I think we'd all agree that they need balancing, but I think slowing down the FXO is the way to do it. More weight and less tyre will get us close to the desired effect. GTT is about right, and RB4 isn't too far off it (in the right hands), maybe a "tad" less weight. Really hard to be specific without trying things and seeing if they work.
Remember, Jamexing, that in the sprint style races which are very popular online with the TBO class RB4 and GTT will always have a significant advantage off the start line, over the FXO. With laptimes for each of these cars being as they are, the start advantage is still a small reason to choose the "slower" cars (reasons beside them being way more fun I mean). Make FXO the slower car, and there's no reason to pick it at all. No offense here, but your online experience with these cars is limited, I'm surprised you're so worked up about this subject.

3 seconds is closer than they could be. One class is in the M3 league, the other around S2000-fast, or slower; which on a short track like TopGear's, that doesn't emphasize power as much as agility, should set the two around 6 seconds apart.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_gear#Power_Laps

The more power the TBOs get, the less than RB4 will suffer since it's extra traction will become more advantageous. The FXR does not get this benefit either since all three GTRs have massive slick tyres + loadsa downforce to glue them to the track. Unless traction is an issue AWD isn't a huge benefit.

Hehe

Being AWD, I think the RB4 could benefit from a curve like this, which is not uncommon for a modern engine. (Indeed this is a real curve) And it shows just how silly the current turbocharger modelling in LFS is.

Check it out James

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

Hehe

Being AWD, I think the RB4 could benefit from a curve like this, which is not uncommon for a modern engine. (Indeed this is a real curve) And it shows just how silly the current turbocharger modelling in LFS is.

Check it out James

You really really like SRT-4s dont you Jeff

BL is no comparison to Top Gear's test track. It actually has some very fast sections, so power still counts A LOT. Most of the advantages for the FZ25 are doen to extra power anyway. 200+ kays at the end of the main straight... that's gotta count.

Yes, I do race online, though I don't see too many good races floating around. And FXO doesn't launch too bad at all for FWD. 3 short laps on BL? Wow, that's short.

By the way, nice torque curve BBT! Now that's what RB4 and XR GTT should be. Just that they happen to 2.0L turbos makes the 4G63 with 250hp tune a better candidate if we are to preserve our current engine capacity. For those who absolutely insist on maintaining the current ultra narrow torque bands, please try to drive a Corrolla Sportivo and feel the pain of an unusable powerband (max torque at 6800 and max power at 7800! Exhibits on-off switch behaviour at the 6000rpm VVTLi shift point).

:hide:

You could try out your ideas using LFSTweak, although it only works on the previous physics..
If you were able to get yourself a similar editing tool compatible with the current physics, and posted results openly, enough people could get interested to debug and refine your improvements till the three cars were on par, and make a sufficiently large population sample for Scavier to recognize.

Then again, the class balancing is a pretty crucial element to online racing, which is what LFS is about, so there's probably a good reason why it isn't done yet.
Either it's coming in the next revision, or there's something else prerequisite to it, like a better boost model, that'd void any work and time spent balancing beforehand.

Quote from 96 GTS :

You really really like SRT-4s dont you Jeff

Yes he does It's has an awesome engine, car balance is off a bit, but it still handles well.

Quote from Jamexing :

By the way, nice torque curve BBT! Now that's what RB4 and XR GTT should be. Just that they happen to 2.0L turbos makes the 4G63 with 250hp tune a better candidate if we are to preserve our current engine capacity.

It's a VERY nice torque curve =) runs full boost(14 pounds) from 2200-2300 and holds it there until redline at 6250 =) I would love to see these specs in the RB4 and the XRT, it would make both much more drivable.

Yes I love that engine. It happens to be partially designed by Hyundai as well!!! (Bet you weren't aware of that Chris!)

(Mercedes / Chrysler / Hyundai joint venture)

why are you still comparing lfs cars to real cars and there motors to real motors? (4g) if the devs designed them to be how they are im sure they had good reason. i agree the rb4 and xrt are hanicapped by there powerpands but please dont campare them to real cars just because of how they look.

In principle I agree... but the question remains: why not?

People can compare whatever they want, it's no big deal.

Wish someone comes up with LFSTweak that works for the current LFS, so I could at least do a few tests on different power bands.

Not going to happen from my understanding. Fonnybone makes it, but wishing isn't going to make him have the time or inclination to do it. This thread is dragging on with too much repitition. There are no more good suggestions friend, better powerbands and / or tires where applicable. I know what you mean, and I agree. But there isn't much more to say I'm afraid

We all know the devs aren't going to great lengths to keep classes even (although small changes have been made) since all laptimes change with every physics update. We know there are more physics updates on the horizon so we'll just wait and see what Scawen plays with.

the domination of the fxo never changed and i cannot understand the harm if they at least TRY to balance the tbo class.

or, just as i proposed in another thread: implement server controlled penalty weights for the classes. the community will manage the balancing in no time.

Solution, just give the RB4 NOS... :P

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Solution, just give the RB4 NOS... :P

Will some moderator please lock this thread now that three letter word has been uttered Arrrrgh!

Guys, no offense but please, this is LFS, not NFS:U, so PLEASE no absurd suggestions such as NOS. I completely understand your sentiment, Shannon, though your reaction was a bit extreme to say the least. BUT you do make a great point about this current ricer NOS madness.

I'm glad to see that at least someone in this thread has noticed the fact that all classes are currently too imbalanced for genuinely fun racing amongst different cars of each class. For a refresher, please refer back to p3 #90. As one would notice, I make sensible suggestions only.

Sorry BBT, I know it's getting a bit repetitive, but if you have time could you post a few more turbo engine powerbands? Preferably(not compulsory) 2.0L turboes, just to show what real turbo engine powercurves actually look like. Thanks a lot for your contributions, Ball Bearing Turbo!

Posting the torque curve isn't really all that helpful for an LFS discussion (if you just want torque curves for personal use then do it via PM), what's more important is turbo behaviour. Is it possible to extract any data from LFS about the turbo that can be compared to real life data?

At the moment it might be that we have a perfect power curve (I know we don't, but bear with me) but the boost modelling is so far off that we rarely get to see that perfect curve (i.e. we're rarely running at full boost, which is where a torque curve print out ould ususally be carried out (as rolling roads rarely know what they're doing))

Quote from Jamexing :

could you post a few more turbo engine powerbands? Preferably(not compulsory) 2.0L turboes, just to show what real turbo engine powercurves actually look like.

Here's one from a stock and tuned 2.0T from the new Golf GTI:
http://www.bsrab.se/bilder/_/ev_862_1_l.png/

Here's one for my car (1.8T):
http://www.bsrab.se/bilder/_/ev_616_1%2B_l.png/

Volvo 2.0T:
http://www.bsrab.se/bilder/_/ev_808_1_l.png/

The torque curves are just for the entertainment AND education. It's just for inspiration of how things should be. The turbo modelling problem is definitely serious. So far, the best engine in LFS is the FZ GTR unit. Absoulutely beautiful midrange and high end performance. It's NA.

Let's hope turbo modelling improves on the next patch.

Thanks for the 3 torque curves, atledreier! Goes a long way to show that modern turbo engines are nothing like their ultra-narrow powerband LFS counterparts. The current RB4 powerband is very much like those of very early turbo engines (70's).

Note these were just performance tuned sreet car engines, explaining their relatively low 6000-6500rpm redlines. The volvo powercurves were particularly good, typical of the ultra smooth powerbands of modern European engines. If the RB4's powercurve was anything close to such a shape, imagine how much fun it would be! It only needs better top end punch and a higher redline for RB4 style use.

RB4 with 4G63 equals rally heaven! Love to try such a car on AndroidXP's tracks.

Actually I enjoy the narrow powerband in the XRT. You go full throttle out of a corner and think that the car won't ever move and suddenly it brakes free of all traction and the rear end tries to overtake you. That makes it quite fun to drive - but it doesn't make it a fast car.

Vain

Good luck trying to catch that FXO on a 5 lap or greater race (assuming of course, the FXO driver is highly skilled). I only suggested that its powerband be improved to counter the current FXO madness and to compensate for an improved RB4 (if that happens). If you REALLY love this on-off switch behaviour, do yourself a favour and get yourself a Toyota Corolla Sportivo. 1000rpm(6800rpm-7800rpm) powerband on a 8200rpm redline engine. Bet you'll LOVE that. Gee, where's that corner...

Seriously, why discourage XR GTT usage through a pathetic powerband? Why punish those who love to throttle steer properly? Why turn XR GTT racing into a lottery game? Makes no logical sense at all.

Don't get me wrong, I love to drive RWDs. Well, I learnt to drive real cars in an RWD car! Besides, a well tuned XR GTT shouldn't snap oversteer without warning as you've said, even on full turbo boost. Besides, a good torque band would really reward those who have mastered throttle control. Finessing a well tuned RWD car out of a corner is pure bliss.

For those who think that I'm trying to make TBO class cars too fast, please consider the fact that I've not seriously mentioned any absurd changes (e.g 300hp RB4!). There is no way they can threaten the LX or FZ style cars with anything 260hp or below. Not unless you use slicks, which is a non option as far as I'm concerned.