A bit of defensive driving sorts those idiots out. Just position yourself in the middle of the two lanes as early as you can and stop people physically being able to undertake or overtake you. Works perfectly. Though, I'm only talking about those merging queue situations you've refered to not when traffic is free flowing.
Doesn't work too well for me ! I have a tendency to overdrive a car when I first get in to it and then have difficulty finding how much I need to slow down. I usually end up not pushing hard enough I think, because I can never seem to get any closer than 1-2 seconds off the fastest guys. Don't know why I do really, probably because I find it difficult to sense speed on a computer screen. I know in real life I am completely the opposite by being over cautious. But then that was on motorcycles, I've never done any track days in a car.
Getting back to the tyre phyiscs, something else I've noticed is that I get the impression that the slicks are way too forgiving. Now I've never driven/ridden on slicks but from what I've been told they are not anywhere near as progressive as road tyres when it comes to loosing them. They give great grip up to the point when they let go, but then they let go hard, (at least compared to road tyres). I think this is born out by my experience in watching people racing on slicks, you hardly hear any tyre squeeling and you hardly ever see anyone sliding the rear out around corners. They're either pretty much stuck to the road, (barring the squirming of the suspension of course) or spinning off. Nothing like the kind of behaviour you see on road tests all the time with people squeeling tyres and sliding around all over the place. In LFS I can't say I've noticed any sigificant difference between the behavior of the road tyres and the slicks, except of course in the total amount of grip. If anything the slicks are easier to pull back in to line than the road tyres, needing far less throttle/braking modulating to get the grip back.
I know what you're talking about, I've noticed this too. The fastest guys always seem to be oversteering and over pushing the tyres. Maybe it's to do with the way the game gives audio/visual feedback to compensate for the fact you're not actually sat in a car or maybe it's to do with the tyre physics not being perfect and not enough forward speed is lost when you slide tyres in the corners. In my opinion it's probably a mix of both, but definitely mostly to do with the latter. I just think that you can slide the car around a lot in LFS and not loose as much forward momentum as you would do in real life. Also, I'm not 100% convinced that higher corner speed is maintained quite right when coming out of corners, I've followed guys that are doing a quicker lap than me and sometimes I'm quicker through a corner than them but never seem to make up much distance on the following straight and I know it's not down to gearing because a few times I know I've been using the same set.
And the resulting carnage from the differing lines/relative speeds on different sections of the circuit caused by placing dramatically different machines on the track at same time would be really conducive to good racing right?? No I didn't think so.
Errr... how can it be a "legal advantage" when it's not compliant with the series rules ?? Think you're missing the point of the whole ethos of spec racing. If the spec doesn't suit your tastes/talent just go find one that does and leave other people to race in series that suit their tastes/talents. There are plenty of different motorsport options to choose from.
Sounds more like you're the one whining about not being able to beat these guys that "just turn up with no prep work" to me.
Why care? if you're good, you'll be able to beat them anyway. Your whole post, (and others too), just sound like you're worried about a bit more competition maybe??
IF the changes result in more competition down the ranks what difference does it make to you if you're out in front? or do you worry that restricted set options will mean you can't win as easily anymore??Your posts make no sense to me in all honesty. All I see in most of them is vitriol towards others with a different opinion to you.
Dunno.. but I thought that's exactly what I said??
Actually men and women are just as bad as each other overall. They just do different things badly. As you said women are usually worse at being able to judge speed/distance/space so tend to make mistakes at junctions and parking etc. Men on the other had tend to suffer from believing they are far better drivers than they are and so consiously drive too fast, go for undersize gaps, not leave enough room etc, so their accidents are by and large much more dangerous/severe. Women on the other had, tend to be far more cautious and lacking in confidence so have much more minor accidents. It's for this reason that Insurance companies are able to offer cheaper insurance to women without coming in to trouble with sexual equality legislation because all the facts show that men cause more expensive accidents than women.
2007 Figures here: http://www.dft.gov.uk/162259/1 ... 328843/flagbfactsheet.pdf
Car specific fuel setting
I didn't find this in the improvements suggestion log post and nothing came up when i searched so....appologies if I missed.
Something that has been bugging me for a while now is the need to keep changing the amount of fuel in the car at race start when I change between servers (particularly in CTRA) because the cars have different fuel consumption.
Given that most of the races are of the same lengths so therefore the amount of fuel you need in a car stays pretty much fixed I think it would be an improvement if when you chose a car the amount of fuel you last used in it remained the same.
Eg Drive the XFG in CTRA Race 1 and you'll probably have a fuel setting of around 8%, when you swap to say the FOX in CTRA SS 2 you will need to change the fuel setting of the car as well as changing car and choosing a set. If you're in a push to get in to a race before it starts you are very likely to not have time/forget to change the fuel setting and run out mid race.
So I would like to suggest that the fuel setting is related to the car rather than a global setting at a minimum. Ideally it would be IN the set config itself so that just choosing a set will set the amount of fuel to start a race with.
The pit options such as tyre wear/replacement and refuelling setting would probably be better off either as car specific settings or in the actual set for each car/track also.
Thoughts??
Something that has been bugging me for a while now is the need to keep changing the amount of fuel in the car at race start when I change between servers (particularly in CTRA) because the cars have different fuel consumption.
Given that most of the races are of the same lengths so therefore the amount of fuel you need in a car stays pretty much fixed I think it would be an improvement if when you chose a car the amount of fuel you last used in it remained the same.
Eg Drive the XFG in CTRA Race 1 and you'll probably have a fuel setting of around 8%, when you swap to say the FOX in CTRA SS 2 you will need to change the fuel setting of the car as well as changing car and choosing a set. If you're in a push to get in to a race before it starts you are very likely to not have time/forget to change the fuel setting and run out mid race.
So I would like to suggest that the fuel setting is related to the car rather than a global setting at a minimum. Ideally it would be IN the set config itself so that just choosing a set will set the amount of fuel to start a race with.
The pit options such as tyre wear/replacement and refuelling setting would probably be better off either as car specific settings or in the actual set for each car/track also.
Thoughts??
Not nearly a tough enough sentence IMO, should have been twice that.
Firstly stop making assumptions, it only makes you look stupid.
Secondly, I never braketest people. I'd never even heard the term before I read it on here. If some idiot wants to sit 2" off my rear bumper I'm just going to gradually slow down, (and I mean gradually so they are fully aware of what I'm doing), then I'll floor it. 9 times out of 10 I'll pull away from them becauase I have more torque than most of the idiots who drive like that and they get the message and don't bumper hug me anymore. If they continue to drive like a moron then I'll pull over and let them drive like it.
I hardly ever drive at the speed limit but I won't drive stupidly fast either, so the only people I ever hold up are the ****s that think they are michael schumacher and want to drive a good 20mph + faster than everyone else is going. In those circumstances I just move over and pray that when/if they have an accident it's only themselves they kill.
Lastly I'm not siding with people that brake test or pull out in front of you last minute and then don't go anywhere etc, they are stupid idiotic and dangerous drivers no doubt. But as I said, there is absolutely NO justification for ever intentionally hitting someone when driving. If I ever see someone doing it I will be noting their number plate and making a phone call to the police. You can trust me on that. There is a huge difference between being frustrated, annoyed and even put at risk by other drivers and being the idiot that's doing it!!
PS - Your dad deserved everything he got for what he did. He should have just backed off and let the other guy drive like a moron, better yet he should have reported him to the police and got him points on his license.
Which at the end of the day is how it would be in real life. Take any vehicle and it has basic dynamic characteristics. Once you've got the basic things like damping/spring rates set so that the car handles correctly/optimally, (call it what you will), for your driving style then track to track changes should really be relatively minor. I look at some of the LFS sets for the same car and there can be huge variations in things like spring rates and arb settings for different circuits. This just isn't realistic IMO. For example there is no real reason to be increasing the springing of the front of a particular car by say 60% for one circuit over another. There aren't any major steep gradient down hill braking zones on any of the LFS tracks that spring to mind??. Why would a car need to be massively oversteery on one circuit and massively understeery on another?? (for the same driver)
Then you think wrong. The track is defined by the white lines at the edge of the tarmac. As far as I know two wheels must be inside the area between the two white lines at all times, (certainly that is the case in F1), and if at any time this is not the case you are considered to be course cutting and this will lead to a penalty being imposed.
Obviously in this case the simple answer is to put a tyre wall perpendicular to the track exactly at the apex of the corner right up to the edge of the grass, (or whatever distance away from the edge that would mean you had to keep at least two wheels inside the white line).
Your fault for brake testing?? are you joking?? The fault is 100% completely yours for hitting him deliberately!!!
That makes you a complete moron. IMO people like you should be banned from driving for life. Tagging someone up the rear is one of the most dangerous things you can do whilst driving. I don't care how stupidly the guy in front was behaving there is absolutely no justification for deliberately hitting someone whilst driving. I was about to commen to the OP if he feels he gets treated badly driving a car to try riding a motorbike. With car drivers they're just being stupid. When it comes to motorcycles a fair percentage of car drivers actively begrudge you even being on the road. For example, I lost count of the number of drivers that pulled forward in a queue of traffic and purposfuly pulled over near a traffic island etc to block my path. Why ?? well basicaly they hate the fact that on a motorcycle you're making progress and they're not, and all because they're too frightened to ride one themselves.
Actually it may help it, it may may it worse. Depends on whether the original wheels were being under/correctly/over damped by the OEM dampers. If they were being correctly damped then any change in mass of the wheels will cause the amount of damping to be wrong. Heavier wheels will make the system underdamped and lighter wheels will make the system over damped (relative to "correct" damping). Then there is spring rate to account for. The spring rate will (in combination with the unsprung mass), determine the natural resonance frequency of the suspension system, this resonance is important both in terms of the dynamics of the vehicle and the size/frequency etc of the bumps the suspension can effectively absorb. Changing the wheels mass will affect this frequency and so affect these aspects of the vehicles performance.
Point Tristan is (correctly) making is that without actually knowing what the damping of the system was originally and without knowing the spring rate and total mass of the unsprung weight, you'll never know how much :
a) Your replacement wheel should weigh and/or
b) How much your damping should be adjusted to account for the change in wheels mass and/or
c) How much your spring rate should be adjusted to account for the new wheels mass.
The above is true even if the orginal design parameters were compromised towards comfort and you wanted to improve handling/roadholding. Without knowing the original values and figures you will just have no clue which way to go to achieve what you want.
Last edited by gezmoor, .
Geez what a pratt !! They have to either be drunk or doing that on purpose surely??
Yup belled up and locked and covered with one of those heavy green covers too, (which was also padlocked under the bike). Basically they just lifted it straight in to the back of a van. Not much you can do to stop that really.
I haven't ridden since (1999), got a car instead. I still pine for riding a bike but even at my age the insurance will be a killer for the bike I really want, (either a Gixer 750 or a Blade). I won't go back to a 600 because I had already outgrown them really and I'm a short shifter by habit and middleweights don't have the midrange grunt to suit my riding style.
Was a lovely bike though.
I used to ride one of these, before some kindly sc*mbag stole it.
Had a full race exhaust with carbon end can.
Had a full race exhaust with carbon end can.
Yeah really? I don't know maybe most of you aren't old enough to realise it
but the reason it's a racist comment is because it was used by supporters of the NF and other racist bigots in the UK as a term of abuse against Asians in this country, (even as has been stated if they weren't even from Pakistan). Since when has the term "Brit" ever been used in a negative way to our faces and at the same time with us getting our faces kicked in??? That's why being called a Brit isn't racist and why terms like P*ki, N*gger, Y*d etc are.
No.. we always have great weather.. never know what's going to be next and the forecasters can never get it right. Talking about the weather is a great part of the British subculture.. I can't imagine living somewhere where you can't use talking about the weather as a back up for stilted conversations or embarasing situations..
.. Imagine all the awkward social situations !! I guess that's why we can't/don't create so called comedies like "Friends". 
umm as for the Brit vs N. American driving in snow debate, I'd just like to point out.. we have small roads over here, with bends and things called round abouts and actual real density of traffic Not the 3 mile wide straight roads with traffic light junctions and one car every half an hour that you guys have over there.
Unless you believe those "made up" figures of how much it cost our economy for all those people to stay at home for a day.. yeah right ok.. It's all BS.. The way they calculate the figures is to work on the premis that all those people were paid a days wages to do nothing productive. That's not a real cost, it's an imaginary one that does not have a direct relationship to loss of business revenue. I hate the way the media panders to business like that in this country. Trying to make people feel guilty for having (in a lot of cases) not potentially put their safety at risk just to go to work.
Yeah? well it would seem that we're no less intelligent than Canadians (22% are Creationists) and compared to your neighbours (51% of Americans are Creationists) we're all geniuses
http://ncseweb.org/news/2008/0 ... creationism-canada-001375
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories ... on/polls/main965223.shtml
Basically, Tris has it right. Or at least partially right. All road cars are, of course, built to a market price point and therefore a set of compromises. As they come out of the factory they are the best that they can be for the price point and market position intended by the manufacturer and the idea that spending a few hundred pounds on body kit, loud exhaust and/or larger (read heavier) wheels in isolation is going to make the car perform better is just ignorance pure and simple.
However, that doesn't mean that such a car can't be improved to meet the individual users set of compromises, (which may well not be the same as the manufacturers), to improve certain aspects of the cars performance. But, it requires a proper understanding of vehicle dynamics and comprehensive set of changes to improve things such as suspension performance. These things aren't actually difficult to understand, but most people never bother to take the time to understand them before embarking on their £££ spending spree on bigger heavier alloys, plastic bodywork etc.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG