I can reproduce the crash, too. Happens on this line:

004C6A07 idiv eax,ebx

ebx is in this case 0, when I change it to 1 LFS continues running in some cases. The value in ebx is most likely FOV related, as it changes when zooming in/out manually, or when the TV cam auto-adjusts the FOV due to the car distance.

Why do you think your account has been hacked, and why would anyone care to do that? Unless doing it to annoy you specifically, they wouldn't gain anything from hacking a demo account. If they want one to try and cheat or hack licensed content then it would be much easier to just register a new account with a throwaway email address.

I can confirm that spectating while no cars are on the track locks the fps to 40, which is probably the same fps used for the LFS menus, so it might actually be intentional. Movement does seem oddly choppy though, for some reason.

Quote from Marco8188 :

But if, for example unblocks me with my username and after a month change hardware, lfs fails?

Yes, possibly, but as a licensed user you get +1 unlock every Friday up to two spare unlocks total, so you never have the risk of permanently being locked out of LFS. If you install a new CPU or something and LFS locks itself, you can just unlock again, using one of your spare unlocks.

Your friend, however, will have to unlock LFS on his laptop, which also means he has to somehow acquire a temporary internet connection to do that. Unlocking LFS anywhere else but his laptop won't work.

To unlock it your friend must bring his laptop to you or find another place with an internet connection. Once his laptop is connected to the internet, he can unlock LFS.

Unlocking LFS on your PC (with his credentials, that according to the EULA he must not share with you), and then sending the unlocked LFS installation to him will NOT work, since LFS detects that the hardware it was unlocked on has changed.

Quote from !RAM! :

Z vs. Z17 fps

The only clear difference I can see is that Z17 seems to use Anisotropic filtering.

You sure you don't have a game specific profile that doesn't work anymore because the LFS.exe has changed maybe? Or maybe you have a different install location for Z17?

Quote from geeman1 :

Not if you use triple buffering, which you should. I don't think you even can switch triple buffering off inside LFS. Of course you could force it off from the drivers, but I don't see why would anyone want to do that.

Oh right, didn't think about that

Yes.

1) Vsync will only limit to 60fps if your monitor refresh rate is 60Hz (they are linked)
2) Only vsync can effectively eliminate tearing. Manual limitation might sorta work but it also might not
3) Vsync will cut your fps dramatically if you are for some reason not able to reach your monitor's refresh rate. Every time you dip below it your fps will be cut in half, so for example on 60Hz if you can't hold 60fps it will be cut to 30fps, if you can't reach that it will be cut to 15fps, etc.
4) Manual limitation should really only be used to relieve your graphics card from unnecessary stress (or prevent fps jumping up and down too much). Depending on your PC's timer resolution the manual limitation can also be considerably less accurate than using vsync

Overall, vsync should only be used if you notice tearing and you have a graphics card / CPU combo that can reliably hold your monitor's refresh rate in fps.

This thread is going in circles only rivalled by oval servers. The cold hard truth is that Scawen apparently doesn't want or care about 45° lock angles. It would be a thing of < 1 minute to re-enable, but seeing how it hasn't happened since 2006 when this thread was started seems to be a good indicator that it won't happen at all. So your BMW-whatever has 45° lock angle? Well, your car isn't in LFS.

With the VWS Scawen will finally move into the right direction of severely limiting car setup options, because they're frankly quite ridiculous. I don't think this will immediately apply to all road cars, but in the end it really should. This is a change long overdue, IMO.

Quote from JJ72 :

That's nonsense

+1. For all reasons that may exist to not have 45° lock, the physics definitely aren't one. If anything, the missing tyre-fender interaction is a problem, but that also happens on < 45° lock angles.

I'm guessing it's the German abbreviation for "Kupplung", so the clutch, yes. To fix it, do what NotAnIllusion said; lift the throttle while shifting to the next gear.

If you're using autoclutch also make sure
1) if you spin, get OFF the throttle
2) if you recover from a standstill (after spin, etc.) shift down to first gear before accelerating, and don't make the first gear too long in the setup

Not doing these things can burn out the clutch really bad.

Quote from Krayy :

As your actual user name or as your nickname that you set in the options screen?

The forum name is equal to the license name

Or just go here: https://www.lfs.net/?page=register
And enter a user name with space and click "Check availability & spelling" below.

Quote from fraghetti :

the new dashboard icons really look neat with enabled speedo.
but why arent they in cockpit? :/

Why does nobody ever read what Scawen says?

Quote from Scawen :

Virtual dash uses symbols (soon to be implemented on real dashboards)

Quote from Bose321 :

Could you tell if in the future LFS also have that when you have the lights turned on, you will see it on the road

It would require a pretty big graphics engine overhaul to allow for dynamic lights that look anything near as good as the ones in newer games. Unless we ever get night racing, which would make such a change necessary, don't even dream on that getting implemented. It is nothing more than eyecandy (in a racing simulation!) that would require a significant amount of work for 'nothing'.

Driving with 360° view is freaky

Quote from Krayy :

I'm pretty sure that LFS will not let you register a username with a space in it

Well, you're wrong
For example "Bob Smith"

Yes. Options > Display > Interface (bottom right corner)

The entire right side is related to the colours of the track minimap.

E: Heh, too slow

Sorry for barging in, but, what if the user name has a space in it? Mind, I have never even looked at lapper and have no idea how it works, but just using the first occurrence of a space as user/message separation (looking at the !pm command here) seems problematic.

Also Bass-Driver, it's spelled private, not privet.

Cars aren't modifiable in LFS. There is a hack tool named LFS Tweak, but even that only allows quite rough changes that won't help you with your problem. Even if you had a way to tweak all parameters to match your planned car, I'd say LFS still has too many physics problems and inaccuracies to be of any use.

Now I'd say your best bet is probably rFactor, but this requires 1) tons of work to get your car in 2) tons of work and in-detail expert knowledge of tyre physics and car dynamics to make this car behave remotely like the real thing.

Honestly, overall I'd say you probably have to scrap the idea of using a sim to experiment. Unless you find someone knowledgeable to write a sim for your car specifically, you won't get any useful data out of a computer simulation. The time would be better spent working on the actual car and making tests with it.

Quote from Khann :

Yep, curb sounds are definitely more important that tyre physics.

That's not what he meant, but the missing punctuation made it hard to understand

Corrected:
"Talking about tyres - it's not an important thing, but I hope they will include a sound when driving on curbs with the new patch."

And I agree, a tyre impact sound, dynamically created whenever the tyre experiences sudden compression/force would be very nice, both for bumps on the road and especially for the kerbs. In a real car, going over kerbs can be extremely loud (granted, we lack sawtooth kerbs in LFS), where as in LFS the most you hear is your FF wheel rattling, if the shaking FF isn't mysteriously drowned out as it tends to happen with LFS' FF implementation, that is.

You can see the diff quite clearly without zooming in and both JPEGs are larger than the PNG. Since this screenshot has lots of large uniform spaces the PNG's compression can work better here.

Yeah, if you screenshot a pitch black area then they would not be huge :rolleyes:
They will be huge if the picture contains lots of detail, which screenshots tend to have.

Yeah, but that's because with PrtScr you paste it into an image editing program and save it as PNG, which uses lossless compression resulting in a smaller filesize without quality loss. When posting stuff on the web you should use JPEG anyway, since the file size will be smaller by an order of magnitude compared to PNG. The only exception for that is simple graphics (few colours used and large areas having the same colour) and/or pictures where the quality is of utmost importance.

Quote from BOSCHO :

the Ctrl+S works but the images with it are with poor quality than with the PrtSc

Huh? Can you please post an example of this? Ctrl-S saves as bmp, which uses no compression and should therefore be 100% quality.

Granted, at least when viewing a MPR there could be an optional smoothing algorithm running, since what happens in the 'future' is perfectly well known in that case. So instead of simply letting the physics run their course with the last packet input, you could alter the input between the packets so that the car position matches the 'future' packet as close as possible when it is read from the MPR, minimizing the huge abrupt warps without resorting to the cars floating around magically. Not easy but definitely possible.

The realtime network code could also be improved to avoid warping, at the cost of delaying the car position by at least one packet. I think it would actually be preferable to have slightly more delayed reactions of your opponents than them driving or warping into you for a split second before continuing their real path.

However, the current implementation already works well enough, meaning we probably won't see that changed for a long time, if ever.

Nope.