a small chance a few days ago and most are good, I sent a few PM's but I didn't make a list of approved entries yet. After my turn for the car shopping round ends and I post the reviews and winners to that challenge I will start a list of received and accepted entries to this challenge. So keep the entries coming, I currently have about 21 sitting in my inbox so it looks like this is a pretty lively contest so far.
Chief designer and CEO, Centauri motor works, Centauri Performance Vehicles (CPV)
"Centauri: The Stars Are Within Your Reach."
Centauri engines Centauri cars
CPV engines CPV cars
Company ID: 1943047
<<

DeusExMackia

User avatar

Posts: 362

Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 1:11 am

Location: Whatlington, Battle, UK

Cars: '04 Seat Arosa 1.0 S

Post Sat Jan 30, 2016 6:36 am

Re: Nineties Econobox Challenge. *Build Phase*

Damn! Looking forward to the reviews. And good luck with those too!
ImageImageImageImage
Company ID: 1959771

The Great Automation Badge Grid - Get your company on the grid

"Spending warm summer days indoors, writing frightening verse to a bucktooth girl in Luxembourg"
PreviousNext

Return to Community Challenges & Competitions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron