Quote from nisskid :

let's remember though simply having oversteer on the exit of the corner is not drift, in fact it's the opposite really of what a fast drift is aiming at, those instances where he has oversteer on the exit are usually as a result of maintaining traction mid corner.

a fast drift is all mid corner with as little entry drift as you can manage, this is because this is where the rears are doing the least work, when you start exiting the corner and working the rear tyres you want to be straight again with full traction on the rears.

like i said it's a shame the style shown in the vid wasnt continued and refined, as obviously it is very rough, but i think it has massive potential, especially for the low powered RWD cars through tight courses where they have sharper corners and less room to apex the corner.

I think you have a wrong idea of cornering. I am by now way condescendent or harsh, and I don't mean to be that way.
You have to think about transients. Let's take the different transients of cornering :
*) Increasing brakes while increasing turn in | Understeer
1) Decreasing brakes/throttle while increasing turn in | Oversteer
2) 0 foot input while increasing turn in | Neutral
3) Increasing throttle while decreasing turn in | Understeer

Those are the four basics effects of cornering with a FR car. (what the car will tend to do on it's own). So, what you call mid-corner, would be the moment where the only inputs are the steering ones, because it occurs between the moment of right before you hit the apex and right after hitting it?
If it is the case, then you are wrong to assume the most important phase of a fast drift occurs here. There are actually two types of fast drifts (low angle - based on the tires' slip angle - lots of grip even if sliding - constant "relative angle" with the racing line, and progressive angle with the exit direction - 4 wheels are sliding) :

A) One which is very entry-oriented, in which you enter the corner with a tad more speed than you would do if you kept your tires sticking to the road. During transient 1, you get your tire to the angle you like. If you catch too much angle, and think that it could jeopardize your balance when you'll apply the throttle, then you use very briefly transient * to stabilize the angle. During transient 2, your car should keep the same momentum, and the same "relative angle". During transient 3, your car will still slide a bit, and regain the grip roughly around halfway between the apex and the exit point.
This is done mainly in tight corners, where sliding can help carrying the momentum, on low powered and light cars. The angles can be "quite high" here, depending on the nature of the corner, its line, whether it is uphill or downhill, etc.
B) One which is more exit-oriented than A. In transient one, you launch your car so that it will have a lower angle than in A. In transient two, you do nothing, and by the time you have reached the apex, you'll start regaining grip, and exit in transient 3 as a normal exit. This is better for either fast corners, or heavy cars, in order to prevent the inertia to create unwanted extra-understeer.

So basically, mid-corner should only be a non-important, transition point. Why ? Because if you try to kepe the traction in transient 1, then slide in transient two, and keep the traction in transient 3, you'll just break the momentum of the car. Breaking momentum = Slower.

I have to say that the transient I said above are the general behavior of a FR car regarding the mass transfers. A MR or RR car would have entry understeer (too much weight at the rear) and exit oversteer (the rear weighs too much for the tires to handle, and it is easy to break it free).
A slide is useful only if your setup behaves in order to increase the effects of the mass transfers.
This is why we can't say that a slide if always faster or always slower than not sliding. It depends on how the driver drives and how the car is set up. If it is set up for stability, then sticking to the road would be faster (if one of the ends break free, then you'll understeer really bad). If your car is set up to use the mass transfers as a way to increase it's cornering power (low front damping/high rear damping for FR cars | high front damping/compression-rebound rear damping quasi equal for a MR-RR car), then you might consider sliding.

But, stop the OT : please precise what you call mid-corner. Does it matches the definition it gave above? Otherwise, please explain

Quote from nisskid :

as i said there was quite a few mistakes, but i think you missed the point, i was trying to demonstrate the origins of drift and how they originally took on quite a fast form, one of keiichi's biggest errors there was line which was killing his speed, but as far as car balance there were only a few errors there in his drift which caused dramatic speed loss.

Wrong.

His dramatic speed loss is not due to his line, which are okay, but it is due to the difference in slip angles between front wheels and rear wheels.

Look at how much he needs to countersteer to keep the full throttle to prevent spinning (the rear wheels spin really hard on the downhill part).
As I said, Tsuchiya made Pluspy and Pluspy II as show drift (holding the drift longer than what is optimal, and with a too high angle and difference of angle between the frnt and the rear wheels). As I said, he intentionally made this video for fun show drift, because he is more skilled than that.

So this video has got nothing to do with the origins of drift. People say that drift (with your meaning : a way to clear corners faster) was born in the mountain of Japan, which is wrong again : it was popularized in the street culture, because of the nature of the track (low grip, tight corners and winding path where entry speed matters slightly more than exit speed).
However, it existed back in the 60's, especially on the Porsches (mid-ship, so exit oversteer was not really avoidable at that time, even with the best setups), would it be for track or asphalt rallye racing.

We agree that sliding was at first a way to be fast, and bbman explained also why. We also agree that drift now is a motorsport based on show. And we agree also that sliding is not fast in every situation : since it is more demanding on the tires, people would actually do it on short runs, and only on some corners where the gain of being in the slip-zone is much more important that having your 4 wheels gripping on the road. We finally agree that oversteer slide (from the wheel POV : front grip, rear no grip) at the exits will always be slower than having your rearies grip the road (on a RWD).

Quote from Becky Rose :

Actually no LFS' engine already has all the internal workings needed to introduce variable track temperature, using the existing path and picking a small number of points laterally at each node point along it would be more than adequate.

Yes, but then it would not be *that* realistic. To have the most advanced simulation of track heating, the patches of tracks would have to be as small as possible, otherwise you might find yourself driving in a patch of 50x50cm that is heated well, then take the corner too wide, and put your tire on a patch of 50x50cm that is too cold, resulting in a very shapr loss of traction

Quote from scania :

is it too much XF?

Totally agree, too many different versions of XF or FX (F stands for FWD in those cases, so I would really be in pain to see a FWD 4.2 V10 FXO )

What I would just like to see are the following cars

XRS (XR GT-S - see first attached picture) :
Engine specs : the same as the XRG
Weight : 1050 kilos (100 kilos less than the XRG)
So a power to weight ratio of 133.33 bhp/ton
Ability to wear supers and to have the same Clutch Pack LSD settings as more powerful cars (basically like the XRG was before downgrade).

XFS (XF GTi-S - see second attached picture).
Engine specs : 1.3 I4 engine, 126 bhp (11 more hp than the XFG).
Weight : the same as the XFG
So a power to weight ratio of 132.66 bhp/ton
Ability to wear supers and to have the same settings as more powerful cars.

So, you'll wonder what has change in the pictures ? The bodykit of the XRS would be more sporty, and seem more solid. It would have a very low rear spoiler, maybe like the factory BMW one (just a raised trunk), or like the sport version of the Mazda RX-7 FC3S (but still lower than the XRT).
For the XFS, basically it would be the same design as the XFG right now. As opposed, the "new" XFG would receive a more traditionnal hatchback look, without the becquet, higher bodykits and a single tip exhaust.

The XRG and the new XFG would remain in the demo, while the XFS and XRS would be included in S1 or S2. Why those few modifications then ? The two new cars would be trackday road-legal versions of their lower-specs counterparts, and be a blast to drive against each other

Sorry about the bad edit, I am not an artist, I just wanted to give some idea about the end product

Very interesting post Becky. Well thought, well argumented : well done

However, I have to agree to those saying a static platform is more important to begin with. Simply for the fact that a dynamic platform, as other stated, can hide physical issues (if a dynamic track was implemented, then developing a perfect tire model would be impossible).
I, personally, think that the devs are thinking about a dynamic environment and will start working on it "soon". The tire model is good for the moment, and with a little more attention, it will be way, way better, to handle even closer to IRL. Then, the next patch is most likely to see those dynamics : change of the wind direction and strenght, dynamic weather, oil on track and track heating.

However, for some aspects, it might need a long adjustment, since, for the track heating for instance, to make it realistic you would have to make it heat with squares with sides as close to 0 as possible, which will be a real pain for older computers .
But this is what LFS will go toward quite soon, don't worry

@ the guy who said LFS' display was bad : Dude, I have a 17" (I mean inches) monitor on my laptop, and with appropriate settings in the views' options, you can acheive a pretty nice effect : increase the FOV to 110, inclination to -5, head moving to G forces, lower the driving position a bit and make the driver stand a bit forward to prevent the cockpit from being distorded and you get a pretty decent view, IMHO

Quote from nisskid :

a decent example of some fast drifting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHOkR8vrP94

I am sorry, but in this video, Tsuchiya does mostly slow show drifts. Just look at his exit speeds in the first part (downhill), especially after the right hander 180° corners. This is clearly show, and I have to say that I've seen Tsuchiya do better (Sorry I saw that the video showed only the 2nd part - Uphill, but this is even slower...)

As opposed, this video shows us a better Tsuchiya : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... UxxpU&feature=related

Especially at the marks 2:15, ~2:30, 3:23, he does drifts with a very low slip angle (around 3-4°), which are clearly fast (just check the exit speed and the speed carried through the corner). However, at ~3:30, he slides by mistake, and we can clearly note a parallel between the exits you showed in your video (only 2 wheels are sliding : the rear ones).

So to clarify again : even if we know that what you mean by drift is the 4-wheel drift (4WDr), which is a way to use the maximum slip angles of the car, please use another term (sliding, 4WDr, etc), because people will associate "drift" to the motorsport. Once again, they may be wrong, but it is the common sense it has now.

In that case, show drifting will always be slower than proper racing (and of course slower than 4WDr). If you look at the final scene of F&F Tokyo Drift (the "race" on the mountain), you can't do anything but laugh, since the way they drive is clearly show oriented, while any UF1 hotlapper in LFS would beat the crap out of them.

@Nightshift : Countersteering during the entry phase usually mean that you steered too much and you have to stabilize your car, so this might have been a bit too optimistic Usually, during a 4WDr, you don't need to countersteer during the entry phase, because you use that oversteer to build up angle. And during the exit phase, you don't really "need" to countersteer, because as you apply throttle, you'll understeer (loss of front traction) already enough, so countersteering too much will make you end up with even more unwanted understeer

@tristan : gosh, that guy has clear problems to understand what we say, doesn't he ?

I voted for FF's

Quote from 5haz :

My idea of a drift is if the car is sliding sideways, but there is little or no opposite lock applied, instead of the back wheels spinning wildly with no grip and the front wheels gripping and keeping the back inline, all four wheels are sliding, the four wheel drift lies in a really thin line between all four wheels gripping and a powerslide, it's very hard to achieve in modern cars with lots of grip, but in older cars with less grip, drivers like Fangio often held cars in a drift through entire corners, with incredibly skill.

Yeah this was what drifting was all about at the beginning : a way to remove the limitation of the cars/tires.

Nowadays, since the tires are better, the optimal slip zone is too thin for an average/good racer to be in it. We can just check the example of the XRG/XRT : the slip zone on normals is quite large, so you can be fast when sliding, but in the XRT, since it's heavier and it has supers, the optimal slip zone is so small and not that much rewarding (tires heat too fast and it is hard to get into that zone), that it is overally more rewarding to have your 4 tires grip the road.

Quote from nisskid :

so this is coming down to a differ in terms?

by drifting i mean drifting, if you like to call it sliding then good for you. the sport drifting originated from the term to describe the tyres "drifting" through a corner, just because drifting is now a sport doesnt take away it's original definition, i explained this early on, if people didn't see it or read it then that isn't my fault.

also my video was generally more angle than needed, but like i said i wasnt that good back then and holding more angle was easier.

Man, I don't wanna seem rude, but if you don't make the effort to choose appropriate terms for a discussion, then there's no point having it.
Since you don't seem to want a proper discussion, but instead being right at all cost, glad wheel4hummer killed the debate.

Quote from m4ccy :

Im sorry guys, my 1st post as an S2 racer and i turn half the lfs communtiy against myself

It is better to turn half of the community against to than turning ALL of the community

Which means that you have a lot of posts to get the whole community behind you, don't worry, this will be forgotten in a year

Quote from SamH :

I'm a smoker and I think the only people who are more stupid than smokers are people who think that smoking can be rationalized or justified.

Incidentally, cardio-vascular exercise is an irresponsible waste of the planet's resources. It burns energy in a disgustingly wasteful and selfish way and it needlessly depleats the world's already limited food resources. This is the era of conservation, so get busy and sit on your backside. Stop the waste.

You are describing a wonderful utopia in a wonderful way Sam ^^

Quote from Doorman :

Cracking advice. He forgot to mention: It'll cost you a fortune, you'll smell, you'll having trouble breathing, and you'll look stupid. Keep at it fella, you'll be glad you did.

Wrong.

It costs you a fortune if you buy the bad shit : I stopped smoking blond cigarettes and I now roll/entube my own : monthly cost 50€ at the maximum (I smoke 20 cig/day). Cost of buying Marlboro-like : 175€/month
Because of the plausible smell, I brush my teeth more often (3 to 4 times a day)--> I have a better mouth hygiena than you I guess
To prevent the trouble breathing, I do cardio training, aerobic exercises (bike, long and fast walks, sometime jogging). So my body can handle this, and I don't cough ^^
It is some discriminatory statement you do by saying we, smokers, look stupid : it is like saying the mormons or the amish look stupid. You discriminate us because of one of our behavior and this is the clear example of how open-minded people like you (aka the ones who do the anti-smokers campaign) are.

I think you misinterpreted some of our comments and got quite rude.

However, I find your apology thread sincere and convincing, and I have to say that it is not a common behavior so

Next time you think about quitting smoking : don't (except if you jeopardize your life, but it'll be around 65yo, and every doctor will tell you that stopping now won't raise your life expectancy except than a few days, so... )

Bon anniversaire from a real French supporter !

I wish you the best for your family, your work and your happinness

Quote from m4ccy :

Today i made a rb4 interior in a test Y folder and upgraded my Y folder to z as a test, guess what i still have the interior i made.

BUT Not with my XRT

As people said, the interiors were upgraded because they were crap. I ddon't want to be pessimistic, but in a next patch, the RB4 will see it's interior lifted, while the XRT seems to be a final version for a looooooong time
So you'd rather create new interiors for the XRT, and wait till the RB4 is one to finish it

And btw, it's not a great loss that neon rims doesn't work anymore, IMHO

Quote from nisskid :

i never made the statement that drift was a better way to race, this seems to have been lost along the way, and by along the way i mean at the start.

the only bold statement i made was that drift CAN be faster, not that it is faster.

would you agree that in some situations drifting around a corner can be faster than maintaining full traction?

In order to prevent future misunderstanding, you would rather define what you mean by drifting. On that forum, drifting means literally : D1GP. So when you say "Drift CAN be faster than normal racing", people automatically compare D1GP to DTM. In that case, they are right.

Read the message I shown you about sliding some pages ago. As you saw, I did not demonstrate something much different than your point, but I used the right word, and people agreed with me.
Definitions are important :
- "Drifting is faster than normal racing" : a big NO NO.
- "Sliding is faster than normal racing" : a big YES according to the demonstration I made in my post.

But drifting and sliding are two different things that light different areas of the forumers brains :
- Drifting is the show motorsport
- Sliding is the racing technique of using the tires' slip angles.

So basically, you're not wrong if you mean sliding. If you mean D1GP, you're deeply wrong that time (but I know you don't). That's why definitions are so important.
You want to use "gripping" to define the standard way of racing, and it is a new word to define it. So, if you don't want to come back to the roots of this definitions, please do not come back to the roots of the word drifting (when it was a racing technique), since now it means something else


And also, when done properly, they look completely different. I did not see your video, but I bet that it is drifting. If you are interested, stay in touch with me, and I can send you some replays that will show you what sliding is about Then you can watch them and see whether your definition matches what it is

Well after thinking about it, my platypus picture in my final entry

Quote from nisskid :

I have no idea what you just wrote but I’m 95% sure it has nothing to do with my point.

Locked diffs and the popular 2way mechanical LSD work in very similar ways, I din’s see much point getting into technicalities. I was comparing it to something like a 1.5way which is popular for a lot of racers which isn't "locked" on decal unlike a locked or 2 way diff.

I'm not real sure what the rest of the post about, but it looked like if anything u were agreeing with some of my points.

There's drifting then there's drifting.

Drifting can be considered a technique or an even something you use to describe an action. Drifting is also a sport.

Unfortunately these days you can't mention the word drift without conjuring up scenes from F&F Tokyo Drift in people's heads, but what I’m actually talking about is the motion of a car "drifting", nothing to do with the developed sport.

I know people often get on the defensive in these topics, but it's important to remember that all I’m saying is I think it's possible for drift to be faster than grip, in theory at least. Whether that be overcoming poor setup. poor conditions etc etc. I would argue that it's already proved in rally to an extent.

There are so many factors that make it not the case in practice, but I think it's good to theorise some times, something I think people struggle to do, maybe be a bit more open mind to possibilities.

Please don't be condescendent. I was not with you, so please do not with me.

Thanks.

Now that it is said, my post was explaining to you WHY a high locking differential was still effective even when "drifting" (high angle, low traction). So it was an answer to your post in which you clearly said : "the off-gas understeer isn't wanted on purpose, since it only happens when the tires grip the road and not while the tires are skidding". You seem to be a logical person which can hold a reasonable flow of thought, so I bet you understand now what I was posting.

____

Also.

The locked diff and a LSD works on very different ways. A locked diff means either a welded open diff (so that the wheels always spin at the same speed), or simply no differential at all (which will have the same effect as in my previous parenthesis).
As opposed to, a 2-way clutch pack LSD means that the wheels will lock at the same amount on power and on coast but not always. A CPLSD is meant to "activate" itself after it has sensed a torque mismatch between the both wheels (which is symbolized by the preload clutches inside the differential). The more preload there is, the less torque mismatch you will need to reach the critical value of torque mismatch at which the wheels start locking each other. Which is already very different and more complex than a standard locked diff. If it behaved the same, you would have a poor turn in, while the 2-way is meant to have stability in turning, without sacrificing much turn-in power (in sense of ability).

A 1.5-way CPLSD is a differential which will lock the wheels on coast, but, generally, half of the locking value of the locking on power. If, when you apply throttle and there is a torque mismatch (understand : one wheel starts spinning), the differentials locks itself at 100% (both wheels turn at the same speed), when decelerating and cornering, if one wheel starts skidding, the diff will lock at 50% (the opposed wheel will spin at half the speed of the skidding wheel). This means less stability, but better turn-in. It is a compromise, and it is generally up to the driver or the mechanic to arbitrate between both of them.

_____

"Drifting" literally means : "to deviate gently from a direction".

I agree with you about the deviation of the initial definition, but since you say people tend to be allergic to the actual meaning of drift, let's move over, and call the racing technique with an another name (which I called sliding in my previous posts).

We are not close-minded to your thoughts, and it is good that at least someone can think over the publicly accepted meaning of drift. However, we are in gentlemen, and stating our thoughts as well, which may interefere with yours.
When you want us to be open-minded, you don't seem to realize that some of us here are (tristancliffe, me, etc). Because we accept your theory, and we answer it with arguements. Being close-minded would be not to hear it, or saying that it's BS and don't say why (which is exetremely frustrating, I reckon). Openmindedness do not mean by any chances : accepting a theory without confronting it with facts.

Plus, we explain you in a very calm and soft manner why your theory is not complete (not wrong, not complete). So there is no need to get aggressive or qualify us as close minded, when it is obviously the case that we do our best not to be.

Quote from nisskid :

My point is if you're not using 100% of the rear grip, then why do you need 100% grip.

You may have less grip at the rear, but it is being used in a more efficient manner.


lol please tell me you're not serious are you? The reason why locked diffs are preferably is because when feathering the throttle the diff doesn't shift going from acceleration to decceleration. The understeer caused from locked or 2 way diffs is only present when the tyres havnt' broken traction, once the traction is broken the diff doesnt contribute to any understeer until you grip back up. The entry understeer is a bi-product, but any decent drifter will overcome it with a decent initiation and they wont see the bi-product again until after they have finished drifting.

For your first paragraph : maybe because using 90% of the available traction is better than using only 30% ? Just my guess...

For your second paragraph : seting up cars is about balance. In a RWD, you have a lot of grip at the rear and, personnally, I use setups with wheel set up to understeer, while the ARB of the car are meant to oversteer. In that case, my rear wheels have traction, and I don't sacrifice my cornering power. So in a well set up car, sliding is not the bi-product of less grip to the rear, it is induced by the driver.

For your third paragraph, drifters don't use locked diff, they use high-locking LSD. And yes, when you release the throttle, you will have understeer, like you will have oversteer when you apply it. If you couple this with both front and rear suspension having the same damping settings, you will increase even more this effect (understeer while releasing gas, oversteer with pushing it). Add a shot of ARB set up you feel comfortable with, and you have a good drift setup.
What I mean is that, if the differential did not do anything about the understeer when the wheels are sliding, it means that your suspension setup isn't balanced with the diff : suspension for ultra-oversteer off-gas will result in a conflict between the sprung mass (the chassis) wanting to oversteer, and the unsprung mass (wheels) wanting to reduce the oversteer. And since the sprung mass is heavier, its inertia will win and you will have a long spin (180° while travelling in a straight line).

If your car is set up the other way : suspension (off gas understeer), diff (off gas oversteer with a low coast preload), then your car won't spin because of its inertia, it will just spin where it is now and do more than 180° because the wheels won't stop the oversteer of a car.

My point being : even when you are drifting, the diff on coast is very important. Drifting is not like having NO grip at all : there is still friction between the road and the car, otherwise you wouldn't hear the tires screaming... There is still friction, but just a slight little bit (5%, this is why your tires heat up). And if there is friction, than the coast setting of the LSD is as much important as the power setting.

Thanks for the answers !

I am not a very fast racer, but I am pretty interested in car dynamics, and I like gathering as many information on this topic as I can (I'll be running in a student go-kart 24 hours race in may 2010, and since my team will know basically nothing except what the steering wheel, accelerator and brake do, having as much info as I can might help them to train them better ).

I don't have time to look at your link now, since I am in the US, and I have to go at a thanksgiving dinner (which I don't know anything about, tbh ), but I'll check it as soon as I get back

Quote from tristancliffe :

This, in turn, means that at no point will the rear wheels be doing naff all.

Gratz Tristan, you managed to sum up in a few lines what I struggled to in some paragraphs

Of course, having the rear going crazy is useless, and it is too bad that people mistake having slip angle with this when they assume : Drift can be as fast as grip.

Can you please light my bulb (without any meaning except the electrical one ) ? What are the factors that determine the optimal slip angle of a tire, apart from its compound and the nature of the track?
How does the width, sidewall length, pressure, diameter of the tire affect this?

Thank you for answering, as I have no clue.

For Nisskid and Tristan :

You both are right, but you should also stop considering the track itself, but the tire compound as well

Tires, and you obviously know it (but let me tell it for other people as well ), do not behave like this :

Grip | No Grip
----------------------------------------------->
Force exerted on the tire.

It behaves more like this :

Grip | Slip Zone | No Grip
------------------------------------------------>
Force exerted on the tire.

The "Slip Zone" (please tell the appropriate term since I do not know the official one) is a zone where your tire will have some slip angle, without losing its grip. Pro racing drivers, for timed runs or qualifications, tend to drive on that limit zone which separates when the tires stick to the road, and when the tires do not stick to the road.
In the slip zone, since you do not lose too much traction (and then propulsive power for the driven wheel) and since you have less resistance with the road (the tires slide a bit), it is overally faster than grip driving.
This is why some cars seem to be "flying" around the corners, because the drivers tend to stay on the Slip Zone.

To drive in that zone, you have to make all of your tires stay in it. If you only have 3 (let's say the outside front for a RWD car is the most likely to be grippy at the exit), you will create a resistance, which will not only slow the car down, but also create a mismatch between the slip angle of your front tires and the angle of your rear tires, making the rear travel faster than at the equilibrium, and tunring the "slide" (4 wheels in the slip zone), into a "drift" (Outside front grips, inside front is in the Slip Zone, Rears are in the no grip zone). If it is only your rear outside tire that is "below" the Slip Zone, in the Grip part, you will break the slip angle of our fronts, which will result in a joyful and awkward understeer.

Of course, the "width" of the Slip Zone depends on the compounds. Race slicks are designed to increase the width of the grip zone toward the right limit of the Slip Zone. It is all the more seeable on soft compounds slicks : either you have traction, either you have not. On R4 (the hardest, for instance), you see that you can lightly slide your tire without causing too much heat, in a very thin slip zone, and yet be fast.
On treaded tires, the hardest the compound is, the larger the Slip Zone will be --> this makes the Normal compound easier to get to a good slide in the slip zone.

The hardest bit to understand is that being fast in the Slip Zone has got nothing to do with the angle. It is about the force exerted on a tire, so basically, untill you reach the peak force where the Slip Zone turns itself to the No Grip zone, you can virtually acheive whatever angle you like (may I remind that I speak about slip angle, and not angle of the car in comparison to the line).
The only problem is that : the higher the angle is, the higher the force exerted on the tire is, the closer it is to the No grip zone.

That is why having a 2° slip angle on a fast bend is useless, since the faster you corner, the stronger the Gs will be. As opposite, you can acheive angles of 13° max with the XRG in a hairpin without losing much speed. (Because less speed means that you can have a higher angle).

Then comes the tricky part : when should you get your tires to slide ?
Because obviously, carrying a slide from the entry point to the exit point is useless.
You have to progressively make your tires slide :
- After the entry point, you get a slight oversteer by increasing the angle of your rearies.
- Then, untill the apex, your fronties will progressively increase the angle : this will make you get a constant angle for your tires and for your car untill the apex.
- Right after the apex, your fronties will still be in the Slip Zone, while your rearies will rapidly but progressively regain grip : you'll start to understeer.
- Just before the exit point (when you should touch the outside rumble pad), all of your tires will have grip again.

This is the only way when a "slide" (not a "drift") can acheive speeds that are "slightly" faster than just gripping your car.

Of course, once again, you don't see that move in official races because :
- they have slick tires with a very slip zone
- since it uses more of your tires, it creates more heat, which means to change tires more often.

However, in rallyes, slalom or uphill races with cars having other tires than slicks, this is quite common. Just take the example of Jean Ragnotti (a Renault rallye driver back in the 80's), who was sliding a lot of asphalt corners in a FWD car because back in that days, the tires did not have really impressive specs.

However, D1GP style will always be slower than grip, no matter what. However, you don't really see the cars sliding in most of the case, because having a 0°-3° slide isn't noticeable when you spectate (while it is when you drive). And those 3° can make the difference, while 53°, if they are pleasant to see, do not get the car far

Quote from ColeusRattus :

Quite interesting point, but I beg to differ. What's the difference between you and people demanding more "drift features" or "tunable cars"? Grammar, and you're a tad less annoying. That's it. Both groups want something that, when regarding the history of how Scawen handles things, are not going to happen.
Well, there is another difference: I wouldn't mind more info, while I'd propably stop playing lFs if "tuning" would be in ^^. Thing is though, while wouldn't mind more info, I too don't mind if the communications concept of LfS stays the way it is.

But then, trying to convince you of this point is much like asking for more info: a fight against windmills. Come on, Rosinante, there's a lot of work to do

Thank you with the comparison with Don Quijote, you got a good point here ! I usually like to destroy windmills, since pissing the crap out of the country men is funny. However, my proud stallion is called "Hey you" (easier to say...).

You obviously did not understand what I say, because I, obviously as well, wasn't clear in my description of "people who bitch about anything". In that expression I referred to people stating that LFS is already dead, or people who, in the Scirocco thread that has been locked, were criticizing its implementation.

I am sorry if my "tuning" suggestion has upset you, as it wasn't its goal. I made a long post suggesting what I think would be nice to see in Live For Speed and describing it to the maximum I could, people did not like it, end of the story, I am not chasing ghosts

There is a difference in my thread and the usual "SpOiLeRz AnD BoDyKiDz PLZZZZ 111!" requests, and this difference is even more noticeable in the thread we are currently discussing in. I told that main difference in my post, the one you were too lazy enough to quote in its integrity (which means that either you only listen to what you want to, either you try to reduce my argument to a single sentence, which is a rhetorical techniques that is too simple to work here).

Quote from Zen321 :

...you stand up to point out some things that could be done differently/better, as long as you stay within the borders of reason and usefulness for Live For Speed.

The difference is that people who ask for 20' rims or spoilers ask something that could be harmful to the game. Does telling more information about what is under development now is harmful? I don't think so, and since you seem to be a senseful person, you won't think so as well.

You might be scared of having people complaining all the time. Of course, the whiners. But, seriously, why should you care? And if you do care, just look at some posts here of people being whining LFS is dead. If you do care, you are obliged to think that seeing those kind of comments are more annoying that "good improvement, but we still don't have scratches on the rims". If you do care, then you'll agree with me about the fact that having more information is better than not having any.

Oh, I'm extremely stupid since you told me that you would not mind extra information?
Then, maybe you just wanted to be aggressive toward me and other people ? Because in your post, except in the sentence in which you agree with what I said : "More information would be good", you resume my post either as a crusade to get more information or an advertisement to motivate people to join that crusade.
In my previous posts in that thread, I was just stating some facts and defending them among other players, nothing like copypasting this in a mini-essay I would send to Scavier.

So, as an advice, please keep your aggro out of the forums. If you wife annoys you, beat her, or simply go play LFS at the bangers section, but stop doing freely comparing people to thing they are not if you agree with them I don't care about your critics toward me, but some people might not be able to make the difference between a (poor, by the way,) sarcasm and a real opinion, which will lead to more aggro. As I said in my previous post that you did not read till the end : haters, please pass, as this is a debate between serious people concerned about LFS and that don't need some (childish) ad hominem attack to express their points

Thanks

Quote from KOB_CHEESE :

Handbrake on my Mazda Bongo uses a drum on each rear wheel, wheras the 'proper' rear braking is done via discs.. so I guess there must be other vehicles about with this setup

Yeah that is what I heard. Maybe for rear-drum-braked car, it uses the same value, however in LFS all of, or at least most of, the cars use rear disk brakes, and I am not sure that a car uses the rear disk brakes as the park brake. (again, please correct me if I'm wrong).

Quote from 1303s_vortech :

If my memory's right it was removed because it ends as an exploit...
Using a negative e-brake value gave you some kind of "nawz"....
:chairs:

How was it possible to set negative values to LFS ?? Is that the Speed Hack ? (when you have the e-brake on it accelerates even more).

Quote from J@tko :

You're meant to spend more time on the picture than the post. It's not an english competition

Beleive it or not, I spent more time on photoshop than on the lfs forum