Quote from Krammeh :

use the other wrist!

Must give it a try! But no-hands shifting will be interesting ...

Take care,
PK

Quote from AndroidXP :

It's not about how easy it is to change the car's behaviour, though - it's about how fine adjustments you can make to the components. This doesn't only affect gearing, it affects nearly every setting currently available. For most of LFS' road cars and the state of tuning they represent you'd have at best a few settings to choose from.

Example current vs. how it should be:
- brake strength adjustable to 1 Nm vs. not adjustable at all
- spring stiffness adjustable to 0.1 N/mm vs. maybe having 5 choices from soft to hard (?)
- damping adjustable to 0.1 Ns/mm vs. maybe having 8 clicks available or less
- anti-roll adjustable to 0.1 N/mm vs. maybe having 6 ARB strengths to choose from or less
- maximum lock, parallel steer, gearing... you get the idea

+1, implement please!

is it me?
i downloaded the cmx viewer, but the VWS_default is very bright..
is hard to make a skin like this..
i downloaded the viewer twice and its the same...
don't know if its mentioned before, but its alot of pages to view

What do you mean bright?

Maybe you have a custom reflection map?
I have also but seems fine here:

Quote from kiss me :

is it me?
i downloaded the cmx viewer, but the VWS_default is very bright..
is hard to make a skin like this..
i downloaded the viewer twice and its the same...
don't know if its mentioned before, but its alot of pages to view

Have you heard of the search feature?

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1003510#post1003510

Too many people are too lazy to search. You know you can actually get your answer sooner if you first search before asking it? Sorry to be telling you - there are many more who should be told, especially in the test patch threads. It's saddening how lazy so many are while they expect Scawen to fix everything in a whimp.

-Disregard-

Contrarily to what I expected, there were some interesting arguments about the restrictions on the car

I especially liked AndroidXP's efforts to offer a tangible suggestion of how it should be
On the road cars, setup adjustment should be limited up to a certain point, assuming that if we are racing the XRG we bought it on ebaymotors and upgraded it to the serie's specs. WE obviously don't have the financial of the material power to build custom springs that manage to work with a frequency 0.01Hz away from what the engineers calculated.
Concerning the dampers, the adjustments seem to be fine the way they are now. For a lot of dampers, you juste have to turn a sprocket in a certain way to make it stiffer (like the Konis, so like LFS). For others, you have certain positions which provide different damping ratios.
For the ARB, you should not have a choice of 6 ratios, but a choice of six different values at the front and at the rear which makes 36 different choices, and which is pretty close to the choice between different IRL front and rear ARB for a car.

The wheel adjustment seems perfectly fine, since the tools used to adjust each wheels are really, really precise.

@gezmoor (Thanks for the magnesium wheels links The RS Watanabe are the same design as the superlite, but idk whether they are made of magnesium, so I'll take a look )
Concerning the "cheap" suspension that would be "mainly unadjustable", I think this is a wrong assumption. Cheap doesn't always mean of a bad quality and, especially with the big companies, the price of the suspensions is directly linked to the price of the brand.
Let's look at the jeans' market for example. A Lot of really expensive jeans are not that durable (Diesel), while the average priced jean (Lewis) can last for around 3 years.
Concerning the suspension, it is similar. Some brands like Koni or Bilstein make you pay a lot for a product which, honestly, can be compared in quality and performance output to a one costing 50 to 75% of the price. The only thing is that it is cooler to tell you have Bilstein suspension than a Tokico one This explains the difference of prices for a similar quality setting.

As I told, I am exploring all of the options to modify a car for asphalt rallyes/slalom and uphill/downhill races events. After looking at a lot of different paths to follow, to enjoy more the ride and yet be competitive, I concluded that modifying as much as I can (aka spending time & money as much as I can afford) is definitely the best way to acheive a good output. I think this should be the way you think about it in LFS.
I spent so many hours of thinking, calculating and test driving setups for my cars in LFS that I find they are pretty damn optimized. And I usually don't screw around wiht 1 click of spring stiffness

vicc he right though the skin is unusually bright for whatever reason

Quote from Zen321 :

Contrarily to what I expected, there were some interesting arguments about the restrictions on the car

I especially liked AndroidXP's efforts to offer a tangible suggestion of how it should be
On the road cars, setup adjustment should be limited up to a certain point, assuming that if we are racing the XRG we bought it on ebaymotors and upgraded it to the serie's specs........

Then they should be fitted with roll cages, as is a compulsory requirement in all organised racing. This of course all means they're not road cars.

It's the identity crisis. I'm quite happy for there to be no "road cars" at all in LFS, but they shouldn't pretend that they are. It's a bit silly if they look and sound like standard road cars, whilst at the same time being, for all intents and purposes, mechanically, race cars - of whatever level.

We could all make up some abitrary adjustment values, 4 clicks here, 6 clicks there, but wouldn't it be better to just base it on something real? Why not (for instance) look at similar Caterham 7 series' cars and see what sort of adjustments can be made to those cars, then make those adjustments available on the LX4 and LX6. If those cars have no lights, remove the lights, if they have full race-cages then add full cages to LX4 and LX6. Repeat for other cars, if desired add proper "Base road cars" to LFS with realistically minimal adjustment levels, lights etc etc. Done.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Wow, could you release that skin please?/post link to where you got it?

like Victor said use the search function

just go to skin section in VWS thread

finally bought a license because of this!

i'd be in heaven if LFS had a MKiv Jetta 1.8t (or a VR6), Carbonio intake and a Remus exhaust!

Quote from erfrag :

finally bought a license because of this!

i'd be in heaven if LFS had a MKiv Jetta 1.8t (or a VR6), Carbonio intake and a Remus exhaust!

Despite that wish. Welcome to S2!

Quote from G!NhO :

like Victor said use the search function

just go to skin section in VWS thread

Ok NVM - Wasn't being eagle eyed. :hide:

good news... just a question though , what engine versoin is it ? the 2.0tsi or the 1.4 ?

Quote from silent_wind :

good news... just a question though , what engine versoin is it ? the 2.0tsi or the 1.4 ?

The one with the 200bhp.

Quote from silent_wind :

good news... just a question though , what engine versoin is it ? the 2.0tsi or the 1.4 ?

It's the 2.0tsi

@Sinbad : Trackday cars usually are not required to have roll bars. So you can fit suspension and differential upgrades to your road-legal car (making it less road legal though) and go at your local track for some pick up racing. I feel it's like this in Live For Speed for the road legal cars. For the race-cars there is no arguing.

It just shows your conception of what LFS should be, while my ideas show mine. Do you want to have "extremely road legal cars ?" (Fixed suspension settings, Open diff for the lowered powered cars, no RB, "safety camber and toe"). Or do you want to have "trackday prepared cars" ? You said in your earlier post that the first conception wasn't good, so we agree on the second point

TBH, I don't see the link between the rollcages and the matter of the discussion, as they are essentially for the look in LFS (no chassis flex and stiffness yet ) so there is no point of including them .
The beauty of LFS is that there is a lot of adjustement possible. Having less variety would be a great idea, however, having to restrict them to a very few choices would make it very very bad. As I said, there are some values that need to be diminished (transmission, spring stiffness, ARB ratio to quite a bit, different brake strength) while some others should stay the way they are (all wheel and tires settings, direction, differential, damping settings, ride height, brake bias), because they are "easily" modable IRL.

A counter-argument to "in the series, every car needs to be to the same specs". It's true, all the time you usually only have a choice between some of mandatory parts. However, the same car can be eligible for different series, and then, the rules are different, with different boundaries of adjustement. This is why having LFS have the largest realistic adjustment boundaries is better, since, if some InSim programs is out, you can always downgrade the cars (not only restriction speaking).

Quote from kaynd :

Who is going to play that role in LFS?
Having enough experience in lfs setups and seeing how hard track and race-S setup are made, (almost random spring frequencies regardless the damping, plenty of rebound overdamping, not enough suspension travel, random anti roll bars, plenty of bottoming out and poor drivability in general.)
I really hope that Scawen will not decide to play that role… unless he has time… and I mean a really long period of time to find the appropriate settings for the suspension presellected options. And this isn’t going to happen anytime soon because he has got to do many more important things for the development of the sim.

Aren't the race_s setups already done by someone else than a dev? Someone from beta test team. I think this was brought up when the race_s setups were introduced in '06 April patch iirc.

i can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't wait

Hmmm I'll i need a week work vacation on this and play the day a week, cant wait for this

Quote from deggis :

Aren't the race_s setups already done by someone else than a dev? Someone from beta test team. I think this was brought up when the race_s setups were introduced in '06 April patch iirc.

I don't really know/remember, but anyway they are obsolete now due to physics changes.
and I have to say that as I see it, there is not much effort put into them (setups).

yay =) i knew there had to be a LFS christmas present

Quote from pinoykid13 :

i can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't waiti can't wait

you forgot i can't wait.

Awesome !!!! thx Scavier !! you all made my month =D

Quote from deggis :

Aren't the race_s setups already done by someone else than a dev? Someone from beta test team. I think this was brought up when the race_s setups were introduced in '06 April patch iirc.

VW test drivers ? well... for the Scirocco at least....

Quote from kaynd :

I don't really know/remember, but anyway they are obsolete now due to physics changes.
and I have to say that as I see it, there is not much effort put into them (setups).

You're correct... race_s setup files are dated April 2006, so they have not changed since.

But what I meant was there are likely plenty of people in the LFS test team willing to do that.

Quote from el pibe :

VW test drivers ? well... for the Scirocco at least....

Eh, no.