unrealistic powerbands and rpm

[TakumiFuji01]

Well the Spoon S2000 race car doesn't even rev to 11,000 RPM LOL and its suppose to use the stock S2000 gearbox.

 

[Tornado]

The reason was "because we say so". That's why I asked.

It doesn't take a degree in mechanical engineering to look at the real life tuned cars in the game (and the descriptions explaining what was done to them) and compare them to cars you tune I'm the game (with similar descriptions to what you're doing to them). It certainly doesn't when the second post in the thread links to another thread which already delved into the topic in some detail for what should happen instead.

By multiple points of comparison you mean GT6 data...



Which doesn't say anything unless you actually show the data for "real life".

You mean the 4 dyno charts (two about engines with similar torque curves, two with engines of similar size with similar power), the detailed technical explanation given by Vegard about mean effective pressure, the comparisons to real life engine designs, and the talk about horsepower as a function of torque and RPM aren't any of that?


You can try and claim why you were really arguing or add another thing the the list of things that aren't important or whatever to your heart's content, but at the end of the day "small engines need to rev more to make as much power as big engines" is still a pretty staightforward truism.

 

[eran0004]

It doesn't take a degree in mechanical engineering to look at the real life tuned cars in the game (and the descriptions explaining what was done to them) and compare them to cars you tune I'm the game (with similar descriptions to what you're doing to them). It certainly doesn't when the second post in the thread links to another thread which already delved into the topic in some detail for what should happen instead.

It doesn't take a degree in mechanical engineering to explain your point of view either. "Because I say so" is not a valid argument.

You mean the 4 dyno charts (two about engines with similar torque curves, two with engines of similar size with similar power), the detailed technical explanation given by Vegard about mean effective pressure, the comparisons to real life engine designs, and the talk about horsepower as a function of torque and RPM aren't any of that?

No, I mean the "real life".

 

[Tornado]

It doesn't take a degree in mechanical engineering to explain your point of view either. "Because I say so" is not a valid argument.

And as per usual, it is simply fantastic that detailed explanations were given to you from multiple angles of reasoning; and that you ignoring them even when they are pointed out to you doesn't make them not exist. You're also perfectly free to answer any of the questions posed to you earlier.




Until then you'll have to forgive me for treating your entire diatribe as another "Lexus GS300 Vertex Edition".

 

[eran0004]

And as per usual, it is simply fantastic that detailed explanations were given to you from multiple angles of reasoning; and that you ignoring them even when they are pointed out to you doesn't make them not exist. You're also perfectly free to answer any of the questions posed to you earlier.




Until then you'll have to forgive me for treating your entire diatribe as another "Lexus GS300 Vertex Edition".

Is the Lexus still an open wound for you? Here, have a Band-Aid.

 

[alexnipi]

I've noticed a few cars where, after thinking about it, the powerband / rpm of the max power is just impossible for that engine size, well, I believe so anyway, so I want to see what other peoples opinions are or if other cars have been noticed with ridiculous, unrealistic powerbands.

I love Supras, and love the 2JZ engine. Seeing them make over 900hp is believable with big boost, and big turbos. but 944hp at only 5100rpm?? no way!

that's normal if you put the mid rpm range turbo -_-
and the first pic only says where is the peak of power not the limit rpm

 

[Tornado]

Is the Lexus still an open wound for you? Here, have a Band-Aid.

That was another instance where you spent half a dozen posts arguing something that was obviously wrong from your first post, and even Famine called you on it that time, so... Nah. I'm good. The parallels are (once again) simply too amusing to ignore.


Since you already admitted that the OP was right and you were apparently arguing against something you knew was true, (and you're pretty much ignoring everything that doesn't fit your argument anyway), I think I'll just call which one of the two things I said you were doing here.








Anyway, I'll do some pictures up for the tuning of the pre-GT3 games when I get home from work.

 

[eran0004]

That was another instance where you spent half a dozen posts arguing something that was obviously wrong, and even Famine called you on it that time, so... Nah. I'm good. The parallels are (once again) simply too amusing to ignore.


Since you already admitted that the OP was right and you were apparently arguing against something you knew was true, (and you're pretty much ignoring everything that doesn't fit your argument anyway), I think I'll just call it here.

I don't know how you do your reading, I wasn't arguing against the OP. I was just asking for comparisons. Then @Vegard came with his "reality is the comparison" and only later on gave an example of how an engine that he spent a fortune on for upgrades doesn't behave like the stock engine should.

And then to show what's wrong with the Corsa engine he posted a comparison with a Porsche 991.

If you're going to compare something, compare equals.

That's all I'm saying.

 

[Vegard]

It still "behaves" like the stock engine, that was my whole point.
I don't know how you do your reading...


I used that to demonstrate the fact that increasing horsepower can, and most often is done without increasing peak torque.

I recommend you read this and this.

 

[eran0004]

It still "behaves" like the stock engine, that was my whole point.
I don't know how you do your reading...

You said that there was a problem with it putting out so much power and torque at so and so much rpm, and that it was an economy engine built with low cost in mind. You didn't say that the problem was that it behaved like the stock engine. If that was your point I misunderstood and I'm sorry.

I used that to demonstrate the fact that increasing horsepower can, and most often is done without increasing peak torque.

So essentially you can increase the power without increasing the revs, by increasing torque in the high revs.

 

[Vegard]

You said that there was a problem with it putting out so much power and torque at so and so much rpm, and that it was an economy engine built with low cost in mind. You didn't say that the problem was that it behaved like the stock engine. If that was your point I misunderstood and I'm sorry.

My point was that a 1.4 liter NA engine with that amount of power would probably develop that power somewhere between 8500 rpm and 9500 rpm and be very peaky.
A 1.4 liter engine with that much torque would have to be turbo or supercharged. It's physically impossible to get that engine to produce this kind of specific torque, especially considering its humble underpinnings (block and crankshaft).

In GT6 the power is doubled and the torque profile is virtually unchanged.

So essentially you can increase the power without increasing the revs, by increasing torque in the high revs.

If you are talking about maximum revs, yes that is possible. It depends on the engine though.

The Carrera S / Carrera S Powerkit is a great example.
The dotted lines are the Carrera S and the full line is with the power kit. Torque is black, power is grey.

Modifications are:

• Ported and polished intake.
• Different intake camshaft.
• Re-mapped ECU.
• Variable resonance intake manifold.
• Sports exhaust system.

A mild upgrade, mainly through improved top end breathing, giving 30 PS.

 

[Johnnypenso]

You said that there was a problem with it putting out so much power and torque at so and so much rpm, and that it was an economy engine built with low cost in mind. You didn't say that the problem was that it behaved like the stock engine. If that was your point I misunderstood and I'm sorry.

So essentially you can increase the power without increasing the revs, by increasing torque in the high revs.

Actually the first thing he said was:

The main problem is that all tuning parts function as torque multipliers across the entire rev range! The only exceptions are turbos and superchargers. These are modeled to give a torque boost in a specific rpm range.

What you end up with are engines that keep their original characteristics, but massively inflated and totally unrealistic.

Which is essentially saying that in GT6 a hightly modified engine retains the characteristics of it's stock counterpart, with everything multiplied across the board, which is unrealistic. Seems he was pretty clear from the beginning..to me at least.

 

[BrodieBoi94]

Maybe the reason for this is that PD didn't have all necessary resources to replicate realistic torque/power curves for the game.

So they may have made a generic formula for car mods' affect on the cars' power which just added across the entire board instead of improving certain areas.

If any of you have had a go at tokyo xtreme racer zero (even though the physics aren't realistic), their torque/power curve formula is decent. You can really see the differences, strengths and weaknesses, between different cars or just different upgrade for a specific car.

Then again maybe PD was lazy, or decided to put it to the side for time's sake.

 

[eran0004]

Actually the first thing he said was:



Which is essentially saying that in GT6 a hightly modified engine retains the characteristics of it's stock counterpart, with everything multiplied across the board, which is unrealistic. Seems he was pretty clear from the beginning..to me at least.

And I was just asking for something to compare with.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

The engine tuning power and torque changes are derived from engine tuning codes, they are assigned to each car uniquely ( GT5 and GT6 seems hasn't changed from the car data that I have mapped from replay files since release day ). If they are not realistic ( looks like stock curve with higher numbers ), then PD have put the wrong code or simply apply them with generic tuning code without even bother to make it realistic. The only way to fix it, is to put another car engine tuning code that will increase the power/torque with realistic curve. I did this many times in GT5 via hybrid, in which I can virtually replicate all kind of real life engine output ( curve, peak numbers )

 

[Adamaw11]

If it bothers you so much, just pretend like you did an engine switch. Problem solved.

Great lets use the imagination!


This Supra actually has the 3.4L stroker kit fitted, and its actually supercharged (not turbo)
The trouble is the supercharger belt keeps slipping, thats why power starts dropping off at around 5100rpm

When I took this s2000 to the workshop, they didn't do all the engine work I asked for, instead they cheated and fitted a hidden nitrous kit thats leaking controlled amounts of nitrous oxide in, throughout the whole rev range, thats why the powerband and rpm is almost the same as factory.

This celica actually has a hidden supercharger kit and is stroked to 2.2L
I can enter it in NA-only races because the scrutineers can't tell that its supercharged.

 

[Adamaw11]

The engine tuning power and torque changes are derived from engine tuning codes, they are assigned to each car uniquely ( GT5 and GT6 seems hasn't changed from the car data that I have mapped from replay files since release day ). If they are not realistic ( looks like stock curve with higher numbers ), then PD have put the wrong code or simply apply them with generic tuning code without even bother to make it realistic. The only way to fix it, is to put another car engine tuning code that will increase the power/torque with realistic curve. I did this many times in GT5 via hybrid, in which I can virtually replicate all kind of real life engine output ( curve, peak numbers )

Thats pretty interesting, makes it seem worth getting into modding the game. Its just a shame we have to actually mod the game to make it more realistic.

I curious what the powerbands of those drag supras with 1200+ hp were like, any chance you got graphs of those. It is an awesome engine the 2JZ

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Thats pretty interesting, makes it seem worth getting into modding the game. Its just a shame we have to actually mod the game to make it more realistic.

I curious what the powerbands of those drag supras with 1200+ hp were like, any chance you got graphs of those. It is an awesome engine the 2JZ

If you mean the real car dyno graph, that would be hard to find, need to google it and with luck you may find someone who has it uploaded on a forum. For GT5 replica hybird, I have updated to latest version, so those hybrids are long gone, they got reset. But you may find a member here who still has the car and on 2.11, the Supra was made for @Kurei. He might be able to get a screen cap of the graph if he's still on 2.11
I originally posted the creation here :

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...thread-read-op-before-posting.275309/page-129

The Boost Logic Supra is one of the best replica I have ever made, along with AMS Alpha Omega, NSX TT, 512BB TT, and Devil Z ( L28TT ) in GT5.

 

[Streeto]

Why bother arguing for so long @eran0004? Free postcount?

These guys are clearly right.

I mean it's pretty obvious to anybody with even a slight knowledge of car tuning.

There's a lot of things PD are lazy about, this being one of them.

 

[eran0004]

Why bother arguing for so long @eran0004? Free postcount?

These guys are clearly right.

I mean it's pretty obvious to anybody with even a slight knowledge of car tuning.

There's a lot of things PD are lazy about, this being one of them.

Because I'm not taking "because it is" for an answer.

What are you doing here, other than collecting "free postcounts"?

 

[JayOTT]

Because I'm not taking "because it is" for an answer.

I decided to compile a list of real-life naturally aspirated sports/super cars and bikes and their torque in an attempt to find one that hits the elusive 100 ft-lb/litre (135nm/litre) mark;

Toyota 86/Subaru BRZ: 1998cc, 151 ft lbs (75.58 per litre)
Honda S2000 (First Gen): 1997cc, 161 ft lbs (80.62 per litre)
Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z06: 7008cc, 470 ft lbs (67.07 per litre)
HSV Clubsport R8 SV: 6162cc, 420.4 ft lbs (68.22 per litre)
Dodge Viper SRT: 8390cc, 600 ft lbs (71.51 per litre)
McLaren F1: 6064cc, 480 ft lbs (79.16 per litre)
Pagani Zonda F: 7291cc, 560.5 ft lbs (76.88 per litre)
Porsche 911 GT3 (Latest Model): 3799cc, 324.5 ft lbs (85.42 per litre)
Lamborghini Aventador: 6498cc, 508.2 ft lbs (78.21 per litre)
LaFerrari: 6262cc, 516.3 ft lbs (82.45 per litre)

The closest anything I looked up got was the Zonda R, coming in at 87.47 ft lbs per litre. And that thing's pretty much a race car. And if GT6 has the torque output of the Toyota TS030 correct, not even a Le Mans prototype manages to crack the 90 mark let alone 100 (it comes close, at 89.77 ft lbs per litre)

Make of that what you will.

 

[Streeto]

Because I'm not taking "because it is" for an answer.

What are you doing here, other than collecting "free postcounts"?

Not sure if troll, or just really dumb.

Who said just "because it is"?

They've given you enough information to understand the facts, you're either just one of those people who hates to be wrong, or you think that PD do everything right.

Everybody knows how messed up the powerbands are on some cars, you're the only one failing to see this.

 

[eran0004]

Not sure troll, or just really dumb.

Who said just "because it is"?

They've given you enough information to understand the facts, you're either just one of those people who hates to be wrong, or you think that PD do everything right.

Everybody knows how messed up the powerbands are on some cars, you're the only one failing to see this.

Lol, your entire post screams of "because it is" and yet you fail to see it. I wonder who is dumb?

 

[Streeto]

I honestly think you should stop trolling, you got destroyed on the first page so let's leave it at that.

I could understand if there was a language barrier or sight problem, but no, you seem fully equiped to understand the truth when it's thrown in your face, yet you go on blindly like a fool.

 

[Kurei]

...The Supra was made for @Kurei. He might be able to get a screen cap of the graph if he's still on 2.11

Unfortunately, I too updated for the purpose of keeping online-playability, the data (save) may be around somewhere on an old USB, but I wouldn't know where to look for that particular one, after moving-in to my new house.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Unfortunately, I too updated for the purpose of keeping online-playability, the data (save) may be around somewhere on an old USB, but I wouldn't know where to look for that particular one, after moving-in to my new house.

No worries mate

 

[Johnnypenso]

Lol, your entire post screams of "because it is" and yet you fail to see it. I wonder who is dumb?

Guess you missed this part of his post?

They've given you enough information to understand the facts, you're either just one of those people who hates to be wrong, or you think that PD do everything right.

Is there something specific in that data you've been given or the explanations that you don't understand? It seems to me all of your queries were answered and it's also clear there are issues with GT6 powerbands. Perhaps you can enlighten us with which part you are stuck on, or just tell us that you now stand corrected and let's move on.

 

[eran0004]

I honestly think you should stop trolling, you got destroyed on the first page so let's leave it at that.

I could understand if there was a language barrier or sight problem, but no, you seem fully equiped to understand the truth when it's thrown in your face, yet you go on blindly like a fool.

Why are you so rude all the time?

And no, I'm no expert on engine tuning. That's why I asked why they thought that it was unrealistic. I got no answers, just some ****** "if you don't understand why then I don't know what to say". It isn't until much later that people actually started to contribute in a productive manner, like @Vegard and @JayOTT did.

And then you come around like some major jerk and start to throw insults at me. You are the troll here, not me.

It seems to me all of your queries were answered and it's also clear there are issues with GT6 powerbands. Perhaps you can enlighten us with which part you are stuck on, or just tell us that you now stand corrected and let's move on.

I'll PM you.

 

[Streeto]

Don't try playing it off like I'm the bad guy, you know what you did.

You're always starting arguments on GTP, I see you all the time, I know who you are.

I'm done here.

 

[Tornado]

I got no answers, just some ****** "if you don't understand why then I don't know what to say". It isn't until much later that people actually started to contribute in a productive manner

And the final result doesn't actually emulate that. It sounds like it does a pretty good job of emulating a VTEC Prelude or a Quad4 Beretta, but those are both car with engines an awful lot larger and an awful lot less stressed than a Corsa 1.4 pushing 180 horsepower would be.

It's still a 1.4 Corsa engine with the mean effective pressure of a turbocharged engine and a torque profile that is identical to the stock car.

The Corsa has a MEP of >1960 kPa, or 19,6 bar*.

Atmospheric engines are typically in the 8,5 to 10,5 bar range while the highest MEP for a atmospheric engine being the BMW S54B32 @ 15,1 bar (117 NM/l).

* Derived from flywheel torque figure, using this equation:

Literally the first and second post in response to you by me and Vegard, respectively.

:

An actual, real life torque graph of a 1.4L inline 4 engine that produces around 180 horsepower.

A post that followed as soon as I found a dyno chart to compare to the on Vegard posted.



No one is saying anything different from the things you were told immediately. You've just decided to stop ignoring them.