Which is why I recommended changing the LX series to be based on power and not number of cylinders. The current LX6 is 190hp. My recommendation is to follow what is currently available, 140hp, 200hp, and 260hp, all of which use 4 cylinder engines, 140hp from 1.8 liter engine, up to 260hp from a 2.3 liter engine (Ford Duratec) that is as light as the older technology 1.8 liter engine.
A term used to refer to weapons, that only require repeated trigger pulls to repeatedly fire.
No lift sequential shifters - the term used (at least in USA) for the tranny setup in cars like the F1 series. It's a sequential shifting mechanical transmission, similar to the ones used on motorcycles, but it's computer controlled, hit a button or paddle, and engine fuel/spark is cut off while the shift occurs. The computer even controls the clutch in the case of launch control, which F1 used to have.
In addition to fast shift times, less wear on the rear tires occurs, which is important with the current F1 rules.
A popular no-lift sequential shifter for race car is XTRAC, take a look at champions or site map to see a fairly large list of race cars that use XTRAC shifters. In addition, club racers with money to burn will put them in their track cars.
http://www.xtrac.com/mainindex.htm
Shift times are 30ms to 50ms. According to the first link below, it's only worth .25 seconds per lap, but the next one states it's up to 1 second per lap in F1 over a conventional shifting setup. Take tire wear issues into account and it makes even more difference.
http://www.autoracing1.com/MarkC/000802ShiftWithOutLift.htm
http://www.linksheaven.com/for ... sion/index.php/t3841.html
Video of Rolf Van Os driving a BMW 320 STW race car with a fast no lift sequential shifter:
Assen-bmwSTW.wmv
No, and it probably doesn't need it, as it doesn't have the power to weight ratio of the cars that do. A Caterham and F1 weigh about the same, but it's 260hp versus 900hp (2004, not sure what the V8's are making now). TC makes sense for 900hp, but it isn't needed for 260hp. Some owners will put in a fast sequential shifter, but this is fairly rare.
Last edited by JeffR, .
In real life, expert drivers lap times improve by several seconds with traction control on. Even fast sequential shifters can shave off 1 or 2 seconds per lap. Expert drivers in real life wouuldn't use TC unless it was helping. So if TC helps in real life, it should help equally well (maybe even more since you can't feel g forces) in a racing sim.
Traction is one issue. The peformance tires for lighter cars, like Avon CR500s, are much stickier than peformance tires on heavyer cars. I had 250hp on my Caterham SV, a 1300lb car, UK versions were running 260hp on SLR's which are about 1150lbs. Now Caterham is selling 260hp CSR. These are driven all the time. Note that power to weigh ratio with a driver is about the same as the 2006 Corvette Z06.
Never got a chance to take it to a track (no trailer, closest track is 130 miles away), but I've pushed pretty hard on a local parking lot sometimes used for pro solo events, and just messing around. Even though 1st gear was tall, redlining at 62mph, it was still easy to get significant lift throttle oversteer if near the limits.
Pics of the one I used to own:
ctm.htm
Caterhams and most non-downforce light cars use bias ply DOT tires or bias ply slicks. There's virtually no loss in grip when the tires slide, so you can seem some wild driving, although it's not the quickest way to drive them.
Here's a another good site of a guy who did a lot hot lapping in his caterham before going over radiator fluid at Spa which wrecked the car (he put up the videos of this too). He's in the rebulding process now. The last few movies were made with a Sony HC1 (HD) camcorder (I've got one of these too), and the picture quaility is very nice.
http://www.jackals-forge.com/lotus/
Monaco has some pretty tight spots, espeically all the hairpin turns. Based on the videos I've seen in the past, South City tracks are wider than Monaco, not that the widest part of Monaco isn't wider than the narrowest part of South City, but overall Monaco is narrower.
As I usually recommend, do a web search for F1 Monaco video and you get random hits. Someone who went there took some videos, but you need Real Player to view those. There's also a google video of a F1C99-02 lap at Monaco with a link to a better quality version.
I just add or take away some books I have the monitor on to adjust the view.
Depends on the track. On a street course, there's no real room to pass, but Spa is large enought that you have some passing that doesn't occur in the pits.
In the Champ car series in the USA, they have 1 minute of extra boost available for a race. This is the "push to pass" button. I don't know if this will help open wheel racing in the USA though. They need to merge the Indy and Champ car back again, so there's a form of racing other than Nascar to watch here.
I live in the USA, where open wheel racing gets little coverage anymore, unless I would be willing to get up at 3 in the morning to watch speed channel. I'd like to see more coverage here, but the stations are too busy with shows like "cooking with the stars". Oh well, at least I get to spend more time on the computer while my wife watches American idol.
Including F1 cars in racing games should help players recognize just how fast these cars are, and that should help promote open wheel racing in general.
Including F1 cars in racing games should help players recognize just how fast these cars are, and that should help promote open wheel racing in general.
and almost proud of it ... Started with NFS2 (1997) (unless you count "pole position" from the old gaming computers like Atari 800), then went through the NFS series. NFS4 (1999) was the first time I tried online racing (chat room and "pits"). I think NFS4 was one of the first hosted online racing games released.
I do the sims as well, I spent 7 of 9 months in a row (there was a Tombraider version released during this time), hot lapping in GPL to get my GPL rank negative. Also joined the 500 second club (sub 8:20) by getting an 8:15.32 lap at Nurburg (Nordschliefe) in the Lotus.
I also got F1 2002 and F1C 99-02 when they were released as well as NR2003. I ordered GTR and GTLegends from Germany since I didn' want to wait for the USA release. I've added rFactor to the collection, and of course I have LFS, but it's the S2 T patch that has impressed me the most with LFS.
Bottom line, too fast is in the eye and hands of the beholder.
Arcade games can be fun too. First person shooter games aren't realistic, but they are still fun. I don't worry about where Lara is stashing all those weapons in the Tomb Raider series (Legends was just released), just seeing her roll, flip, dive, swim, jump, grab, climb, all the while shooting just about every endagered species on earth as well as just about anyone who gets in her way can be fun.
Some of the arcade games are impressive in spite of the physics:
n4dc.wmv
In nfs9 - most wanted, they have some subtle but cool effects, like dark areas getting brighter over time simulating your eyes adjusting. Plus there are cool sounds and the ever present pursuing cops and things to smash into, all part of teaching responsible driving:
n9c69.wmv
n9fprw.wmv
Then there's the ultimate in racing games:
hnr.wmv
Arcade games can be fun too. First person shooter games aren't realistic, but they are still fun. I don't worry about where Lara is stashing all those weapons in the Tomb Raider series (Legends was just released), just seeing her roll, flip, dive, swim, jump, grab, climb, all the while shooting just about every endagered species on earth as well as just about anyone who gets in her way can be fun.
Some of the arcade games are impressive in spite of the physics:
n4dc.wmv
In nfs9 - most wanted, they have some subtle but cool effects, like dark areas getting brighter over time simulating your eyes adjusting. Plus there are cool sounds and the ever present pursuing cops and things to smash into, all part of teaching responsible driving:
n9c69.wmv
n9fprw.wmv
Then there's the ultimate in racing games:
hnr.wmv
Last edited by JeffR, .
F1's at Monaco aren't much different than the second video, except no one puts up solid barriers in the middle of a street course.
The reaction depends on if you've driven other games with F1 cars. Just like in real life, you can get aclimated to some pretty fast paced stuff. I hate to admit this, but one thing that the arcade series Need For Speed had going for it was a sense of speed, and some fast manuevering. Having played F1C99-02, and the formula in rFactor before, I found the BF1 a welcome addition to LFS. The 2nd car I drove in version 2T was the LX6 (I used to own a Caterham).
I use a view of 65 degrees. As posted, Monaco in an F1 must be tough.
Tightest tracks were in an arcade game, NFS Underground 2's Street X events, this the longest of them, sub 29 second lap:
n8sx.wmv
Download a replay from a hot lapper in the F1 at South City, in the meantime:
Formula at Sardian (rfr):
rfrf1sh.wmv
Of course, a hacked F1 car doing 41 seconds at Hockenheim, makes it look tight (rd3):
rd3hocs27.wmv
Tightest tracks were in an arcade game, NFS Underground 2's Street X events, this the longest of them, sub 29 second lap:
n8sx.wmv
Download a replay from a hot lapper in the F1 at South City, in the meantime:
Formula at Sardian (rfr):
rfrf1sh.wmv
Of course, a hacked F1 car doing 41 seconds at Hockenheim, makes it look tight (rd3):
rd3hocs27.wmv
Last edited by JeffR, .
Some good video links here, including the Derek Bell 956C lap at Nordschliefe (1983), and the recent Radical SR8 lap of 6:55 at Nordschliefe (2003).
http://cygnus.shackspace.com/archive/ring.html
http://cygnus.shackspace.com/archive/ring.html
Last edited by JeffR, .
Depends on the tire compound. Some tires lose very little grip when slipping. A bit off topic here, but because of the slipping grip limitations of clutches in most RWD cars, magazine testers just find the sweet spot rpm, drop the clutch and let the tires spin for acceleration measurements. The slipping tires provide more grip than slipping clutches in most cars. I think that stock clutches are designed like this on purpose to keep from breaking transmissions.
Porche sets up their modern cars to have a significant amount of understeer. With all that mass at the back end, you don't want oversteer. Try drving a race prepped 911 and it will be a lot more sensitve.
Weight transfer is normally the smallest factor with lift throttle oversteer. In a rear wheel drive car, lifting the throttle applies a braking torque to the rear wheels only, so they have less grip available for cornering. The differential setup can exaggerate lift throttle oversteer reaction. Except for low speed, low gear corners where there's a lot of engine braking torque, the weight transfer from lifting on the throttle isn't much, as the braking torque at the rear wheels is small in higher gears.
(Repeating myself, but how many here are finding it hard to believe I'm defending LFS's tire physics now?).
Driver in second video is Rolf Van Os (just updated the original post to reflect this).
Video of BMW M3 GTR with TC, fast shifter
Make that videos. The first video car uses a pattern shifter, and it appears to be a no lift shifter. The second video shows the near instantenous (30ms to 50ms depending on rpm drop) of a XTRAC like no lift sequential shifter.
Hans Stuck in a BMW M3 GTR at the old and the new nurburg / nordschliefe combined, very cool for fans of Nordschliefe. There's a cool shot of the racing slicks. 2 laps at the new Nurburgring GP track. It starts at the bottom of the downhill start finish straight, just before the tight right turn. On the second lap after the chicane near the end of Nurburgring GP, Hans turns left to go onto the Nordschleife track. The end of the Nordschleife track leads back onto the main start / finish straight for the new Nuburgring. I read that total distance is a bit over 17 miles per lap.
m3gtrnrd.wmv
Rolf Van Os in a BMW 320 STW (Super Tourer, the top class) with a near instant sequential shifter (similar to XTRAC). Due to a qualifying issue, this very fast car is starting from the back of the pack in a mixed class race. Obviously a lot of passing occurs. This a Dutch Supercar Challenge event. There are virtually no restrictions on the cars except that power to weight ratio determines which class the car is running in. This means ECU and braking type traction control is allowed, along with the incredibly quick sequential shifters. Turn down the sound as the rear end is very whiny.
Assen-bmwSTW.wmv
Maps of the old and new Nurburg. The 14.1 mile version just bypassed the south section by connecting the straight leading into the south section to the straight returning from the south section. You can see the small key hole like uturn connecting the two straights on the map. It was a left turn almost 90 degrees from the old track followed by a near 270 degree right turn back onto the return straight.
Hans Stuck in a BMW M3 GTR at the old and the new nurburg / nordschliefe combined, very cool for fans of Nordschliefe. There's a cool shot of the racing slicks. 2 laps at the new Nurburgring GP track. It starts at the bottom of the downhill start finish straight, just before the tight right turn. On the second lap after the chicane near the end of Nurburgring GP, Hans turns left to go onto the Nordschleife track. The end of the Nordschleife track leads back onto the main start / finish straight for the new Nuburgring. I read that total distance is a bit over 17 miles per lap.
m3gtrnrd.wmv
Rolf Van Os in a BMW 320 STW (Super Tourer, the top class) with a near instant sequential shifter (similar to XTRAC). Due to a qualifying issue, this very fast car is starting from the back of the pack in a mixed class race. Obviously a lot of passing occurs. This a Dutch Supercar Challenge event. There are virtually no restrictions on the cars except that power to weight ratio determines which class the car is running in. This means ECU and braking type traction control is allowed, along with the incredibly quick sequential shifters. Turn down the sound as the rear end is very whiny.
Assen-bmwSTW.wmv
Maps of the old and new Nurburg. The 14.1 mile version just bypassed the south section by connecting the straight leading into the south section to the straight returning from the south section. You can see the small key hole like uturn connecting the two straights on the map. It was a left turn almost 90 degrees from the old track followed by a near 270 degree right turn back onto the return straight.
Last edited by JeffR, .
yes.
Traction control can be ECU and/or brake based. Each wheel of a car may have speed sensors on them depending on the series. Without sensors all around, the rate of rpm acceleration is monitored by the ECU.
What a racing traction control system does is reduce engine power and/or apply individual wheel braking if it detects that a tire is slipping beyond a preset amount of allowed slippage. Small computers peform this function, just like the ECU in any car is actually a small computer.
Many racing classes, like FIA F1 don't allow braking to be used for traction control, so only the engine control is done. Usually fuel is cut off from one or more cylinders to reduce engine power.
In the racing classes that allow individual braking, in addition to engine management, the brakes distribute rear wheel torque in an optimal way beyond what a limited slip differential could do. It can also provide some ABS like control at the front on RWD cars, but unlike true ABS, it allows for optimal slippage instead of none.
Racing traction control systems will produce better lap times. A human can't match the millisecond reaction time of a computer and sensors.
In Indy Racing League - traction control is driver adjustable during a race.
As posted racing traction control systems allow optimal slippage, something very tough to do for a real life drive. Depending on the track it's worth a few seconds per lap even with an expert driver. Obviously it's possible to race without traction control but it's more prone to incidents and a tad slower.
No lift fast sequential shifters, like XTRAC, which shift in 30ms to 50ms (depending on rpm drop), shave off a few seconds per lap as well. LFS doesn't model these though, even though F1 cars have them.
As posted racing traction control systems allow optimal slippage, something very tough to do for a real life drive. Depending on the track it's worth a few seconds per lap even with an expert driver. Obviously it's possible to race without traction control but it's more prone to incidents and a tad slower.
No lift fast sequential shifters, like XTRAC, which shift in 30ms to 50ms (depending on rpm drop), shave off a few seconds per lap as well. LFS doesn't model these though, even though F1 cars have them.
Bottom line here - real race cars have traction control, so a racing simulation should also have traction control.
Note that in real life, traction control, and no lift fast sequential shifters both take seconds off lap times, which is why they are used. Note that the traction control in LFS models the real ones where you set the amount of slippage. A driver might be able to maintain optimal slippage for a qualifying lap, but not for a 2 hour race.
You can always turn off traction control. The USA racing series Champ cars (formerly CART) and Nascar don't allow traction control. Some claim it's still being used secretively, but based on the higher number of spin outs in these series as opposed to other racing series, there aren't many that are cheating.
FIA F1, ALMS LMP, FIA GT1 classes allow traction control, but via the ECU only. A lot of European racing series, like the Dutch Supercar Challenge have no restrictions at all, so traction control uses ECU and individual wheel braking.
What isn't modeled in LFS yet, is the super fast (30ms to 50ms) no lift sequential shifters used in F1 and other racing classes.
I've posted links to videos in another thread.
Note that in real life, traction control, and no lift fast sequential shifters both take seconds off lap times, which is why they are used. Note that the traction control in LFS models the real ones where you set the amount of slippage. A driver might be able to maintain optimal slippage for a qualifying lap, but not for a 2 hour race.
You can always turn off traction control. The USA racing series Champ cars (formerly CART) and Nascar don't allow traction control. Some claim it's still being used secretively, but based on the higher number of spin outs in these series as opposed to other racing series, there aren't many that are cheating.
FIA F1, ALMS LMP, FIA GT1 classes allow traction control, but via the ECU only. A lot of European racing series, like the Dutch Supercar Challenge have no restrictions at all, so traction control uses ECU and individual wheel braking.
What isn't modeled in LFS yet, is the super fast (30ms to 50ms) no lift sequential shifters used in F1 and other racing classes.
I've posted links to videos in another thread.
Last edited by JeffR, .
I already posted this, I think the new patch T is great. Tried out Sauber and the LX6 (being a Caterham fan), and like them both. Not much to add to what's already been posted in this thread other than I really like the game now.
I sold my Caterham, (was spending too much time in the shop getting upgrades, and the guy who was working on it has a chronic illness, so the Caterham has a new home new San Francisco, where there is someone that can work on it). The last set of upgrades got the 2.3 liter 4 cylinder Ford Duratec up to 250hp. The USA version of the the Caterham CSR 260 will end up with about the same 250hp (we have lower octane gas in the USA, so the hp drops from 260hp to 250hp). The CSR weighs about 1400 lbs, a tad heavier than my Caterhan SV, but the CSR has a stronger frame, and even more race oriented suspension setup. They drooped the nose a bit to reduce the front end lift (at 100mph, the lift would have been 100lbs, but now it's just 20lbs, so less understeer at speed). For the USA, Cosworth in Long Beach, California is doing the engine upgrades.
Since the real 4 cylinder is getting 260hp as opposed to the LX6's 190hp, maybe it's time for a name change in the LX series that's based on power instead of number of cylinders. There's a 200hp option for the CSR, and some of the older style Caterham optional engines only have 140hp. Seems like a good range, 140hp, 200hp, 260hp.
For the high end LX, it should have the 13 inch wheels and either DOT or slicks, similar to the actual Caterham CSR. DOT tires result in about 1.3'gs of cornering, slicks about 1.5g's. The CSR already come with the dry sump systems you need to handle 1.5g's without causing oil starvation issues. The cars also have the frame strength, suspension, bearings, ... to deal with 1.5 g's. The main reason for the high conering g's is that light cars <1600lbs can use very soft compound tires, so a DOT tire for one of these cars is much stickier than a DOT tire for a car > 2500lbs.
However these are future possible enhancements to the garage of cars. So far, I'm happy with the new patch T.
Since the real 4 cylinder is getting 260hp as opposed to the LX6's 190hp, maybe it's time for a name change in the LX series that's based on power instead of number of cylinders. There's a 200hp option for the CSR, and some of the older style Caterham optional engines only have 140hp. Seems like a good range, 140hp, 200hp, 260hp.
For the high end LX, it should have the 13 inch wheels and either DOT or slicks, similar to the actual Caterham CSR. DOT tires result in about 1.3'gs of cornering, slicks about 1.5g's. The CSR already come with the dry sump systems you need to handle 1.5g's without causing oil starvation issues. The cars also have the frame strength, suspension, bearings, ... to deal with 1.5 g's. The main reason for the high conering g's is that light cars <1600lbs can use very soft compound tires, so a DOT tire for one of these cars is much stickier than a DOT tire for a car > 2500lbs.
However these are future possible enhancements to the garage of cars. So far, I'm happy with the new patch T.
Last edited by JeffR, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG