Engine dimensions format

[07CobaltGirl]

I've seen a couple posts on engine size, but none of them definitively explained the format for me. A few scenarios have size requirements. I can see them change, but it is really tough (for me at least) to track which dimensions are increasing/decreasing with changes made to the configuration. If the requirement expressed is 600mm X 500mm X 520mm, for example, is this expressing L x W x H? Or H x W x L? Maybe these could be labeled to make it easier to visualize the dimension changes? Every time I think I figured it out, it does something which I did not expect.

[Killrob]

Good point! I think the easiest way around that would be to implement the size arrows for scenarios like currently when building an engine for a specific engine bay.

[07CobaltGirl]

[Killrob]

Huh? Was that already in the previous public build? If yes, sorry for that, confusion on my end.

[Reaper392]

Its definitely not in the scenarios, I think CobaltGirl was just genuinely unsure if you were being patronising or not (looks pretty clear that you aren't being patronising to me). I have the same problem so i would be all for a change like that

[maffc]

Also it would be helpful if we could see the dimensions on the same screen when we are altering items that change them. e.g. the bore and stroke on the bottom end instead of having to flick between that and the test screen

[Killrob]

Measures hovering around the engine, changing in real-time as you alter the sliders would be great, yes. Not easy to do currently. I think the arrows should suffice for the moment (which do work in real-time without retesting), as it doesn't really matter which dimension is which as long as the engine fits.

[maffc]

I'm still confused over engine dimensions.
I built a V8 engine which measured 558x422x663
I then revised the engine to create a cheaper, lighter and lower power version by using a smaller turbo, changing the intercooler and swapping per throttle injection with twin. (Turbo Intercooling doesn't seem to be part of the size calculations since you can use any of the options with no changes in size).

I would have expected the lower power version to be no bigger than it's more powerful brother. Graphically it looks smaller to me as the twin config is much shorter than per throttle, but it measures 574x466x624.

I've attached the LUA files of the engines if you want a look.

[07CobaltGirl]

maffc, yes, I wasn't sure if the response was sarcastic. The arrows idea didn't really address my question, or...more precisely, it was much more than I was asking for and didn't answer the immediate question at hand. I just want to know if it is 600mm (W) x 500mm (L) x 520mm (H), 600mm (H) x 500mm (L) x 520mm (W), or 600mm (L) x 500mm (W) x 520mm (H). Which number is which dimension in the scenarios, so I can better determine what changes will be made to affect size? I do pretty well with nearly all of them (except for turbos which still confuse the crap out of me), as long as it doesn't have those requirements. I spend forever just trying to meet that single requirement and never get to tune. I'd like to see if there is a way to use something other than the smallest possible displacement (or very close to it), which is what I usually end up with on them.

[Der Bayer]

The green version should be the right one. Just build an inline 6 and you will see that the first dimension will be pretty huge, the second one pretty small.

[07CobaltGirl]

So LxWxH then. That is what I expected it to be, but sometimes it just seems off (meaning not exactly what I was expecting). Just wanted confirmation. Thanks!

[maffc]

The green version should be the right one. Just build an inline 6 and you will see that the first dimension will be pretty huge, the second one pretty small.

Ah ha, so given that format I can see that choosing twin config did reduce the height of the engine,,I just don't get how using a smaller turbo makes it longer and wider :s

[maffc]

The green version should be the right one. Just build an inline 6 and you will see that the first dimension will be pretty huge, the second one pretty small.

Ah ha, so given that format I can see that choosing twin config did reduce the height of the engine,,I just don't get how using a smaller turbo makes it longer and wider :s

Sus'd it out. It is the twin config that causes the size changes after all. The per throttle config is much smaller than twin, but the graphics when using a turbo charger have a large unit sat on top of it, whereas the twin config appears to be inside this unit. It seems this unit isn't being taken into account when sizing the engine.