Automation Thread
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /o/ - Auto
You are currently reading a thread in /o/ - Auto
Show me your most JDM engine
>>13812870
>>13812870
Dat Nissan life
Dat power curve
>>13813161
>3k a year
>>13813237
>1.9k a year
I dont like this
>>13813366
lol I didn't feel like making the reliable :D
Totally not a Grand National
>>13813486
INFRINGMENT
>>13813533
We're a chionnese car company for chinoonese peeopo
Is this better?
>A weird AW11/S15
>>13813543
How do you have .14 of a car?
>>13813581
The rest of it snap oversteered into a tree.
>His car doesn't kill it's customers
bumpu
>>13812870
>JDM engine
>Not saving American industry by producing pushrawd v8 modurs
God dang it git out
>>13813815
Nothing like a 10.8L twin turbo Push Rod V8
>tfw my laptop struggles to play this game
>>13813901
When you say laptop, do you mean calculator?
>>13813896
Makes the wildcat look like a ripoff.
>>13813896
>not building a motor that costs so much you need to sell the house to fund it and its maintenance.
>>13813486
not with those hideous amber lamps.
![1406034962763[2].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/zG3R7tV.jpg "1406034962763[2].jpg")
>>13813901
>Windows experience score 3.3
needs more 1 hp/L monstrosities.
>>13814582
Fuck that there efficency gimmie torks
>>13814582
well close enough right?
>>13814748
Good enough
>>13814748
literaly how
>>13814950
literally lawnmower carburetor
Has anybody completed the Twingo yet?
>>13814568
>>13813896
how about a miata with Z1 headlights and a 2litre engine?
>>13816494
>tfw update broke the game and I can't reinstall it
>>13816494
why does it use as much fuel as an ls400 ?
>>13816844
What are you talking about?
>fuel consumption and mileage: 7.8 l/100km / 36.1 mpg (imp.) / 30.1 mpg (U.S.) / 12.8 km/l average estimated by a-c: 8.6 l/100km / 32.8 mpg (imp.) / 27.3 mpg (U.S.) / 11.6 km/l
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/mazda/mx-5_1gen/mx-5_1gen/1990.html
15.38 l/100km for a 2.0 is on par with a 1.6 doing 12.8 l/100km
>>13814568
>2800hp
Making peak power and torque at redline is pretty shit tho
>>13813780
I really miss this ad campaign. Funny how http://www.2011mediocrity.com/ redirects to the Subaru website.
r8? I know 6.2 to 60 is slow but it was the best I could get
>>13817043
Too quiet
Too much comfort
Too expensive
the engine take to long to make for what it is worth.
What are your market scores and target groups?
>>13817068
Selling at 38k, keep in mind this is the top trim model
Was trying to go for an S2000 thingy if it wasn't obvious
Automation is shit desu, turbos are literally 1978 tech in it.
I recommend EA Pro if you really like simulating engines.
>>13817268
looks boring tbqh
>>13817124
I see your luxury s2000
And call with a 2.8 v6 Miata
>>13817290
I have around 120h in it... Gets boring quickly since it's pretty shallow - no custom turbos or cams, limited bore/stroke ratio etc.
It also isn't even a real wave action simulator either.
0-62 in 6.8s
>>13817295
>1423.8 kg
>>13817300
Ill stick with automation
theyre supposed to redo turbos some day and I can put shit in cars
>>13817302
>6.8s
>From a V6
>Meanwhile a dinky little luxurious S200 with a 2.0L I4 is quicker to 60 at 6.2s
Lemme go make the base model and come back with a cheaper cost
fucking normie games trying to make me lower my compression ratio. the beta uprising needs to happen NOW
but in all seriousness do i need richer fuel and faster ignition timing?
>>13817345
It's an '88 frame and a '75 block. Still sells more than your state of the art 4 pot
>>13816494
>>13816496
pic
Can someone make an engine for me?
>>13817426
why not
>>13817426
What do you have in mind?
>B18C5 bored and stroked to 2.15L
>GTX3582R 0.82 A/R @28 psi
>Ported heads with large valves
>Short runners and free flowing exhaust
>Low friction bottom end (Dry sump, small skirts)
>716hp @ 7700rpm
>540lb-ft @ 5500rpm
>>13817318
>some day
Literally nothing has changed in the engine simulator for 2 years except V6s and modern pushrods.
>>13817471
is that supposed to look good lel
you cant even talk shit on automation if you think so
Anyone else having a problem with the diagnostic screen not showing up when you test run an engine? Because of this, I can't ever figure out what's wrong with my engines.
>>13817163
What's she put down with a DCOE or Dual quad setup?
>>13817381
Richen the fuel or change your cam profile. What sort of a power curve do you want?
>>13817471
i tried
>>13817483
It's not supposed to look good, it's supposed to be accurate.
If you're playing it for the graphics you're a babby.
>>13817580
that doesnt look accurate you dumb nigger
>>13817603
Why?
>>13817622
have you never seen a dyno
pic related is a real 700hp Honda dyno
>Tried making my bikes engine in this
>CC doesnt go low enough
>Rev limited doesnt go high enough
>But pretty close
I lost 10hp, gained 6Nm. Not bad.
Too bad there is no options for timing, swap that belt out for some gears for muh immersion.
>>13817557
one generating 250kW at peak.
>>13817641
and some shit I threw together in automation for comparison
>>13817662
Richen your fuel until it stops knocking and post results.
>>13817431
>>13817437
Straight 6. Dohc. 83.5 x 91. 93 octane. 71mm turbo
Thanks in advance
>>13818067
couldnt quite go 71mm
its not all out either
>>13818271
You can use the middle mouse button to chance the camera center point.
>>13818293
that wouldve been helpful to know
thanks for the future tho
>>13817471
>Literally nothing has changed in the engine simulator for 2 years except V6s and modern pushrods.
This is because they've been adding other shit to the game. It's about more than the engine.
>>13818067
GT4294R turbo (70.3mm, 1.01A/R)
15 psi at 3800rpm, 540hp@7300rpm, 451lbft@5500rpm
25 psi at 4000rpm, 717hp@7400rpm, 612lbft@4700rpm
35 psi at 4500rpm, 867hp@7400rpm, 772lbft@4600rpm
45 psi at 5200rpm, 914hp@5400rpm, 902lbft@5200rpm
>>13817641
It looks different because:
1. I calculate only once per 300rpm because it takes a while even on an i7
2. I probably simulated more modern turbo than that dyno used, smallish A/R with a twin-scroll billet turbine
3. A lot of other variables. Not all 700hp Hondas are the same.
>>13818403
Yeah but I don't see the car designer part going places... I think they've bitten off more than they can chew, making a huge car tycoon is fucking hard and it shows...
all of the bodies look really weird for some reason, they should allow for more sculpting.
Remember 3 years ago?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7kbqset9Yc
>>13818821
it doesnt just look different it looks like complete shit for what it s supposed to be
that looks like a nitrous dyno not a turbo
>$500 for a sim that mikes shittier dynos than a game
lel
>>13813543
>total cost: 103300
kek
Rate my 80's machine. The engine is a 4 webbers flatcrank V8.
>>13819045
>>13818271
>>13818821
Neat. Can you add camshaft data?
>>13819282
9:1 compression also
>>13817381
You need to retard timing
this worth playing again? I haven't played since 2014
>>13819282
Yeah I can.
I used something like 240/[email protected] total lift or similar.
>>13819293
I presumed 9.0:1 I think.
Will this teach me how engine work?
>>13820231
nope. Try car mechanic sim
>>13812870
What game is this?
>>13820231
>>13820252
Car mech sim just helps you learn basic parts. Not so much what they do and how to identify problems. It's still worth it.
>>13817471
ftfy
fite me
>>13820492
NAME OF GAME FAGGOT
>>13820499
