Quote from robtuner :

Why, have you have seen a exhaust pipe smoking,
Except cold engines.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pn_n1Jc3uzE&fmt=18

I bet that's not cold.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83KL2HojF2U&fmt=18



Some turbocharged engines, when running a bit on the rich side, sometimes produce amounts of black smoke. I don't know if there's a design failure of sorts somewhere in the engine or what causes it, all I know is that they're in complete working order and yet produce smoke.

Quote from Not Sure :

My suggestions:

"parantamiseksi" instead of "viihdyttävyyden parantamiseksi.

"DEMO" and "LUKITTU" look strange, maybe they should not be in caps.

'parantamiseksi' sounds nice; changed.

Caps are used because original text in game uses caps also, just like vari said. I agree they will look a bit off in an installer license text - but the original use is in game where caps are used to emphasize parts of the text. It's not a big deal if those are changed to lower case for the installer text (meaning if it's technically possible to have it separate from the in game help.txt).

Quote from ProDemoDrifter :

i've been noticing the turbo gauge,from what i can see,seems pretty wrong to me.i was wondering how can you havent noticed it yet.First of all it should have negative values,and lfs should show negative values.

It only should show negative values if the pressure is taken from the manifold (often the case with aftermarket boost gauges). If the pressure is measured from somewhere before the throttle body, there will only be positive values (most of the cars that have a boost gauge installed from factory). LFS does indeed show negative values as well, currently only in the XRR though.

Boost spiking or pressure fluctuations (wastegate design faults / boost control / whatever) aren't there because the engine physics model is very simplistic at the moment - it's a "known issue". I don't think it's about to change in the near future.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Cd has nothing to do with frontal area.

The Yaris is, from memory (you can look it up if you like) around 0.3 - 0.35.

And even if it IS as low as 0.25, then that's aero alone. Without any engine braking. If you honestly think that lifting in gear at 160km/h drops you 1km/h/s then you are mistaken or lying.

Mk1 Yaris (I'm assuming Mk2 is very similar, maybe smaller Cd but bigger A): drag coefficient of ~0,3 and frontal area around 2,1 m^2 -> total drag = 0,63..

Add to that the rolling resistance, there's no way to slow down so slowly unless resting ones foot on the accelerator.

Quote from dougie-lampkin :

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

I'm sorry, I misunderstood your line thinking that what you meant was a 3D cam profile like in Ferraris

Economical driving depends on what part of the actual driving do you mean.

You accelerate with full throttle using gears so you stay around the peak torque revs -> least amount of fuel mass / kWh -> the best efficiency.

Maintaining constant speed should be done in the highest possible gear that the engine is comfortable running in, this usually means 1000 - 2000 rpm below the torque peak.

With a "modern" engine, decelerating should be done by coasting in highest possible gear that keeps you above the rpm range that enables fuel injection again (usually 1500 rpm). While coasting, the lower the revs, the longer you get zero fuel consumption. With a carbureted engine I guess it's irrelevant (or less significant) whether you coast or change to neutral.

Using the brakes wastes the kinetic energy of a car, energy that has been produced by burning fuel. Surviving on the road without using your brakes all the time means you have to learn how to keep a safe distance to the car in front, and continuously observing what happens around you so you can be prepared to lift off and slow down by coasting instead of wasting the energy by heating your brakes.

Of course there are situations where you actually need to brake, and brakes in general need to be used for them to stay in good condition..


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:

Quote from Danke :

It's possible that Eric has been working on a fictional track or two since the release of S2 way back when. Then he put it/them on hold when this Rockingham thing came up. So we still could see a fictional track or two eventually in S3.

That's highly unlikely, but like you said, nobody knows for sure. It's just that if a single track takes Eric a year to build, and people think it only takes him three months, we're behind the 'expected track amount' by three tracks a year -> lots of disappointed people after it's realised that there's nothing more to come after years of "development"..

Let's just hope that's not the case

I like this game. It most definitely isn't a sim, but it's entertaining enough to spend time with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyO3QpWdV9U

Quote from FinnishFlash :

Nice...


Anyways, thank you all.

Quote from NoYPiDRiFTER :

I have backed up my LFS, Cut it down to fit my drive...

Check if you actually have enough free space on the disk to write anything on it?

Quote from batteryy :

i know the engine is limited and free roam isnt possible but it hasnt got anything to do with the fact that people can drift or cruise if they want.

Suggesting improvements that cater only for cruising and/or drifting earns a "this is a race sim" reply, each and every time. Nothing stops people using the sim for whatever they like, no matter how perverted. But asking free roam tracks for a racing simulation is asking for the developers to use their time on something that in no way makes the simulation better for the original target audience.

I'd say it has everything to do with it.

Quote from batteryy :

wtf is it with ''this is a race sim'' thing anyway? if lfs has high level of detail in physics, and people like it why exactly it wouldnt be possible for them to enjoy the physics the way they like it? if someone likes to go sideways just let him do it, if someone likes to cruise why wouldnt it be allowed for him to do?

Because, as stated in similar threads before, just removing the barriers to allow free roam isn't possible with the current LFS engine. A racing simulator doesn't need free roam tracks - if the engine would be rewritten to allow multiple routes it would be of use only to cruise people. It would also take time from the actual race sim development.

That's the F-word with it.

Quote from MAX-k :

not really realistic. I've driven a sequential car for a year, IRL, and I actually could shift down while accelerating.

In the game, if you stop accelerating, with a turbo car, you lose your turbo pressure.

So, why is it impossible to shift down while accelerating ?

Thanks and sorry for my poor English.

With synchromesh or dog engagement rings that are in good condition, you always have to unload the gears to disengage them. That means either using the clutch or lifting the throttle (or using ignition cut or similar methods to cut down engine torque).

Your real life sequential car might be computer controlled, so you don't actually need to do anything but move the stick. It's different behind the scenes.

Even though the amount of people online has stayed pretty much the same through the S2 era, the number of racers have decreased quite a bit. Many "old-timers" have grown bored and switched sims / quit completely. These old-timers had a background of other sims, but now - I'll make a bold claim that's nothing more than a hunch - more and more people online have no earlier experience of "proper" racing and that shows up as lack of respect, general misconceptions of racing etiquette etc.

Combine the lack of good racing servers to the slowed down pace of development and you're bound to lose interest.

Quote from batteryy :

whats the harm?

If someone replaces an original LFS car body with an illegal modified body and makes a skin for the new body, all the people who obey the rules set in license agreement see a messy skin on the familiar body. And, allegedly, changing the body shape also affects crash physics, so it'll directly affect the gameplay.

No.

Quote from UnknownMaster21 :

Bolts on wheels

:ices_rofl


most LFS cars have zero nuts/bolts

:shhh:

Quote from Jakg :

Click LFS S2, then click password, and delete it. LFS will stay locked - but it won't go online until you type the correct password in (don't lock or unlock).

When you have unlocked S2 and remove your password, LFS will stay UNlocked. Other than that, you pretty much got it right :)

Quote from ADX.14 :

Why not we don't have a rally option?

Because we don't have rally stages to use rallycars on?

Rally != Rallycross

Quote from bbman :

www.virtualr.net - from hardware to speculations over the next nfs you can find everything there...

qft

innnn

Quote from Matrixi :

I can't see any reason why this kind of PR tactic wouldn't work with the case of LFS.

It's hard to report on whatever you've been doing when you can't go into specifics (because some things they work on might not make it into LFS at all and people get angry because they were "promised" something in the dev blog), and when the work has been done on stuff that isn't up for release for the next year or so (and could still get canceled).

Things do change, existing plans and scheduled changes are thrown out the window when a new, interesting opportunity arises (like FBM, VWS). If there would be a solid plan set, then it would be easy to post progress reports. But having a plan would mean that any new deals for cars or tracks or whatever would bring results in a timeframe of years, not months. This would steer the deals towards other sims that can respond quicker..

That's at least the way I think things are, the excuse of a progress report taking too much of the precious development time isn't really that valid.

Server details have been sent via forum PM. If you didn't get yours, please PM me.

Quote from anbiddulph :

you kinda just owned yourself then, that post was over a year ago...

Or maybe it was deliberate?

Creating a demo account requires a fresh email address, so it makes the process a bit more difficult for people who have had their earlier accounts banned. But I can't see any validation method that would keep the multiple account people away - Myusername1 could then make a new account called Anotherusername..

I'm afraid there's no easy way out of some demo users being stupid. Make the server S2 and it all starts to make sense

Round 7 thread @ http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=56435