That's not much for a I-4 600 cc FSAE car. What engine was your team using?

Mattgignac, can you confirm that the 64 hp (or is it 68?) was measured at the rear wheels? I wonder if the developers would fix the MRT5 after all this time.

Last edited by Cappy333, Sun 2 Mar 2008, 05:53.

MRT5 was a while ago but these days FSAE teams using larger engines (restricted 600cc 4cylinders, etc.) are making as much as 80-100 hp at the wheels. The MRT5's 68 hp figure was most likely also measured at the wheels (chassis dyno).

I always assumed that power for LFS cars was advertised at the crankshaft/flywheel (engine brake dyno). If this is true, then the LFS MRT5 has less power than the real MRT5. Can anyone confirm this error?

Why do you say concrete is more slippery than asphalt? This site shows concrete is more grippy even when wet. http://www.school-for-champion ... science/frictioncoeff.htm

Since concrete has lower surface roughness than asphalt, concrete probably is less grippy and has a higher propensity to cause hydroplaning in heavy rain.

About rubber on the racing line, I was assuming it would be reset after every race. This way everyone knows what to expect from the track without having to do warm up laps.

I had originally signed up for the test race before noticing the time of the race. Would it be possible to race later than 18 GMT? Those of us in the Americas will still be at work or school. If the races cannot be later, could it be on Saturdays or Sundays instead of on Thursdays?

I agree with this, as long as the difference in grip is not unrealistically large.

Do you guys think marbles (little chunks of rubber found off racing line that act like ball bearings) should also be included? I think marbles would be difficult to model and computationally expensive if they are done as individual particles.

What's the scoop?

I don't feel very strongly either way about wind, as long as the the windspeed is low.

As far as instant pitting, I think it should probably be allowed during qualifying, but definately not during races.

The reason I say "all but one" (instead of "all") is because it is likely that one person may be AFK, or someone might be a trouble maker.

I would not have a problem if races in progress were never able to be restarted, but I think that many people would a problem with that.

People get frustrated when they're leading a race, and then it restarts simply because their opponents don't like the situation. I think the following procedure should be implemented for online pickup games.

Races in progress will restart if:
1) At least half of racers vote to restart INCLUDING the current race leader.
OR
2) Every racer except the current race leader votes to restart.

When a race in progress is restarted, starting positions will be determined by ranking immediately before restart (not from previous qualifying or race rankings). This will discourage aggresive starts, by punishing players who crash during starts with poor restart placement. Since restarts will be rare, a last place qualifier has little chance of gain by starting aggresively.

Finished races will restart if:
1) At least half of racers vote to restart.

Let me know what you think.

Not a fan of the music, but the video rocks.

I am able to unlock versions V and X. I copied the version V misc folder and pasted it in version Q. Version Q was still unlocked. I also tried pasting version X misc folder to version Q. Still no success.

You're right. It was Q that I tried, not P. I would like to have a working version Q and/or P and I think there are others.

Zach,

I was using the patched 0.5P exectuable.

Thanks for doing the dirty work for us. However, I have the same problem Shaun463 and GrandlHuber had. I get the following message when attempting to unlock 0.5P S2 license:

"Unknown command"

The error box is displayed in by the LFS program, not by Windows.

This is a pretty good start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_racing_simulators

I don't know much about programming. I downloaded a hex editor and searched the executable file (with the LFS icon) for "master", "server", "IP", and "unlock" and I couldn't find an address. It seems like the ASCII text mostly includes all the different potential error messages.

Thanks, that makes sense. I must be an blind because I can't find the master server's new address or where I can change the address in the program. Is this possible?

Although I have one available unlock, I can't unlock S2 versions 0.5P or 0.5Q. The reason I am trying to unlock these versions is for use with Mecanik and LFSTweak (older version). The newest version of LFSTweak is not sufficient because it only modifies demo cars, and does not modify vehicle weight.

When I try to unlock I get the following message even when my firewall is disabled:

"The program was unable to connect to the master server. This could be for various reasons:
1) If you are protected by a firewall it may have blocked the connection. 2) It may temporarily impossible to connect to the master from your ISP.
3) The master server may not be running due to a technical problem."

Thanks for any assistance.

It is true that stiff front ARB will tend to make a car understeer during steady-state cornering. The high weight transfer at the front (instead of the rear) causes less front grip.

However, under power the high front weight transfer combined with locked differential mean that higher torque (and foward thrust) are being applied at the outside wheel than the inside wheel. The foward thrust on the outside wheel causes a yaw moment that rotates the car into the turn. Therefore, what you have observed in the game is consistent with real world physics.

Note that if the differential was open, the outside wheel thrust would be no greater than the inside wheel thrust, so there would be zero yaw moment due to thrust (assuming small steer angles).

A-mods have smaller dimensions, engines, and the design is more competitive with no minimum weight requirement if I recall.

There are Formula SAE cars with suspensions and 600cc engines that weigh less than 400 lbs. These cars are almost as big as A-mods. I don't include driver weight.

I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying in real life you could strip down an F1 car to make it an A-mod. I'm saying in the game you can modify one car's parameters to get a good approximation of another's performance. So the F1 car with much less weight, and much less power would approximate an A-mod. The biggest difference would be the wheelbase and track dimensions of the F1 car are way too big, but these affect acceleration, top speed, and lateral acceleration to a smaller degree than power, aerodynamics, and weight.

I think improvements should be given this order of priority:

1) Improve physics. (already quite good)

2) Add real tracks. (The fantasy tracks are well done and they offer a new experience for people who've raced other sims. However, many people desire to learn real tracks so they can relate to televised races or practice for track days. I would wait patiently and pay $10 for Nurburgring.)

3) Add real cars. (The current cars are either real or inspired by real cars which is good. I think there are still some car classes that don't have representation e.g. shifter kart, production supercar, Le Mans Prototype, Rally racecar, and perhaps NASCAR. Also the MRT should be updated to a lighter, more powerful FSAE car. Sorry McGill.)

Let's say you wanted to make an SCCA A-modified car:
Take BF1, use max downforce, restrict power, reduce weight (could be less than 600 lbs)

But you're right, most cars don't require that level of weight reduction.

I would find it very useful if mass could be removed from a car in single player. Together with the options of engine restriction and positive ballast, this allows approximation of performance of many real world cars. The weight removal does not need to allow weight distribution changes, but if this is easy enough to program, then why not. Personally, I'd like to see enough adjustability so that you could cut the weight of the car in half.

This would be a SINGLE PLAYER ONLY feature, so enforcement of required weight would not be an issue for fair online play.