...on my near ancient system:
Win-7 64bit, AMD PhenomII-955, Radeon HD5777

nearly no reduction in frame rates with mirror-AA on, (I use 4x fs-AA, 4x mirror-AA, 4x-fs-AF, peaks to near-100fps, drops down to ~60fps when inside a big field. (( 1920x1200; everything else on high ))
I do not use "v-sync", by the way.

I had the brief impression of 2..3 sprint-races, yesterday on cargame-S2, so far it did not seem to reduce performance. If anything things might have smoothened a little bit - but that might just be a false impression because of a small grid, late in the evening / night-time.

However: big thumbs-up for keeping us updated on development-progress, again

Last edited by DrBen, Sat, 1 Feb 2014 13:36. Reason : spelling

...however: please take a look at the bright side of things.

Every perceivable incremental step that actually brings us (sim-racers) closer to what we are longing for is a step in the right direction. Evolution instead of revolution. That simple.

Unfortunately this means that Scawen will have to put in even more work if he so choses to steadily continue his search for realism.

Fact is: Computing power is limited. And methematical models that might already work when bench-testing -- thus studying minute detail by essentially "slowing down time" -- cannot always be "dummed down" sufficiently in order to work in real-time on a contemporary PC and still give satisfactory results. Remember racing is about racing other (ordinary) people with limited (or indeed regulated) equipment - on preferably a fair ground.

However: when Scawen sees a way to rejuvenate the physics of LFS that allows to stop the race-winning people to use all the catastrophically unrealistic set-ups as they are now -> we all win. Talking about damage to suspension etc. the amount of diff-lock and so on.
Oh and how about different tyre-compounds and/or wheel-rim sizes, tyre widths to chose from on the same car?

Would be nice to finally get some semi-realistic damage-model where we can actually see bits and pieces flying off the cars in a manner so that we can just about identify what kind of damage our competitors and ourselves suffer and know how that could affect the race that we are in. I'm strictly not talking about "pretty" damage, here! Just stuff that enhances the experience ten-fold!

Then there are brake-temps, engine water- and oil-temps -> even the often belittled rfactor has these things more-or-less. Losing lubrication and receiving catastrophic engine-failure just about three hairpins short of reaching the top of virtual Col de Turini: Been there, it was priceless!

What LFS badly needs right now is some more "broadband"-realism. On top of some changes - or should I rather say: Improvements to the tyre physics. Rain would be much appreciated! Water puddles building up, {english term for aquaplaning, anyone?}; Dirt/junk-buildup on the track as opposed to just on the individual cars' tyres, too (albeit I could wait for the latter stuff a little longer)

Buttom line: Any changes that makes it a good deal harder to win with unrealistic set-ups is a win-win in my book! And the outlook to new (track-) content is of course great, too!
Hopefully a few more narrow and corner-heavy, hilly tracks will be added in that respect as to to make low-downforce touring cars (turbo + LRF) more appealing and enjoyable to compete in!

Quote :

The GTX 660 card he linked has a blower type cooler,

that may just make it work, then. However: it will never be very quiet(to my standards, at least - talking experience).
Given the factory psu a lower-consumption gpu is still the best foundation for whatever type of cooling that may come with.

Simple rule of thumb: a newer chip-design will most-likely yield lower consumption == less problems while achieving about the same performance as an older design with 20~40W more consumption. Rule-of-thumb so to speak.

The whole graphics card - chase is one of the downsides of PC-gaming. You will never, ever stay on-top of it for very long. Gamemakers know how stupid their consumers are and thus release early - generating the need for a hot-running gpu all anew.

...engines are really all of these things:

heavy, complex - mostly turbo-charged beasts.

require ever more filters

have been given an artificial advantage in some markets due to fuel-tax regulations (Germany, to name one where diesel fuel is sold cheaper than gas)

upsides: diesel has higher energy-density. That's why you run for longer on a full tank.

Modern diesels have been direct-injected for about 20(?) years. Taking advantage when cruising at low revs and/or low loads. Petrols are just recently starting to play catch-up on that technical aspect.

Last but not least: Because they are so lazy in producing good torque at low revs. they provide a good alternative for heavier cars and commercial vehicles that would otherwise require massive petrol engines (and their fuel bills) that would then largely remain unused in their higher revs (since what you really want is a good intermittent acceleration like 30mph to ~ 110mph in you large limousine, in a straight line (Autobahn, anyone?) rather than knife-edge, "sports"-handling and instant (=nervous) throttle-reactions that you get with high-displacement N/As.

Downside is: The good torque means the transmission needs at least the same beef as does that big gas-NA engine, thus got to be built bigger and "heavier"-duty in order not to fall apart the instant you get going.

So I say: for endurance prototype racing, sparing big gasoline-NAs against Turbo-Diesels might just make sense (& be fun). Just like the stuff that has benefitted some marques in RL racing.

My 2 cents.

Is it worth 24 pounds? If you don't earn less than that in a month I say it is. Graphics may be dated but are still perfectly adequate (you know the demo) - yet physics are right up there with the best of them. Even ffb "tells" you more than you get out of some other sims. If you really want to race online, without fuss -> lfs is (still) it. If you want to indulge yourself into the feel of real-world car-model copies and all kinds of real-world tracks (but hardly 1:1 reproductions), then try rFactor. HistoriX GT 1.95 is quite a superb mod.
But I have yet to race the damn thing.


If you don't have a steering wheel, yet -> lfs is it - me thinks. AND THEN, get a 900° capable wheel, instantly!

...since I've built my last machine (that which I am typing this on).

However: The power-aspect from the previous posts is relevant. As much as is the problem of cooling. These pre-built systems are usually meant to be easily servicable // NOT easily upgradable.

The power your new gfx-card will suck-in in addition to what the rest of the machine is already consuming will need to be cooled off, as well. If not: Prepair for some major headaches either because of constant overheat-induced rebooting/self-throttling (which means your card's potential 'power' will remain un-tapped and - literally - wasted) OR because of the excess noise of ramped-up fan-speeds.

Take a good look at your case when opened. Your safest bet is to buy not the best performer in theoretical benchmarks by " +- 2% " - but to take a good loog at the power consumtion figures of the cards in your financial reach. Go for less consumtion with possably a good compatibility of the cards physical layout for an optional aftermarked bolt-on heatsink to improve cooling when needed later on.

Just my 2 cents.

A good resource for further investigation:
www.silentpcreview.com


edit:
the form factor "µATX" just means that the board doesn't stretch to a full standard-ATX-size BUT remains 100% compatible with every ATX-case. In layman's terms: a 'shortened' ATX-footprint. If the picture you posted is the correct for the internals of your machine - everything is o.k. - a standard graphics card will probably fit the single "PEG"-slot (PCI-express-graphics) on the board just fine. As long as the case has standard-ATX-width every not-overly-long cards will really fit just in.

The problematic part is the cooling - and that leads back to the all-important pc-enclosure, the big case holing all the internals inside. You not only need x-numers of fans and / or sufficient measure in air-flow, you also need the right direction of air-flow, reaching all the hottest bits in the right direction in order for them to work efficiently-enough to perform their job.

Most home-builds that are designed for silence tend to utilize the standard-ATX guideline of front-low in and up-the-back-out. However, I don't know the case's air-flow design: side-vents in the service-door and a solid-looking front usually tell the story of a messed-up airflow that just concentrates on the most-obvious stuff, meaning CPU and GPU - if you're lucky. E.g. harddrives will hardly benefit from those air-openings if the inside case-layout follows standard-configurations, which - that said - many pre-built chassis don't.

Hence my recommondation to look at power-consumtion first and just go for the card with the least amount of consumption (under load) that fits your performance requirements. You might just get away with the factory power supply when you do - and even save money. AND IF the psu goes bad, that might as well be because of the hotter air that gets sent through it rather than it not being capable of handling the power that the system draws off-it.
See my drift?

Last edited by DrBen, Wed, 29 May 2013 09:43. Reason : included some form-factor facts

when you catch yourself watching a GT5-youtube lap in total and utter awe thinking up sth. inside your head, silently, along lines of how this other guy's set-up seems so unbelievably stable to you when charging through the bends of the Nordschleife...

...until you come to your senses and realize: heck: LFS doesn't feature the "ring", Assetto-Corsa Demo is still not available and you basically wasted the last bit precious nighttime watching some kiddo playing petty racing game about 100.000 toy-"cars" -almost all of which sorely lacking even the most-basic cockpit-view, let alone any sense of nature-inspired believable 'physics' --->

you then go to bed dreaming the good dream about something which micht one day happen to be called "S3"

Greets & Good night

yaaAAAAWN!

Every other day it seems, some price-conscious newbie asks about "a good wheel"


I've been using my G25 for years - and although I would like to take a step-up from it, it really took me a loooong time to actually hit it's limits.

G27 is practically the same wheel with a few improvements: less noisy/notchy gears inside (or so they say), mod-friendly pedal-faces, more buttons on the wheel.

What it doesn't offer is a load-cell brake. But that can be modded later on, albeit at a price. As a whole package, you cannot go wrong with a stock G27.

If you want an alternative in the same price range, take a look at the Fanatec "CSR" and "911 GT3" "911 GT2"-wheel. Fanatec will leave you the choice of what kind of pedal-set and/or shifter to get in addition to the bare wheel. They do offer better/ more expensive stuff as well as cheaper options.

Virtually all affordable stuff is made in cheap-labour asian countries and then shipped over here. Logitech might be found on store shelves more often than Fanatec.
A notch above the aforementioned wheels would be the Thrustmaster "T500RS" albeit at a much higher price-point and still without shifter & load-cell brake. Fanatec has the "CSR-elite" and "Clubsport Wheel" to match it's price and level of performance.

All in all: you get what you pay for. G27 is a solid choice for potentially years of trouble-free use. Just remember to treat it with respect, as some aspects of it's construction are more toy-spec than hard-core-tough. Same story for every relevant alternative.

Hi there,

first of all, even though e.g. polepositiondriver (or any driver, really) hasn't yet memorized each and every corner completely (with every suitable strategic line that these have on offer) does not indicate they might have no reasons to think and/or feel in a specific way about what they have in their hands (i.e. that shiny lfs license).

Statistics are indeed, afaik, quite useless. There have been multiple resets of personal stats throughout the life of lfs. I've been driving/racing lfs since the dawn of the first available S2-demo.

And I am today still not within the magical 2 second reach of the world's quickest WR-drivers. On some track-combos where I feel I'm not that slow I still catch myself thinking: where do these guys "see" and gain those extra 3..4 seconds from? Constantly over-driving their cars, using the guard-rails to help them making a corner? Total advantage of that extra bit of luck called draft throughout more than half a lap?

Or maybe there is a certain component buried inside the still very well-behaving physics engine that makes the kind of driving that one *thinks* should be the most realistic, elegant and fast - horribly inferior to another driving-style that simply takes advantage of some minor shortcomings in the physics and turns out to be indeed the faster way around a track in lfs?

Maybe it is just my bad luck that - in most racing situations - the environment won't clear up enough to allow for a few very clean laps. On the other hand, I just might not want to admit that I'm getting old an were never that fast to begin with.

However there are some shortcomings I've come across in LFS:
... no dirt 'on the road'.
... no weather
... no different tyre dimensions to chose from (I'd certainly like to play around with that stuff, like wider-narrower tires, bigger or smaller rims (with corresponding change of tire profile, ...)

... afair there is only a limited amount of suspension set-ups present in today's car-models inside lfs. Like no multi-link rear suspension, etc... I would like that little bit more of variety so there is different tech inside the same class to race against. This certainly is another bit of the puzzle to be included in the "tire-model" stuff, if that is to be implemented

... as mentioned before: no day and night low-beam/high-beam, stuff like that. When this arrives, we might actually get to use those cool and old-school pupup-headlamps of the xrg/xrt and other cars.


But the number-1 missing feature there is today is indeed: lack of tracks.

The open-config patch last year really stirred my enthusiasm again, since now there were a good bunch of "new" corners to explore inside the game. I think that feeling might not be uncommon among 'veteran' lfs-players. And it really illustrates that the odd high-speed lap in Aston or Westhill will not have to power to draw affection for all eternity.

We need more tracks. And by that I don't necessarily mean real-world tracks. I'm actually fine with fictional creations. Classic real-world road courses would be a cool "plus", however: take a good look at i-racing and to what insane measures their obsession with real tracks lead them and their business model! Fictional tracks really have a lot going for them:
No fuss about "is it accurately reproduced?" "How would it compare to sim "y" ?" Fictional tracks may be harder to create from scratch but will never be "wrong", so long the designer puts in the effort to get his/her vision right.

I know I really like the tracks that are in lfs today - it is just: they are getting old and sometimes tend to bore me quite hard, even when in pickup-racing the combo high-speed track plus slow roadcar comes up (i.e. quite often on cargame.nl) and everyone is lured in by the wiiiiiide track to go into T1{,T2,T3,...} much too aggressively due to the lack of perceived speed (Sometimes, more than 2/3 of the pack usually only know *one* quick line and won't miss to trade some paint in order to claim the right to stay on that very line)

I'd sure love some more, narrower road courses that have a little more flow and a bunch of extra-versatile corners thrown into them, a few more undulations in the surface, much lower over-all speed (to reward good handling & race-craft above all else). Fern Bay is just not enough. That said, the lfs-devs always gave us the advise to try out other games/sims before we bore ourselves to death.

Other than that: Still the user interface is one of the best in the business, netcode is good and stable (once again, after those crackers were coded out of their amok-appearances), even physics were once so far ahead of nearly everyone else, they still feel "very near to the real thing", today.

So far for now:
And please, let's not abuse statistics to the extreme when we discuss our share our points of view!

Cheers!

Lately I have put the Devs' advice - play some other game, for a change - to some good use:

rfactor 1; HistorX 1.95; Nordschleife-24h and Targa Florio == heaven for a "sim-driver". Because that's what i've been doing in it - driving solo, enjoying something completely different.

Graphics-wise: I was really happy. Some outstanding work (even though the car models are mainly converted from a prior commercial effort: GTL) is included, there. And even though I know that race-cars are only marginally-comparable to their street-counterparts - I was immersed into the illusion of driving those classics on the street and loved every second of it - mainly because the default set-ups actually seemed to work, once I got to know the cars' quirks in their handling. But mostly: oh my god that handling!

Completely different from what we are used to with modern cars / race sims. And so rewarding, once one has finally got it right. Really fun that. And actually it shows with what little technical possibilities rfactor 1 offers, how much of a good-looking, refreshingly entertaining and engaging piece of simulated driving a well-craftet collage of algorithms and artistic effort can get you.

So for

1.: graphics are over-rated big-time - and they sadly always will be
because
2.: you cannot convey a thorough view on the quality of a good simulation just through pretty pictures, alone - be it moving ones on youtube/TV or stills as in print and/or web.

You can however sell a mediocre shooter with some pretty eye-candy any day - because that's what you'll get when you take the pretend-stage away from it: pretty pictures of a preferably bloody, yet simple and repetetive trade. Games are made to satisfy their players not on achievements or skill alone.

Racing Sims - real simulations - sure feel different, as they should!

Good thing you asked here, first.

Pardon my not-so tactful assumption. Your question makes it sound as if you might not have spent much time yet getting to know the underlying principles of vehicle- and driving dynamics.
Keep in mind that LFS - as much as its function is that of a recreational game - is meant to be an accurate simulation of real race craft based on a physics model that gives results as close to the real thing as possible.

Thus I would suggest:
Take your time to experiment with it. And from time to time take a pause to evaluate your own driving. Single player replays are best suited to get a glimpse from an outside perspective. The forces-display is helpful, as well.

Additionally it might be a good idea to search on youtube for the all-famous "drift bible" - video by Keiichi Tsuchia. Pay a little bit of attention to what he presents us with when in the little red AE86

Next you absolutely should familiarize yourself with the term LSD, it's different types - and try out what lfs offers there. Same set-up, different type of LSD (if not a statically locked axle to begin with) and different preload can have quite an effect on the driving technique you need in order to control the car.

Another Top-Tip: Try out the FE-rally-cross tracks first. Especially the small sprint-track "RX-green" with it's tarmac main straight. Learn to Feel the difference of the track surface. You might actually benefit from some longer stints in road-racing: tires do respond differently when mildly warmed up or hot. Hint: in hot lap-mode you can pre-heat the tires in the pits.
Always try to keep track of where the cars "weight" is sent to and at what magnitude of load the tires are gripping or scratching.

at the end comes a small disclaimer: I'm not actually a "drifter". However, getting to practice it a little didn't exactly hurt my driving.
Plus: lfs is not yet finished. There are changes and improvements in the works regarding the physics model - although nobody knows when they will actually be released, yet. So my guess is to learn and understand what's actually happening with the car when driving/drifting will be very beneficial, especially when those changes eventually hit the open.

Quote :

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matrixi
Learn with a conventional RWD car like XRT, or even XRG. Low powered car is good for getting around the basics, as it's more forgiving with throttle control, leaving you more room to concentrate on your steering while simply flooring the accelerator.

+1, also if you havent already - find a setup you are comfortable with, if not, tweak your setup abit so it's less likely to spin

AI-drivers once were very capable of actually racing the player offline. However this was true a long time ago. During the still ongoing S2-alpha stage (first alpha-release dates back to 2006 IIRC) many changes to physics, track-layout and other parts of the sim were made and at some point the once usable AI-underpinnings got incompatible with all the refinements brought to S2-alpha.

I highly doubt we will see any substantial AI improvements until the first alpha of S3. Unless the developers have other plans and just wouldn't let us know in advance...

Changing topic to online-hooligans:
For all I know is that bad drivers will always continue to be a part of lfs and any online-racing (-simulation) for that matter. Worth mentioning: some people might just have a bad day. Or quite a variety of opponents fail to deliver on their potential, causing mayhem in the field - each doing so on an all-new round, e.g.: always pushing your car out of the race.
Happened to me more times than I can remember. Sometimes there is nothing you can do about it as much as calling it a day, and move on.

Enjoy the good races, while they last. They are out there. Fought out by people who enjoy actual racing as much as you do. Try to find the right guys to hang out with and race. Don't waste any time on "arguing" with the crashers too much :-)

Oh yeah: if you want to afford it: i-racing is as much a good option as it is indeed one reason why formerly active lfs-fans have gone quiet over the last couple of years. The rise and the fall of the once ground braking "CTRA"-pickup-servers is another one - I really enjoyed the competition there, especially the hilarious jump-and-bump server. But that has been yesterday's news for quite some time, already.

for your entertainment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghyWX4XgqZU

Faster drivers - if they are experienced at all - will wait for a chance that does not include sending you into the ditch on purpose.

Simple rule to think about: overtaking is best done on straightways NOT when entering a corner.

That rule stays true even in multi-class racing - even if some blockheads seem not to remember sometimes(...)

As I learnt before: decide which line you want to take through a turn before you get to the final turn-in - and then stick to that line.

That means: If you're entering a corner with noone else in sight: feel free to use all the track (fastest line). If you are under pressure from behind: consider the possibility of entering the corner side-by-side with your opponent. Then you both will need a somewhat slower speed through the turn in order to avoid hazardous contact and to hold your own line throughout the corner. Biggest responsibiltiy: chose either the outside or the inside throughout the whole corner (or left/right throughout a combination of consecutive corners) and do not deviate from your chosen side of the track.
Simple rule of thumb: If you are already at the inside: stay inside
If you are a little too late on your brakes and your (faster) opponent from behind aims for the inside : outside line is your only option.

Really: blocking your opponents by wildly switching lines back and forth while cornering is generelly considered bad sportsmanship.

Whatever you do, please keep an eye on the mirrors and monitor your own distance to other cars constantly throughout the race.

Always give your opponent enough room to "survive" a given corner while staying on the track. It is perfectly O.K. to make room sparse for your opponents but never take away another's room as much as to throw them off-track. Always leave enough space for others to survive.

Good racers can vary their racing line as to force their opponents onto a slower line without the need to <<kill>> them.

Big hint: don't join an ongoing race mid-way if you can help it. Especially on a short and tight track this can be very troublesome. If you absolutely have to get started, wait for the main field to pass the pits and go out afterwards to avoid any immediate conflict.

If you see yourself in the situation of a total stand-still, posing a potential danger to the rest of the race: remember the magic [shift]-[s] command.


However: especially in multi-class races -- consider your own vehicles's limits
- what tires are you running on? Street/offroad/slicks ?
- what tires is your opponent running on? If it is a gt-class racer that usually means some variant of slicks = more lateral road-holding capability.
- downforce-enhancements on your car or the opponents' vehicles?


The first rule when you are faced with an opponent slower than yourself, coming in sight in front of you is very simple, as well:
YOU are responsible not to interfere with the line of the racer you wish to overtake. Prepare to avoid physical contact as much as possible.

Sure enough there are a great number of racers out there that did not yet take to heart the most basic principles of the racing code. Do not let them discourage yourself from aspiring a a clean and competitive racing style.

Quote from CodieMorgan :

EG: before saying sex dolls suck - try it first - u might like it.

I will certainly take this into consideration! I just don't overly like the stronger smell of some cheap rubber...

BTW, I kind of had my go at the "sneak preview" with rTractor's Rockingham add-on: I liked it. But then again: It isn't really the kind of track that I'm longing for. There are others out there (fictional or not) that really lighten up my day much more.

I just say "touge" and I think most of you will know where I'm hinting at... ...Thinking Akina downhill, Akagi and such
The rfactor-supplied "Festival of Speed" track is of the kind that really meets my thoughts spot-on. Highly technical, some REAL elevetion changes, real long and heavy bumps, rally-cross hill-climb is just awesome with the street-93'-'95_Supra etc...

You see where this is going?

SparkyDave is spot-on right on this one.

LFS has been a huge success because of it's inherent driving feel.

From the start (when it was simply the best piece of software to run with an attached ffb-wheel) it attracted the real driving enthusiasts by the bucket load. It wasn't at all harder to drive than other good sims of the same era - it just felt down-right better to drive than most of the other stuff!

Plus - the user interface is of a so much more "straight-forward" design than in most of the other successful titles that are still around and being played, today. A huge plus imho. I like that special focus on the workings that lie deep within the sim and the apparent lack of optical sophistication regarding the "set-up-my-car&race" experience. No fancy animated sequences when I press ONE button inside the menu-system. When the nfs-hobby-modder (i.e. "player") is done repainting his wing I've already adjusted my suspension travel, changed my steering settings and picked the right brake-bias based on feel -- and I'm ready to go racing. No penis-enlarging self-promotion through autistic pixel- and sound rituals. Just plain racing!

I immediately got sucked into driving fictional car-models that actually felt more real than anything licensed that I had had the joy of piloting on my PC-monitor - period.

Therefore: more tracks, please. They are absolutely needed. Fern Bay gets old driving round-and-round there. There are definitely some good tracks out there in the real world - that just don't get the credit they deserve. Because they are not suitable for F1 races to be held on them. Think about it Fern Bay and F1? Wouldn't mix!

However each and every RL-track was first created in the mind of their creators, then ran through some tough search for money and only at the end, after they were sculpted into the dirt by some bad-ass sweaty hands and sleepless hours/days/months of hard work - only then could some rich bitches (professional racing drivers, at the time of dawn of the sport) get on with their task and finally race on them. Finding some good lines and fighting for position clearly came AFTER all that.

My point is: every good and/or historic track started out as fiction. In the real world there are only few that really learn to drive ONE hard and long track perfectly. But racecraft was never about perfection of the monotonous same piece of tarmac/dirt/whatever. The real passion is found in variety. Only one track in the world would be pretty damn boring. Even if it was the Nordschleife. I mean, yes, satisfaction can be achieved running one track for every single day of my life. But very certainly the fun would fade eventually. When perfecting the already better than everyone else's lap-time and line becomes repetetive, running that track over and over again, widening the gap when no one else is able to really compete anymore, isn't this the opposite of fun? Hard and honest work, yes - but fun?

Get a grip! If you want real-world tracks that badly: go "I-racing". Lots of ovals to chose from :P

I'm more or less on the lookout for tracks that are fun in an every-day car. Like the xrg/xfg/mini to "lrf-class" and so on. Different kinds of road-tyres, car-like handling with minimum artificial down-force. Maybe with a chunk more power than today's car models, even. And please give me more elevation-changes, switch-backs, hill-climbs and longer, more twisty and challenging, winding _narrow_(!) tracks to make me work my car more and more! Oh and don't forget to feed some other good stuff to the open wheeler guys, they (your customers) deserve that, as well!

I'm all for fictional. Make it brilliant - no excuses for not giving us "Spa" or other lame high-speed, too-wide-for-our-own-good historic tracks. Just tracks - and more of them, with that excellent blend of variety that the current ones have introduced to us - Tracks are all that we really need! Some new and fresh pieces of tarmac/dirt/gravel to race on.

Quote from SparkyDave :

Justasimfan... Please edit the title of this thread, left as it is it just screams bad english.

As for real tracks LFS doesn’t need real tracks as this would just bring up the old arguments that "X car can lap faster at Y track in this sim so it must be better physics" ect.
I think that more fictional content for lfs would be a greater advantage, and should be easier to make and cheaper too, unless track
owners are giving away laser data?

I'm sure by now the US probably has a satellite or 2 that could scan the track from space by now anyway

SD.

Quote from theirishnoob :

i thought thats how they got bigger no ?? by pretending to buy porshe to shoot up stock prices ?


also... if Vw are in... where the hell is mitz and nissan ??

Finally someone who got me "sort-of right" on that one

Quote from luchian :

Hey, deep insight mate. I carefull red your post, and I must say I "feel" you but the truth is that I cannot dedicate as much time as I would like to LFS, and more, in our championship, we have a round each week where the other coleagues are unforgivenable (does this word even exists ?).

let's say I think it exists - it does so in German, at least. But rather than literal I will try to match the meaning in this case with another word: "erbarmungslos" (derived from '[comes back at you] without mercy': "ohne Erbarmen").

Quote :

Nevertheless, I shall start experimenting more, and play with the settings. Let's say that I understood how to setup the brakes, but could use some hints to reduce tyre wear, for starters .

Cheers,
Lucian

As I said, you're on the right track. Let's say diff-type and settings determine how aggressive you can accelerate. It's about the same in effect as what you know about the brakes. You can brake once and hard, relying on the fact that the set is pre-set not to cook your tyres...
...or you can brake with more than just one impulse, e.g. to counter some bumps in the road right in front of your turn-in-point --- or indeed rhythmically to get the car sideways in a controlled fashion, maybe helped by a little special steering-technique (what indeed rally-drivers and drifters both use for different results).

A diff-setup is determined by two factors, mainly: average power-loss in the corncers (that's why I chose to use open diffs for set-development) and the way you want the car to react when using the gas. That has to do with overall weight-shift balance and your preferred way to steer a car (be it fwd, rwd or awd) with lots of adjustability on power or less.

Hint number 2: Watch Keiichi Tsuchia's "Drift Bible" on youtube. I watched it like 20 times already. And still learn new stuff that I didn't learn previously!

...talking about time to spare; Sadly that problem seems to affect us in an equal manner. Whatever you do: Make it fun!

Cheers,
Heiko

Quote from Jakg :

As a technology, ABS should beat an ordinary driver.

ABS for a start, can control all 4 wheels independently which *no* driver can, and it can also keep recalculating 500 times a second.

ABS as it started out was a system to help keeping the wheels from locking-up through independently triggered automatic brake-pressure-interrupts. Earlier systems like I am driving up to this day and age don't have the benefit of the contemporary-fast computing capacity found in today's systems. So they will behave a little worse at times. For example on uneven, loose surfaces like freshly fallen snow residing on a thicker conditioned layer of snow with a few holes in there where tarmac and icy-tarmac shines through. In Germany where spikes are prohibited from actual use (destroys the road surfaces that get built here) these systems will probably get tuned for maximum safety through consistency. Not for maximum stopping-power under all circumstances and road-conditions. Naturally this means such systems will interfere at a very early stage in the "drama of loosing grip".

Quote :

You can't use "bad" ABS (single channel or just over-active) as an example unless you also compare a bad driver to good ABS.

I just returned from test-driving my next car (yes it was on Friday 13th...) and I did the compulsory braking tests that every good driver knows they should be included into the process of test-driving a car. And I didn't trigger the ABS. Since a '2006 model could not possibly have left it's Japanese factory withouth it (call me an anti-patriot, if you so will, for having driven our old Family's Mercedes E220 auto-sedan for more than 10 years without crash, even though the seating and positioning are clearly not made for my hight which is 186cm) I came back to the dealer and asked the inevitable question:
Does it really have ABS? I made the tyres squeel, I felt the stopping power and evaluated it more than average and more than enough for German country roads where I will be using it most of the time. That said, I was amazed that the pedal had this much feel and that I didn't trigger the ABS (i.e. didn't lock the wheels at all) on all of the 4-5 tries where I had the chance to put my foot down. Funnily the dealer's spokes-woman didn't know what to answer me and instead explained to me (thoroughly and rather without fail) what the ABS is really for and so forth. I listened whole-heartedly and remembered this thread...

Quote :

Bikes are quite different - you've got more roll (up front) that you can get away with, and also there's only two wheels which the rider can independently modulate. You don't get this in a car.

My ABS is actually fairly good in terms of activation (at least, on tarmac - on gravel it's useless), but theres no way I can stop quicker without it.

Well - for racing bikes I guess this is a useless debate. For road-bikes this might be a helpful tool for less-experienced riders. But why no ABS-off switch for those that want to play with their bikes - and some of those, that even want to play with their lifes at stake (and that of other people)?

To cut a long story short: People who say, it was not originally planned to make a car (/bike / boat) stop in less of a distance, are absolutely and spot-on on the right track.

But what was originally planned 25 years ago, is yesterday's news, anyway!

Last edited by DrBen, Sun, 15 May 2011 09:54.

Quote from luchian :

same here, I love this car.

cheers mate - and welcome to this semi-exclusive kind-of "club"

Quote :

The reason I started this thread is because I am not good at setuping. The example given, don't know to tell the diference between different types of differentials (funny words play)
Single thing I am good at, is fine tunning brakes to my liking to obtain stability on the braking.

That's more than good news. It means you're on the right track. You DO understand brake-balance is important. And in truth there is no "right setting for every occasion". Brake balance is one of the most important factors when it comes to controlling a car, it makes a difference big enough to be faster or slower than the other guy who races with exactly the same set up except for this single setting.

Brake balance determines the choices of driving "styles" that you can chose. Sometimes one has to adapt quickly and without choice: think about a broken suspension-arm or a blown-out wheel... ...Brake balance is "off-balance" in a glance, once it hits you(...)

Balance is the most important thing. If you think a little further you will notice: good balance means good "handling". Good handling is when the car retains a good amount of responsiveness. From my point of view, very few "Hotlap-sets" still retain that responsiveness. Responsiveness means you can alter your driving style a little and still keep tight control of the car even in situations that get a little fuzzy, very suddenly. Like emergency braking to avoid that crashing pair of contestants. That's why a little touch of forgiveness is needed.

I try to tune a car so that it feels tight enough to really "race with the best of them" but not necessarily to beat their lap-times. If I can come close, I'm delighted - true. But if I can keep them in-check with clean driving, I always tend to enjoy things even better. That's why I want my car to handle, not to win drag-races or indeed: HotLaps.

So I started talking about balance. I always try to refine my wip-setups for maximum on-line stability. Sometimes in the process I discover faulty lines that I had already taken to heart previously and have a hard time relearning parts of the track. Actually this happens quite frequently. It is in those moments that I _stop_ searching for optimum speed and lapt-times and start thinking about handling, again. For me this is the most clear indication that I have already reached the point where going even faster means un-race-able handling. That's when I stop with the basic rules of "harder, stronger, tighter" and - sometimes - even take one or a few things "one-step-back", again.

This is how I got faster. Through improving my intimacy with the car in question. That's done through refinement and long evenings spent with my brain spinning in the red-line rather than my pixels dancing "help me, I'm too slow, gimme some good set-up, please".

No offense there, your call for help was comprehensive and justified. I hope this insight into my thoughts helps you to decide for yourself which footsteps YOU want to follow. Maybe you have a buddy in a team you're in that is better at tuning sets than I will ever get. I'm not real-life mechanic, after all. But I know a well-behaving car, when I'm at the wheel of one. In fact, I now know more about driving dynamics and road manners of cars than I will probably need on the road for my entire life (and then some). That's thanks (to a much higher part than anything else) to the enjoyment that lies within LFS and (in some specific parts) "Richard Burns Rally".

=============

Hint:
Since I developed this thing starting with a random old set AND using an open differential from the beginning... ...maybe you want to try a viscous diff first, then a clutch-pack later on. Porsche's GT3 of some model-year used values like 45% lock on-power and above 60% lock off-power. And that car often gets described as snappy on the edge and ready to bite your head off, like a snake. In my mind that's the usual journalist-post-recognition-marketing-speak that you will read in car-magazines that don't have good drivers as their employees. Think about it, what kind of differential will be more forgiving and may indeed be the better way to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of a suspension set-up than the other. "Viscous" or "clutch-pack"?

And why do all other cars with rwd other than mussle-cars NOT have a welded-type, locked differential?

Cheers,

Heiko

Long time ago I made my license, training in a Golf III,

I quite liked it. It had a much more utilitarian feel to it than today's Volkswagen-Golfs and the rest of the small-to-compact FWD-stuff they are offering right now.

Then I discovered that my family's boring old Merc had some pretty good treat in store: RWD

I still drive it today - almost exclusively that is. I used to think back to the Golf III and thought... ..."never seen anything "VW" that good-looking, again". Then I started to notice that nearly every affordable VW on sale was either a very dark shade of gray or mostly deep-grainy black inside. I started to wander more and found I liked my trusty old Merc's blue-wooden (real wood, yet not too much of it!) trim inside to grow on me, slowly-but-surely.

Then VW started to build "ESP" into their cars. At the same time they did away with any option (most of their cars) to deactivate it. While maintaining a "ESP-free" fleet of vans and van-like cars (I'm purely talking about Germany, here)...


...Then the Scirocco came. I just thought: "What a surprisingly good-looking VW" and found out later, even the LFS-devs announced to reproduce it in their Sim - "authentically with all its superior driving aids [and bells&whistles]".

In the meantime Mercs of new would adapt to their newly found product-policy (nicked from VW adverts) to include as much health-and-safety as they can into each and every car, whether it needed it (A-Class) or not. And like VW they forgot the single possibility to redeem themselves upon true driving enthusiasts, Ladies and Gentlemen on the track and beyond, I'm talking about the


ESP-OFF-SWITCH

Some models might have a fake one installed into their mostly god-awful "dashboard" or whatever they use to call these things today. But don't be fooled. If you try to switch off the esp in your car, nothing big will happen. Yes, you can still catch fire while running straight into the next tree, if that pleases you. But you could do this with ESP-ON, anyway. And some drivers - I believe - would definitely deserve this self-inflicted form of natural selection more than others (but that's a different story)

So now we have it. The (now) second-least-driver-oriented marque in the world (tm) with the most uninteresting interpretation of a WRC-car... (that barely even has any resemblance to a car with the same name you could actually buy) ... in the whole wide world. Wow, that's a quite well-fitting match, don't you think?

Anyway, what on earth was the management at VW thinking when green-lighting a WRC-car without using the concurrent Scirocco-design as their modeling base?


The real "Polo", I agree, is a much newer car (or might be, because a I cannot really recall the last time I actively noticed a brand-new one, they all look the same to me)...
...but boy oh boy does it look fat. And I don't mean dirty-Harry-in-the-pants kind of "fat" -- just ordinarily "I had a few too much X-Large QuarterPounderWithCheeseMenu - kind of _FAT_

Greets
and let the loathing begin... (I don't care, anyway)

Subaru, get your act together and show them hideous newguys their place! Citroen: You're building cars that at least look the part: Make your move, now! And play your cards wisely. Because VW plays dirty with lots of Skoda-DNA and their newly inherited co-worker "Walter Röhrl" after they shot Porsche on the stock-exchange :P

What - A - Wonderful - World!

Last edited by DrBen, Tue, 10 May 2011 22:41.

make a good amount of sense in F11, as well.

Then we will gain an overall coherent presentation of the key influences regarding vehicle dynamics under power- or braking-load. As always, depress the clutch and all you have is suspension geometry and spring/damper plus tyres...

...and if using a differential, it depends really. On how this works his magic (kind & settings matter).

So power on, power off, braking - and - like all the rally-enthusiasts on lfs know: left-foot-braking is not restricted to "not having a 3-pedal-setup"...

...Hope this makes sense to you all.

That's it. I will edit the thread-title accordingly.
Cheers

Heiko

Quote from luchian :

And now the most dary demand of all: a RALLYX setup for the FZ5 ?
Can't do nothing to change it, it is the only car of the season. (fern bay 5, if that counts) .

Seriously dude:
Start with the standard-rallyX-set, modify the anti-rollbar first until you feel that it's right for you, adjust spring-rates and damper inbound/outbound later. Make sure that your wheels don't topple over after each of those changes, they should stay at a constant still-angle within certain limits of variation whether suspension is totally compressed/decompressed.

...This is basically how it's done. Through refinement.
Also diff-settings can have a huge impact on your personal success howling the beast around a track. This way you will get to learn the car better and aquire a deeper understanding about what it likes and what it loathes you to do and treat it right...

...hopefully I didn't write any nonsensical bla, right now. I'm not a native english-speaker, after all

...and I immediately started to tune and fine-tune setups on my own.

Sadly most of the stuff is quite old and/or lost in migration...
...so I started to develop something for aston grand touring (see attachment)

But beware: it is a first alpha kind-of starting-point, meant to be driven with your head, balancing tyre-wear. Optimised for handling through the tighter chicanes in 2nd gear (no lower), reasonable acceleration but not theoretical top-speed.

Focus is by far more on the handling front and on steering-feel. I used my G25 at about 80 to 90 % force set in the driver and between 75 and 85 inside lfs. 720° of rotation as this matches the on-screen wheel and is relatively close to what real-world cars would offer when lightly tuned.

But beware: still with open diff. As I said: something to drive with your head rather thand your lead-foot. It can be driven with confidence however, whether with a full tank of fuel or from 10% down to empty. You will be able to nail your laptimes regardless of fuel-status. Just don't run dry, of course

So there it goes. This was purely done on a whim and is not considered final as of yet. Lots of players, lots of tastes. Fine-tune it to your liking (I mean it, this is important). Don't expect a man's car to do the driving for you. YOU have to know your way around the car, not the other way around!

Simple - YOU have to do the driving.
After all: Isn't this the essence of participating in / dealing with a racing-sim?

Quote from pik_d :

I'm talking about this bit:

It's a bit confusing since setup names appear in F12 already, I'm not sure if he missed that or if he means that it should be in F11 as well as F12 where it already is.

Alright guys,

Today it's sunday and I'm actually wide-awake and whistling my favorite tune lighthartedly...

...yes, the second part is the one I missed, obviously. Thus I stand corrected. Setup-names do appear already - no need to mess with the positioning of that piece of information. My bad. On the other hand: I would really like to see the name in both screens since there is no need to dive into pit-strategies on sprint-races, when all I want is to confirm that I have applied the right setup for my projected driving-style / race-length. And really since F11 is kind-of left for dead and superfluous on road cars, at the moment that is: why not repeat that damned name there, too? So I'll second pik_d and his interpretation on this one


Anyway thanks for your thoughts, questions and comments on this one. I appreciate it. I even start to wander if there are more drivers out there missing this feature

Very simple suggestion:

make the brake-bias appear read-only on cars where this is non-adjustable on-the-fly (while racing).

That way if one uses many setups (i.e. me, too) or choses to try a new set without looking into the details beforehand...

(really, I know I should always look into the key aspects before starting in a race with a set; Just so happens I don't do it occasionally, e.g. on automated pick-up racing servers where the restart is bound to appear any second)

...one can quickly take a grasp at how the brakes are set. AND thereby determine the right driving-style for that particular car/track-combination. Just for people who sometimes tend to get a little confused about things (me, doh!)

Another simple add-on suggestion: make the setup-name appear in either F11/F12 screen, as well. I do believe these two little tweaks together will make a difference for some if not many.

---comes to mind: a simple "apply custom default-set" (which is user-selectable for each car; defaults to "Race-S" when not yet reviewed) with a generic fuel-level of 50% as a last-minute option before race-start (when starting lights are not yet lit) would come in handy. Simple thing via keyboard short-cut, perhaps?


These are my thoughts that accumulated throughout these past days and mostly evenings when I had a few more thorough sessions in LFS (and beyond), again after quite some time with a little less online racing.

edit: please read on below when I go into detail WHY I'm also interested in diff-kind and settings to be readable (read-only) in F11, as well...

Maybe these will inspire you for some future release?

Greets
Heiko

Last edited by DrBen, Sun, 8 May 2011 21:18. Reason : edited the title to read: &quot;(F11) read-only brake bias AND &quot;diff-used&quot;+settings&quot;; was &quot;(F11) ... read-only brake-bias on road cars ?&quot;