No, the Starion is not an RX-7. It's F/R, but that's as far as similarities go. As for torque, a 13A isn't really a 4G63. The 4G63 is about beautifully smooth and wide powerbands with FAT mid range torque and vey good top end. The 13A has more of a F-1 nature (revver). The FDs had sequential turbos that led to behavior even more "interesting" then the current XR GTT with its inaccurate turbo modelling.
Yes, their masses, mass distributions and peak power were quite similiar, but differences in powerbands make a HUGE difference to how cars handle.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
IRL, it is IMPOSSIBLE to eliminate blindspots unless your ca has transparent/no roof pillars. Even so, blind spots WILL pop up when inclination changes, etc.....
In essence, unless you drive and utterly transparent car, blind spots will exist no matter what you do. The best we can do to minimise blind spots is to mount rearward/sideward facing cameras, but them there are still limits imposed by camera perspective.
Just trying to clear up a myth of clearable blindspots. Even the most perfect mirror adjustments can only see what the pillars don't block. Unless youdrive a topless car with no spoiler/high tail to block the view, but them you still can't see too low.
In essence, unless you drive and utterly transparent car, blind spots will exist no matter what you do. The best we can do to minimise blind spots is to mount rearward/sideward facing cameras, but them there are still limits imposed by camera perspective.
Just trying to clear up a myth of clearable blindspots. Even the most perfect mirror adjustments can only see what the pillars don't block. Unless youdrive a topless car with no spoiler/high tail to block the view, but them you still can't see too low.
We're trying to stop flying/spinning like mad after low speed collision into the wall syndrome, nothing more and nothing less.
It's a little something called weight distribution. The compact nature of a rotary allows it to be mounted far back in the engine bay. This frees up space and improves packaging while moving a major mass closer to the middle of the car's wheelbase, reducing moment of inertia and improving steering response while achieving a more ideal weght distribution. Coupled with the fact that it's 200lbs LIGHTER than an LS1 as you've said, the benefits are blindingly obvious. 200lbs, that's like removing a large man off a car.
If you care only about drag strip ETs RWHP, than you're welcome to mount an LS1 to anything that'll fit. If real racetrack handling, balance and lap times matter more than big numbers on a dyno readout and drag ETs, than stick to a turbochared rotary. There's always the larger 3-rotor rotary if the OEM 1.3L 2 rotor starts to reach its limits. Since you can reliably get 300+rwhp out of a well tuned and maintained RX-7 with the OE engine as the basis, an LS1 is pointless if chassis balance is more of a concern than pure straight line speed.
Anyway, +infinity for including an RX-7 like car in S2/S3.
Last time rotary Mazda went prototype racing, it was banned after its maiden win/race, on the grounds of "unfair advantage".
Lack of vibration, lack of mass, MASSIVE power to weight ratio, compact dimensions..... no wonder normal piston petrol engines looked like dinosaurs.
+infinity for adding a properly performing rotary engined car in LFS, though with turbo modelling as bad as it currently is, I just wish they get all the current engines right first.
Lack of vibration, lack of mass, MASSIVE power to weight ratio, compact dimensions..... no wonder normal piston petrol engines looked like dinosaurs.
+infinity for adding a properly performing rotary engined car in LFS, though with turbo modelling as bad as it currently is, I just wish they get all the current engines right first.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
Just to clear up a little myth about wheels, both serious racers and drifters use the same wheels, so there's no such thing as "drift wheels".
Both applications, however, desire the same characteristics. Low mass, high stiffness, strength to weight ratio, temperature and corrosion resistance, reliability, etc. IRL, those so called "drift wheels" used in D1 are no different from what race cars use.
Good idea, would stop quite a few unintended wreckages.
+1
+1
Last edited by Jamexing, .
Well GT4 used the driving simulator moniker, which actually worked well for its sales.
The word driving is an umbrella term that covers anything from city driving to drifting to full-blown circuit/rally racing, so it's always valid.
The word driving is an umbrella term that covers anything from city driving to drifting to full-blown circuit/rally racing, so it's always valid.
What we really need for off-road vehicles are cars like rally prepared Pajeros, Pajero Evolutions, Paris Dakar Rally VW Touregs and as shown by Hyperactive, Baja Racers.
Rally raid and Baja racers only, none of those sorry excuses for SUVs like Honda CRV, RAV4, etc... and all the names that make a sick joke out of a the 4WD/Rally/Baja RAcer community.
Rally raid and Baja racers only, none of those sorry excuses for SUVs like Honda CRV, RAV4, etc... and all the names that make a sick joke out of a the 4WD/Rally/Baja RAcer community.
Actually, both need better energy absorbtion. And in RL engineering terms, concrete walls aren't quite as rigid as they seem to the average joe. Hit them hard enough and they'll crack/flack, absorbing some of the energy.
Honestly, simulating cracking/flaking walls is a bit OTT for a driving sim, but as you've also said, Nick II, damping physics would go a long way to approximating RL behavior.
Why not change LFS's label from racing sim to driving sim? Ultimately, how cars are setup and driven are in the hands of the driver in question, so just concentrate on simulating cars as well as possible. This keeps everyone happy and would end drifter vs "grip racer" and vice versa flame wars for good.
It'll also kill this pointless "let's change LFS to a drift sim" thread for good while keeping everyone happy.
It'll also kill this pointless "let's change LFS to a drift sim" thread for good while keeping everyone happy.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
If this brings free positive publicity for LFS, why not? Having fun AND doing some good for the world is always welcome in my book.
What LFS REALLY needs is proper rallying, which ATM is utterlu non-existant. A monte carlo style tarmac rally stage would satisfy both the serious rally racers (like me) and the drifters. Problem sloved.
For the drift guys who absolutely insist on drift specific tracks, just give them a GIANT version of the autocross car park arena and let them setup whatever course they want. This way, everyone's happy.
However, I don't see all this happening in the forseeable future.
For the drift guys who absolutely insist on drift specific tracks, just give them a GIANT version of the autocross car park arena and let them setup whatever course they want. This way, everyone's happy.
However, I don't see all this happening in the forseeable future.
Yes, that's exatly it. If you drop something on an ideal (absolutely NO damping) spring, it will simply bounce the object back and energize it with as much kinetic energy as there was potential energy in the deeformed spring. This assumes that there's no air resistance, of course, but the results are still the same: bounce.
What LFS needs is to implement some damping forces to the walls. The worst case in LFS os the walls at the pit area. They seem to be modelled as VERY stiff springs with minimal/no damping. If you've ever tried colliding ANY car into those walls at ANY speed, it'll simply bounce of and spin like mad, even at 10KPH.
When was the last time some car hit a strong and solid brick wall at 10kph and at a 30 degree angle and bounce off spinning like mad?
BTW, +1 for poperly behaving tire walls.
I was arguing against the fact that some people think that manual clutch should be faster than all other forms of clutching. That is just as wrong as the currently super fast button clutch.
I'm all for realistic cluthcing and shift speeds. I just can't stand the fact that some people think more manual inputs must mean more speed.
That's just neither realsitic nor fair.
Drifting and normal racing are both doable IRL with cars like the XR GTT anyway, the only differences being suspension/steering setups and of course, the DRIVER.
As some here have already said, both obey the same physical laws since we're all living in the same universe anyway (or at least I hope so
).
As some here have already said, both obey the same physical laws since we're all living in the same universe anyway (or at least I hope so
).Well, personally I don't really think you're a spammer. Some of your posts lack any real content, but an annoying spammer you are not.
Anyway, I extend my personal welcome to you for joining the LFS community. Just get a license and maybe we'll have a few good races together.
Now there goes another S2 license.
Hope you change your mind, I'm sure most of us still welcome you. Read your posts and TBH, you're not that bad. Just put more though and costructive/serious points into your posts and there's no excuse for anyone to call you a spammer.
Sorry about the less than clear wording. I meant if you give it JUST enough throttle you'll actually end up neutralizing or oversteering the car.
If the understeer is VERY HEAVY and you squeeze it only a tiny bit, of course you'll understeer further.
A great example of this is the McLaren F-1 road car. At steady state and low speeds, it understeers heavily, but JUST enough throttle will balance or oversteer it. As you've said, booting it swaps ends.
Just make a GIANT version of the dragstrip as a starting template, add terrain features and elevation changes/corners and wallop, a good WRC tarmac style point to point race.
I know this is a vast oversimplifiication, but point is, it can be done.
I know this is a vast oversimplifiication, but point is, it can be done.
If he's a spammer, we could simply ignore him, not pick on him. Many spammers are simply attention seekers seeking a response from the more serious members of these forums. No need to go on the offensive at all.
A wise man once said:
"To achieve true victory is to do so without becoming the very thing which you fight against."
A wise man once said:
"To achieve true victory is to do so without becoming the very thing which you fight against."
I would LOVE a p to p race in LFS, and the fact that he's a demo racer doesn't mean that he has no right to disagree.
BTW, good on you for your MSA licnese.
Exactly the kind of attitude("by the we TyresHot was referring to") that LFS doesn't need. And I bet a lot of these "veterans" don't even know how to drive REAL cars. I'm quite a noob, aren't I?
I'm not the one spamming the threads. I'm just SICK and TIRED of licensed players picking on every demo player who bothers to post his opinion on these forums. Bet these so-called vets never heard of creating encouraging and positive atmospheres.
No wonder he's still a demo racer. If I've read the elitist anti-demo racer crap on these forums before I got the licencse, well, i simply wouldn't bother.
No, it was because I was in a serious hurry in heavy rain, not some crazy stunt.
Of course you'll snap at the ABSOLUTE limit in a very well balanced car, but to have a car set to understeer moderately and STILL snap with a tiny squeeze of the throttle mid corner is just wrong. That's what I based my assesement of pre-patch U tire physics on. How on earth can you have a RWD car that's already understeering significantly and STILL snap oversteer at the slightest touch of the throttle?
Just to remind you what understeer is, it's loss of grip at the front before the rear. Which means there's grip in reserve at the rear, so a very careful throttle application should actually lead to a balanced or slightly oversteering state if your steering angle is kept steady. All this assumes you have a moderately powered (XF GTT or FZ50) car.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG