nope. you gotta use the predefined shapes...and there are a lot of them.
depends on the car. some cars only have 1 turbo upgrade option, some have 2 or 3. and other cars have up to 6 different types of super charger options (3 roots, 3 centrifugal) in addition to the turbos.
skinning is done by using predefined shapes.
if you go looking for a cheep xbox someplace, make sure you get a 360 and not the orginal xbox.
skinning is done by using predefined shapes.
if you go looking for a cheep xbox someplace, make sure you get a 360 and not the orginal xbox.
FI pressures is just about the only thing you can't tune on the car. the kit you buy works at a specific pressure, and isn't tunable.
hmm...haven't noticed that problem. very well could be the cd-saver things causing read errors.
GT4 wasn't a la carte priced, and Sony/Polyphony gave up that idea for the next GT game because of the huge backlash that it received. the next GT game will be full-featured, but I expect that they will sell additional cars on top...i expect forza will do the same.
and, i've found when using the wheel, the physics are actually pretty close to pc sim standards. not quite at the LFS level, but better than others (*cough* GTR, GTL, etc *cough*).
and, i've found when using the wheel, the physics are actually pretty close to pc sim standards. not quite at the LFS level, but better than others (*cough* GTR, GTL, etc *cough*).
...as compared to 750 cars in GT4
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/games/forza-motorsport-2.ars
read the review. it points out the strengths and the weakness of the title.
read the review. it points out the strengths and the weakness of the title.
sorry. it was rooble, that had asked the question.
and i think that it is not as much a "wankel rules, everybody who disagrees sucks" thread, but "we'd like rotaries in the game" thread, and disagreeing with the people who come in saying "rotaries shouldn't be in the game because rotaries are t3h suX0r. it burns oil and gets bad fuel economy".
yeah, they burn oil. they are supposed to. and it isn't that much oil either. it is such a slow rate of oil injection that the devs wouldn't even have to bother with modeling an oil usage system. and when did fuel economy become an issue for a racing game? the fzr gets like 4-5mpg. rotary engines actually get fuel economy close to a similarly powered v6, and produce the same emissions.
i guess it comes from people seeing it listed as a 1.3L, and thinking that it should be getting fuel economy similar to a honda fit, but if you measure the amount of air flow though a rotary, you'd find that the volume of air that it moves is somewhere between a 2.6L v6 and a 3.9L v6.
and the same things keep getting said over and over because people come in making the same arguments against rotaries, and the "problems" they bring up a pretty much non-issues, which have to get pointed out over and over.
you asked what rotary cars were as fast/famous as the rx-7. i answered your question, and cited my results, otherwise people would be griping about where that info came from. if this thread bothers you so much, the easy solution is, don't read it
just read this in a review of the game and thought it was interesting...
yeah, i kind of agree. its really impressive skill using the tools available, but i tend to make the more race car like skins...
here is one of mine
here is one of mine
how about the mazda 787b, which is the car that won le mans. it was a NA 4 rotor (which is 2.67L, not 2.4. each rotor is 0.67L 
), and produced 700hp (that's 262hp/L)
also, the rx8 is the car to have in auto-x. it completley dominates b-stock.
from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rx8
and in reviews, it consistently comes out on top of more powerful cars like the 350z. one such example
), and produced 700hp (that's 262hp/L)also, the rx8 is the car to have in auto-x. it completley dominates b-stock.
from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rx8
and in reviews, it consistently comes out on top of more powerful cars like the 350z. one such example
don't forget the $130 for the wheel.
yup. pgr4 looks like it will be a very cool arcade racer...dynamic weather conditions, and that dynamic weather will affect the traction available on the road surface. but pgr4 doesn't even have a slated release date (that i've seen). i'd expect late this year, to early next year.
forza 2 uses bascially the same system for paint jobs. primative shapes, gradient shapes, and then some various predefined shapes (likes flames, race symbols, letters and numbers, etc).
there are some insanely talented people making skins for their cars too. this is by far one of the best i've seen. no, there isn't a way to upload pictures. this is made by simple shapes and gradient shapes.
there are some insanely talented people making skins for their cars too. this is by far one of the best i've seen. no, there isn't a way to upload pictures. this is made by simple shapes and gradient shapes.
pretty good review. the physics, while not perfect, are actually pretty good, especially when using the FF wheel. i was actually pleasantly surprised when a high hp fwd car i had torque steered when i stomped on the gas.
its not quiet as good as LFS, but i'd put it firmly in 2nd for physics simulations.
an unrestricted rotary is loud. the rotary powered cars in ALMS is by far the loudest car on the track. best description i've heard of an unmuffled rotary engine is "god's chainsaw"
there is soooo much misinformation in this thread, its not even funny.
where to start...i guess fuel economy
the fuel economy of rotaries has been increasing with each generation. the first rotary engines got pretty bad fuel economy, but then again, so did the first piston engines, but like Mako said, they actually get close to the same gas mileage as similarly powered boingers.
The FD (when not driven at WOT) gets around 15mpg in the city, and gets 25-27mpg on the highway. The RX-8 gets around 18mpg in the city, and around 25-27mpg on the highway. Compare that to the V6 Accord, which gets around 19mpg in the city, and 28-30mpg on the highway. Not that much worse.
There are 2 problem areas for rotary fuel economy. one is the shape of the rotor...it creates a long combustion chamber. and at high rpms the a/f mixture might not complete combustion before exhaust. but this has partially been addressed by the firing order of the plugs. second problem is primarly limited to FD and prior rotary engines because exhaust gases were able to leak back into the intake "stroke". Changing the port locations on the rx8 all but elimiated this problem.
and to the person that asked about compression, its not 13:1, but the renesis engine in the rx8 is 11:1. pretty close.
also considering the piston engine has had developed over 100 years and by every automotive company out there and the rotary engine has had only half the development time, and only 1 company, the rotary engine is doing remarkably well. try to imagine where it would be if it had the same development resources as the piston engine.
Oil usage, yes, rotary engines do burn oil, and they are supposed to, as that is the source of lubrication for the apex seals. the rate at which they use oil depends on how hard it is driven, but typically on older rotaries it is 1qt/1000miles, and on the rx8 it is 1qt/3000 miles. Although, Mako was incorrect about the rx8 having a seperate tank for the oil that is injected into the engine. the oil metering pump draws the oil injected into the from the regular supply.
Both the apex seal failure and overall reliability can attribute to improper tuning, like Mako said. And even then, it is mainly related to FD. The FD is an incredible car, but it did have some flaws, mainly being inadequate cooling, especially considering it needed it the most because of the twin turbos.
Take the FD out of the equation, and the rotary engine is extremely reliable. It is not uncommon to hear about FBs and FCs with over 300k on the odometer. Compared to a piston engine, the rotary engine is extremely simple.
now, on to power. the rotary engine produces a very flat torque curve, so, even though it doesn't make all that much torque (comparitivly), it makes it very low, and maintains it. For example, the rx8 produces about 130ft/lbs of torque at the wheel peak, but its making 125ft/lbs by 3.5k rpm. That's more than most econoboxes make peak. and no one complains about econoboxes not being driveable. Fact is, rotary engines are very drivable on the street.
where to start...i guess fuel economy
the fuel economy of rotaries has been increasing with each generation. the first rotary engines got pretty bad fuel economy, but then again, so did the first piston engines, but like Mako said, they actually get close to the same gas mileage as similarly powered boingers.
The FD (when not driven at WOT) gets around 15mpg in the city, and gets 25-27mpg on the highway. The RX-8 gets around 18mpg in the city, and around 25-27mpg on the highway. Compare that to the V6 Accord, which gets around 19mpg in the city, and 28-30mpg on the highway. Not that much worse.
There are 2 problem areas for rotary fuel economy. one is the shape of the rotor...it creates a long combustion chamber. and at high rpms the a/f mixture might not complete combustion before exhaust. but this has partially been addressed by the firing order of the plugs. second problem is primarly limited to FD and prior rotary engines because exhaust gases were able to leak back into the intake "stroke". Changing the port locations on the rx8 all but elimiated this problem.
and to the person that asked about compression, its not 13:1, but the renesis engine in the rx8 is 11:1. pretty close.
also considering the piston engine has had developed over 100 years and by every automotive company out there and the rotary engine has had only half the development time, and only 1 company, the rotary engine is doing remarkably well. try to imagine where it would be if it had the same development resources as the piston engine.
Oil usage, yes, rotary engines do burn oil, and they are supposed to, as that is the source of lubrication for the apex seals. the rate at which they use oil depends on how hard it is driven, but typically on older rotaries it is 1qt/1000miles, and on the rx8 it is 1qt/3000 miles. Although, Mako was incorrect about the rx8 having a seperate tank for the oil that is injected into the engine. the oil metering pump draws the oil injected into the from the regular supply.
Both the apex seal failure and overall reliability can attribute to improper tuning, like Mako said. And even then, it is mainly related to FD. The FD is an incredible car, but it did have some flaws, mainly being inadequate cooling, especially considering it needed it the most because of the twin turbos.
Take the FD out of the equation, and the rotary engine is extremely reliable. It is not uncommon to hear about FBs and FCs with over 300k on the odometer. Compared to a piston engine, the rotary engine is extremely simple.
now, on to power. the rotary engine produces a very flat torque curve, so, even though it doesn't make all that much torque (comparitivly), it makes it very low, and maintains it. For example, the rx8 produces about 130ft/lbs of torque at the wheel peak, but its making 125ft/lbs by 3.5k rpm. That's more than most econoboxes make peak. and no one complains about econoboxes not being driveable. Fact is, rotary engines are very drivable on the street.
yeah, even though he lost, i agree totally. that car just absolutely outclassed the other cars it wasn't even funny.
since it was a show promoting the game, they should have based the cars allowed off of the classes defined in the game. but whatever
haven't watched it, but the standard points system would be better, IMO.
oh, and in the forza show, the vette didn't win
oh, and in the forza show, the vette didn't win
how'd you find this out? not being rude. honestly want to know.
can't help you with local stores, but you can sort of standardize the reviews by looking up your current headphones, and find a review that matches what you think of them. then the reviews for the ones you are looking at should be pretty close to your perception.
of course you could always try google maps for potential local stores
http://maps.google.com/maps?f= ... ie=UTF8&z=10&om=1
of course you could always try google maps for potential local stores
http://maps.google.com/maps?f= ... ie=UTF8&z=10&om=1
are you ordering these online, or buying from a local store? if you are buying locally, i'd highly recommend that you take a cd and try out various headphones in person, because I can't tell you to go with a natural & full sound, or a bassy & flat (ish) sound because my personal preference might be different than yours.
short of that, figure out what your preference is, and then read some reviews of those headphones and see how closely your preference matches the reviewers perception of sound they put out.
no highs, no lows, must be a bose.
its not really all that new of a concept. a9.com did it a few years ago (although i can't find it on their site anymore).
it'd be nice if they listed out which cities have Street View.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG