I think it's just a case of familiarity.. For most people at least it is probably the combo they are most competant on due to having driven it on the Demo before getting an S2 license.
I have to say though that my tin top is the UF-BR. It's also the one I'm consistantly most competitive in on, (relatively speaking). Which I guess says a lot about my driving ability, ie underpowered car with load of grip.
I have to say though that my tin top is the UF-BR. It's also the one I'm consistantly most competitive in on, (relatively speaking). Which I guess says a lot about my driving ability, ie underpowered car with load of grip.
Well then it's a catch 22 situation. Without new people becoming aware of its existence LFS will not continue to bring in enough money to continue its development. Without development, ulitmately it won't attract enough new people who want to pay for it as it slowly becomes more and more dated compared with modern games on the market.
Without development, (eventually), you get no revenue stream, without revenue you get no development.
Point being, even what few competitors LFS has are catching up in the areas that LFS always had the advantage, (ie the physics). Once other sims surpass LFS in terms of physics, there is only so far that being "cheap" will attract people to the game as it continues to get dated compared to the competition. Put it this way, would you pay for LFS if it had CGA graphics even if it did have a perfect physics model? I would suggest only a very small minority of people would, (even of those interested in driving sims), let alone the general game playing public.
Much as I think LFS is rewarding to play and I don't begrudge a single penny I paid for it, I still feel that eventually it will just fade away and die.
Why? well most products do ultimately of course, but also because I don't feel it's being suficiently marketed to keep the influx of new users required to really make it become a solid final product. It's all well and good the devs saying they are happy with the pace of development but ultimately it's just too slow getting to final product status IMO. If it remains like this, eventually it's current user base will just get bored and move on, (new sims are being released all the time), and the devs will loose their revenue stream and development will ultimately grind to a halt.
That said, IF the devs manage to pull off a release of a final product in the near future that gets great reviews, they may well finally hit the jackpot and see sales rocket.
But, all products have their day and then fade away and even if LFS does manage to be a commercial success, ultimately that will happen to LFS too.
Why? well most products do ultimately of course, but also because I don't feel it's being suficiently marketed to keep the influx of new users required to really make it become a solid final product. It's all well and good the devs saying they are happy with the pace of development but ultimately it's just too slow getting to final product status IMO. If it remains like this, eventually it's current user base will just get bored and move on, (new sims are being released all the time), and the devs will loose their revenue stream and development will ultimately grind to a halt.
That said, IF the devs manage to pull off a release of a final product in the near future that gets great reviews, they may well finally hit the jackpot and see sales rocket.
But, all products have their day and then fade away and even if LFS does manage to be a commercial success, ultimately that will happen to LFS too.
Exactly my point. Much as I admire Schuey's talent, he kinda made F1 boring with regards to who was going to be the next WDC.
You guys are funny. Since when has F1 car design, (or any single seater for that matter), ever been asthetically pleasing??? It's 100% about function. Always has been, always will be and always should be IMO.
Well the guy has exceptional "seat of the pants" feel, (probably one of the best ever F1 drivers in that sense), and that is required in spades to be a fast motorcycle rider. Whether he can cut it at anything above national level only time will tell, (assuming he's even interested that is which doesn't seem to be the case). Just don't underestimate the talent required to acheive these kind of lap times on ANY incarnation of MotoGP bike !
http://www.crash.net/motorspor ... s_-_on_a_motogp_bike.html
Having said that his times are WAY off the pace in real race terms, (and given that these days WSBs are probably more of a handful than MotoGP bikes), but for an almost complete motorcycling novice to just jump on such a machine and be able to push it even a little without falling off is one heck of an acheivement.
http://www.crash.net/motorspor ... s_-_on_a_motogp_bike.html
Having said that his times are WAY off the pace in real race terms, (and given that these days WSBs are probably more of a handful than MotoGP bikes), but for an almost complete motorcycling novice to just jump on such a machine and be able to push it even a little without falling off is one heck of an acheivement.
So all in all this milleniums seasons have been pretty poor and lacking high quality competitition by comparison
The point being??
Most motor vehicle manufacturers have a similar history.
hmm.. and pray tell what's so special about that particular car??
All I see is a powerful car being slid around a lot. Pretty much any powerful car can be made to do all that in the hands of the right driver.
Reminds me of a video I saw of Schumacher driving some american muscle car around a track... He had it under complete control at all times at all kinds of angles even when going off the tarmac on to the grass. It's driver skill not a great car that allows that to be done.
All I see is a powerful car being slid around a lot. Pretty much any powerful car can be made to do all that in the hands of the right driver.
Reminds me of a video I saw of Schumacher driving some american muscle car around a track... He had it under complete control at all times at all kinds of angles even when going off the tarmac on to the grass. It's driver skill not a great car that allows that to be done.
Obviously.
But my point was purely about what does and doesn't constitute a criminal offense.
There is a world of difference, in my eyes at least, between saying something or acting in some way that some people find offensive and commiting a criminal act.
As Voltaire once said: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
I've always maintained that it is "intent" that is important not how something is perceived. If somebody does something that didn't intend to offend but ended up causing offense to somebody else, then to my mind the worst they can be accused of is bad taste/lack of tact. Even if these supporters were intending to be offensive to hamilton as a black person, what of it? There is a gulf of difference between expressing offensive views and actually causing harm to someone because of belief in those views. Don't be naieve enough to believe that just because a couple of idiots paint their faces black that we're in danger of regressing back to the dark days of slavery, because it's just not going to happen. Stupidity isn't a criminal offense, and I would fear for any society that chose to make it one. We should be shaking our heads with pity for those people over the whole situation and moving on, not expressing indignant outrage over it. I fear the term racist has grown to become all encompasing and hence the true horror of its meaning has been diminished. Hitler was a racist, members of the KKK are racists, people that are willing to oppress, beat, maim and kill others just because of a difference in skin colour are racists. There is a chasm of difference between true racism and bigoted prejudice as expressed by some idiotic sports supporters.
For what exactly?
It's not illegal to be racist. At least it isn't in the UK and as far as I know it isn't anywhere else in the world either. It is illegal however, to incite racial hatred. But having seen what the spectators were doing in Spain I think it would be impossible to hang that accusation on them.
Much as some people would like it to be otherwise, just causing offense to another person is not a criminal offence, (not in the western world at least).
Interesting statistic:
Discounting races where either driver DNF'd, average points scored per race for 2008 are as follows:
Hamilton: 5.76
Massa : 6.06
Read in to that what you will.
Or if we just discount non finishes due to reliability:
Hamilton: 5.76
Massa: 5.70
First race of the season Massa's engine gave way. He was almost certain to have picked up 5 points at least from that race.
Would seem to me that ulitmately Massa lost the championship in Australia.
Looking at the last 1/3 of the season (last 6 races) to try and predict any potential form for next season brings up some intersting stats:
Points per race:
Alonso: 6.33
Massa: 3.83
Hamilton: 3.66
Raikonnen: 3.00
Kubica: 2.83
I know it's not necessarily any indication, but it does appear that Alonso was on competitive terms. Next year might turn out to be very interesting indeed.
Last edited by gezmoor, .
What I find humorous about all this "there is a conspiracy against Maclaren" stuff is this. IMO Maclaren shouldn't even be in this season. After having gotten their hands on stolen technical secrets from another team I don't see how anyone can say they haven't gained advantage that they wouldn't have had otherwise. It's oh so simple to retort, "ah but as long as they don't use the bits they got plans for it's ok", to which I would say, "your showing a complete lack of knowlege about how an inteligent mind works". ie once any competetant technical guy has seen plans/details of technical improvements there is no way to remove that information from their brain and therefore no way to remove their ability not to use it in some way. It's all about ideas at this level not actual implementation. So to all you conspirators I say this....
Just be thankful Maclaren are even allowed to race this season. Because to my mind after such a patent breaking of F1 laws, (in a way that hits at the very core of sportsmanship), I think the only valid penalty should have been a seasons ban for the team.
Just be thankful Maclaren are even allowed to race this season. Because to my mind after such a patent breaking of F1 laws, (in a way that hits at the very core of sportsmanship), I think the only valid penalty should have been a seasons ban for the team.
Don't waste your money on replacing the fairing with OEM kit. Get a fibreglass replica fairing, if you can. Also, you should also invest in crash protectors, (you know the "peg" like things you see sticking out of the fairings of some bikes?), and bar end sliders to fit the end of your handlebars, see here:
http://www.rg-racing.com/brows ... aki/GPZ500/All_Years.aspx
Yup. Pretty much
Depends on how you define level. Obviously if you want to look at it purely from the terms of engine parts, one car having a turbo and another not would seem not to be level. But, when the car that is allowed the turbo is starting off with a distinct power disadvantage because of it's engine type then allowing it to use a turbo to achieve comparible peak power is exactly to level the playing field. Looking at it from the perspective of mechanical parts is simplistic in such circumstances, (and I think you know it :razz
. Fair point.
Actually it's a far closer comparible than you believe. The Ducatis were not only twin cylinder configurations, they were allowed 33% greater capacity than the 4 cylinder inline bikes. Why? well because despite using a very high tech cylinder head the Ducatis didn't have a hope in hell of achieving a similar peak power output as the inline 4's if they were the same capacity, so they were allowed greater capacity in order to be competitive for peak output. But then they had an even greater advantage of making considerably more low down torque, not only from the intrinsic advantage of their engine layout but also from their extra capacity. Despite this, I don't recall many people claiming the ducatis had an unfair advantage.
Diesel cars need a turbo to be even remotely competitive with similar capacity petrol engined cars. So the turbo isn't relevant. What Diesel cars will always be better at, (compared to same capacity petrol engines), is producing low down/mid range (ish) torque. Only problem is, they produce so much torque, (especially in a heavily tuned engine), that they can't put it down without spinning up the wheels all over the place. So they resort to traction control that essentially removes the torque advantage. Anyway it's horses for courses... pretty much the same debate that was had when Ducatis first entered WSB racing with their big capacity twins, they had the edge out of the corners but got passed down the straights by the inline 4 engined bikes.
Shame they were competitive against petrol engined RWD cars then huh?
True racing is blind to drive type or engine type. Anyone who's doesn't think so isn't a real racing fan. Rules are only put in place for the purposes of safety and competitiveness. If RWD petrol engined etc car drivers can't handle the fact that their favorite car is being whooped on the racetrack by a FWD diesel, that has nothing to do with mixed marque racing. If they don't like it they should stick to watching single marque racing series.
I like the idea of a forced speed limit, as long as it could be done in such a way so as not to cause damage to the car or driver through excessive deceleration. It would have the advantage of keeping each driver in their relative track positions and distances, therefore taking away the unfair disadvantage of being "caught up" by a driver that wasn't even close to catching you pre-safety car deployment.
I also like the idea of "all the way to the end" races, just like in motoGP. It sorts the men out from the boys in terms of true car control as tyres "go off" etc. It will also punish the more reckless drivers who dive up the inside shredding tyres knowing full well they'll have a new set in 10 laps or so. What's so skillful about locking up the front tyres, diving up the inside of someone late in to a corner and forcing them to run wide and essentially "bullying" them out of the way? Nothing in my opinion.
Racing isn't about just being the one able to do the fastest lap. If it were we might as well just do Saturday and give the points to the drivers according to their "hot lap" times !!
I also like the idea of "all the way to the end" races, just like in motoGP. It sorts the men out from the boys in terms of true car control as tyres "go off" etc. It will also punish the more reckless drivers who dive up the inside shredding tyres knowing full well they'll have a new set in 10 laps or so. What's so skillful about locking up the front tyres, diving up the inside of someone late in to a corner and forcing them to run wide and essentially "bullying" them out of the way? Nothing in my opinion.
Racing isn't about just being the one able to do the fastest lap. If it were we might as well just do Saturday and give the points to the drivers according to their "hot lap" times !!
I couldn't agree more. IF you have the money to burn then go for it. Just don't take too many risks and try to stay out of trouble and it should be a positive experience irrespective of how well you actually do.
I use cockpit view exclusively. I did try a couple of the other views just to see what they were like but they just seemed "wrong" to me. Probably because I drive in real life so any view other than cockpit view just makes me feel like I'm playing a game.
In LFS, Left foot exclusively.
In a real car, Right foot exclusively.
Don't really know why I Left foot brake in LFS as I've never used left foot to brake in a real car, seems a bit weird how easy it is to do in LFS. I tried it a few times in a real car and just ended up slamming on the brakes really hard as I was automatically pushing down like I would on a clutch pedal despite consiously knowing I was pushing the brake pedeal. That's the power of autonomous motor function for you.
In a real car, Right foot exclusively.
Don't really know why I Left foot brake in LFS as I've never used left foot to brake in a real car, seems a bit weird how easy it is to do in LFS. I tried it a few times in a real car and just ended up slamming on the brakes really hard as I was automatically pushing down like I would on a clutch pedal despite consiously knowing I was pushing the brake pedeal. That's the power of autonomous motor function for you.
With reference to the impact of the amount of air in the tyre affecting temperatures etc. Things to consiser are:
a) All mass will absorb thermal energy from any other mass with which it comes in to contact, (in the direction that the thermal gradient created by the temperature difference between the two masses dictates).
b) The rate at which the energy transfer occurs is dependant on the thermal gradient between, and the thermal properties of, the two masses.
c) The amount of total thermal energy transfered is related to the specific heat capacity of the mass and the absolute amount of mass.
d) Gases absorb thermal energy in two ways:
i) Convection (movement of molecules)
ii) Conduction (Kinetic Energy transfer between molecules)
Both of those mechanisms are affected by the total amount of gas molecules and their density. ie pressure of the gas. Lowering the pressure of a gas will reduce both it's ability to absorb and to transfer thermal energy. Taken to the extreme, a gas with zero pressure (ie a vacuum) will not absorb or transfer any heat at all.
a) All mass will absorb thermal energy from any other mass with which it comes in to contact, (in the direction that the thermal gradient created by the temperature difference between the two masses dictates).
b) The rate at which the energy transfer occurs is dependant on the thermal gradient between, and the thermal properties of, the two masses.
c) The amount of total thermal energy transfered is related to the specific heat capacity of the mass and the absolute amount of mass.
d) Gases absorb thermal energy in two ways:
i) Convection (movement of molecules)
ii) Conduction (Kinetic Energy transfer between molecules)
Both of those mechanisms are affected by the total amount of gas molecules and their density. ie pressure of the gas. Lowering the pressure of a gas will reduce both it's ability to absorb and to transfer thermal energy. Taken to the extreme, a gas with zero pressure (ie a vacuum) will not absorb or transfer any heat at all.
what you mean like accept technical information taken from another team unknowingly?? .. nah .. never !!
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG