i phrased it poorly so let me elaborate, it would have been too big for an offroady recreational vehicle of the same time period like a rav4, x-90, jimny, etc. but would have also been too small and open to be a competitor to the patrol, pajero and other SUVs of the time that were more focused on comfort. While this is a smiliar size it does not resemble the hopper. The hopper is an almost carbon copy of a jeep wrangler of the time. This design is more utilitarian and uncomplicated rather than a status symbol. it is also not usdm Its important to look at their usage. the TD42 was made for fullsize SUVs and commerical vehicles, not something lighter and smaller like a hopper (wich as per my last point isnt that small but smaller than the vehicles this engine was used in) and same with the TB. The toyota engines are a good point tho, as they were used in the offroad focused land cruises up until the J70. The issue here is that the J70 was not available in the united states and is from 1984, while the hopper in game started production a whole 10 years later. The F engines were still used in the larger land cruisers but then again, those are fullsize SUVs. The fact that they pulled out of the makret for a jeep-esque offroad car for the us instead of bringing the new one to the us, says something about the demand for a japanese jeep inspired car there. As said before the J70 Landcruiser is not available in the US Market and is thus not a real counterpart for the hopper here. The jeep sells itself as a symbol of patriotism while a japanese car cant do that in the us market. Besides its really obvious that this is just a jeep with an ibishu badge
I gotta say, road debris is getting out of hand. It feels like once a week I have to dodge matresses/pallets/etc... on the highway lately... That combined with the rally stage quality of local roads makes for a more exciting daily commute than I particularly care for... Really not in the mood to see what a matress would do to my Mustang at highway speeds. Nearly have a couple of times this week alone though...
The subreddit for my area is slowly devolving into memes about Lightning McQueen paving our roads... As for the matresses... I dunno... The r/BeamNG memes are crossing into reality I guess
Thankfully most of our road debris here is cleared away by the road zombies. Unfortunately that means I have to deal with road zombies. They just repaved one of the major roads, so my morning commute is fast and smooth. In the evening I have to avoid that road because its just a parking lot. Literally took an hour yesterday to go a little over 5 miles compared to the 15 minutes it took in the morning.
Another video demonstrates the ESC often does bad interference Here, I replicated this in BeamNG(sometimes I drive with ESC-off other times I drive with ESC-sport) Watch this video, think again.
Yeah, I miss the informative button too. My understanding about this is that since ESC has a PID controller, and it suffered from "integral windup" in that instance, which might be the reason that the ESC caused the angular velocity to change polarity, as the intergral needs time to "unwound". Even the ESC believed that it was an oversteer, it should have only reduced the left turn speed, instead of all the way past zero rad/s to the opposite direction. ESC might mistaken believed that the vehicle was about to roll over. In some vehicles the ESC might induce a massive understeer when it senses that the vehicle is about to roll. The problem is, the calculation error accumulates when prolonged g-loading. Ever heard of graveyard spiral? Without visual reference, prolonged turning can make people feel like going in a straight line. ESC is much cheaper and less accurate than inertial navigation system in an aircraft. Thus when doing donut, the accmulated g-forces might make the ESC misinterpret the current orientation, when an opposite donut is attempted as shown in your video, the ESC believed that the vehicle was about to roll over.
Ho has summoned the Skodaguy? No the reason is it simply doesnt need it since the electric motor recuperates when braking wich basically lessens the strain on the brakes so you dont need discs. Also most VAG cars are really front biased with the brakes wich is why most Skodas have issues with the rear brakes just rusting away because they are so rarely used wich is an issue you wont have with drums. The last thing is as stated above the cost savings although you dont save that much with drums over discs nowadays
Interesting, I am wondering if integral windup would also explain the occasional BeamNGs ESC/Traction control insisting to brake the vehicle to a full stop besides you already being straight again. It happens particularly often when you are cornering hard uphill with full throttle coming out of the turn. Side forces are significant as is ESC intervention and since you stress test the traction control system as well, one might imagine that it overloads and then wants to overcompensate by braking you to a snails pace. It could also explain why after fully stopping the system recovers. Sadly it isnt very reproducable.
So I have been forced to rent a vehicle as my truck is down and my car is having some recall work done. I initially requested a compact car from Enterprise. When I got there, they were out of compact, sub-compact, standard, and full-sized vehicles. They had ONE vehicle left. So I was put into a luxury class car for the same price as the compact I reserved. The vehicle is a 2020 Chrysler 300, and in typical rental car fashion it's beat to hell. However, I absolutely love the thing and I don't want to give it back. It has a leather interior with heated and ventilated seats, panoramic sunroof, heated steering wheel, automatic climate control, a big ol' touchscreen with navigation, power EVERYTHING, and the smoothest shifting 8-speed automatic I've ever had the pleasure of driving. Like, I'm a die-hard manual guy and will be until the day I die, but a good modern ZF automatic is really good. It has the 3.6L Pentastar V6 so it's amazing on gas and it rides like a cloud. This vehicle has zero sporting pretentions (like none, you can't even shift it "manually" with paddles or anything) and that's how I like my luxury cars. Just a big boat that wafts along. It's still pretty speedy, though. It can get out of its own way and even got a little rowdy in the rain yesterday. It has a limited slip in it! This car just doesn't need the Hemi V8, honestly. These Pentastar V6 motors are perfectly adequate power wise and are smooth and hella quiet. I want one.
When a luxury car is done properly there is nothing else like quite like it, unfortunately it seems that true luxury cars are bit thin on ice these, mainly because auto makers are usually attempting to inject sporting pretensions in high price tagged vehicles that ARE NOT meant to be sports/performance cars
Many of today's V8 pickups and fullsize cars are sold on the 6-cylinder's the image of a poverty engine, not on actual inadequacy of the V6.
one engine that sounds wholly inadequate and shouldn't exist in a pickup truck is GM's L3b engine. 2.7L straight 4 main issue is that it is sounds like it would be under full stress even in normal running conditions
Eh, less that and more you can't even option the V8 in most of the current 300 trim levels. Majority of 300's you'd see on the road are not the 300S V8, and are thus the 3.6L Pentastar. Frankly, if I were in the market for one of these, I wouldn't pony up the $3,000 for the 300S V8 over the 300S V6. I'd rather that $3,000 go towards optional extras like a sunroof and such. I also feel the stigma a V6 has is dying fairly rapidly considering most people seriously can't tell anymore. 15 years ago? Yeah, you could tell a massive difference between a V6 and a V8 in the same car. Hell, Toyota doesn't even OFFER a V8 in the Tundra anymore. --- Post updated --- I think it was a Car & Driver review of a Silverado with that engine in it where I saw it got worse gas mileage than the 5.3L V8 did. That's what happens when you underpower a vehicle.
I probably would if I could afford it. It's not that I hate the V6, it's that I love V8s. Granted, I probably would't buy a 300 anyway since you can't get it with a stick, but still. And just to get the results they did, they used a computer setup so fantastically complicated that there is no consistent relationship between the position of the throttle pedal and the position of the throttle valve. I almost feel like just giving the truck a stupid CVT would be a simpler and less idiotic way to get the effect they were going for. All just to play the regulation game, I guess.
To be fair the 2.7 is significantly better in every way (except for maybe reliability) than the pushrod V6 it replaced. They do still offer the V6 for super-low-cost applications, but it can't be all that reliable being a 4.3L pushrod, 90 degree V6.
That 4.3 is actually the second such engine GM has made for pickup trucks. The original was more or less a 350 minus two cylinders and I don't remember ever hearing particularly bad things about it, except that it was a little underpowered for a half-ton pickup.
The original 4.3 V6 was one of the best engines GM has made regarding reliability and overall repairability. Shared basically everything with the 350, so parts are cheap and easy to find. Built pretty strong in general too. Never heard anything bad about them except for power, which has already been mentioned.
