The raw input seems very noisy compared to aquiring tyre forces, I don't see why it should spike like it does.

As for the discrepencies, I'm looking at BF1 and it's only out by 1Nm, which doesn't seem significant given that some smoothing is applied), and the LX6 is spot on.

RAC peaks at 339 in the charts but shows as 360 Nm ingame.
FXO 298 vs 305.
XRT 339 vs 345.
RB4 333 vs 340.
XRR 615 vs 627.
FXR 613 vs 627.

Though now that I look at it, it probably has something to do with the turbo.

Yes it's probable, even if I measured the torque with full throttle and full boost pressure from red line to low revs.

Quote from Bob Smith :

The raw input seems very noisy compared to aquiring tyre forces, I don't see why it should spike like it does.

Because of the moment of inertia of all rotating parts of the car, the torque value I was reading was very sensitive to longitudinal acceleration (illustration here). So I written an acceleration script that could maintain car deceleration to -0.01G and gathered data when the instant acceleration was between -0.01 and 0G. The regulator was not perfect, so was the raw data.

So, anybody got the best gear ratio's off it yet?

nice one, thanks

Added power curves, see the first post.

Why don't the devs publish these info ?

Quote from Keling :

Why don't the devs publish these info ?

Nobody asked

Quote from Riel :

So, anybody got the best gear ratio's off it yet?

There is no such thing.

Quote from Bogey Jammer :

so I'm making programs to build automatically my setups as quickly as possible, relying most on theory with the help of very few but accurate enough driving feels, instead of full feeling corrected setups like most of people do.

Are you planning to release those sooner or later?

Not sooner nor later but never.
The program is made with my observations, experience and point of view. It 100% fits my needs, so it 10% fits others. Sorry but you can think it is like a personal tooth brush, or a secret weapon.
I've already spent many hours on it, and it evolutes very often, because sometimes I notice some physics interpretation mistakes or get some new needs, not good in these conditions to maintain it public anyway. Moreover I fear negative reception.
So the better I can do is to suggest to start with the excellent Bob Smith's VHPA as a base, and write something yourself fitting yourself if you really want it, but I can't help it.

Quote from Bogey Jammer :

Moreover I fear negative reception.

I don't think you should be as long as you make clear all the caveats. I think it would be great 'food for thought' (just like VHPA is) regardless of its true usefulness to the average Joe Racer.

Of course if you don't want to share it I respect your decision, but hope you change your mind anyway

Yes, possibly, but the main caveat is that I don't really know the caveats. While VHPA was designed mainly for education and is "enter the car settings, I show up the results", mine is same plus "enter what you want, I create the setting" which can be source of problems. I might be satisfied by the possible mistakes, so I don't want to be viewed as a charlatan, even if it already produced effective results for me. But car setups are said to be shaped to the driver, that can explain this.
However, when the program will be mature enough, I'll enjoy to introduce it, and wait for reactions.

If I may say something: Maybe the chart could be posted with revs per minute. I guess that would be a lot more useful for most people. I have never before heard of rad/s. Is that a rather common unit in some countries?

rad/s is the S.I unit for rotational velocity, and the output unit used by LFS for physics calculation. Moreover you can calculate engine power output directly by multiplying engine velocity in rad/s by torque in N.m., and gives kilowatts, another universal unit that I personally prefer over the commercial hp.
Anyway, I published the data in xls file format, it would be easy to change the formulas as you wish.

Quote from Bogey Jammer :

rad/s is the S.I unit for rotational velocity, and the output unit used by LFS for physics calculation. Moreover you can calculate engine power output directly by multiplying engine velocity in rad/s by torque in N.m., and gives kilowatts, another universal unit that I personally prefer over the commercial hp.
Anyway, I published the data in xls file format, it would be easy to change the formulas as you wish.

I did not ever use MS Excel, didn't even know that it already exists on my system...
However I guess I have to multiply the x-values by 9.something but please could you guide me to whereabout I could do that in Excel?

:doh: I think you are not familiar with computers, you can start to press F1 and read documentation on the net about this one of the most ever documented software...

Quote from Bogey Jammer :

:doh: I think you are not familiar with computers, you can start to press F1 and read documentation on the net about this one of the most ever documented software...

Well I did not ask you how I could make such charts myself I just asked for help in visualisation of the information it provides but thanks anyway.

Quote from 5tag :

I just asked for help in visualisation of the information it provides

That is exactly I tried to explain, but this would be more adequate for you in my opinion. Your request deals with excel basics, and should not be discussed here sorry

Is it just me or are those curves way too smooth to be realistic?

No critisism of the work done, more a comment on a potential "unrealism" of LFS. With the exception of the BF1, I would be amazed if any of the "real" cars that the respective LFS models are based on have anywhere near as smooth power/torque curves. Especially, given that they are meant to be tuned versions.

Where are the flatspots, or step changes in gradient that would almost certainly exist in real life?

Quote from Bogey Jammer :

That is exactly I tried to explain, but this would be more adequate for you in my opinion. Your request deals with excel basics, and should not be discussed here sorry

You know what screw it I'll just imagine it because 1 rad/s is almost 10 rpm anyway.^^

I tried and searched for half an hour and did not find anything. I just hated programing and chart calculations in school then.

Quote from gezmoor :

Where are the flatspots, or step changes in gradient that would almost certainly exist in real life?

Scawen has stated that engine modelling in LFS is very simplistic, and that he would like to improve the engine simulation in the future. Maybe we'll get lumpy curves then, I get the impression they are mostly polynomials and such atm.

360 º is 2* π rad

Quote from gezmoor :

Is it just me or are those curves way too smooth to be realistic?

well, as I reckon devs (Scawen mostly) wouldnt bother providing realistic engine torque curves until whole drivetrain would be properly simulated, and we have issues with the critical part - the tires (as the simulation developes in LFS gradually from contact patch thru tires, suspension and so on to the engine). Thats why torque curves are so simplistic - frankly speaking I dont know why not applying real data from several types of engines tests.

Quote from gezmoor :

Where are the flatspots, or step changes in gradient that would almost certainly exist in real life?

Many things have to be modeled in engine physics to get less smooth curves (thermodynamics, fluid mechanics, pure mechanic, variable admission systems, ignition timing, cam profile and many other parameters). Anyway the common curves published in some general cars documentation are quite simplistic too. And the curves measured by dynometers are highly disputable (based on my observations )

But I admit such engine modeling would be exciting and would introduce us to engine setup !

This isn't going to happen in any sim anytime soon... such a physics model, specialized only for the engine is extremely complicated.
"Drown by hand" power cuerves, imitating or copying similar power curves from similar real engines, would be enough for any sim released in the following decade.
One of the difficulties, would be part throttle power oughtput. But anyway any model based on data gathered from real dynos would be much easier to implement.