Quote from deggis :

owned!

I already mentioned about this some 30+ pages ago but no one replied... what do you think is the collision detection still the same? Now that the new tyre physics should make racing closer I really don't want to see anymore those moonflights from a minor touch made in 30 km/h speed. I'm talking about only the collision detection not a whole new damage model. I think this issue at least should be very high on the to do list, right after aeromodel bugs and tyre physics issues.

I agree, and I've said so at length a few times before, so will leave it at that

it will make them a lot worse to drive in comparison to other setups though, which effectively makes them a lot worse to drive, as other setups / times can be the only real reference point

I guess people are just more used to the corporate style of beta, release, patch, patch, go and make a new game, leaving the old one still buggy....

Quote from Lord_Verminaard :

Hmm, a lot of the design and testing on the C6 was done by some German engineers in ... er.. GERMANY. :P The C6 Z06 ran a lap at Nurburgring in 7:42.99. That's pretty damn fast. If a car cant handle, there is no way it can do a lap at the 'ring that quick.

One thing US-ians seem to have always struggled with is the differences between outright grip and handling. One need only look at the focus on skidpad numbers to see this
Outright grip will let a fast car get around a circuit in a good time, but that doesn't really tell you anything much about how hard the driver had to fight it to get it there. Whether or not the latest Corvette actually handles nicely as well as grips well I don't know, just bringing up an observation

Quote from Rappa Z :

dam, What is so special with this game?I looked it up and it looks like a Toca Race Driver 3 or Gran Turismo 4.

Toca and GT are buggy with difficult interfaces and reasonable driving physics? Someones got things a little backwards I reckon

first crash putting my name in, was ok next time.
second crash starting a race, keeps happening.
looks like a great piece of software...

heh... envisaging a controller to use for car race sims wouldn't exactly require huge leaps of thought

yep, some things just can't be simmed accurately. Pretty much anything relying on the human bodys motion, as opposed to controls that the human body twiddles (wheel, pedals, buttons, etc) is going to be very difficult / impossible. At least bike racing is cheap enough to be moderately accessible in real life

no they don't! There are not many countries that make nice cars, many don't make any I believe. Taking the PC 'all countries make ok cars' line is just a cop out

new tyre and aero, woohoo

you think there are no rfactor players that dislike U.S-ians?

most racers aren't particularly good at setup creation, the fast sets are much more readily available than the 'almost as fast but much more driveable' sets...

you can play definition god all you like if you really want
to my mind, the forces involved in your fwd 'power oversteer' are very similar to the forces involved in lift off oversteer. weight shift is the sole contributor to the oversteer, whereas 'power oversteer' to me implies that power is the main contributor.

seems we have a fairly different idea of power oversteer. obviously you could put some maccas trays under your fwd hatchback's rear wheels, get on the power, and call it power oversteer if you wanted, but that's hardly behaving like a rwd

ok, but you're hardly initiating the rear wheels sliding with power. you're just getting a bit of extra bite from the front once the rear is hanging out...

so why can't you correct for the understeer with a bigger rear roll bar, damper tuning, or any of the other usual options...?

Quote from Gentlefoot :

In most caes, only cars with power to the rear wheels can produce 'power oversteer'. However, even front wheel drive cars can experience power oversteer with certain setups and a diff under some circumstances.

Mind describing some of those circumstances?

you mean like, police progress report threads?

Quote from tristancliffe :

I'd be interested to see a torque curve (or a power curve before you all start) of the engine using the different cam profiles and timings, because I expect the 'mid range torque boost' with the different timing won't be as great as some people think. The huge main reason of Variable Valve Timing (including or not variable lift) is emissions and economy. It's highly likely (but impossible to say without more data than the engine departments are going to divulge) that the racier cam profiles and timings are better throughout the rev range in terms of performance, but seriously lack in terms of economy and emissions, whereas the less racey profiles/lifts/timings sacrifice a bit of torque for cleaner and more complete burning.

As I say it's almost, if not totally impossible to say this with a great deal of accuracy without all the data, which we ain't likely to see. Ever.

Have you driven other cars with small capacity engines tuned to produce peak power at high rpm? They're not real fun to drive around town etc, pretty grumpy down at low rpm. Much as I think vtec is a bit wrong and silly, (much better, smoother, ways of producing higher peak power imho) it's signifigantly better than the same peak engine tune without it...
if you look at a vtec engines torque plot, it's a bunch of fairly flat steps, (the steps are one of the main reasons I don't like vtec) as opposed to a 'normal' high rpm tuned small capacity engine, which usually rises pretty steeply.

the dodgy behaviour with combinations of lateral and longitudinal load has been with us since the beginning, seems a bit hopeful to just assume all will be perfect in a few months time... though certainly, I'm hoping too

if you think oversteer is what defines 'behaving like a rwd' then you lack an understanding of vehicle dynamics in general

sorry, but the bit about fwd cars behaving like rwd is as much misguided rubbish as the first poster

if you're going to judge the capability of drivetrain layouts, you really need to use something other than parity modified racing

locked dif, lower damping on the rear suspension than the front, fair bit of toe in on the rear wheels, low pressure in rear tyres.

'saving' part worn tyres is career-mode ish, which we currently have none of. You don't have to save fuel, or body shells, or anything else...

The original suggestion sounds reasonable to me, as a suggestion for consideration... though I wouldn't really care if it got implemented or not. Doesn't seem the sort of thing that would be worried about in real life, but that may mean the current tyre wear physics are not representative?