Quote from EeekiE :

There's no need for them to produce and sell Diesel at the pumps of that quality. Just as there are petrol fuels that far exceed anything you can buy at the pump.

Supercharging vs Turbocharging is a different thread alltogether and it all boils down to personal taste. For road use, I much prefer drivability over chasing numbers.

I think some people need to learn to love something, but not keep trying to prove how superior it is. My car for instance, handles like a pig on ice, goes like shit off a shovel, and stops like Lisa Riley falling down some stairs but I blummin' love it, and wouldn't want to swap it for say a 205 GTI which I acknowledge would be a faster car.

Well, I never said that your car is absolutely crap, so? And yes, I fully respect your love for your car, believe it or not. I have no personal vendettas against anyone here too. It is also refreshing to see someone who knows the to value their cars and get the most of it too.

Well, diesel fuel quality has improved over the years. ULSD (Ultra low sulphur diesel) is getting more widespread, and BP is already giving a special higher than usual cetane version of diesel. The "magic" additive? High quality biodiesel.

I'm quite aware that quite a few people already run 108 Octane fuel for their daily drivers. For petrolheads who tune the shit out of their engines. Would any of those high performance engines work as well as designed without at least PULP (PREMIUM Unleaded Petrol)? Of course not. Just that I've not seen anyone tune diesel engines for high cetane use yet. The results would be interesting to say the least. Fact is, I'm as some of you already know am quite familiar with the 4D56. I can guarantee that they CAN rev all the way to 6000rpm without internal damage. The only problem is that normal 40-45 cetane diesel they're designed to run on simply doesn't burn quickly and efficiently enough to make good power at say 5000rpm. Would be fun to have some 55-60 cetane fuel to experiment with and of course a good 4D56 as a testbed. As for problems such as high EGTs (exhaust gas temperatures), a freer flowing exhaust and improved cooling would fix that. BTW, they already come with heavy duty oil coolers in OEM form too, since they were originally from trucks meant to be worked LONG and HARD. Potential powerbands of say 2000-5800rpm is no joke.

In case you're all wondering:

Bore: 91.1mm
Stroke: 95mm

So in terms of mean piston speed, it's still well under control at 6000rpm.

Well, the usual cetane in europe these days is now 51 cetane, so it's way better than it was.

Look forward to running a fair race between the 2 of us someday, EeekiE!

Probably unlikely in all honesty as I only tend to play it on a LAN with my friends, or on my own server against a few guys from up the road.

108 Octane isn't really that exotic for petrol, I'm talking about other blends, and some of the Fuels Ferrari used to use in F1 that even had water suspended in the fuel.
And in the world of spark-ignition engines, there are alternatives even to Petrol that can be used to good effect in motorsport.

Quote from EeekiE :

Probably unlikely in all honesty as I only tend to play it on a LAN with my friends, or on my own server against a few guys from up the road.

108 Octane isn't really that exotic for petrol, I'm talking about other blends, and some of the Fuels Ferrari used to use in F1 that even had water suspended in the fuel.
And in the world of spark-ignition engines, there are alternatives even to Petrol that can be used to good effect in motorsport.

Like Niromethane?

Methanol power? BIG spark advance + BIG compression = MORE POWER!!!

Sorry, but this is the stupidest idea I`v ever heard, THIS IS RACING wats the point of racing if U can`t hear the engine scriming at 8.000 rpm and then U hit the rev limiter dive 4 the next gear and........... ppl pls stop this Diesel racing idea, is rubbish.

Pls don`t ban me 4 this.

cmon have you looked at diesel racing? Le Mans & BTCC & WTC... ok so you cant hear the engine screaming, it hardly ruins it. Makes it different, but doesnt ruin it.

i am all for reviving the diesel idea! especially now we have air intake restrictions and weight bias, you can just about make any petrol car in LFS, and check out how different mods would affect it! i have never had a diesel car and i want to see how it would differ

diesel car? no . Diesel Audi R10TDI or Peugeot 908?(or any lemans prototype) hell yeah!

i just couldent see it hapening on lfs

I think kind of BMW 123d (204 bhp; 400 nm (the same as the 306 horsepower petrol engine in 135i)) would do very well in Lfs.
Would be interesting to drive against petrol engines.
And, Audi won LeMans with TDi in 2006, 2007, 2008, and Peugeot with Hdi 2nd, so......

diesel idea is GREAT i love it
btw..
how dare u to claim diesels sound rubbish?! mercedes 123 and 124 300D sounds AMAZING

and 1 more thing... who is going to invent technology that let us virtual races smell the striking fragrance of racing fuel and oil, i need to smell that fumes that makes me go 10% faster

Diesel idea is wicked!!

To Aid : burn some oil or petrol in your house that will make it realistic

Quote from ButterTyres :

cmon have you looked at diesel racing? Le Mans & BTCC & WTC... ok so you cant hear the engine screaming, it hardly ruins it. Makes it different, but doesnt ruin it.

engine screaming is sound, sound is energy, more engine screaming=lost more power
I just want to have a car which can send all the power to its wheel, not the other place and waste it

It's not quite like that Scania. F1 engines are loud, but they make a lot of power. Jet engines are loud, but make a lot of power. 1.2l Vauxhall engines are quiet, and couldn't pull the scab off a schoolboy's knee.

Remember that the sound energy is only a tiny proportion of the total energy in the system, most of which is in the form of heat. Barely 25% of the energy comes out as torque/power.

Having said that, the chavs* with big exhausts that reduce the output of their car do increase the amount of noise at the expense of power. All show and no go. One reason why they deserve to be laughed at.

*anyone who fits 'sports' exhausts to a road car.

Quote from tristancliffe :

It's not quite like that Scania. F1 engines are loud, but they make a lot of power. Jet engines are loud, but make a lot of power. 1.2l Vauxhall engines are quiet, and couldn't pull the scab off a schoolboy's knee.

Remember that the sound energy is only a tiny proportion of the total energy in the system, most of which is in the form of heat. Barely 25% of the energy comes out as torque/power.

Having said that, the chavs* with big exhausts that reduce the output of their car do increase the amount of noise at the expense of power. All show and no go. One reason why they deserve to be laughed at.

*anyone who fits 'sports' exhausts to a road car.

Because they make more power

25% of 1000ps & 100% of 100ps, which is higher?

I'm talking about efficiency

If we can make 500ps wheel power from 50% of 1000ps energy of fuel, why do we should make it from 5% of 10000ps?

Quote from scania :

25% of 1000ps & 100% of 100ps, which is higher?
?

25% of 1000ps = 250ps
100% of 100ps = 100ps

So for now, the standard engine still is 2.5 time more interesting

Quote from tristancliffe :

Having said that, the chavs* with big exhausts that reduce the output of their car do increase the amount of noise at the expense of power. All show and no go.

That's not entirely true. Some exhausts do increase power. Look at this dyno chart (engine dyno, apparently): http://www.spswebpage.com/Dyna ... th-4-chamber-muffler.html

But, that isn't really big exhaust, because that's with a 2in exhaust pipe according to that page, and a chambered muffler. Not the chavy straight-through ones. Although, that's only a 4.5HP increase. It's only chavy if it's a ricer fart can, or if they install performance modifications that only give 5HP on a car with 300lbs of subwoofers and amplifiers.

Do 10 more dyno runs and you'll get 10 different figures, probably varying by +-5hp anyway. Sure, some exhausts can improve output (thought they mainly concentrate on the manifold rather than the rear silencer), but they are exceptions in the 'tuning' world.

Quote from Zen321 :

25% of 1000ps = 250ps
100% of 100ps = 100ps

So for now, the standard engine still is 2.5 time more interesting

but
If we can make 100ps from 100% of 100ps, why should we make it from 25% of 400ps?

Quote from scania :

but
If we can make 100ps from 100% of 100ps, why should we make it from 25% of 400ps?

25% of 400ps is exactly the same as 100% of 100ps. I don't see what this argument is about. I mean, 2.5% of 4000ps is 100ps, but so what? Yay, we all can perform basic math. Yay.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

25% of 400ps is exactly the same as 100% of 100ps. I don't see what this argument is about. I mean, 2.5% of 4000ps is 100ps, but so what? Yay, we all can perform basic math. Yay.

The argument is about efficiency. How one achieves said power, how many killojoule from gasoline are efficiency used and what's wasted on heat, sound energy and friction, etc.

A Veyron is a very good example of how shitty and inefficient todays engines are. And that's a "good" engine.

Full power, it uses more then 6.4 liters of fuel per minute (1.7 US Gallon).
One liter of petrol yields 34000000 joules of energy when burnt.
Do your math and convert that to kilowatts and you realize how much energy is used to make a "puny" 1000+ hp in a car.

A coal-fired power station is hundredfold more efficient in terms of energy consumption vs energy output in terms of kW and they are certainly not considered to be the leaders is efficient energy conversion (though it's gotten a lot better in the last 12-15 years)

But that's a bit off topic now :P

Quote from gohfeld23 :

The argument is about efficiency. How one achieves said power, how many killojoule from gasoline are efficiency used and what's wasted on heat, sound energy and friction, etc.

OH! You guys mean the amount of theoretical horsepower contained in a given amount of fuel, then? It makes sense now.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

25% of 400ps is exactly the same as 100% of 100ps. I don't see what this argument is about. I mean, 2.5% of 4000ps is 100ps, but so what? Yay, we all can perform basic math. Yay.

It is a very big different! it means you need 4 times fuel to finish the same race(or more, because you need extraX2 fuel to blance the extra weigh of the extra fuel)

But it's still not that simple though. Silencing the car, or making the engine quieter almost certainly means more power is wasted as heat and friction (heat) than the noisy engine (where it is lost as sound, obviously).

The efficiency of an engine is roughly around 30% based on calorific value. But even if you burnt gasoline in perfect conditions I doubt you'd get more than 40% efficiency. Burning stuff just isn't efficient. Coal/Oil power stations aren't that much more efficient in reality, though of course they don't have to worry about the mass of the power station being moveable, and can make things strong enough to work at higher pressures.

Quote from tristancliffe :

But it's still not that simple though. Silencing the car, or making the engine quieter almost certainly means more power is wasted as heat and friction (heat) than the noisy engine (where it is lost as sound, obviously).

The efficiency of an engine is roughly around 30% based on calorific value. But even if you burnt gasoline in perfect conditions I doubt you'd get more than 40% efficiency. Burning stuff just isn't efficient. Coal/Oil power stations aren't that much more efficient in reality, though of course they don't have to worry about the mass of the power station being moveable, and can make things strong enough to work at higher pressures.

But diesel can be 45%

however, all of Internal combustion engine will be out, air car & electrics car is the future of car. heavy vehicle with long-distance will use a high efficiency External combustion engine or Internal stream engine with electrics hybrid or hydraulic hybrid

Quote from scania :

But diesel can be 45%

however, all of Internal combustion engine will be out, air car & electrics car is the future of car. heavy vehicle with long-distance will use a high efficiency External combustion engine or Internal stream engine with electrics hybrid or hydraulic hybrid

About the transfer from calorifical energy. Yes, burning a liters of fuel produces a lot of energy through the form of heat. However, it is not the heat that powers (well indirectly it does) the cars. It is the expansion of thoses gases, which then is transformed into longitudinal force (pistons), which is then changed into rotational force (crankshaft). To the heat is not really used here (even if the heat is the cause of the expansion of gases in the cylinder).

Maybe to improve efficieny should we add a water tank around the exhaust catalyst, so that the heat will make the water boil. This would be, of course, coupled to a steam engine located in the back of the car, which would be linked to the transmission, so that we have extra efficiency ?