As i feel the pain of my non-100Mbit racing comrades, I think it would be a wise idea to split the stream into 1-4h parts to make downloading a more bearable experience. Other than that props to the staff.

Attention, we might be recruiting honorary members to keep the legacy alive. Our recruiters are on the move and will be coming to a city near you. Here's one of our recruiters at work: link
It is of utmost importance you come well prepared.

Render by mogster, much appreciated.

This post is being written with mixed feelings. At the same time it's a glorious launch of a new team and - well - a wistful farewell.

Fist Raisin Team was built on the foundation of great Finnish motorsport legacy. Our relentless faith in the deepest essence of raisins was always our strength. We believe raisin is not about being the thid or the scond, only the fist will be remembered. Our heritage has inspired individuals worldwide. Entire corporations, such as our main sponsor Sun Maid, rely on our motto: "When in doubt, go Raisin!"

Building a successful team takes finesse. The team was assembled with utmost urgency and was in action for two weeks. Instead of gathering every possible creature with limbs for controlling a car, we chose to form a compact core group which ended up to be

• P. Lehto - plehto
  
• A. Tuokko - Profi
  
• JJ Nylander - Oxygene
  

Some say they have three legs, and that they habit the upper atmosphere - all we know is, they (are) always fist on the line.

We are very humble and down to earth. Still it's worth mentioning that we have been victorious in every single race that we participated and this isn't subject to change. On the track we have been rivaled by many, some unnamed parties have even imitated our team's appearance in order to be as skillful and cunning.

On a sad note, dominance has numbed our senses; winning just isn't the same anymore. Therefore we are forced to withdraw from racing and give others the opportunity to win races once again.

Fist Raisin Team is out but here's a video to relieve the pain of parting.
Video (If you are german, click here)

Last edited by plehto, Tue 12 Jan 2010, 20:39.

Quote from janipewter :

What a ridiculous argument this is.
On a dry asphalt road you'll stop faster with locked wheels. On a very wet asphalt road you'll stop faster with ABS. On ice you will stop faster with ABS. On very loose gravel, snow, mud etc, you will stop faster with locked wheels, and on these particular surfaces it will take what seems like a lifetime to stop with ABS.

And the ridiculousness goes on. Dry and wet asphalt behave somewhat the same regarding slip ratio - braking force. The optimum is achieved with 10-30 % slip and there is a ~30% reduction in braking force with a locked tyre. This is reflected in a finnish test, where using non-studded winter tyres braking distance on dry asphalt increased from 32 m on ABS to 45 m on locked tyres.
On loose surfaces and ice, a locked tyre will yield a shorter braking distance. On loose surfaces partly due to the tyre digging into the ground. Also in test conditions threshold braking on ice demonstrated significant gains over a locked tyre(191 m - 230 m). It is worth mentioning that in emergency braking situations nobody will be able to perform threshold braking to it's full potential.
www.autoshop101.com/forms/brake09.pdf Here you go, page 3.

All of these test results are from straight line braking. While cornering ABS benefits from being able to control each brake individually to achieve the system's desired slip ratio. With conventional brakes, no matter who the driver is, you will be unable to do this due to different loads on each tyre and having only one pedal, d'uh

Quote :

Yes ABS does work in reverse. But I don't see the need for it to. If you find yourself in a situation where you are going backwards fast enough to warrant the use of ABS then you've severly messed up somewhere, and in such a situation, locked wheels would probably help you more than ABS. Remember, ABS helps you brake and steer. If you're going backwards at 50mph, why on earth would you need to steer? You'd want to stop as fast as possible, and if you're in a spin, ABS will not help.

I give you props for your logic 'ABS helps to steer'->'You don't need to steer while reversing fast'->'ABS will not help'. However that isnt the reality. There might be some buddhist thinking behind not needing to steer while reversing, but I'm not familiar with that religion.

The reason why ABS would be needed on reverse is simple. Due to brake bias of the car, which in traditional systems is achieved with a pressure regulator for the rear brakes, you will not get much brake force to the rear tyres that act as front tyres. You'll also lock up the fronts, causing tyres to loose their lateral traction and make you prone to spin. With ABS brakes more brake pressure can be applied to the rear brakes. This in combination with the front brakes not locking up (while reversing) will yield in a much shorter braking distance with much greater stability. Which, by the way, happens to be one of the key benefits of ABS: you will maintain directional stability even when one side of the car is on ice and the other on asphalt.

Oh and just my favorite quote to end this post:

Quote from janipewter :

Since most of you have no idea what you are talking about, I will clear some things up.

Last edited by plehto, Mon 23 Nov 2009, 13:58.

I vote that lfs physics should be rewritten by people that think red is correct. Truly ingenious thinking that could change the world, you would make Columbus proud. Dare to think differently.

Ok I'll break my promise just this once.
You are again quoting me out of context, this is how it should go

Quote :

I said the conditions where abs is at disadvantage in braking distance are not relevant to lfs or this discussion. Hence why it has the off-topic quote as it's not related to anything in lfs.
*insert winter tyre results from the offtopic quote here*

I'm sure you can find a way to quote a part of this post as well to prove something wrong. And yes, I did not think about gravel or grass at that time, as i don't find grass to have enough traction or gravel physics to be adequate for racing.

Also if VW required abs to be modeled for the scirocco, just like TC for BMW F1, why does it need to be added to all the road cars?

Quote from vari :

This is a test patch thread that has a new implementation called ABS. How is it exactly offtopic to make comparisons to the real device that it's simulating?

I don't think that the intention of this tread is just to discuss what and whatnot should be in but rather how well the changes work, or both.

When you say that a test should be made with one new car I have to disagree as it's known to change from vehicle to vehicle (unless of course it's those specific cars we have in the game). And the fact that you post figures about winter tyres is somewhat amusing since LFS doesn't have those. (Even though ABS seems to outperform on tarmac)

You also mention the fact that the cars were used (in the report I posted). I would probably concentrate more on the fact that they were using more than 10 year old
ABS systems probably making them less effective compared to what we have today.

I don't think that it makes much difference that they used old cars and brake components when it comes to the balance between ABS and non ABS braking. If anything, it's likely to make ABS less effective in my opinion but that isn't a fact, just a gut feeling.

And finally, should ABS be in the game? In my opinion yes because it's a simulator afterall.

You are putting words in my mouth or failing to understand what i wrote.
At no point did i say we shouldn't make comparision to the real life counterpart. I said the conditions where abs is at disadvantage in braking distance are not relevant to lfs or this discussion. Hence why it has the off-topic quote as it's not related to anything in lfs.
Also at any point i did not comment on how abs affects braking distance in real life on tarmac and equivalent hard surfaces, or the validity of the results in the research you posted. I did not say abs shouldn't shorten braking distances in lfs, but if such an option is provided at it's current state you will gain considerable advantage in terms of braking distance, controllability and lack of flatspots.

Furthermore i did not say the test should use one new car, but a single vehicle. The point is the test environment has to be controlled. With used second or even third owner cars(read: cars with x kilometers driven, not old e.g. from year 1990) you cannot ensure any of that. You can play the guessing game on how it might or might not have affected the results, but the fact is results achieved like this arent reliable.
Also an abs system has some sort of diagnostic that'll let you know if there's something wrong with the system, without abs you have no idea until you virtually have no brake pads left.

Once again, I did not doubt that with abs you can and will achieve shorter braking distances in a number of conditions. Nor did I say that the results are completely wrong, but that they are not reliable or exact. Therefore I wouldn't quote them as facts.
If you want to continue your war on me, trying to disprove everything i say with invalid arguments, be my guest. You can also continue your mission on proving abs shortens braking distance, which i don't deny it does, but I will not be replying to any further messages.

Quote from Vain :

Can we get some technical data on the LFS-ABS?
E.g. can someone make a braking test on flat asphalt and read out the braking force? That way we can analyse how the LFS-ABS works and compare it to real life systems.
I've personally worked a bit with the internals of a very recent ABS system and I'd like to see how well LFS implements it.

Vain

I already did some testing, they are in my previous post: http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1005928#post1005928

Last edited by plehto, Sun 14 Dec 2008, 13:54.

Quote from vari :

Since it's unclear which surface types you mean I tried to find some facts. I wouldn't make generalisations perhaps implying that it should be so in LFS.

This report was made ten years ago. Attached is the summary.

Yes, I didn't mention any specific conditions because it didn't have any relevance to lfs or to this conversation. I was simply pointing out the principle behind abs design, while understanding it doesn't shorten your braking distance in all conditions. The discussion shouldn't be about abs benefits on different surfaces, that's offtopic. The focus should be on whether we need abs in the game at all and if so, is the current abs operation in patch z4 what we want see in the final patch. Do we really want to make this game about road safety or should racing be the priority?

Quote from offtopic :

Tekniikan Maailma 7/2005, page 150, found the following in their tests:
Test car VW Golf 1.6 FSI '05, using Continental ContiVikingContact 3 and Nokian Hakkapeliitta 4(studded)
With studded winter tyres on asphalt, snow and ice braking distances are as follows:
locked: 47m, 57m, 230m
threshold braking(no abs): 38m, 62m, 191m
threshold braking(abs): 40m, 66m, 221m
abs: 35m, 68m, 237m

With non-studded winter tyres results were:
locked: 45m, 53m, 255m
threshold braking(no abs): 37m, 59m, 295m
abs: 32m, 64m, 404m

On loose surfaces results would be similar.

I also went through that test you posted, the methods how the test was performed are very questionable.
A few things that bothered me:
3.1 Test Vehicles
"Eight test vehicles were purchased or leased from central ohio automobile dealerships. Seven were obtained from used car lots, and one from a dealership's pool car fleet."
"The tires on each test vehicle were steel belted radials. Each set was inspected and found to be in acceptable condition and of the sizes specified by manufacturers."
"The brakepads, rotors, drums and shoes were tested in 'as is' condition unless it was necessary to replace them(e.g., one vehicle's rear brake pads wre worn past their wear limits)"

Car manufacturers or models aren't mentioned either, just the model year.
Call me a sceptic, but a test conducted with multiple cars and their tires and brake components tested 'as is' isn't very scientific. Just the tires and how old/worn they are can make a big difference, especially in wet conditions. Multiple other things could have altered the results: suspension geometry, wear of brake components to name a few.

A proper test would use a single vehicle and disclose it's make, tyres used and other relevant data regarding the test. A controlled test environment includes the vehicle and all components related to it.

Last edited by plehto, Sun 14 Dec 2008, 12:03.

Quote from D_Thrasher :

I think the ABS is a great inclusion personally. Road cars in real life have it, so why not the road cars in LFS? Leaving it out would make the sim *less* realistic. And of course, it's likely to make laps faster; the whole point of ABS is that it shortens braking distances and helps maintain control.

Yes, road cars do have abs for safety reasons. But abs is prohibited in almost all racing. So choose your poison, which realism is the one we want to go after? A super safe volvo or a race car, i know which one is my choise. Take the mainstreaming approach and you'll have a console game in your hands. Not really challenging, easy to learn, loss of interest in a couple of months.
Also the idea of abs is to maintain steering, not to shorten braking distances. In many cases braking distance with abs is longer compared to locked tyres.

The suggestion of making abs response rate slower and making the brake pressure release greater/longer sound like viable options. As said in my previous post, right now it takes ~0.02s for the system to release brake pressure making the abs system work at around 50Hz. From googling i found results varying from 15 up to 20Hz.

Last edited by plehto, Sun 14 Dec 2008, 02:19.

I deeply hope there will be a server side option to force abs on/off. If you don't use it while others do, you are giving up a huge advantage. I haven't tested complete laps, but i did a braking test.
Car used was xrg, brake force at maximum(1840Nm) with and without abs, 810Nm without abs(typical for current setups).

Findings:
With abs you can trail brake as deep into the corner as you want, not having to worry about flatspots whatsoever. On top you will maintain perfect controllability over the car. Also as the back to front weight shift has been done already and deceleration is somewhat constant, car's behavior remains very predictable and stable.
Abs also reacts very quickly, around ~0.02s from the moment of abs engaging to disengaging. At 153km/h abs allows wheel speed to drop to 106km/h before taking action. At 73 km/h the same figure is 55km/h. I don't know what kind of speed differences real abs systems allow, so can't comment on this.

To compare braking distance i did a 160-0 brake test with xrg and analyzed the rafs with f1perfview. Results and graph are attached.
It can quickly be seen that with abs you achieve far greater avarage deceleration from 160-60 km/h, the difference is nearly 9%. As a result braking distance is shortened by 10 meters and it takes 0.25 seconds less to do so. This combined with being able to brake deeper into the corner with zero risk of flatspotting, you really can't be competitive without abs.
Keeping in mind this was with road_normal tyres, I'm fairly sure the differences would be even greater with road_super.

In essence the abs takes away from the challenge of driving these cars. It becomes dull and boring when you can get that perfect braking everytime without flatspots. The challenge and fun of trailbraking deep into the corner and keeping the car balanced while doing so is what motivates and rewards drivers. Learning driving techniques and mastering them is what should make a driver faster, not a button to enable abs.
Also now it really doesn't make a difference whether you drive with keyboard, mouse or wheel. Each of them can be equally fast, mouse probably being the fastest on the low power road cars.

I am not trying to say abs cannot be this effective, but driving aids should make it easier to drive around the circuit, not faster. In the older versions brake help eliminated some of the lock-ups, but it certainly didn't shorten your braking distances or make your laptimes quicker. LFS is supposed to be a pc simulator, but seeing how easy these cars are becoming to control it's ready to be ported into a console game.
Also i would like to know which road car racing series, or any racing series for that matter, allow the use of abs.

Last edited by plehto, Sat 13 Dec 2008, 21:40.

Quote from ColeusRattus :

Well, I for on don't think it's inappropriate to adress people directly with a "you" in here. But seeing that you are from finnland, I understand that notion. Having been in Tampere a few weeks ago, you're one of the most reserved people I have ever encountered. It's almost spooky (unless you meet a drunk finn...)

Point was that replying without a quote and using 'you' doesn't really define who you are answering to, especially as my first post wasnt directed at you.

Quote from ColeusRattus :

Perhaps it's time for you to move on to something else then. Also, I can't really agree to you. Of course everyone in here knows that the physics are still flawed, but as far as I can recall, most of the patches did more the the physics than to the look of the game. Additionally, the better and more complex the system is, the longer it takes to considerably improve it.

Assuming you are referring to me with "you", which really isnt adequate in forums.
You don't need to remember anything, just check the changelogs for patch z and y from lfs.net. It quickly becomes apparent that most of the changes to physics have been minor tweaks, excluding clutch heat, tyre heat and gearboxes.

Quote from ColeusRattus :

Fact: people who utter assumptions as "facts" are retarded.

Touche sir, touche.

I suggest you don't reply to this message, or any other for that matter, if your input isnt something else than "go play some other game" or "you're a demo racer, you're wrong".

Quote from Uximura :

Fact: "At some point" people lose interest and get interested by other products.

Fact: "At some point" sends the ball so far ahead in time you'll forget why or who had thrown it years before in case you happen to find it years later.

Fact: LFS has again the opportunity to compare itself with real world car (common one this time, the scirocco) and again the solution presented is half-baked like so many in LFS these recent years. Not even suspension geometry/type is of same nature. Fantasy la-la land continues.

Fact: The excuse over these years for half-baked, has been that after months of idling you work your butt-off for a month to make an artificial (self imposed or not) deadline. "there is no time for that" becomes the easy and handy excuse. Since GC there was no time to code a proper suspension for it? Shouldn't it have been a priority?

Fact: Confort is an enemy of will.

Fact: LFS will remain the sim that could but rarely is.

Well said, although we cannot know for certain how much work has been done.
Over the last year lfs hasn't received anything major. Some textures and minor tweaks which really isn't much. Including the modifications to how the tyres heat up which pretty much eliminated the use of the softest compound for the fastest cars.

What lfs needs is changes to the way it feels, not the way it looks. To mention a few things in need of improvement: realistic slip curves for slicks, undertray downforce, downforce relative to yaw(assuming this isnt modeled). Also the unbalanced classes, big gtr's especially, make for really dull endurance racing.
A new car won't change the issues that lie beneath. But I'll wait and give this patch a chance to impress. All I can say is that waiting 6 months for a new patch just to be disappointed is getting old.

Thanks!
This was an opportunity i just couldn't pass.
Looking forward to racing at westhill.

Quote from evilgeek :

huh?

at half a tenth per shift (guessing), time will add up quick, plus the FZR can't run longer stints, as it burns way more fuel. so i think the balance should be fairly close now.

Guessing isn't going to do much good.
And secondly fuel has never been the limiting factor for stint length. In endurance races fzr can do a 1 hour stint most of the time, when xrr is limited to 40-50 minutes.

I reckon fzr will be quite a bit quicker compared to xrr and fxr, if it's to run without ballast.
On certain tracks fzr hotlaps were >1-1.5s faster, and i doubt slower gearshifts will balance this out.
That combined with fzr's ability to run longer stints compared to the other two, it could turn out to be quite a dominant car.
However better wait and see some league races first.

With a little patience he could turn that into a Paul Sr moustache.

I'll race.

I have never noticed any lag in the steering due to ffb. Could it just be that you have anologue steer smooth set to something else than 0?

Quote from Viper93 :

If they make street tyres behave with minimal traction loss past peak slip who is to say that there isn't a slick out there that can do the same thing? Not saying that there are many out there, but surely there has to be at least one.

The downside is that the maximum lateral force achieved will be reduced. Also combining vertical forces with high lateral forces(&slip angles) is not that simple. If it was, we would still see race cars sliding all over the place like in the 60's.

Quote from Viper93 :

I think LFS "could" use a tyre that is a bit more challenging to drive, if the tyre now is kept for the casual player. Then leagues could run this more challenging tyre maybe?

Current slip curves are true with regular road tyres, however it's a different story with racing slicks.
Racing slicks reach their maximum lateral force at a lower slip angle(around 5-8 degrees) and then have a fall-off in the curve. According to android's graphs slicks pull the same lateral force from around ~7 degrees of slip until 16 degrees and above. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand that this behaviour cannot be correct.

The fall-off would be enhanced even further with winged cars if yaw affected the amount of downforce achieved. As the loss of downforce happens, the vertical load on the tyre is decreased and therefore the maximum achievable lateral force is greatly reduced.
This in combination with a more realistic slip curve would most likely make the cars behave more snappy around and above the maximum slip angle.

Some information regarding grip under accelerating and braking. http://www.insideracingtechnology.com/tirebkexerpt2.htm
Clutch pack would be the best choise for any car, currently the lack of a preload just hampers all the benefits so there is no point using it.

I also attached a graph showing lateral force vs slip angle under various vertical loads.

One small improvement is needed: ability to save password for a server without joining it.

One thread would surely have been enough.

Fuel consumption won't resolve the issue.
At least in the moe test race fzr was so much quicker that after less than 40minutes it had made a gap large enough to make a pitstop and still return to the lead.