Quote from Kazu2799 :

can you don't touch the Hand brake while RWD drift? ya, you can, it just not a good drift, but it is drift

hmm never seen someone drift in real life did you?

Actually needing to touch the handbrake in a drift FWD or RWD in my eyes is just a poor drifter that is new to drifting. It is not required and there are many other ways to initiate a drift. Shift lock, scando flick etc etc etc. All that require skill, unlike the handbrake.

Quote from rainspecialist :

watch my video about ff drifting on youtube (link above) and youll see the way this guy drifts the ff civic theres smoke, alot plus the slide lasts through the whole turn and he dosent just use the E-brake so your a retard

I posted that same vid earlier or in another thread myself. WATCH the end where it is in car. He actually has the handbrake on 90%+ of each corner. Even from the outside cam you can see that the rear wheels are fully locked up most of the time. The ONLY reason there is smoke is because the rears are locked and dragging, nothing else.

You really should WATCH what you post and understand WHAT you are watching before you make statements like that

You and a number of others might like to defend FF drifting but the fact that the MAJOR D1 events do NOT allow FWD cars at all just shows what we all know. FF drifting is really just dragging locked up wheels around a corner. It is NOT the same as a RWD drift where you are actually holding the car in balance and steering with you right foot.

Please find a vid that shows a FF drift through a series of complex bends WITHOUT ever using the handbrake and I will change my view

Quote from Stang70Fastback :

Thats what I was saying. The only accidents at our school involved cars with too much power. But TOO much power means 200+ bhp (or ever 300 in some cases there.) 135 hp is LESS than almost ALL of the cars at my school had, and no-one seemed to have any trouble controlling those raging horses under the 'bonnet.'

I get the feeling you fail to understand what I am talking about then. No a 140bhp car is not like a 200bhp car. You are 100% right there and a 200bhp car will get you in trouble far faster. agreed.

BUT a 90bhp car is nothing like a 136bhp car. You might not accept that a 136bhp car is fast but with modern cars they are actually capable of high enough top speeds to get a new driver into lots of trouble. It is even enough to get the back to step if you panic in a corner and play with the throttle with a lead foot trying to correct.

Even the poster with the car admits that the 3 stats I made a note of are TRUE. Youth + lack of RL driving experience + power DOES increase the risk of a crash. The further any of those moves up the scale the more likely the crash is.

You do realise that driving is NOT just about your skill, but the rest of the stupid morons on the road.

Yes you can get many cars of that power level nowdays and that might make you believe it is no longer a powerful car but compared to the cars most young drivers are forced to drive in the UK due to high insurance costs for anything remotly powerful it is far more powerful.

Does that help you see where I am coming from.

Quote from Stang70Fastback :

I still don't think you can call a 136bhp car 'fast.'



<--- THAT'S fast. But that's got like almost 10x the power

Yep your avitar car is a "very fast" car but this is relative.

We are talking about the first car a person will drive on public roads.

So in the context of someone still learning what testosterone is and its effects on the mind and body, yes 136 bhp is fast and will get you into trouble.

lol

Quote from wheel4hummer :

I admit that if I were to drive anything with more then 200HP, then I would end up in a ditch somewhere the first day I drove it. Although I did drive my friend's Pontiac Grand Prix once, but that only has about 190HP.

I took a BWM Works Cooper S on a 500mile test drive once. 210bhp light car that is not yours and no worries about your own no claims bonus in the arse end of Scotland makes you drive like a nutter. Yep its true, the faster the car will go the faster you need to drive it before it becomes fun. This thing didnt really start to sit right on the road until you hit 90+mph. At that speed you could feel the suspension was working at the frequencies it was designed to operate at. It just felt too solid at slower speeds.

And that is the problem right there. The faster a car is designed to go the worse it feels and the slower it feels until you get it up to its operating speed. The speed the suspension and setup are designed for.

I bet an Enzo is a pile of shite to drive around town, its designed for very different tasks

Last edited by Woz, Thu 24 Jan 2008, 00:19.

Quote from DragonCommando :

The problem with that is that you don't actualy syncronize the shaft speed to the gear speed that way, it will still be spinning slower than it needs to be. So if you are driving with an un-syncronized transmission you will still crash the dogs if you don't match the speeds.

Not true. You just have to rev match and that is the whole point of the blip in heel-toe, no need for a double de-clutch. That technique has not been required for many many years now. Gear boxes and the rest of the running gear are just better now.

In my BWM Mini, when I has it, I could downshift direct from 5th to 3rd gear while doing 60-70mph and without the passenger feeling the shift. Its all about rev matching, nothing more. I practiced this because the shift would put me directly in the powerband for the car when I wanted to overtake.

You blip on the downshifts while braking because you do not want the effects of engine braking. If you are braking at the limits of your tyres, something you want to do, and then downshift without matching you lock the wheels so are forced to come off the brakes a bit. This gives you uneven braking and means you take longer to slow.

If you match the revs you dont get the engine braking effects in the same way so you can brake at full force easier and the higher rev load on the engine also help stop the drive wheels locking as it tries to keep them moving.

When engine and gearbox damage get more harsh there will be a huge number of people that have to learn to "unlearn" their LFS bad habbits they currently have. Most of the extreme engine brake techniques you see used in LFS are not possible IRL due to the damage they inflict on the car parts.

IRL you will find that Racing = speed + mechanical sympathy. The clutch heat when implemented caused enough issues but gearbox damage will bring many compaints to the fore

Quote from Dark Elite :

If you use the laws of averages, those three points are correct - and yes, I can see where I unfortunately sit in this scenario. It's not going to stop me, but I do acknowledge it. The sad fact is that I'll have had over three years' driving experience, three years' experience of the physics involved in driving a car, and three years' teaching in the dangerous nature of driving; but no insurance company will care. I know there's no substitute for road driving experience, but that doesn't mean no other experience is worth anything.

I'm still kind of ambivalent about whether a larger, more powerful but also heavier and better-planted car is more dangerous than a smaller, less powerful but also less protected and less grippy one.

I am interested in your 3 years driving experience, where was this gained. Please do not say LFS.

The trouble is that when you start to drive on real roads you realise that all the theory, sims and lessons has not prepared you for what you WILL encounter on the roads, it can be a nightmare out there in the real world. The place is full of t*ats that should not be on the roads at all.

Here is a great example on why you faster but "more stable" car (As you put it) will put you more at risk...

There were studies done years ago on seatbelts wearing around the time when the law changed so you had to wear them. The test subjects were monitored driving with and without a seatbelt. What the researchers found was that when people wear seatbelts they pull away faster, drive faster, brake later and take more risks in general.

The safer you feel in your car the more you will push it harder. The less "risk" you feel the more "risk" you take, this is just basic human nature and the same think happens in all aspects of life no matter the activity.

Try it yourself. Drive without your seatbelt and you will feel very exposed. You will find you are less inclined to push it.

As you yourself acknowledge, you are at the bottom of the chain. No RL road experience coupled with fast car. While you might feel you are safe there will be situations that catch you. That first time you hit black ice, oil or even a big deep puddle at real speed is the time you realise how little room for error there is. Even the first time someone steps out on you and you are forced to stop or kill them.

So a car which is slower and feels less safe will make you drive slower. The slower you are the more margin of error you have and the more chance you have to recover.

I have learnt, over my long driving history, that in the end on public roads a slower car with crap tyres ends up more fun. You can push its limits at far far slower speeds and the lack of speed means you have a chance to catch the mistake with time to spare. In the end it is just as much fun but you do not end up dead as you go into a tree backwards

+1 but only if it remembers the damage state of your car. You should also loose a lap off the count.

I can see rejoin only helpful in endurance races and in those races people will use this system to cheat unless there are penalties.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Of course you're in favour of lowering the age of starting - not because you've thought it through, or because you've digested the facts of driving (being unable to drive on the road means you don't know very much about it). You want the limit lowered because YOU want to drive.

I am unbiased. I have been driving for over 10 years legally (and some more on private roads/airfields etc). Raising the age limit won't change my ability to drive, and so I can look at the pros and cons retrospectively. And it's OBVIOUS that a 19 year old new driver is VASTLY (factors of 10) safer as a new driver. Will there still be accidents? Yes. Will some still be twats on the road? Yes. But overall the picture is safer.

And of course you don't agree with power restrictions because you 'own' a silly repmobile (that is a LOT more dangerous as a first car than pretty much anything vaguely close to sensible). Again, you are biased, and therefore your views hold little water.

When you grow up you'll realise just how silly letting most 17 year olds out in cars on their own (or worse, with mates) is. But right now, as a child, you are unable to see that because you are the very age group you need to look at.

Quote from Dark Elite :

As for restricting new drivers... Well, I'd think a 70bhp car, with no protection, weighing next to nothing, would be a hell of a lot more dangerous than my 4WD 136bhp Mondeo, don't you? And I think most modifications are ruled out by insurance costs now, anyway.

Sam

I think the 4WD 136bhp Mundano sounds a nightmare in the hands of a 17 year old TBH. But then I get the feeling you will be in for a nice shock when it comes to insurance.

You should think what it is that insurance costs show. Here is the general idea though.

1) The more powerful the car the more chance it is involved in a crash.
2) The younger the driver the more chance they are involved in a crash.
3) The more years of experence the less chance of a crash.

You can see where you sit in this no?

Last edited by Woz, Wed 23 Jan 2008, 10:44.

Quote from scania :

I have said many times
Drift=a car slide across

Blah blah blah.

This is drifting http://youtube.com/watch?v=PI4vJ6lziZg

This is someone wishing they could do that, but instead just lock the back wheels and drag them about http://youtube.com/watch?v=JQMQkMvRG3I watch near the end and you realise he just has handbrake on almost 90% of the time in a "drift"

If you see them as the same you are watching with different eyes than me

Quote from scania :

Drift means a car slid across a coner under contral by inertia, but not using mechanism to make the car slide. The mechan system is just using to help the car drifter better.

Most people do not consider FWD cars drifting because its just lame. Lock the handbrake and drag the arse about.

Watch a good drifter in RWD car and it can be an art. Watch anyone drift in a FWD car and it just looks stupid.

Does not matter how you want to dress it up, its just the way it is.

Quote from evilpimp :

@woz - I think he meant people make the tracks and such and send it to the developers for testing. And if it is accepted, it could be implemented in the next patch. So it would be checked before being official. I dont see anything bad about that exept that it would give devs another work which would be to test every single one of them.

Even worse then. All that will do is tie up the limited resources by needing the devs to wade through piles and piles of crap. All of which created by people that have no idea on the optimisations needed to use with LFS in the best way, the colour palletes used etc.

The only way to outsource is to employ people on contract that you trust to produce good work in the first place. Not ask for piles of low quality work from the general public and hope you find a diamond in there. The resources to manage this would be too great for too little gain

Quote from mike61es :

I'm using sequential shifting without clutch. Just change with my foot down.

No you are not. The UFR does NOT have a sequential shifter.. You have a sequentail gear selector making an H pattern change gear. You HAVE to use the clutch and you HAVE to lift.

Quote from waveform :

.......

sigh.. Please search.

This has been thrashed to death in many many many threads. There are a number of reasons why its just NOT a good idea.

1) Modding hell. This is like the old windows DLL hell and is highlighted well in rFactor. Here you have 1000's of would-be modders for every 1 talented one. These muppets pump out something quick then patch it every 2 seconds when a bug is found. Means you never know if you have the right track let alone version for the server you want to join.

2) LFS World. To work with LFS there would need to be changes to LFS world for stats logging. For this to work mods and tracks need to be LOCKED down when realsed and only allowed to change when an LFS physics mod comes through. This leads us back to point 1.

3) FPS games that do well with modding have on the whole built up GOOD mod teams over many versions of the related game. These teams have learnt what it means to be professional, beta test and ONLY release when ready. The games also have enough players to be able to deal with the signal to noise ratio that modding brings and filter out the crap.

Yes modding can help BUT it needs to be VERY tightly controlled and only select people that will not just port shite rF tracks & cars to LFS. This is NOT what LFS needs and it will actually cause LFS harm IMHO.

What makes LFS so great is that you can just run up and play. If modding is left unchecked this is what happens.

1) Join server to find you do not have map.
2) Grab map then try and join to realise wrong version.
3) Finally locate correct version and download only to find track now changed.
4) Go back to 1 until you managed to join.

I believe the ONLY way to go is the total conversion route. In that mods are stand alone. The tracks & cars can only be used in that mod although a mod can reuse the base cars if required.

This keeps everything isolated and removes some LFS world issues.

Quote from Ian.H :

Something like rF's RCD (talent) files would be great; for example:

// rFactor Talent File - Generated by rFactor Talent Editor

David McQueen
{
// Driver info
Nationality=Scottish
DateofBirth=12-11-1982
Starts=29
Poles=14
Wins=6
DriversChampionships=0

// Driver stats
Aggression=53.65
Reputation=43.69
Courtesy=75.56
Composure=1.88
Speed=93.66
Crash=62.23
Recovery=8.35
CompletedLaps=2.88
MinRacingSkill=5.43
}

Shame ISI never managed to make use of them properly in rF (for some stupidly unknown reason).. but if implemented well.. I think it'd enable much more variation



Regards,

Ian

Yep, would be good

Quote from Dark Elite :

I knew the age limit was only fifteen - personally I approve of lower age limits, but only if there is a more comprehensive test and some sort of personality assessment for younger people. I speak as someone too young to hold a driving licence in the UK.

Insurance, though... That is simply ridiculous. I'm facing premiums of over £2000, but not having it is just unthinkable. Or rather, the person who hits you not having it is unthinkable.

Sam

Actually NZ is a prime example why you should NOT let younger drivers on the road. You just have to look at the young kids playing GT4 IRL to realise they are NOT equiped to drive at that age!

Always young deaths, always young people running from police with chase ending around a lamp post etc etc.

If you want to lower premiums for younger people they need to take the responibility to stop having crashes. There are higher premiums for younger drivers because they have the MOST crashes. It is as simple as that.

The reason yours costs so much is that chances are, at your age, you will cost the insurance company money

Quote from Stang70Fastback :

You idiot, that's Star WARS dammit.

I have to ask, why is it that LFS doesn't do day/night as is? I know there are ton's of 'easy fix' issues that have yet to be addressed, as they are focusing on certain improvements in particular, but is it difficult to do or not? I can't imagine it being more difficult than changing the lighting in the game, adding lit-up lights, and just making the headlights light up the space ahead of the car... but I don't know anything about programming. If they did that, it would be a much cooler upgrade than just a new track, or a new car (in my opinion.)

rotf. You don't program IRL then

Not that simple and then there are normally loads of tweaking that is required so they you know its good on all platforms of hardward supported etc.

Quote from mike61es :

Hi,
Can anybody tell me why my clutch is burning out after only 4 laps in a UFR race. It doesn't seem to happen in any other vehicle.
Thanks

Because you are slipping the clutch too much and the clutch in that car is not a strongas other cars perhapse.

Watch a replay and watch your gear changes. More slipping (blue bar) = more heat.

Are you blipping on down shifts? Are you flat shifting? etc etc

The part of Bathurst as you come over the top and it dives into the most mental set of wall lined S's

Infact a track like Bathurst, flat areas coupled with an area with big elevation changes. Built using corners based on famous corners from different tracks

I would just make the penalty of a disconnect 2 laps (1 for long tracks). Just enough to make it not worth doing.

Quote from wsinda :

Simple suggestion: Let Shift-R restart the training lesson.

In the overtaking lessons, once you've hit an AI car, you know you have to abort and start again. Currently, you need to press Esc and click the mouse twice. A faster way would be to Shift-R, just like in a single-player race against AI.

I like how it is TBH. Makes a mistake more of a pain, which it should be.

It should be less of a problem soon as Scawen has said the AI are still being worked on so the next patch should solve the last issues with them.

Quote from Bluebird B B :

No? Two examples of drivers at Nordschleife
Here you go
http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwBJ8SHB42U

and
(jusy ignore the annoying music)
http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=QiWQl4Eb_jM

Have fun

Can't really see the feet in the vids or know the cars setup/config etc but the first vid shows it well enough. The driver pushes the car until the tyres SCRUB but NO FURTHER. He is smooooth with power feed in etc.

Now compare that to how MOST appear to push LFS, they push harder and faster. Its a fact of sim racing because your feedback lags slightly, no direct G feedback that you get IRL

Quote from Bob Smith :

Depends on your reference point really. The sun is in an arm of the galaxy that rotates around the galactic core, which itself is hurtling through space. So, the sun does move. It just doesn't move around the earth.

Wow, old school thinking if ever I saw it. It has been known for years now the world is flat and the big ball of fire in the sky has to be re-lit every morning.

You need to read some more

Quote from mc906 :

some after all the arguement, can everyone drop the subject about FF drifting and focus on the competition...
this post isnt named " Whats Your Opinion on FF Drifting

If you had read my last two posts you would have realised I had just backed out of the thread

Quote from kamkorPL :

But in this case I just really like the fact that someone tries to organise something now, when no other event is being organised in lfs drift scene. It would suck if organisator would bediscouraged by comments.

Yep agreed.

Quote from Bluebird B B :

Sorry i disagree, to those people: Its on telly, youtube etc. see for yourself, real tyres dont overheat so fast and are not as bad with some dirt on it(althougt dirt certainly changes grips levels).

How can you compare what you see in a vid directly to LFS, you have not frame of reference. You cant SEE..

• how much G they are pulling.
  
• how much loading they have on the tyres.
  
• their exact control inputs.
  
• what setup they have.
  
• how they are nursing their tyres.

As Trist said, IRL you NEVER push as hard and as far into slip as many people do in LFS. The lack of G force, the slight lag in FF coupled with no fear of pain, damage or death from a crash means IRL you would never run laps at LFS "race pace".

Real life racing is actually about speed + mechanical sympathy. Most LFS players appear to believe its all about speed and nothing else. In LFS too many people run at "qualify pace" and then wonder why they have melted tyres.

If you could find a vid that allows a REAL comparission it would help but in the end tyre data if more valid than a vid.

No the tyres are not perfect, as Scawen has stated, but they are not bad.