ETK 2400i

Uff! I have 0 idea to do jbeam, I'm bit frustrated with that, because i should be able but I haven't had the time to learn.
Thanks anyway mate!, you're allways trying to help.

 

UPDATED REPORT: ETK 3000i (pre-facelift, 4AT)

In its day, this was pretty much the car for a yuppie middle manager. Now, 30 years on, they're rarely seen at all, prized by drifters but hoarded by a small, fanatical group of fans who only bring them out on sunny summer days and when there's an autocross. Even those almost exclusively favor manual-transmission variants, making running 3000i automatics a rarer sight than some supercars nowadays.

Spoiler: Pics

Spoiler: Test Results

Layout: Front/Rear
Engine: ETK aluminum inline 6
Displacement ci/cc: ???/~3000, devs don't give out this information
Compression ratio: Devs don't give out this information either
HP @ RPM: 190 @ 5350
Lb-ft @ RPM: 213 @ 3750
Transmission: 4-speed automatic
Tires: 195/60R15 - 195/60R15 (standard type)
Approx. Price: $9200
0-60 MPH: 7.3 sec
0-100 MPH: 18.6 sec
0-150 MPH: 62.3 sec
Quarter Mile: 15.0 @ 93 MPH
Top Speed: 156 MPH
60-0 MPH: 140 ft
Weight: 3124 lb
Distribution F/R: 52/48
Lb per HP: 16.4
Lateral grip: 0.76 g

This is my final report (for now) on the ETK 3000i (pre-facelift, 4AT). It has been crossposted to the most active "default vehicle" thread because I have been using it as my default vehicle.

The engine of the ETK 3000i is powerful and smooth, with a gentle, wide-band torque curve. It delivers slightly more peak lb-ft than peak horsepower, with a somewhat high torque peak and a somewhat low power peak; indicative of a balanced, friendly, driveable engine. Overall power output is fully adequate, so that the vehicle never feels labored under acceleration, and is well-matched to the underbody, so that braking distances are intuitive and the car rarely feels ahead of itself. Fuel economy tends to average around 6-7 MPG in 10/10 driving. The cooling system is, again, well-matched; the temperature can go to 213F coolant and 233F oil with prolonged freeway running, but as far as I know never actually overheats against a stock engine. Acceleration does vary quite a bit with technique; my previous times (only replaced because I'd forgotten to time 0-150) were 7.2 and 17.8 with some revs on the launch, but I was too lazy to replicate the technique.

The underbody feels somewhat soft, but not overly so, and remains composed over all but the largest and fastest of bumps, even taking small jumps in stride with minimal unsettling on landing. It seems to have a natural oversteer bias, as long as you are careful not to overload the tires; it will understeer if you do push too hard. It is capable of power oversteer despite the open differential, but this can be difficult to induce deliberately (such as when attempting to power through a slow hairpin on dirt); the differential can still give you grief when attempting to power up a steep hill at low speed, especially if you drop a wheel on dirt. Large skids are much more saveable than before, but are still easily capable of getting out of hand; slides should be corrected quickly if possible, and both the throttle and the steering can be of use in doing so. The car does show a little bit of instability under heavy braking (especially going downhill). In quick left-right changes of direction it behaves with acceptable quickness, as long as you have the car fully under control going in; understeer will show itself if you go in to hot and if the car is already sliding then the effort is probably hopeless. On loose surfaces, the car becomes a little more of a handful but is still fully controllable. I would call the overall package somewhat entertaining but not especially confidence-inspiring; it reacts well to a somewhat measured driving style. Drawing out 70-80% of its potential is easy, but fangs appear in the remainder.

The brakes are non-ABS and can take approximately 70-75% pedal pressure before locking in a straight, flat stop on clean pavement; inclines and trail braking will of course affect this figure. They can take some getting used to at first, but are fairly easy to modulate once learned. Surprisingly for a German car, they are a bit prone to fade, though not excessively; they tend to cool off quickly after a hard stop and hang a ways below the threshold of indicated fade.

This leaves only the gearbox, and though it has acceptable ratios, I stand by my previous statements to the effect that it is one of the most irritating devices I have ever had the displeasure to interact with, in real life or in a video game. It is incredibly unresponsive, frequently requiring the better part of a second at full throttle to force a downshift; it also loves to rush into top gear, especially if you're shifting it manually and try to wind out second before going into D, in which case it will usually upshift straight into fourth, then lollygag for what feels like an eternity before downshifting back to third. In this case the workaround seems to be shifting early from 2 to D and letting the gearbox decide its own upshift point; it will then go smoothly from second to third as it should. Furthermore, in mid-to-high-speed sweepers, it will head straight for fourth as soon as your foot slackens on the throttle. Overall, a far cry from the Gavril automatics which are seemingly always in the right gear, even when left fully to their own devices!

Looking at the files, it appears that the maximum torque rating of the standard long block is 440 Nm/324.5 lb-ft, which means that if you want to be fully safe with nitrous at minimum engagement RPM (2500), the actual maximum is 40 kW (good for 241 HP), with 55 (261 HP) being possible at the default engagement RPM of 3500, and 105 (good for 327 HP) at 5400. If you use the race ECU to extend your rev limit, you can unlock 140 (363 HP) at 6000, but be aware of overrev damage starting at 6300 RPM. The Heavy Duty Long Block with a torque rating of 650 can take 95 kW (good for 314 HP) at 2500 RPM, 130 kW (360 HP) at 3500, and 225 kW (485 HP) at 5400, with 270 kW (535 HP) waiting for you at 6000 and overrev damage at 6600. With the Ultra Heavy Duty Long Block rated at 830 Nm, the numbers are 145 kW (380 HP) at 2500 RPM, 195 kW (446 HP) at 3500, 325 kW (618 HP) at 5400, and 385 kW (687 HP) at 6000 RPM, with overrev kicking in at 6650 RPM. With the stock ECU and long block, I recommend 55 kW kicking in at 3600 RPM, which will stay below the threshold of damage, keep the nitrous engaged during full-throttle acceleration to give about 261 peak HP, and avoid making the car completely uncontrollable, but beware of the gearbox's attempts to cause you grief in twistier sections. Note that the HDLB cuts you down to 188 HP and 211 lb-ft due to greater internal losses, and the UHDLB to 187/210.

 

The above post has been updated with new information, but not fully. The vehicle's top speed appears to have increased to 156 MPH with updates (160 if there's any kind of downgrade at all), which seems to me pretty fast for a 1980s German sedan with 190 HP.

 

Sometimes I got random engine explosion in the ETKI Track, this only happened in 0.17.

 

Hmm...

 

Mmmhm.

 

[Delete]

 

The ETKi Track's engine is damaged very quickly, I think this has to do with realism or something, as if you could damage it by careless
acceleration and engine load.

 

It's mis-set values; not intended to blow that quickly.

 

Really ? oh.. I was double checking lately because I started believing I did something wrong with my mod. Then driving the ETKi
I thought it was intended.

 

It's just occurred to me that the I-Series' naming convention makes no sense.

The modern ETK names are mostly fine. On the 800 Series, it's fairly straightforward. Here's what a standard config name looks like:

The first digit is always 8, because that's the model name (like 3 or 5 series BMWs). The second digit seems to refer to the number of doors—which is why every on every current config it's 5, because it's a 5-door wagon. On a sedan it'd be 4, on a coupe it'd be 2, and so on. The last digit refers to the number of cylinders, 4 or 6.

Next we have the letters. There are currently four in use: "t" for "touring," "c" for "comfort," "d" for "diesel," and "x" for all-wheel drive.

All of this makes sense (to me, at least), and it's fairly simple. Next there's the K-Series.

At first glance, it seems to fall in line with the 800 series (the fact that the model name is a letter and not a three-digit number isn't anachronistic; think 3 series and Z4).

"K" is the model name, "c" stands for "coupe" (as opposed to "comfort," but in the same vein as "touring"), and the digit is either 4 or 6 and refers to cylinder count like the 800 series (they share their engines). The letters "d," "x," and "t" are also used (although "t" stands for "turbocharged," instead of "touring").

Still straightforward, even if some of the same letters being used to mean different things is a little strange.

But then you have the I-Series. Its official name was originally "2400i," as this thread's title and the concept render image can attest, with "24" standing for its 2.4L engine. Right off the bat, it's a bit strange to have the name based entirely around the engine displacement. BMWs do list the displacement, but only after the actual model number (325, 330, etc.). This problem was made worse with the addition of a 3.0L engine, which meant calling models with that engine a 2400i wouldn't make any sense. The problem was "solved" by changing the name to I-Series, with "2400" and "3000" as model designations. But that only causes more problems. For one, "i" is clearly supposed to be a trim suffix, like "d," "c," and "x" on the new models. This can be proven two separate ways. First, the base model 2.4 doesn't have the "i" suffix (which means it technically isn't an I-Series), and second, the "i" appears after the "t" on the turbocharged models.

This would mean that by the I-Series' logic, the 800 series should be called the C-Series.

Finally, what the hell does "i" even stand for? It can't be "fuel injection" like on BMWs, because the "i"-less base model has the standard fuel injectors and not a carburetor. It has to refer to something the 2400i has that the 2400 doesn't. And by following that criteria, "i" must stand for "slightly fancier trim pieces." They have identical powertrain configurations.

TL;DR: This car shouldn't be called the "I-Series," because not only does it not line up with the other existing ETK models, it doesn't even make sense on its own due to "i" being a trim level denomination. It would even make more sense to call it an older generation 800 series, like the Pessima, because they're both mid-size sedans*.

---

*There might not be an official sedan version of the 800 yet, but I can't think of a single car that was only sold as a wagon; plus, the "5" denomination and the fact that the body part name is "Wagon Unibody" is clear future-proofing for a possible sedan version one day).

 

Diverting from the real life Bavarian namings (BMW-namings thus) seems to me intentional by the devs. On top of that forget not that
car manufacturers are free to apply any naming whatsoever. Take for instance the term GTI, it's interpreted in many ways by different
makes. Also concerning BMW, they didn't always stick to the traditional use of a naming system.

Examples : 3.0 CS ( I owned a '73 3.0 S hah )
2800 CS
2002 ti
507

And these few examples all originate from long after the days the 328 was rolling out of the factory.
I know, the in-game ETK's stem from eras aligned to the more structured namings BMW used/uses.

But real life brands are forced at some points in their existence to divert from systematical naming for several reasons imo.
Commercial being one of them and also the cataloging of their own technical data as well as replacement parts being another
one. It's not impossible to repeat the same type of car over and over through the years but I think there are some shortcomings
to that.

To come back to ETK, I agree that the term "i" in "2400i" causes a little confusion. At some point I was even considering to make
a carburetor version of the 2400 for my mod 'CTK-28'. Still am considering btw and the ETK 2400 having a misleading factor in
it's naming was the initial inspiration for this idea.

At the end, I don't mind BeamNG stirring up some model naming, especially when real life comparison comes too close in an uncomfortable way. This just a personal opinion though, everyone has their own of course.

 

The ETK nomenclature is a bit odd, but I don't think it's that bad. Considering the age gap between the I-Series and K/800-Series, I don't think it's a problem other than the base I-Series. It's easy enough to think that some corporate/marketing restructuring happened in those years. Rename the 2400 base and actually finish the modern ETK's factory offerings and I'd be fine with it.

That being said, I do love when the lore ties into other stuff (Burnside JR's race car, Gavril RS and Marshall offerings, etc...), so seeing some tie in between the I-Series and 800-Series would be nice to see.

 

I-Series makes no sense not just because it doesn’t line up with the 800 series, but because “I” denotes a trim level. It’s like calling a 7-Series the “Li-Series”.

 

One thing I've always taken an issue with for the I-Series, was that cosmetically, the facelifted '90s model is just the '80s model with retextured lights and different wheels. This was passable in 2016, but now with additions like the facelifted Roamer and pre-facelift D-Series, the '90s I-Series just feels out of place.

I hope that in the near future, the facelifted model is brought up to at least the game's current standard of quality with a more distinctive redesign and more features that differentiate it from the '80s I-Series.

 

I'm late after your message but i just discovered it. Back in the sixties and early seventies, Bmw cars were called 1500, 1800, 2000, 2500 and 2800, and that with 3 different body style. They've added CS to the big coupe versions with the 2000 cs, 2500 cs and 2800 cs. Then with the 3 liters engine they changed to 3.0s for sedan and 3.0cs for coupe. The equivalent car to the later 3 series were called 1602, 1802, 2002. All of this to say that Bmw before creating the 3,5,6 and 7 series were a bit confused by their model designation before finding the right way. I guess that the ETKi nomemclature is a bit refering to this kind of early model designation.

 

As well commenting on how he says it’s odd that the numbers are based on the engine displacement, Lexus does this with the 350 (3.5L V6), 570, (5.7L V8) 460 (4.6L V8) and so on.

 

I never said it’s odd that the individual models are referred to by engine displacement. I said it’s odd that the vehicle as a whole is referred to as “I-Series” when “i” is a trim denomination. It’d be like calling the Pessima the “Ibishu X-Series” since its trim levels are “DX,” “LX,” and “ZX.”

I suppose there’s no real better way to list it with the current UI, though, short of renaming the entire car and its trims.

 

I don't agree with much of anything you say, but this is spot on. That's always bugged me, pretty much from the beginning.