record holders

[BlastersPewPew]

Are you guys running any cooling for the engine? I was running the bare minimum to keep the engine cool.

[rileybanks]

zero cooling.

[strop]

Oh, I'm running minimum cooling. Makes a little difference. Also the fact I was trying out a brick

Lower drag body it is then!

[Jakgoe]

You have to appreciate the cars that get 160mpg+, but break down in 75 miles due to lack of cooling .

[strop]

LOL yeah and also rack up $70000 and 1000+ production units in build costs

[TrackpadUser]

Got it down to 1.36L/100km.

Which is about:

173 miles per uk gallons.
or
207.7 miles per us gallons.

[strop]

Lol that's awesome.

Actually now genuinely curious as to your approach, purely in the case I ever want to build a cheap eco car... Or even run an ultra eco challenge...

[TrackpadUser]

CRX body.

+15 most sliders.

Smallest I4 possible, tuned for maximum efficiency (stayed NA)

105s all corners.

Everything tuned to reduce weight, so smallest brakes, no safety, -15 interior, 4 speed gearbox.

And no cooling. Does 1.48L/100km with enough cooling to have the reliability higher than zero.

The car costs like 100000$ to make.

Surprisingly, even though it only has ~25 hp, it has 23 sportiness.

[strop]

Probably because it's so damn light. A quick look at the detailed stats would be quite revealing.

In low powered cars, the drag becomes a defining feature of the economy calculations then!

[TrackpadUser]

Sorry for the very crappy crop.



Edit: It says 1.48 L/100km because I added some cooling so the engine has more than 0 reliability. Putting the slider at zero brings it to the values I quoted earlier.

[strop]

Hm, I don't know how on earth you managed to get over 200mpg US with no ventilation! (But I'm not very good at configuring cars with 0 ventilation).

Instead, I have one with a positive engine reliability (0.7) that does 1.39L/100km, or 169.3mpg, but no way can I get that tune to over 200mpg ever!

Interestingly enough, it's..... much more powerful, and pretty quick too, what with a power:weight ratio of about 160hp:tonne. And if I sacrifice about 0.3mpg to put in larger wheels (13" instead of 10"), my car goes... a lot faster around Nordschleife (9:32.87 to be precise!)... sacrifice another 0.4mpg to make them 16" rims and it goes to 9:26.76

There's potential for something possibly interesting here.... stay tuned, I'm going to set something up.

eco.png (441.3 KiB) Viewed 4898 times

[rileybanks]

I find 8 gears is more economical than 4.

[strop]

you're right, using 8 gears, I got my build up to 189.1mpg with 0.5 reliability... absolutely hilarious top speed gearing of 834km/h though

(build year 2015 btw)

[Carmain2K]

Sorry for the crappy printscreen, but I made this in the demo...



252.4 MPG (UK)
210.2 MPG (US)
1.12 lt/100km

This could probably be beaten with a lighter/more aerodynamic body, but for now...



Oh and this is my first post, after over a year of lurking...

[strop]

Well, I'm really impressed!

(Also, since I'm not very good at tuning low-end power engines, how did you get 10.8hp @ 2000rpm?