Bruckell LeGran

Yep, and Bruckell already has plenty of engines in that time period (70s to 00s) and they also lasted up until the Lansdale got out of production in 2007. So there are many ideas for expanding the brand at that time span! Even today, the existing 3.5 V6 and 5.7/6.5/6.5 Supercharged V8s are a great base for a modern expansion of the brand!
--- Post updated ---

This was just a simple assumption I made for the 2.5, but you're right, boring out the 2.2 wouldn't make any sense since it's just a grocery getter for daily commuting and not for revving the nuts out of it. So stroking the 2.2 for a bit more torque makes more sense.

Making a 90s 5.0 V8 out of two 2.5 I4s is actually a great idea I had thought of a while back and it would make perfect sense for a Full-Size FWD Soliad model like the Wendover or anything of that size.
Also, a 90s Bruckell Muscle Car contender to a 90s Gavril Barstow is a great scenario, because Gavril already has the 4.5/5.5 SOHC V8s and Bruckell makes larger cars and larger engines, so it would be interesting to see the size and technology differences between the two 90s Muscle Cars.

Tbh, the numbers of the 3.8 V6 I mentioned are with the Stock ECU left alone @6000RPM. What you say is actually very interesting, it seems like BeamNG hasn't thought of airflow and parasitic losses of the superchargers of this engine but, on the other hand, this could also be its M.O. by design. I lean more towards the second hypothesis, tbh, since BeamNG devs are people who know a thing or two better than us.

 

POV: Average Altezza/IS200 owner after finding a engine the size of their mom and fits it into a 90's shitbox:

 

Different sizes between the I4s was an inference from @McBeamer94's post
--- Post updated ---

Not sure what causes it, but it's been the case for every supercharged engine I've checked. Likely, the base assumption is that some parameter such as pulley size gets adjusted along with the rev limiter to optimize for a specific slice of the allowed rev range

 

Some more testing on supercharger behavior: the supercharger/rev limiter interaction does appear to be fairly universal, however drive modes can override it by setting a boost cap.

Testing the Bastion Redtail, in stock form it delivers 809HP from a peak boost level of 17.3PSI. This depends on drivemode, however. In Caged mode the supercharger doesn't deliver boost at all, but can still be sort of heard and so is likely still causing parasitic loss; the result is about 285-290 HP. In comfort, sport, or drift mode, you still only get 14 PSI, only good for about 730HP at most (app readings jump around too much to tell exactly), with a much broader peak indicating some kind of wastegate in use. In Savage mode or with the electronics disabled completely, you get full power.

If you switch to the race adjustable ECU and up the rev limiter all the way to 7500, Caged mode still gives 0 PSI and comfort/sport/drift still give 14 PSI, resulting in no change to power output. Savage and full-off, however, now give 20.8PSI peak boost, good for 942HP with no other changes to the engine setup.

Testing with a Barstow Kingsnake reveals more strange behavior, but also pretty much confirms my previous guess about the intentionality and purpose of the supercharger/rev limiter interaction. With the rev limiter removed, the supercharger is set off the engine's overrev risk threshold, which for the Barstow's 423 with stock internals is 5000RPM. This results in barely 9PSI and a peak of 333HP. Furthermore, the supercharger simply cuts out at the 5000RPM overrev threshold, which almost creates a pseudo rev limiter of its own. Installing the non-adjustable rev limiter, which is set at 5000RPM, delivers the same result. The adjustable rev limiter the car comes with, set to 5200RPM by default, gives 9.3PSI and 340HP, and also prevents the supercharger from cutting out at 5000RPM. Setting the same limiter to 7500RPM gives 13.4PSI, with peak boost ocurring deep into the realm of instant, severe valvetrain damage, but also gives a power peak of 392HP which is still within safe RPM. Just for the sake of completeness, setting the rev limiter to its minimum of 4000RPM gives 7.2PSI and 294HP. This system also does not react to choice of long block, only to RPM limit or overrev threshold.

Given this information, I think we can assume fairly safely that the interaction of superchargers and rev limiters in BeamNG is an intentional auto-adjustment mechanism designed to optimize the supercharger for a specific part of the allowed RPM range. It may also be built into the game engine, as I don't see anything in the JBeam to direct this behavior, albeit I'm not a modder or otherwise a coder so I there may be one that I don't recognize.

This behavior is also exclusive to superchargers; while Stage 3 turbochargers are user-adjustable, I did investigate lower-level, non-adjustable turbochargers and they do not appear to react to rev limiter settings at all.

 

I personally believe that the common problem with Legran and Wendover is that their rear disc brakes have poor heat dissipation, and the heat dissipation speed is really as slow as the drum brakes So much so that the rear brakes of their racing versions will quickly overheat

 

It's a shitbox, what do you expect

 

you'd think the race version would have better heat dissipation

 

Just use the disc brakes

 

they said they used disc brakes

 

Makes sense, turbos run off exhaust gases and not the engine's RPM.

 

That's the thing though. With a higher rev limiter, a supercharger in BeamNG will deliver more boost for any given RPM. I checked quite thoroughly

 

What the actual hell is this?

 

A spammer

 

I'm not too familiar with IRL 80s warning light clusters, but it feels slightly off that the LeGran has both modern warning symbols at the bottom of the instrument cluster and the block style warning lights at the top. I'd imagine only the upper ones should be there. Maybe that does make sense, I don't know but I figured I'd ask. Also, I'd change the high beam block light to blue instead of orange.



Also, if the Sport Cluster (A) with gear indicator for column shifters would make a return... that'd be greeeeat.

 

I completely agree with everything here. My car, which is from about the same time period, has the block warning lights, and no modern indicators. I’ve never seen a car without a blue high-beam indicator, unless it’s over maybe fifty years old. I’ve also never seen a column shift without a gear indicator.

 

It looks like a 1982 Chrysler LeBaron mixed with the 1988 New Yorker.

 

The Sport SE V6 AWD is literally Pontiac 6000 STE AWD
And the SE Campagne offroad wagon is basically AMC Eagle

 

the SE campagne is Late eighties and the amc eagle was late 70s early 80s

 

The Eagle's production continued until 1988. Anyway the off-road wagon clearly took some influence from the Eagle cuz there was nothing else like it, GM certainly didn't make anything like that.

 

6000 STE AWD if it was actually decent