Quote from obsolum :

I'm also not entirely sure if the handbrake just activates the rear brakes. It could be but somehow I would find it hard to believe in the case of brake discs.

On some rear disk cars, there's a small drum brake built into the hub that's cable operated for the handbrake, I heard before. But there's also disk brakes that can be cable operated as well as hydraulic. It's the law in this country for every post '79 car (cars are NCT exempt after 30 years, so they can be in any condition you like) to have a cable operated rear brake, at least. Look at bicycle disk brakes. The majority of these are cable operated, so it is possible

Surely when you reverse and pull the handbrake, the rear of the car will go down, not up, as it's the same effect as applying the normal brakes whilst moving forward? I never noticed LFS cars not dipping at the rear when handbraking going forward though, nice find

Quote from Flame CZE :

I meant the interface scale, sorry.

All that does is downscale the buttons you see on-screen, like the buttons in autocross mode. It won't affect the display resolution or aspect ratio at all

Quote from zeugnimod :

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1277689#post1277689

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1277694#post1277694

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1277724#post1277724

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1277735#post1277735

Sorry I haven't read every single post on the forum looking for unwritten rules, as you say it should be added to the rules

VOB mods aren't illegal. Publishing a downloadable link to the mods is against forum rules, but owning them and even publishing screenshots doesn't break any part of the EULA

Quote :

-------------------------
-- LFS Forum Agreement --
-------------------------
1) When I post a message on this forum, I will do my very best to write in a polite manner and not use foul language and / or insult an individual or group of people.

2) I shall not post illegal software or post links to illegal software on this forum. Illegal software is software published without permission from the author or copyright owner.

3) I shall not post images, or links to images, which contain offensive content such as nudity, pornographic, racist or any other clearly offensive content such as excessive violence.

4) Any "mods" - modifications to the Live for Speed exe, must be discussed with a moderator before being released on the forum. If a mod is approved by a moderator, it may then be released in the appropriate section of the forum. Please do not contact a developer as we do not support mods and do not have the time to deal with them. Any mods which change the shape of a car model, or which allow online cheating or circumvent HLVC, will be rejected.

5) I realise that if I ignore this agreement, I risk being denied access to this forum.

Quote from tristancliffe :

He was pointing out that even with aerodynamic drag alone, your car will slow down faster than you claim, as your car doesn't have a Cd of 0.25.

Why not? An Audi A2 has a Cd of 0.25, and that's not far off the shape of my car. A Pug 308 has a Cd of 0.29. Given my car has a smaller area than both of these, I don't see why a Cd of around 0.25 is impossible?

Quote from Huru-aito :

Other notes: a car that weighs around 1000kg and takes 10 seconds to decelerate from 160km/h to 150km/h has a Cd*A of around 0,25. Even less if you use engine braking to slow the car down. By comparison, a Mitsubishi Eclipse from late 90's has Cd*A of 0,515.

Toyota VVT-i doesn't have different cams, it just has an adjustable intake cam pulley.

:twocents:

Of course it doesn't have 4 different cams, it does have 3 different intake cam positions, like I said

I guess my car is fairly aerodynamic then? Maybe it does have something wrong with it, I don't know. It does have a good bit of engine braking when driving in traffic at low speeds though. I can usually drive in traffic just using the gears, without having to touch the brakes, by using engine braking in 1st. I'd still need to use the handbrake just to stop it rolling at <2km/h though. But that's highly dangerous driving, so I don't do it

Quote from tristancliffe :

I bet you can't corner as well in neutral as you can in gear (with the clutch engaged of course). Therefore you have less control.

Quote from dougie-lampkin :

...I never said anything about staying in neutral while going around corners either...

As I said before, I never mentioned cornering out of gear, if there's a significant corner in the road it's more than likely too steep to coast down anyway. Even still, if it was downhill, you could corner just as well, unless you were trying to keep to rally speeds

Quote from tristancliffe :

Plus you render an active safety system - accelerating out of the way of the juggernaut with no brakes for example - useless.

In all fairness, it's not hard to see a truck coming towards you at speed in your rear-view mirror. Taking an extra couple of seconds to engage a gear won't make the slightest bit of difference there, as you'd have seen him coming a mile back. I've yet to find a hazard on the road that requires sharp acceleration (other than having to reach a gap in the ditch when a boy racer comes against you at night on a back road with no intentions of stopping, fairly common on our 1.5 car width roads ), rather than sharp braking...

I'm not trying to justify my driving techniques to anyone, I don't need to, especially over an internet forum. It's what I do, and it seems to work fine, haven't heard any complaints from the back yet And they're not all chavish, but coming from Stab City what would you expect??

While everyone is trying to have a go at my driving, you should also know that I drive with one hand on the wheel (on a related note however, I am not a chav, so my seat is not reclined at 45°...), I regularly text whilst driving on the motorway and I usually don't stop at the lights if I see them turn amber. Oh, and I have a habit of tailgating anybody going at or below the speed limits. Fire away

Sounds like you're trying to run a 16:9 resolution on a 4:3 monitor. Right click on your desktop and go to properties, and find the resolution you're using in Settings. Then go to options -> screen in LFS and select this resolution. This should fix the aspect ratio, as long as your windows resolution is correct

Quote from STROBE :

Sorry, did I touch a nerve?

No not really. Just, as Erik said, your post loses any points it may have had (which it didn't) after you attacked the poster. If you're stooping to that level, you can't have much of an argument to fall back on

Quote from STROBE :

I never take my car out of gear when moving, with the exception of going <10mph on the approach to red traffic lights when I pop it into neutral and coast the last metres for a gentle stop (and even if it was in gear, I'd have the clutch pedal depressed anyway rather than force it into first gear whilst moving).

Good for you. I never said this is wrong or dangerous, even though you would equally fail a driving test for this.

Quote from STROBE :

Having the car out of gear robs you of control, and in the UK I believe you'd fail your driving test for coasting. An automatic transmission isn't a valid comparison as power is applied again as soon as you open the throttle, unlike being in neutral in a manual.

What is this control everyone is talking about? I'm no less in control when I'm out of gear, as long as I have a hand on the wheel. Sure, I can't sharply accelerate instantly, but when do you ever need to do this? I'm still only a couple of seconds from re-engaging a gear if I need to speed up, what situation could this possibly spell disaster for? You would fail a test for this, yes, but 90% of drivers on the roads do things that they would be failed for anyway (like you coasting up to the lights, you hypocrite )

Quote from STROBE :

I'm not really concerned how long you've been driving (although if we're comparing e-penii, I've been driving 12 more years than you, never needed a formal driving instructor, and, touch wood, have never so much as had a scrape. W00t, go me.), it's the fact that you obviously don't understand the physics and reasons behind why you shouldn't coast. It's inherently linked to safety and your ability to control the car in the event of an emergency or unforeseen situation, and if you think there's no way you're going to have any unforeseen situation when coasting down a slight incline, then you're only proving that you've only been driving on the road for less than a year, and if I may say so, don't know shit.

I'm not comparing anything, I'm just pointing out that statistically I'm as safe a driver as you, so your argument of the massive dangers associated with coasting is quite null. I do understand the physics of coasting, you're relying on gravity to keep you going, it's not that hard. I never said there's no such thing as an unforeseen situation, please stop putting words into my mouth I clearly do "know shit", as I passed a driving test. Therefore I have a certificate showing that I do indeed "know shit"

Well at least it wasn't racist or anything

Quote from STROBE :

You mean there are different laws of physics for trucks and cars?

So that explains why I sometimes get pimply 17 year old kids in their Mum's Yaris thinking they know best about what constitutes safe driving.

Sarcasm detector broken, or just plain trolling

When did I say it was safer to do anything? I said what I do when I'm driving, as I believe it to be the most beneficial for the car. I don't think taking the car out of gear is going to make me spin off the road and barrel roll into the nearest field, thank you very much. I don't know why you're having a spa attack over it anyway, I don't even live in your country, so when I cause an over 7000 car pileup because I popped into neutral going down a slight hill, you're not going to be involved.

And I do know better than quite a few people on the roads, I passed my test first time after 2 lessons, I've been driving almost a year on the road, and 3 or 4 off the road, with not even a scratch on anything I've driven. I've a fully clean license, not even been cautioned before. And guess what, I've been coasting downhill in neutral for the past year, and I haven't even had a car implode as a result

I meant the engine wear saving. Sorry, but I'd rather spend an extra 0.004 MPG at most (my MPG indicator only has 2 decimal places, so it's probably less...) to save 4 times the work on the engine, plus as you say, it's even more of a saving when the idle cam position is open. The car gets enough of a thrashing at times, so I try to save every little bit where I can I agree that the reduced engine wear won't be visible during my time with the car (only another 8 weeks), but sitting at 600 RPM for a few hundred yards is better than sitting at 3000 RPM.

And in the Mini, it doesn't use "0" fuel when coasting. As it runs on a carb, the throttle is always slightly open to allow enough fuel through to keep the engine ticking over at idle. Without an ECU, this is always open, even when coasting. I presume that doesn't apply to injected engines though, as the ECU should close the throttle when coasting?

Yes, because a 26 ton diesel lorry (presumably it's the FM series if it's around 26 ton, so it's at least 9l displacement and turbo'd) follows the exact same physics as a 900 kg petrol 1l car :rolleyes:

Actually, it's far more likely to happen in a truck. The driver behind can't see what's in front of you, and doesn't know if you're slowing down or stopping. At least in a car he could see the traffic in front and anticipate your braking.

Quote from hyntty :

Rubbish. Utterly rubbish.

Rubbish? No. I posted a factual statement (I can get video evidence later to show this IS what happens), that simply proves that engine braking is not all it's cracked up to be. And that is in 5th gear, hitting about 5000 revs at 160km/h, with obviously at least 160km/h worth of wind against me, and no other cars around causing disturbances.

I couldn't care less about what your car does in the situation, I'm telling you this is what happens in my car, and that is why engine braking is pointless in my car. I don't remember saying "Engine braking is shit and anyone who does it is a complete tool"? Unless you happen to own a 1st gen 1.0l Yaris VVT-i and can prove this isn't what happens, don't claim it to be rubbish

Quote from hyntty :

I've driven a Volvo around a town with only minimal brake usage, namely when the exhaust brake stopped working in really low speeds. Does that make me a complete retard?

Yes it does. Your brake lights are there for a reason. Stopping in town with minimal brake usage is what causes crashes, when the driver behind you can't anticipate you stopping.

Quote from tristancliffe :

10 seconds to drop 10km/h???? Something is wrong with your car!! Unless, of course, you left it in top gear and just lifted. That's not what you do on a downhill stretch of road. You use a lower gear and higher revs. Not redline revs, but around the peak torque rpm. I can assure you that it will reduce brake temperatures by around 50% on the way down a mountain.

Perhaps the naysayers have never driven down a mountain in a car with weak brakes, and had to rely on engine braking?

Tristan, that's what happens in my car, in the situation earlier in this post. I couldn't have selected a lower gear without pushing the redline, which I have no intentions of doing (although it does sound amazing in this car, it goes all the way to 7k :schwitz, and as you say is not what you would be doing going downhill. There's nothing wrong with it that I know of, it has the exact same performance as every other Yaris. Granted, the engine power isn't exactly astounding, and I wouldn't expect it to have amazing engine braking as a result (I'd imagine bigger engines would have more of a vacuum effect? Not sure on this though...).

Also, I have a Mini. Don't talk to me about dodgy brakes

How does it remove control? The idea of going downhill is to control your speed. I have a big square pedal in the middle of the floor that does that very job for me, far better then the one on the right actually. It does burn slightly more fuel, either in neutral or coasting in gear my MPG display shows 99.9 MPG though, so it's not very significant. And it does save the engine slightly, if you're coasting you're going to be revving at around 2-3k, which is 4 or 5 times more wear than caused by idling. Nothing you'll notice in the short term, but it all adds up. My car (which is VVT-i) has an idle cam, a "cruising" cam, and a fast cam position, meaning the saving is even better when the idle cam position is in operation

It takes a whole second to put in the clutch and engage a gear anyway, so I don't see what the safety issue is? If it's a large enough hill that I'm going into neutral, I'm not going to be absolutely flying it. And why would you want to sharply accelerate all of a sudden when going downhill, so much that you couldn't take a second or two to re-engage a gear?...I never said anything about staying in neutral while going around corners either? If there's a downhill road with a significant corner, it's probably a disused B-road (they've all been bypased here, the only people that use them are the locals, who beat around them anyway), in which case I won't be in neutral, I'll probably have my foot flat to the floor

Our driving instructors have a saying here: "Gears are to go, brakes are to slow". Makes sense really, you have brakes to slow you down when going downhill, engine braking won't add much of an effect unless you're revving the bejases out of the car in the first place Or you could fashion an air brake out of plywood or something, apparently the one on the Veyron has more braking power itself than the brakes on your average shopping trolley

That's not being out of control gezmoor. Being out of control is when you're struggling to stop yourself crashing. So you're saying if I'm stopped in a car park (in which I wouldn't be able to steer or accelerate suddenly, as I'm stopped obviously), I'm in immediate peril?

Tristan, if you're going down a hill long and steep enough to cause your brakes to boil and fail, engine braking (unless you're in 1st gear doing 100km/h) will have next to no effect. Even using engine braking alone (with wind resistance too), my car takes about 10 seconds to fall from 160 to 150km/h, on a flat straight motorway. Add into this a mountain road (since you're threatening falling over the edge of a mountain, it's safe to assume the road is fairly steep), and engine braking is useless. Although if I was going down a hill that steep, I would of course leave it in gear. The hills I'm talking about coasting in neutral would be a long hill just steep enough to keep your speed constant. Coasting down 1 in 5 roads is obviously fairly ridiculous

I've been experimenting with this in my own car. The MPG display is almost completely dependant on throttle position from what I've found. It is more economical for fuel to stay in the lowest gear possible, but don't forget you're causing excess wear on the engine, so it's a false economy really. This is why I tend to pop into neutral when going downhill also, it uses a slight bit of fuel to tick over, but it's saving the engine from 3000-4000 revs as opposed to maybe 600 to idle I'm sure it's possible to find a ratio for engine wear:fuel consumed, to find the most economical overall gear and throttle position to have, but I just use my car to get from A to B for now so I'm not too concerned with that

E: I would perceive efficient as meaning getting the most horsepower possible out of the engine for the MPG, and economical as getting the best MPG possible at the expense of power

I used OSCommerce before for my (failed :shy e-shop...Seemed to work OK itself, you could tweak it slightly to your needs, although it has decent product listing as standard

Any DUI servers up tonight? I haven't hit the JD requirement, but I am currently polishing off a litre's worth of Huzzar...To the LFS-mobile! :spin:

Myself and a couple of mates did a test not so long ago in Forza, 2 laps around the 'Ring both before and after a serious bender. I found my lap times to be better after the drink somehow LFSUI, bring it on

The problem with the demo is it's anonymous. Anybody can register as many accounts as they like, and drive however they like online with no repercussions. Whereas in the licensed servers, you have one account, which means you tend to try and drive someway responsibly. That, and those that pay for a license generally have some sort of interest in sim racing, and find the actual racing part to be more fun and challenging than wrecking as many others as possible

Long story short, S2 servers are significantly cleaner than demo servers, but there are of course exceptions

Quote from aroX123 :

Sorry

Haha that's just disturbing on so many levels

I don't see the big deal about breaking in engines properly. Look at the amount of used cars on the roads, most of whose original owners were mindless simpletons that drove them as normal from the showroom.

Look at the amount of "granny cars" (Ka's, Yaris', Clio's, etc.) still upwards of 10 years old that drive fine today. Do you honestly believe the first owners of those cars followed careful engineer's instructions about how to break in an engine properly over 1000 miles? I'm driving a 9 year old Yaris at the moment, with almost 75k miles on the clock, that still drives like new. I'd bet money on the fact that it wasn't originally owned by someone as careful as George here (what kind of mechanically sympathetic person buys a new bog standard 1L like mine anyway :razz, yet it hasn't needed a single engine part replaced since new. It's had the handbrake cable, plugs, oil, filters done etc., but nothing out of the ordinary. The car gets a fair amount of abuse from me alone (such as driving the length of an 8 mile motorway at 6k to squeeze 170km/h out, on several occasions, being redlined through the gears, etc., usual 17-year-old-first-car type stuff :shy, but isn't showing an ounce of it. Modern cars are built to withstand the inevitable abuse and neglect from the common folk I suppose

tl;dr - Forget the engineering perfection style of breaking the engine in. Drive it at sensible levels for the first couple of 100 miles, then gradually work up to your usual standard of driving. By the time you come to sell it (presumably you won't be hanging onto it for more than say 5 years...), any long-term damage resulting from a less than 100% breaking in period won't be noticeable, and I'd highly doubt even the second owner would find anything untoward

Quote from Bawbag :

The point is to show that not every patch comes out on a Friday, so it could be out on Wednesday for all we know, but what Wednesday.....

Nooo, speculative patches are ALWAYS on a Friday, even the dogs on the street know that And Sam said it's coming soon, so it MUST be this Friday

Recent night out involving a bit too much "orange juice". At this point I was protecting my gentlemen's regions after repeatedly having a rucksack full of red bull cans dropped from quite a height onto me On the plus side, I didn't feel it much (as you can see from my happy face :razz, as we had started mixing vodka and Guinness about an hour before hand

Quote from SamH :

It feels like a new patch is imminent

New patch this Friday then? :hyper: