I do know some racing buddies who are real sucker at remembering tracks, they could do a race, have at least 30 laps on them and a week later they don't remember a thing

Fail is what i reckon.

Ive driven a few RL tracks in games have never visted them myself but there always a huge diffrence car corners whether ect.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Put the roof down and you have 63,000,000 miles of headroom (assuming no passing moons, satellites or birds. Or pylons).

But yeah, those long of leg might need to get an S2000, which is similar (but a bit less fun, and not quite as good at handling) but a big bigger. And I think Mk3 MX-5s suit a longer person.

Indeed, I can fit into a current MX-5 without problem, but the wheel is in the way of my knees on the older ones.

they use rFactor too...

Quote from Vain :

....the imaginary.... (sorry, wasn't interested in the rest of the quote)

Visualisation is a technique taught by sports psychologists to athletes of all types; its basically about rehearsing a positive outcome for an event in as detailed and vivid way as you're capable (might be a useful technique for LFSers)

As well as getting a feel for the rhythm of a track, I'd guess that many racers are using remembered images from the PS2/3 as a visualisation tool. To that extent, the physics of the game are irrelevant.

(There's a lot of anecdotal reference to a study made on basketball players showing only a 1% difference in the success rates of two groups: one which practiced free throws in their heads, and one which physically practiced. I think it might be one of those myths perpetuated by some would-be sports guru, but if anyone knows any better I'd be interested to know more.)

Quote from tristancliffe :

It handles like an XRG basically. Predicable, controllable, and remarkable safe over the limit. It will NEVER catch you out, it ALWAYS tells you what it's going to do next, and it'll hang on far more than a small car should.

I've tried setting up an XRG with real life MX5 suspension settings (the weight, distribution, and power are already identical), but still found it very difficult to pinpoint where and how (...if?) LFS accurately or inaccurately simulates the real thing.

"Predictable, controllable" are pretty general descriptors. Something a fortune teller might say.

It has to be vague, because everyone's exact idea of what a car should do to his/her inputs varies quite considerably. However, the MX-5 is predictable, in so much that any driver of any competence will know beforehand what the car will do to given inputs. Controllable is it's response to inputs after the event you predicted would happen above, did.

The XRG isn't an MX-5, so MX-5 settings on it won't produce the same end result. If I put Lotus Esprit settings in the FZ5 I would expect it to handle (or not, depending on your perception of Lotus) like an Esprit.

tristan, please compile a setup of your nearest mx-5 "feeling" and post it here, since you have the background in real-life motor sports and a mx-5 handy...
thx

Cor blimey... I'm not sure if I'm clever or patient enough to attempt that. Maybe I'll have a go when I have a spare couple of hours... Which isn't often.

Quote from micha1980de :

tristan, please compile a setup of your nearest mx-5 "feeling" and post it here, since you have the background in real-life motor sports and a mx-5 handy...
thx

I imagine the XR is quite a long way from the MX-5 in terms of weight distribution, CoG, various other centers only Bob knows, wheelbase and certainly chassis flex... So that would be destined to fail from the start, no?

And suspension geometry.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Maybe I'll have a go when I have a spare couple of hours... Which isn't often.

..says the man with a near 10,000 post count

gran turismo isnt tooo bad for becoming familiar with the corners. If you've done 800 laps around something like infineon in gran turismo, you will find it easier to learn the track because you will know when a left or right or a double apex is coming up. the braking pts are different among other things because of the subpar physics... but tracks are pretty well made.

irl, you feel alot more, the actual grip level changes in different parts of the track, camber etc are off by small or large margins... but it is better than nothign as long as you arent an idiot and try and brake and corner at the same speeds.

Quote from Yaamboo :

The new track is in the game. I guess the plans were ready at that point already.

Are you sure? How could that be possible? I mean the game is developed in 2004, tracks might be made even earlier. (GT4 was released 2005 in Europe, 2004 in Japan)

Quote from nihil :

Visualisation is a technique taught by sports psychologists to athletes of all types; its basically about rehearsing a positive outcome for an event in as detailed and vivid way as you're capable (might be a useful technique for LFSers)

As well as getting a feel for the rhythm of a track, I'd guess that many racers are using remembered images from the PS2/3 as a visualisation tool. To that extent, the physics of the game are irrelevant.

(There's a lot of anecdotal reference to a study made on basketball players showing only a 1% difference in the success rates of two groups: one which practiced free throws in their heads, and one which physically practiced. I think it might be one of those myths perpetuated by some would-be sports guru, but if anyone knows any better I'd be interested to know more.)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ALkx9nwGIlU

Something like that?