Which engine would you buy?

Neither. I don't want to drive a fucking minivan.

If they all weigh the same i'll have engine C

>>16814093

engine a for everyday stuff

engine c for track day bro

>>16814100
You don't even have a car so I wouldn't worry about minivans if I was you.

C

>>16814142

>projecting this hard in a busrider benchrace thread

B to be honest because A is a mombomber engine and C is a wheezy boosted to shit Nip fourbanger.

how much do they weigh?

B

>>16814177
>four banger
>that absurd HP/tork discrepancy

It's probably a dorito engine.

File: 1ll2222.jpg (296KB, 1200x628px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 1200x628px

>>16814093
Engine B. Actually, Engine B has very similar real life specs to the 3.6L V6 in 2016+ Camaros. The horsepower and torque numbers are off by 3 at absolute most, and the thing redlines at 7 grand with a very linear powerband.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qrs0oa-XIV4

File: test.jpg (54KB, 960x683px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 960x683px

>When you have engine A irl

>>16815482
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtOlxn3M1WI

>>16814093
Engine D:
>500hp
>7ft/lbs
>107,000RPM redline

File: IMG_7589.png (602KB, 661x604px) Image search: [Google]

602KB, 661x604px

>>16815482
>v6 """""muscle"""""

fucking degenerate

>>16815519
>minivan with bespoke suspension, brakes, a stripped interior, and a custom roll cage
opinion discarded.
Next.

>>16815513
This is /o/ not /shittyairplanes/

B and supercharger it

>>16814093
What's the cylinder count and alignment pattern?

I won't answer until I know the timing for work throws.

>>16814093
it comes down to gearing lad

>>16814093
Depends on the weight and gearing of the car it's going into desu

>>16814100

>>16814093
Stop being retarded.
Stating engine characteristics without considering the application it will be used for is typical busrider shit.

1 - B
2 - C
3 - A

Generally B
For racing: C
For hauling/offroad: A
I'm assuming they're all using the same tranny.

C would only be physically possible if peak torque was at the very top of the rev range... unlikely

B because I only care about performance

>>16820317
Woops meant C

C because waiting for power makes the power all that much better. Also you'll probably get better fuel economy when you're driving conservatively.

Having power anytime you floor it is fun for a while. Flooring it, waiting a second or two, and then having it shove you back I to your seat never gets old.
Hence why a lot of cars guys like a little turbo lag. It's honestly fun.
Just stay in the high revs if you want to stay in power.
(I drive an AW11 so if I want any power I have to stay between 4.5 and 8k.

>>16820144
explain

Okay, so using Automation I was able to get approximations of the types of engines you would need to have to get the simulated numbers. Based on the constraints in place for each engine specification, I found it much easier to use a different type of engine for each scenario. Although the engine types varied, there were consistent materials to keep things as close as possible. Each engine...
>only used cast iron blocks, heads, cranks, conrods, and pistons
>DOHC with 4 valves per cylinder
>same quality settings
>stroke as long as possible without reaching RPM limit
Other factors such as intake, VVL, VVT, aspiration, and injection type were used as needed to meet the numbers specified

File: EngineA.png (1MB, 1600x866px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x866px

>>16822466
>Engine A
A V8 is the easiest option to get the amount of torque needed at lower RPMs. Engine specific choices included VVT on the intake valves and multipoint EFI. Nothing too special about the motor.

*quick note: fuel type and air/fuel mixture were also consistent for each motor

File: EngineB.png (1MB, 1600x866px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x866px

>>16822466
>Engine B
Due to how turbos work in this game, an inline 6 was used for earlier turbo spool. Due to only using cast parts and meeting the specified numbers, the engine had to be very oversquare; 90mm bore and 76mm stroke. Direct injection was used to allow for higher boost/compression to achieve the horsepower figures needed. VVL and full VVT were also needed to create a flat as possible powerband on the engine. While the V8 got away with a single intake, this motor uses a throttle per cylinder configuration to maximize higher RPM performance, and a performance tier intake to boost overall performance.

File: EngineC.png (1MB, 1600x866px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x866px

>>16822466
>Engine C
Probably the hardest engine to try and create because of only using cast parts. To create the necessary torque and high horsepower, a very over square naturally aspirated V12 with a maxed out cam profile was used. No VVL or VVT. Twin performance intake direct injection to allow enough air into the engine and for high enough compression/timing to reach the numbers needed.

>>16822517
>turbo I6
Why not a N/A V6?

>>16815482
>>16815504
is a good example

>>16822544
>Automation
Did they recently move to a steam-only launcher or something? Mine shits the bed with the current install.

>>16822559
I downloaded it a couple months ago. They have a steam based version too, I guess? They're also getting close to having it ported to Unreal Engine

>>16822544
So it's a formula 1 engine

>>16822547
I would have to stray from using cast only to get similar results of the LFX in the Camaro, but totally doable irl of course

>>16814093
C is the only respectable choice

>>16822568
nah it cant be. too little horsepower.

what the fuck is engine c?

>>16822567
Hrm. Maybe I just need to sack up and wipe the install with a fresh one.

Turbo flat 16 when.

>>16822626
Or any flat engines flat engines for that matter. At least when they get UE up they're adding V10s

>>16816007
kill yourself

File: SAAB 9-5 B235.jpg (965KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

965KB, 3264x2448px

>>16814093
I take Engine S:
>320hp
>400lb-ft
>low-midrange torque band
>mid-highrange horse power band
>6000RPM