Why would you distort the scale? This could really come across the wrong way but it's only a matter of perspective: I have given away a tad more than that but I guarantee that I make a hell of a lot less. But that REALLY isn't the point. I could make a fortune extorting young girls for porn, and give 50% of it away but that really is a stupid comparison isn't it? Suppose I ran a porn site (which I don't) and made 1.2 million a year - and gave away 600m/year. Big deal isn't it? No, not really. (EDIT: That was also a ludicrously presumptuous statement to begin with and I make no apology for taking the bait)
Nobody is implying that anyone "has it coming to them", all human life is equally valuable. That is, in fact, the point. So far a few of you are trying to distort it though which I did expect and am more than prepared for.
Happy Tuesday not yet :P
And it's got nothing to do with the deceased, and everything to do with the message you send the living. Regardless of your atheistic or religious stance (let's not pretend they differ much towards culture, but I digress) it's totally irrelevant. In internet "meme", "dead guy is dead" I wonder what the supposedly living can learn from it.
For the first time in history, Jamie said something worth looking at, and he has a point. Just because he's normally full of shit don't discount what he's saying. It's kind of summed up in what Phil said.
I feel remorse and in the past probably too much so about people and situations that will never have a bearing on me. I had a long thread with Kev a few years back about the fact that if I ever caught a rapist in the act I'd probably kill him with my bare hands and whether I was justified or not. It's fine that this fellow entertained people, but this crap happens to people every day and whether you realize it or not you're elevating him over the average human simply because he did rather dumb things and found a way to get paid for it.
Philosophy or not, it's plain fact that it's 100% selfish to actually feel remorse for a guy that (most likely) died doing something we'd condemn our friends for doing and maybe killed an "innocent" at the same time, simply because your depraved entertainment desires have been stunted by the death of a dubious stuntman. Really; think about that. You wouldn't be here lamenting the death of a volunteer who helped addicts or widows get on their feet; because that's not entertainment is it? But a guy who takes a shit in a display toilet at the shop somehow deserves a memorial when he dies being a jackass and takes someone with him - great show people, great show!
Where in the world is this? Is that with a monitor or no? Just seems really really expensive for the parts involved as a whole package... Have you thought about putting some new parts into your existing rig rather than going with either ripoff option?
See, why would anyone say that?
It's only as stupid as it's operator. (It cannot be stupid regardless since it's not sentient; but I'll skip the formalities in this case)
Ridiculous perhaps, but anyone who says it's stupid is only looking in the mirror.
Come on now.
It's cake for anyone who's never tried it surely you've read simracing forums at large for some time now?
Armchair experts abound in this day and age in every conceivable public project; tis the new nature of things but without David Suzuki.
I'm not completely sure what you're talking about for certain, but all I'm saying is that this forum has been filled with a lot of negativity about Scawen's lack of communication and whatnot... then you have a developer who does at least attempt to communicate regularly, and the second they can't meet their honest plan for some reason, some dicknose is ready to jump down their throat for failing to deliver. That's exactly WHY Scavier doesn't say anything and that was my only point; not to derail the iRacing thread 
Ahaha, wow I can't believe you even said that on this forum.
At least they do communicate, and that does show professionalism. People like you are why Scavier ceased relatively open relation with the community...
... Metro 2033 is a tad over a year old, Mafia 2 is not even a year old, and not even Batman AA is quite 2 years old yet... yes clearly outdated. 
I'm not hung up on PhysX or anything, but it sure does make Mafia 2 a lot nicer - so many bits of debris flying everywhere during fire fights makes it notably more fun, especially in 3D. And no, AMD doesn't have a real 3D solution and the driver support isn't even in the same ballpark using iZ3D. For a fee you can walk into the shop, get it, come home and be playing in 3D within minutes - there is no ATiMD option for that.
If you want bang for the buck and a lot of driver hassle and enjoy almost universally poor multi-card support then I can see the appeal of ATi - bang for the buck is the biggest selling feature for the indiscriminate gamer
I'm not hung up on PhysX or anything, but it sure does make Mafia 2 a lot nicer - so many bits of debris flying everywhere during fire fights makes it notably more fun, especially in 3D. And no, AMD doesn't have a real 3D solution and the driver support isn't even in the same ballpark using iZ3D. For a fee you can walk into the shop, get it, come home and be playing in 3D within minutes - there is no ATiMD option for that.
If you want bang for the buck and a lot of driver hassle and enjoy almost universally poor multi-card support then I can see the appeal of ATi - bang for the buck is the biggest selling feature for the indiscriminate gamer
"Fanboyism" is relatively founded when it's based on truth. nVidia has at least made inroads on steroscopic 3D (which is very decent I might add) and good luck installing your Catalyst drivers along with a physX solution (lol?)
I've only been perusing a few threads the last few months, but I can really see why most people with brains on this forum jump on you for saying stupid shit without opening your eyes first.
Yeah this is what I felt when I did the same thing recently. I can't believe such a small team made LFS but it saddens me to wonder if it's been taken as far as it can go - like a snow plow cleaning a parking lot, and eventually the pile builds up and progress halts.
iRacing has a ballsload of momentum behind it and it's still building up after a few years which is a really good sign.
But part of me still hopes the LFS will somehow rejuvenate once Scawen's new tire model is done - as in I hope major upgrades will be done in every area that take a fraction of the time the tires are. It's likely to be wishful thinking but just like GF is saying I have many fond memories in LFS and I sure hope these guys can continue making a living with it, they sure deserve it.
ALSO: GF it's really good to see you around here again! Cheers
What? 1270Km is far enough away that it wouldn't even be FELT be the other location at that magnitude... so; NOT really that close after all is it? :doh:
Heh, kind of surprising coming from you especially as a North American client.
The net code is far and away above LFS in my sole limited experience, and being in FL last I checked I'd have assumed you would've had similar experience. But I suppose that's an endless debate since ISPs and PCs have just as much to do with the equation as programming. Being on the wrong side of the pond could obviously create bias for me for iRacing however. I've just had vastly less random "intersections" and bizarre moments, less warping, and less lagolisions in iRacing as a whole. Your mileage may vary; maybe splurge for a better connection?
As for non-tire physics I am dying to read what you could come up with assuming it's not announced iRacing incoming features. Collisions & damage are on average much more believable than LFS (though you can quickly youtube massive failures of each sim, big deal) and the rest is elementary physics, especially for these folks.
Money on your side doesn't buy you everything; I think you might be a bit naive about business saying something like that. No organisation wants to embarrass itself, much less massive ones - you go ahead and try to coerce a massive organisation into doing business with you, let me know how it goes... You will need a shitload of persistence and tenacity, and some talent, and a product you can manage to convince them with. Trust me, words are not enough.
You know, people can knock iRacing's pricing and scoff at the physics and take the piss in any way shape or form; which they do a lot in this thread and others... but, they (iRacing) sure have done A LOT to expose sim racing, and give it credit for what it is - not just another video game. Wide exposure for iRacing is vastly beneficial for the entire genre as a whole, like it or not. People will even hear about LFS through iRacing circles of course and as the debates rage on, many will try LFS just out of curiosity through word of mouth even though iRacing might have been the catalyst. What iRacing is doing is just very good for this niche industry.
No, no problems with lens flicker. My rig is in my sig, perhaps it could be an SLi thing but I'm not sure why since I think LFS renders SFR by default.
Also never had the problem in WoW when I played it UNTIL patch 4.0 and then this appeared in WoW as well, but isn't in any other games I've played. I assumed it was a "viewport" type of issue but since you don't get it, I'm not sure. Are you using the 271.6 drivers?
Also never had the problem in WoW when I played it UNTIL patch 4.0 and then this appeared in WoW as well, but isn't in any other games I've played. I assumed it was a "viewport" type of issue but since you don't get it, I'm not sure. Are you using the 271.6 drivers?
Hm, I didn't try South City. Interesting though.
No, but thanks for the suggestion...
Tongue in cheek of course, I really should be mature enough to not laugh at juvenile remarks. Though should that day should come; I've probably died
Tongue in cheek of course, I really should be mature enough to not laugh at juvenile remarks. Though should that day should come; I've probably died
Wrong: not "lower species"; I believe the word is "gender".
PS I could use a sammich
So glad my wife doesn't read these forums
PS I could use a sammich
So glad my wife doesn't read these forums
Depends how modern you mean... but autos have had locking torque converters for ages; Mazda's newest aims to be locked 80% of time in city driving as opposed to about 50% for most current gen autos.
As far as I am aware, torque throughput capacity has been (is?) their only real downside.
Forward press is downshift, backwards pull is upshift. What you think about that?
Understandable, this is why I was looking for a generalization. But it seems pretty obvious from your statements below that the most obvious assumption in this case probably is correct. Having a torque converter throws a bit of a wrench into things though. I think however that the situation should be considered with a constant throttle opening. So even if I had torque output figures for said throttle %, and the gear ratios involved, the torque converter would be a hard variable to consider (variable torque multiplication effect).
Let's say for example I went to accelerate from 30km/h to 80km/h. Let's assume that I apply 25% throttle to get there. On it's own, the Auto will have been probably in 3rd to begin with, and will shift into 4th, and subsequently a locked up 5th by the time I hit 65km/h.
If I apply the same 25% throttle but begin in 2nd gear, shift into 3rd at maybe 50km/h and remain there until I hit 80, and THEN shift directly to 4th then 5th, I would accelerate noticeably faster. Note, all figures pulled directly out of my ass.
The more I'm thinking about this as I type it though the more I realize that I'm over-simplifying it rather significantly. I was always under the impression that autos were designed with economy in mind, and the lesser mileage with autos was mostly due to pumping losses & rotating mass, but maybe they're mostly programmed to just be unintrusive for the general public dumbass and thus even more inefficient than is necessary?
You're preaching to the choir. However we share a vehicle (really don't need two) so I was required to be accomodating at least a little bit
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
Question for Tristan & other mechanically saavy individuals
Greetings,
I have a general question about fuel consumption vs gearing in passenger cars. My current vehicle has a 5 speed automatic (I know, I know, that's a wife thing not a BBT thing trust me) which has a semi-manual mode whereby you bump the shifter forward or backward for shifts. Obviously, that's the way I drive since it's the lesser of two evils.
The few times I've left it in full auto mode, I couldn't help but notice that the shifting is (obviously) very lazy, and seems to be programmed to maintain the lowest RPM possible, even when moderate throttle is applied. When I'm driving, I tend to keep the RPMs in a reasonable operating range, unless I won't be slowing / accelerating for considerable time because the response is so much better. The engine has variable valve timing, but it's still only 2.3L and really doesn't have much down low. Thus, in city driving I often find myself at least one gear lower than the auto would choose on it's own.
Now, I haven't done any scientific testing but anecdotally speaking it SEEMS like I get better gas mileage this way. What I'm not sure I understand properly is the relationship(s) between throttle position and engine RPM vs consumption.
If left to it's own devices, the transmission will often require more throttle for a longer time to induce reasonable acceleration, because it's decide that some bullshit gear ratio is desireable, whereas a lower gear would provide quicker acceleration with LESS throttle application.
Will an engine burn more fuel at lower RPM but much wider throttle, for say 6 seconds, or at higher RPM but less throttle for 33% less time.
I know that's not a precise question, and that there's a lot of variables involved that need to be considered, but I hope it conveys the gist of what I'm getting at.
I have a general question about fuel consumption vs gearing in passenger cars. My current vehicle has a 5 speed automatic (I know, I know, that's a wife thing not a BBT thing trust me) which has a semi-manual mode whereby you bump the shifter forward or backward for shifts. Obviously, that's the way I drive since it's the lesser of two evils.
The few times I've left it in full auto mode, I couldn't help but notice that the shifting is (obviously) very lazy, and seems to be programmed to maintain the lowest RPM possible, even when moderate throttle is applied. When I'm driving, I tend to keep the RPMs in a reasonable operating range, unless I won't be slowing / accelerating for considerable time because the response is so much better. The engine has variable valve timing, but it's still only 2.3L and really doesn't have much down low. Thus, in city driving I often find myself at least one gear lower than the auto would choose on it's own.
Now, I haven't done any scientific testing but anecdotally speaking it SEEMS like I get better gas mileage this way. What I'm not sure I understand properly is the relationship(s) between throttle position and engine RPM vs consumption.
If left to it's own devices, the transmission will often require more throttle for a longer time to induce reasonable acceleration, because it's decide that some bullshit gear ratio is desireable, whereas a lower gear would provide quicker acceleration with LESS throttle application.
Will an engine burn more fuel at lower RPM but much wider throttle, for say 6 seconds, or at higher RPM but less throttle for 33% less time.
I know that's not a precise question, and that there's a lot of variables involved that need to be considered, but I hope it conveys the gist of what I'm getting at.
Well, you could probably pimp yourself out for a few nights and have the money for a decent system?
On the other hand I know what you guys are saying about the servers, I just played offline for a while because there was nothing going on server-wise. I was just speaking about the sim itself not that state of the ... "community".
Obviously iR is thriving there. It's a great atmosphere to log into a server with 25 or 30 running practice, hearing the roar of the prototype mixed with the Mustang, traffic everywhere and guys discussing setups over voice... very lively place over there.
On the other hand I know what you guys are saying about the servers, I just played offline for a while because there was nothing going on server-wise. I was just speaking about the sim itself not that state of the ... "community".
Obviously iR is thriving there. It's a great atmosphere to log into a server with 25 or 30 running practice, hearing the roar of the prototype mixed with the Mustang, traffic everywhere and guys discussing setups over voice... very lively place over there.
By far, the 288GTO.
Beautiful, beautiful car and sadly rare, to the point there isn't much footage of anyone giving one some stick
http://www.google.ca/search?tb ... p;aqi=g3&aql=&oq=
Beautiful, beautiful car and sadly rare, to the point there isn't much footage of anyone giving one some stick
http://www.google.ca/search?tb ... p;aqi=g3&aql=&oq=
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG