"I apologize for wrong forum section. Moderators could be delete.."

Hi guys,

I would like to know is there a possibility for a rear body template for FZ's based on SSC Ultimate Aero. No need to triple rear lights if they are not suitable.

The link: http://www.seriouswheels.com/c ... 009-SSC-Ultimate-Aero.htm

Thanks..

Last edited by ADX.14, Tue 6 Jan 2009, 00:23. Reason : Wrong Forum

Quote from BigPeBe :

Getting OT but thanks for including my skin there (Celica).



And on topic, yes this could be nice. I have tested the road cars with slicks and they are great fun with them.

Indeed, I thank you for sharing this great skin as a public release. And secondly, at least there is one driver who can interprete the differences between two types of tyres in real conditions.

Quote from Marco1 :

you guys are so bad in driving whit normal tyres so you need slicks ? ^^

This is a meaningless assumption rather than a question. Please read carefully: Normal tyres for driving, race tyres for racing...

Quote from gaz328 :

Why does they aways need to be a funny guy?

Why don't you study grammar and spelling before building up sentence?

Last edited by ADX.14, Mon 5 Jan 2009, 01:18.

I want to refresh the thread because this is a worthwhile issue to review.

IMHO, we should have slick tyre option for all cars, even for real road cars. Moreover it's hard to define which car is the road car. (LX6, RB4, FXO, XRT, RAC, and FZ5 all have strong engine power; high speed capacity and etc.)

We push all cars to their limits via different setups. With the absence of slick tyre option we can't reach these limits totally. The slick tyres give cars the strongest grip except for wet tarmack surface condition. (Nowadays, no rain drops in the sky of LFS. )

I'm respectful to different opinions and want to know your thoughts.

Here you are some screens..

Quote from Gunn :

I don't find either of those tracks monotonous. Blackwood is a great track in its own right and Westhill was designed for the faster cars. I think we can safely speculate that Westhill will be further developed in future anyway.

Hi Gunn,

Yes both of tracks are very well-shaped circuits. There is no doubt about that. I can explain the monotony in this way: Blackwood is the base track of LFS. The upgrade period from demo license to S1/S2 can takes time a few years. After getting S2 license, we start to discover other tracks and cars. The appetite for Blackwood is decreasing for me, even after driving all cars on it. I don't know the S1/S2 statistics, but the "Least Favorite Track Configuration" poll including Blackwood would be a prominent indicator which supports my opinion.

And Westhill. I do like this track. As you stated it was designed for faster cars, thus it's very smooth. By the way, if Westhill was in demo, the names in these two paragraphs should be replaced.

As a consequence, my intent is increasing and diversifying the track options, if possible.

Thanks and regards..

Quote from Storm_Cloud :

Not very realistic to run a race on a track that includes its own access roads.

I agree with you Storm Cloud, but partially. Think about the "24 Hours of Le Mans" and Mulsanne. The circuit combined with race track and public road which is closed during a few hours during race. I don't mention the whole race circuit closed to public traffic within the race hours such as Monaco.

Further details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24_Hours_of_Le_Mans#The_circuit

Hi BlackBird,

My starting point is South City as you stated. If additional track environment doesn't required, via some adoptations this could be realized, I think. But I'm not a programmer, just a LFS user. And South City.. Any plus updates would be nice..

It would be great, if we could drive the cars on the Blackwood, Aston, and Westhill's overpasses such like on South City and Fern Bay tracks. I've found this familiar suggestion only for Blackwood case.

Of course, in order to accomplish this request, some additional roads and crossovers must be modelled and coded. But by this way, the monotony of the Blackwood and Westhill tracks should be dissolved.

You can see some panoramic views of the patterns in LFS at present.

Thanks..

I found a race car theme which covers the muscle car and GT racing concepts at the same time: "Dodge Challenger GT LeMans 2009"

The Swedish design firm Vizualtech made some renders. Namely this is a 3D modelling project for now.

I know the muscle car feature in LFS was argued many times before. But this car has a GT race concept indeed, and just looks like a muscle car.

And I also notice the licensed car issue. Maybe a familiar model would be great.

Here you go..

My favs: http://newsblogg.viztech.se/fi ... 08/12/xstudiorender06.jpg
http://newsblogg.viztech.se/fi ... 08/12/xstudiorender07.jpg

The blog page: http://newsblogg.viztech.se/20 ... e-racing-challenger-2009/

Here is an interesting example.. They started the car 3 times by this way.

http://fifthgear.five.tv/jsp/5 ... 1GP+200mph+record+attempt

Quote from Zen321 :

However, I still want those decimals of % while not be able to have the same choice for the laps (only lap per lap, or half a half per half a lap, not by tenth of laps)

You haggle well. I will accept 0.5 lap feature. Deal? :Handshake

Quote from HEIZER :

hi all

new skin from me

Skinfile

Breathtaking. A gift from another galaxy. What a flame effect.. Thank you HEIZER.

Quote from C40Z :

download skin

greetz caoz

I really love it. Great work, great rims.. Thanks C40Z

Quote from GTR_Yuni :

We need the noisemakers first, though?

Hi GTR_Yuni

We know that, it will be not implemented soon. Hence I suggested only in sound base for short term. With same logic, we cannot see the pitcrew but we can go to pitbox for pitsop.

Hi Zen321,

Thank you for very detailed explanation. I have no rejection for your examples. But let me state some points in order to clarify.

I mean by realism, "the real race conditions" , not "the physics rules". There is no doubt that, additional single gr makes slower the lap time. And according to the tank capacity, the quantity of the fuel taken does not equal to an integer quotient everytime. But we cannot determine this amount by 0.02% in real race conditions precisely. Just think about the fuelman in F1 pitstops. If the fuelman fills the tank longer by 0.14 sec and pulls back the hose 0.27 sec, all the strategy will collapse. The 0.8 sec. gap you stated before (lap based system = percentage system + 0.8 sec.) already includes the human rejection time lag. So, we can say that "the lap based system" seems more realistic.

And the MRT case. It's obvious the weight effect is more prominent in light heavy cars. But in road car and GTR car class (over 1100 kgs + 70 kgs standard LFS pilot) this effect is very slightly. As I know in F1 cars extra 1 liter of fuel causes 0.2 - 0.3 secs lap time loss according to the tracks.

My suggestion is an option such like as km/h - mph or psi - bar options. All I say that, LFS can calculate the fuel quantity instead of us and will be more user friendly. And finally, we say almost same things, but very slight differently.

Thanks guys for comments,

As you mentioned, in real race car the pilot have no chance to know the fuel remaining in tank, except for the tank is empty. In LFS an average fuel consumption (ATM time based linearly) ratio help us. But it's not given proportion. i.e: If your clutch was damaged and you must drive in 1st gear, the fuel consumption will boost up 3 or 4 times at least. So we can say that this feature is close to realism.

On the other hand the tendency that I observed in some LFS users is in line with demanding more precision about increasing the percentage decimals. And ATM, this approach conflicts with the realism.

Fuel strategy is based on estimation for percentage fuel consumption of the fuel tank capacity per lap. Therefore this system forces me to calculate all of the inputs that I have mentioned in previous sentence. There are various estimated fuel consumption ratios for each car depending on tracks. We can rename these ratios as multipliers. Via these multipliers, LFS can calculate requiring fuel levels instead of us by entering X laps.

i.e:
I consider the 60 laps race as the integrity of 60 laps race with varied lap periods. In every pitstop (assuming 2 pitstops) I must calculate the percentage with a fuel consuming table. But via my suggestion, we just enter the number of laps.

Fuel load at start: enough for 24 laps
Fuel to add in pitstop: enough for 20 laps for 1st, enough for 16 laps for 2nd pitstop

And of course in F12 menu, we can see the fuel remaining as lap based.

Consequently, LFS will be more user friendly by this way. I suggest "Lap based fuel strategy" as an option (similar to psi/bar option), because of time duration endurance races and other cases.

+1/-1 with reasons please

Thanks..

It would be nice but don't ignore the "wet track effect". Each race truck has water-cooled brake system with 200 litres of water tanks capacity. Every race weekend 2000 litres of water requires per truck. Thus this is too hard to implement into LFS nowadays.

Quote from TexasLTU :

+1 very good idea . And how about the full pitcrew?

Hi TexasLTU,

Of course the full pitcrew is the ideal, but due to the constraints I have suggested only the lollipop man as a benchmark for pitstop. Here is a simple example for full pitcrew. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... se_Mg&feature=related

Quote from Bob Smith :

I admit it would be nicer to see the number of licenced racers (be it S1 or S2), but that would require collecting much more data to be done with any accuracy (certainly more than can be obtained from the forum, you'd need to make sort of script to loop through users in LFS World, something I'm certainly not encouraging as I can't see the devs approving). For a rough idea, you can just reduce the numbers on the graph to about a quarter (although how accurate that is, especially post patch Z, I have no idea).

First graph is based on the cumulative numbers and there is no chance to analyze correctly. Instead of linear trend on cumulative basis, logarithmic base is more helpful.

The second graph (additional license daily growth rate) has over volatility. Thus, the idea you stated is a proper beginning. Via my experience I suggest weekly periodicity by summing of the numbers for both growth rate and licence numbers level. Additionally, this feature can be implement for monthly period.

Regards..

PS: Excel is not sufficient program for trend analysis. Metastock is the solution and gives very helpful information about the future.

As mentioned before; for modelling tyre heating, pressure etc, the devs should be consider the "nitrogen using in tyres". Here are the topic related links:

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question594.htm

http://www.nitrogendirect.com/N2Info.htm

http://www.f1technical.net/articles/1

http://www.formula1.com/inside ... nding_the_sport/5283.html

Quote from Bob Smith :

Not only has lfs.net now reached one quarter of a million registrations (2 days ago infact), but the rate at which new registrations are appearing is consistently higher than ever before, including day-of-release spikes (S1A and S2Z excluded).

Congrats and thanks all the LFS team and LFS society. At the same time responsibilities are growing also.

Regards..

PS: I am expert at interpretation and estimation the figure charts. I can help about "what next". If you interested, contact me via private message.

As you said, there are some detail works to do on it. Indeed the simple one is the hardest one. Thank you again piggy501.

Because of non spinning brake discs, I obliged to delete some good patterns. I hope it will be accomplished one day.

Hi piggy501,

Thank you for handling.