Agreed too. IRL, temps are taken at the pits with IR probes, which isn't as good as Real Time monitoring already provided by th F9 feature, but is done real often even by professional race tire engineers.
Functionaly, F9 is good enough for alignment and tire pressure setup, but a pit temp displa would be nice too.
Functionaly, F9 is good enough for alignment and tire pressure setup, but a pit temp displa would be nice too.
The ultimate diff would be an active diff or E-diff (such as Ferrari's version), but that's another story.
The Evolution X is basically what happens when you cross breed a rally car and a supercar whlilst inheriting their more positive traits.
Oh, those 18 inch wheels are meant for pure tarmac only. This is no different form current WRC which uses 18 inch diameter wheels as well. At least they could actually use wider tires on the Evo this time and do an even better job of bringing the chassis alive.
To squash a myth once and for all, no, 4WD does NOT magically add grip. Grip is a funcion of the tires and how they are loaded. 4WD does however allow the potential to make maximum use of the car's available driving force by doing what 2 wheels alone can NEVER achieve. An ideal 4WD system would allow the use of power distribution to achieve ultimate cornering balance on all phases of cornering, optimizing lateral grip and tractive force. The ACD and AYC on the current EVO XI already come cose to this, with only the front diff out of the equation (helical LSD). If only it had AYC in FRONT them it would be complete once the settings are all done. Of course, a fully electric car with one drive motor per wheel and fully computerized electronic power proportioners and speed controllers would be the ultimate 4WD, but that is another story.
Oh, if both a 4WD car and a 2WD car were given excellent snow tires, the 4WD wins hands down. Assuming that all else is equal of course (both have good suspension, brakes, decent power, etc). Transmitting 300hp to the ground on snow with 2WD is sheer futility if you intend to make full use of it. Unless of course your car is anything that remotely resembles something roadable.
Conclusively, I judge cars based on what they are and what they intend to achieve, without any chauvunistic baggage. I'm a person who would like a car if it is what it should be.
Oh, those 18 inch wheels are meant for pure tarmac only. This is no different form current WRC which uses 18 inch diameter wheels as well. At least they could actually use wider tires on the Evo this time and do an even better job of bringing the chassis alive.
To squash a myth once and for all, no, 4WD does NOT magically add grip. Grip is a funcion of the tires and how they are loaded. 4WD does however allow the potential to make maximum use of the car's available driving force by doing what 2 wheels alone can NEVER achieve. An ideal 4WD system would allow the use of power distribution to achieve ultimate cornering balance on all phases of cornering, optimizing lateral grip and tractive force. The ACD and AYC on the current EVO XI already come cose to this, with only the front diff out of the equation (helical LSD). If only it had AYC in FRONT them it would be complete once the settings are all done. Of course, a fully electric car with one drive motor per wheel and fully computerized electronic power proportioners and speed controllers would be the ultimate 4WD, but that is another story.
Oh, if both a 4WD car and a 2WD car were given excellent snow tires, the 4WD wins hands down. Assuming that all else is equal of course (both have good suspension, brakes, decent power, etc). Transmitting 300hp to the ground on snow with 2WD is sheer futility if you intend to make full use of it. Unless of course your car is anything that remotely resembles something roadable.
Conclusively, I judge cars based on what they are and what they intend to achieve, without any chauvunistic baggage. I'm a person who would like a car if it is what it should be.
Ok, now we have a kiddy porn problem on the net. They say:
"Wait, we know! Give us the POWER to block "undesirable" sites and help fight the problem!"
Next thing we know, they get the right to ban ANY site they deem undesirable. Remember the "you're either with us or against us" speach from you know who?
As the wise ones among humanity say: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corupts ABSOLUTELY". Since I don't see how general human nature would change within our lifetimes, these words will always hold true (within our lifetimes at least).
"Wait, we know! Give us the POWER to block "undesirable" sites and help fight the problem!"
Next thing we know, they get the right to ban ANY site they deem undesirable. Remember the "you're either with us or against us" speach from you know who?
As the wise ones among humanity say: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corupts ABSOLUTELY". Since I don't see how general human nature would change within our lifetimes, these words will always hold true (within our lifetimes at least).
This drifter vs gripper thing is getting us nowhere and isn't doing us any good. Getting sick of silly F&F kids is one thing (I see the mtoo ofteh IRL and just ignore them these days). Some of the anti-drifter attitudes here are practically militant. And immature drifters resorting to confrontational stances aren't helping either. 
BTW, some posts of this thread is an utter disaster for well behaved and highly skilled drifters.
Anyway, which is faster, grip or drift? Techcally speaking, there is not much distiction between the 2, and the real question is how much tire slip angle should there be before we consider it "drifting"?
So, which is better? Let's forget this silly distinction and just examine things as they are. Let's use WRC cars since they travel on practically any terrain you could reasonably drive a car on.
On sticky tarmac surfaces, current RL WRC cars run 18 inch wheels and near slick tires. With these condtions, it's best to run relatively small slip angles since the lower sidewalled and wider tires generate maximum grip at lower magnitudes of slip. And yes, the wider the tire, the lower the optimal slip angle.
However, in some conditions, large slip angles are the only way to go fast. The best example of this is the snow stages. The only way to run them in typical circuit racing slip angles is to run them at granny speeds. This is due to the fact that although tire technology has mastered the art of generating longitudinal grip (aka traction), there is still NO tire that could generate much lateral grip on snow. So the only way to go around corners much faster than you should be able to based on the tire's lateral grip alone is to, dare I say drift. When a car's tires are pointing more towards the inside of a corner than they are actually travelling, you're basically using the excess traction to generate more centripetal force.
So to "drift" or "grip"? There's no one correct answer as it all depends on a myriad of variables. Well, when snow is properly simulated in LFS, "drifting" would suddenly become an essential racing technique, if it takes off. ATM, it's tarmac racing all the way, so small slip angles (10-15 degrees) aka "gripping" is the way to go. But if we have cars that Tazio Nuvolari used to drive on the road surfaces he raced on, then 4-wheel drifts throughout corners are the way to ultimate speed.
Conclusion-this grip vs drift war is pure absurdity and must be stopped ASAP. Case closed.
BTW, some posts of this thread is an utter disaster for well behaved and highly skilled drifters. Anyway, which is faster, grip or drift? Techcally speaking, there is not much distiction between the 2, and the real question is how much tire slip angle should there be before we consider it "drifting"?
So, which is better? Let's forget this silly distinction and just examine things as they are. Let's use WRC cars since they travel on practically any terrain you could reasonably drive a car on.
On sticky tarmac surfaces, current RL WRC cars run 18 inch wheels and near slick tires. With these condtions, it's best to run relatively small slip angles since the lower sidewalled and wider tires generate maximum grip at lower magnitudes of slip. And yes, the wider the tire, the lower the optimal slip angle.
However, in some conditions, large slip angles are the only way to go fast. The best example of this is the snow stages. The only way to run them in typical circuit racing slip angles is to run them at granny speeds. This is due to the fact that although tire technology has mastered the art of generating longitudinal grip (aka traction), there is still NO tire that could generate much lateral grip on snow. So the only way to go around corners much faster than you should be able to based on the tire's lateral grip alone is to, dare I say drift. When a car's tires are pointing more towards the inside of a corner than they are actually travelling, you're basically using the excess traction to generate more centripetal force.
So to "drift" or "grip"? There's no one correct answer as it all depends on a myriad of variables. Well, when snow is properly simulated in LFS, "drifting" would suddenly become an essential racing technique, if it takes off. ATM, it's tarmac racing all the way, so small slip angles (10-15 degrees) aka "gripping" is the way to go. But if we have cars that Tazio Nuvolari used to drive on the road surfaces he raced on, then 4-wheel drifts throughout corners are the way to ultimate speed.
Conclusion-this grip vs drift war is pure absurdity and must be stopped ASAP. Case closed.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
Been wishing for a proper rally RB4 for as long as I had LFS.
The AWD turbo FZ50. Been wishing for that too. Imagine a car in LFS that performs very similiarly to RL 911 turbos (996/997 series). Would do a great job of filling a major hole in LFS's car lineup (the supercar).
Thanks for the news article, though unfortunately it doesn't say much. We still don't have too much of an idea as to what happened exactly. Based on what's already said here, i guess it's a case of 2 drivers colliding with each other, resulting in one person getting bounced off the track, which soemhow caused the car to flip a MAYBE end up with the driver himself hitting a wall instead of the car itself, causing the driver to absorb an immense amount of shock himself and ultimately causing his death.
All I can do now is speculate, since there's still not a terribly large amount of info available here. Is the scenario I described above a rough picture of what happend? Please confirm.
All I can do now is speculate, since there's still not a terribly large amount of info available here. Is the scenario I described above a rough picture of what happend? Please confirm.
Again, my condolences to the racer who lost his life and his loved ones.
However, can I request just a bit more detail about the incident, aryton senna 87? I really wonder what kind of crash could have been THIS BAD. I just wonder what really happened. We can't have a good and valid discussion here if we just know nothing about the specifics of the crash.
However, can I request just a bit more detail about the incident, aryton senna 87? I really wonder what kind of crash could have been THIS BAD. I just wonder what really happened. We can't have a good and valid discussion here if we just know nothing about the specifics of the crash.
Here's my stance on the use of 4-way dampers:
For ALL the dedicated track only cars (XFRs, UFRs, GTRs and SSs), 4 way dampers should be implemented since they are standard issue in so many classes of racing already. Cars like BF1 are supposed to use cutting edge dampers anyway.
For the road cars, just stick to the current linear dampers, but with some changes. 2 way adjustables are actually quite common among roadable track cars (which are what the "road cars" in LFS really are), and these days it's easily attainable with a couple of grand and a few days time (installation, testing, etc all included). The only chnge needed to make them perfrom more like the real things is to have a predefined and unchangable high speed blow off. As for the UF1, keep the dampers as it is except with the high speed blow off as I've mentioned. It's hard to find a well working original mini with absolutely no performance upgrades these days anyway.
Just to keep things in perspective and equip cars with dampers they should have.
For ALL the dedicated track only cars (XFRs, UFRs, GTRs and SSs), 4 way dampers should be implemented since they are standard issue in so many classes of racing already. Cars like BF1 are supposed to use cutting edge dampers anyway.
For the road cars, just stick to the current linear dampers, but with some changes. 2 way adjustables are actually quite common among roadable track cars (which are what the "road cars" in LFS really are), and these days it's easily attainable with a couple of grand and a few days time (installation, testing, etc all included). The only chnge needed to make them perfrom more like the real things is to have a predefined and unchangable high speed blow off. As for the UF1, keep the dampers as it is except with the high speed blow off as I've mentioned. It's hard to find a well working original mini with absolutely no performance upgrades these days anyway.
Just to keep things in perspective and equip cars with dampers they should have.
Yes, they are, and I remember I opened a thread about speed sensitive dampers not too long ago too. 4 way dampers have been suggested for quite a while, thouh it's STILL a major physics issue. In the long run (S2 final-S3) this will be inevitable if LFS is to be a complete sim, thus striving to achieve as much realism as technically possible.
Got some decent views and posts on the thread I opened on this, but also some extremly nasty replies too. Some here are already complaining that setting up cars is "too complicated". And from a thread on setups, I gather that the majority don't use their own setups or just tweak some copied setup. That's somewhat ok, but some have even proposed to remove all setup choices. That's utter nonsense since the LFS community already has such great support for those who can't setup their cars from scratch. With all those inferno setups waiting to be downloaded and tweaked, there's no good reason to complain about setting up cars from scratch.
Anyway, I agree we need 4 way dampers, especially for the pure racecars.
My, if any of you can't make a U-turn with a mid-sized SUV with SIX FULL LANES, seriously, I'm absolutely mystified as to how you get your driving licenses.
Just goes to show how silly the steering locks really are. By the looks of it, those cars (which I never liked in the first place anyway) weren't designed for street circuit levels of steering lock at all, with the ridiculously short spacing between he front wheels and wing, allowing no real steering loc at all. In essence, cars were badly designed for the street course.
WRC(and rallying in general) - 1
Purely tarmac circuit only racing - 0
Just goes to show how silly the steering locks really are. By the looks of it, those cars (which I never liked in the first place anyway) weren't designed for street circuit levels of steering lock at all, with the ridiculously short spacing between he front wheels and wing, allowing no real steering loc at all.
In essence, cars were badly designed for the street course. WRC(and rallying in general) - 1
Purely tarmac circuit only racing - 0
Congratulations, Trsitan you've once again revealed your ignorance of racing world insider knowledge. If only you have any idea what kind of innovations are getting tested and implemented over time. Remember when Indy cars that went into walls tail first, causing one bakcbone spinal injury after another with alarming consistancy. Then came mandatory rear aluminum crash absorbing structures. And it has saved so many injuries and lives since then.
As for those carts, all you really need is some pretty open roll cage that provides a safety cell around the driver with minimal weight gain and negative effects. In fact, a strong driver tub and some roll hoops could help too. And relying on flying off the car to save yourself is to relive the vintage eras (aka cars that were moving coffins that actually looked like and shaped like coffins).
Last time I checked, HANS is COMPULSORY in F-1 AND WRC (aka top of motorsport). Case closed on the non-use of HANS. F-1 implementation wsa easy, and WRC implementation was initially a bit troublesome, same as many new devices that go through teething problems. But problems are sorted out thanks to people who are exact opposies of tristan (aka actually try solve problems instead of firing barrages of insults to massage his ego and hide his personal insecurities about his own intellect). Doesn't take anything more than a level headed person with a real backbone to figure that one out.
Boy do I miss the Senna era when competiton was so heated. Like it or not, it's people like him that truely embody the true spirirt of F-1, to push the limits and achieve as far as one possibly could. Imagine F-1 loaded with a bunch of mediocer folks turing it into a slow-mo crashfest. And being tough on newbees is actually good for them (in a purely sompetitve way e.g. not using illegal cheats such as sabotage of course). You don't master racing by being pussyfooted around.
And a few years ago people complained of Ferrari dominance. What a load of crap.
There are unsung heroes behind the scenes who work their fingers off to protect the lives of those who are in motorsport, then there are silly people like tristan who simply don't care about or love anyone on anything.
Here's a little challenge to you tristan:
If you are really half as smart as you claim to be, be a better person and actually educate us with well checked out facts, not resorting to insults and any of this pitiful monkey business.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
Can't race SUV's? You're definitely been stuck on tarmac for WAY too long.
Check for off-road races in Australia. Anything from Nissan Patrols to Toyota landcruisers to Mitsubishi Pajeros are raced off-road AT HIGH SPEEDS. All are just modified producion cars, and some classes are VERY restrictive on waht cahssis mods they can make (e.g. Class 7).
SIX BLOODY LANES and they STILL can't take it? Geez, I can turn a mid sized SUV around that with 2/3rds the width!
The sad truth is that circuit racing and rallying are such polar opposites when it comes to driving skill. In rallying it's more like 80% car control and 20% line, and immense car control by itself is necessary to run really good lines in itself. Not to mention the need to adapt to changing surfaces. Circuit racing is the exact opposite, more about memorizing lines, brake and turn in points.
A bit of controlled powerdrift and they're already complaining? Ridiculous. If they really don't have that kind of technique, some extra steering lock would have done it, though it's not as fast as a well controlled powerdrift as it rotates the car more quickly and gets it on the fast out line earlier.
No, it's not the circuit that's the joke. It's either the drivers or the cars.
The sad truth is that circuit racing and rallying are such polar opposites when it comes to driving skill. In rallying it's more like 80% car control and 20% line, and immense car control by itself is necessary to run really good lines in itself. Not to mention the need to adapt to changing surfaces. Circuit racing is the exact opposite, more about memorizing lines, brake and turn in points.
A bit of controlled powerdrift and they're already complaining? Ridiculous. If they really don't have that kind of technique, some extra steering lock would have done it, though it's not as fast as a well controlled powerdrift as it rotates the car more quickly and gets it on the fast out line earlier.
No, it's not the circuit that's the joke. It's either the drivers or the cars.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
Well, Dale Earnhart died boycotting the very thing that would have saved him. He died from basilar fracture, i.e, his head was ripped off his neck (internally of course, with snapped spinal cord, the skull pulled off the collar bone).
Since Senna's death, a LOT has changed unless you've been living in a cave. And it doesn't really need regualtion. When a well loved member of the sport dies so pointlessly from such a common accident, it's enough to wake up ayone who really cares. It sent shockwaves. The carbon fiber monocoques had their sides redesinged, sio the head is more recessed relative to the op of the sturcture. Not to mention universal adoption of HANs device as basilar fracture became such a common cause of death among racecar drivers. The idea of stopping wheels and suspension form flying off was to stop wheels from flying and hitting the drivers head like what happened to poor Senna. The real trajedy with Senna was that his crash was supposedly VERY survivable. People are still trying to improve safety. For instance, deformable walls on high speed ovals have already saved so much unnecessary death and injury.
There's no denial that nothing's perfectly safe, and some risk is definitely acceptable. But to die unnecessarily makes no one happy. To race, one must first stay alive. And again I stress a dead or seriously injured racer can't win anything.
Since Senna's death, a LOT has changed unless you've been living in a cave. And it doesn't really need regualtion. When a well loved member of the sport dies so pointlessly from such a common accident, it's enough to wake up ayone who really cares. It sent shockwaves. The carbon fiber monocoques had their sides redesinged, sio the head is more recessed relative to the op of the sturcture. Not to mention universal adoption of HANs device as basilar fracture became such a common cause of death among racecar drivers. The idea of stopping wheels and suspension form flying off was to stop wheels from flying and hitting the drivers head like what happened to poor Senna. The real trajedy with Senna was that his crash was supposedly VERY survivable. People are still trying to improve safety. For instance, deformable walls on high speed ovals have already saved so much unnecessary death and injury.
There's no denial that nothing's perfectly safe, and some risk is definitely acceptable. But to die unnecessarily makes no one happy. To race, one must first stay alive. And again I stress a dead or seriously injured racer can't win anything.
A good idea, as rock crawling is a highly technical specialty. Only problem is, we've got no rocks to crawl.
WAY too muach power + no grip = SLOOOOOOOOO.....W
Practically speaking in realistic conditions (e.g. with corners, less than ideal drive surfaces, etc) of course.
Did I read the first post right? NO SEATBELT!
It's always a trajedy when a racer dies. But no seatbelt? The scary fact is that without a racing harness, that is simply a disaster waiting to happen.
There's NEVER enough safety technology in motorsport. Remember the death of Aryton Senna? It was a GIANT wake up call, forcing F-1 to concede to reason and logic. A dead driver can't win anything.
Remember Dale Earnhart and his stubborn refusal to use the HANS device, calling it the noose based on his own twisted notion of "common sense"? He died of the very type of crash that would have been VERY survivable with it.
I give my sincere condolences to the dead veteran racer and all close to him, but I also hope that this incident would force improved safety. Good safety records have a nasty habit of breeding complacency.
Whoever posted this news, please provide more exact details as to the nature of the crash.
It's always a trajedy when a racer dies. But no seatbelt? The scary fact is that without a racing harness, that is simply a disaster waiting to happen.
There's NEVER enough safety technology in motorsport. Remember the death of Aryton Senna? It was a GIANT wake up call, forcing F-1 to concede to reason and logic. A dead driver can't win anything.
Remember Dale Earnhart and his stubborn refusal to use the HANS device, calling it the noose based on his own twisted notion of "common sense"? He died of the very type of crash that would have been VERY survivable with it.
I give my sincere condolences to the dead veteran racer and all close to him, but I also hope that this incident would force improved safety. Good safety records have a nasty habit of breeding complacency.
Whoever posted this news, please provide more exact details as to the nature of the crash.
Why on earth would you want to limit boost and hence power to the wheels unless there are some serious issues such as lack of traction, drivetrain durability, etc? Wouldn't you want MAXIMUM acceleration?
This would be a great idea if we actually HAVE an overpowered 2WD car that really needs it (e.g. 1200hp F-1 car). Otherwise it's just a waste.
Of course, IRL turbos have their optimal efficiency ranges and you would want to keep them operating within the range for the best overall power over the rev range, but LFS turbo modelling is near complete. 8psi boost that takes a full second to spool up at full load (RA).
illepall
This would be a great idea if we actually HAVE an overpowered 2WD car that really needs it (e.g. 1200hp F-1 car). Otherwise it's just a waste.
Of course, IRL turbos have their optimal efficiency ranges and you would want to keep them operating within the range for the best overall power over the rev range, but LFS turbo modelling is near complete. 8psi boost that takes a full second to spool up at full load (RA).
illepallIt's a typo. That's all. Now it's fixed.
For a massless bar with 2 masses of equal mass:
I = MR^2
I = moment of inertia
R = radius of turn (half the bar's length, length is form COG of mass 1 to COG of mass 2)
M = combined mass of the 2 objects
So I is mostly R dominated, but M has a significant linear effect too.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
Lack of excess mass does wonders for decreasing moment of inertia and top end performance, when downforce comes to play.
Unnecessary mass is always bad. It slows the car's acceleration/braking down, wastes fuel, increases load on drivetrain and generally increases wear and tear on all major components. Then you compensate by using a BIGGER and more powerful engine, which will weigh more again, whilst increasing drivetrain mass due to the need for extra-beefy hardware... and the viscious cycle continues.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
Polls bring order to chaos and eliminate time wasted just to count the opinions of forum members. Why wade through pages when the agreement/disagreement ratio is conveninetly laid out?
The real idea is to have the dyno generate torque curves of each gear throughout usable rpms, overlay the torque vs speed graphs of each gear onto one graph and get the whole drive torque vs speed graph in one go.
There's one simple reason for that slow time: sheer LACK of traction.
With so much power, 4WD is the only solution if you want to actually put your insane levels of power to the ground instead of sending those precious horses into a cloud of tire smoke. TC helps, but again the tire's longitudinal grip limits maximum acceleration.
There's no substitute for sheer longitudinal grip.
It does weigh much less then the Veyron though, so agility will be superior.
I know why locked diff is used for WR since it has practically infinite preload both power and coast, allowing the best traction possible short of AYC. However, it offers no tunability on coast, which doesn't help. Not to mention the strong entry understeer that would make it a pain to turn without full commitment. I understand that drivetrain simualtion is still on the simplified side as IRL, a 4WD with locked diffs at both ends would be a pig to turn and kill driveshafts by the dozen. Coast lock tuning could easily achieve change balance without suspension tweaks.
As for power lock, more front lock actually reduces exit understeer for a number of reasons. One is that more power is sent to the wheel where it's most needed (the heavily loaded outside wheel), improving exit traction whilst reducing power to the inside wheel. This prevents inside tire spin whilst allowing the outside wheel to help rotate the car into the turn. Hence, double benefit.
To convince yourself, just try the RB4 with clutch diff (fully locked) rear and open diff front. Terrible front traction and understeer.
Ever tried fitting a quality clutch type 1.5 way LSD to FWD or 4WD? Does wonders for corner exit traction and balance.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG