i know what everybody is thinking, flaming banana, or Mr. T? hold that thought, i was reading my brother's magazine (shhhh, dont tell) and i was reading about a Ferrari California's stats against a Benz' amg...they both could barely break .9 Gs. sure, the California is not one of ferrari's best cars, it is still a ferrari no doubt. i remember looking on lfs, and using a road setup for the XRG (or the closest i could make[loose suspension, positive camber, sway bars, over-inflated tires]) built for comfort, and i was pulling more than .9 Gs, on cold rubber! how is this possible? isnt past .9 Gs considered super-car status? i know the 140 HP XRG is not a 'supercar'

look at my fps

The tyres the XRG is fitted with are too grippy and the suspension is so indefinitely adjustable it's more like a race car than a bog standard road car. The XRG is not a 'realistic' car, as such. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that the physics/suspension/tyre modelling in LFS is inaccurate, it just means that some of the values and parameters are out.

you are right...i REALLY want to believe myself that lfs is perfect...but even the XFG, which is front wheel drive, has the same stats. is that the same deal. if so, then i really want a ROAD car, that is just like any car you would find on the road. low grip, comfort only

Then use a ROAD setup, I think Bob Smith did a pack..

LFS is yet far from being "perfect" in general IMO, but its one of the best at its class.
In LFS, there are few things maybe considered as perfect, one of them is track surfaces. Other is maybe tyre qualities.
IRL, many things affects the grip such as road condition; surface temp, dust, water, oil or quality of the tarmac etc.
Also rubber itself always same.
Although, LFS is on good way of development. I am absolutely sure that Devs taking all of stuff like that in consideration.
But as anyone who is spend some time around here can easily understand that this development process is not easy one.

Quote from halo :

LFS is yet far from being "perfect" in general IMO, but its one of the best at its class.
In LFS, there are few things maybe considered as perfect, one of them is track surfaces. Other is maybe tyre qualities.
IRL, many things affects the grip such as road condition; surface temp, dust, water, oil or quality of the tarmac etc.
Also rubber itself always same.
Although, LFS is on good way of development. I am absolutely sure that Devs taking all of stuff like that in consideration.
But as anyone who is spend some time around here can easily understand that this development process is not easy one.

LFS is the best when we're talking about the normal price game class. Iracing beats LFS on many aspects, but problem is that it's too expensive to be called a normal game in my eyes.
LFS feels great, and the respons from the car feels right, close to the real thing, but it's still a ocean behind the real deal.
Still, LFS feels great, it's simulating real life physics good, but not great.

i dont understand your problem, because you wrote about supercars nearly hitting the 0.9g. i think for the cars in the magazine, it's meant acceleration. in your screenshot the XRG has 0.09g acceleration forces, the 0.9g you see in the shot are the "sideway forces", so i dont understand the base of the discussion. i think 0.09g is nearly realistic for a car like XRG and forces more than 0.9g you can have in normal cars, when you are driving fast corners :P

Quote from haelje :

i dont understand your problem, because you wrote about supercars nearly hitting the 0.9g. i think for the cars in the magazine, it's meant acceleration. in your screenshot the XRG has 0.09g acceleration forces, the 0.9g you see in the shot are the "sideway forces", so i dont understand the base of the discussion. i think 0.09g is nearly realistic for a car like XRG and forces more than 0.9g you can have in normal cars, when you are driving fast corners :P

No, the 0.9G in the first post is for lateral acceleration rather than longitudinal acceleration. 0.09G is very low for a longitudinal acceleration...at that rate of constant G force it would take over 30 seconds to go from 0-60mph.

Quote from amp88 :

No, the 0.9G in the first post is for lateral acceleration rather than longitudinal acceleration. 0.09G is very low for a longitudinal acceleration...at that rate of constant G force it would take over 30 seconds to go from 0-60mph.

did i understand it wrong? in the first post i think he asks, if 0.9g is too much for XRG and longitudinal acceleration, but in the screenshot the longitudinal acceleration is 0.09g

Quote from haelje :

did i understand it wrong?

Yes.

Quote from haelje :

in the first post i think he asks, if 0.9g is too much for XRG and longitudinal acceleration, but in the screenshot the longitudinal acceleration is 0.09g

No, he's talking about lateral acceleration, not longitudinal.

Quote from halo :

LFS is yet far from being "perfect" in general IMO, but its one of the best at its class.

Quote from The Very End :

LFS feels great, and the respons from the car feels right, close to the real thing, but it's still a ocean behind the real deal.

That pretty much sums it up for me. It's like the MSFS quote: "As real as it gets."
That doesn't necessarily mean LFS is ultra-realistic but every other game feels worse. Can't judge IRacing though... it's a shame there is no kind of demo, really.

Quote from logitekg25 :

a Ferrari California's stats against a Benz' amg...they both could barely break .9 Gs.

When I heard about the Lancer Evo doing 0.99 Gs, I was a bit surprised too. On the other hand my logic (which could be wrong) tells me, that pulling off high Gs isn't exactly the heavy cars' territory.

I don't want to imply that LFS is correct, but it wouldn't surprise me if something similar to an XFG with decent tyres and a sporty suspension would "out-G" an AMG.

Think Go-Kart.

okay, my mistake in some technical listings its included, for example the BMW335i: http://www.edmunds.com/insidel ... leId=121462/pageId=125984
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skidpad

Try my quick setup , i tried to get California weight with driver and fuel correct, so... skid pad test on road super(semi-slicks in my opinion :P) - 1G
On normal tires(sport tires) - 0,93 max. Doesn't seem that bad .

I could see where an XFG-ish car could have a 0.95 G rating overall in a corner, such as when you combine trail braking and cornering or acceleration and cornering, but for just pure sideways grip that doesn't seem right. Are all the other cars generating abnormally high G forces?

In my lil' MX-5 I've pulled 1.2G on cold tyres - and that was on the day I fitted our race datalogger into it, so I might have done more on other days when I wasn't logging G.

Okay, it was instantenous G rather than sustained, but still. And that's with rubbish tyres, a worn out 17 year old car, a rubbish driver and a road setup (albeit on a slightly sporty car).

I can peak at around 1,3G and sustain just under 1G with my Mazda 323 GTR on warm street tires on track. That's a pretty heavy car, though, 1150kg plus my fat bum.

Quote from atledreier :

That's a pretty heavy car, though, 1150kg plus my fat bum.

It's 2009, you know.
Nowadays "pretty heavy" means 2t +. Heavy is probably a bit under 2t, normal is above 1.5, and your 1150 kg is a lightweight. Damn, even a Polo weighs that much.

The Ferrari California mentioned above is 1735 kg!!! The Evo I mentioned is in this area too.
I think you already need a lot of magic to make it corner like a 1t car with a decent stock suspension.

Scawen is considering that the tyres in LFS have a little too much grip. You must use a road going set with road normal tyres if you are to make comparisons with real cars though.

In terms of realism, being a few % out on tyre grip is quite a minor detail in the big picture of vehicle dynamics, IMO.

If the Road Normals are more akin to the tyres you find on road cars, would that make the Road Supers more similar to the semi-slick trackday type tyres, ACB10s etc ?

Sounds about right.

But this is for "road cars" this is a RACING simulator so of course the tires will have more grip. Unless your refering to road as in roadcourse

Road Normal sort of implies normal road legal everyday tyres. Even in a racing simulator they're probably meant to be a bit similar.

Quote from Bmxtwins :

But this is for "road cars" this is a RACING simulator so of course the tires will have more grip. Unless your refering to road as in roadcourse

100% wrong here ,

The Round normal suposed to be a Road tyre.

The only thing that you can change in lfs and not in real life is the suspention!! so thats why you need to use bob's road going setups!

I think you can change quite a bit with your average suspension, just not as much as lfs allows you (rangewise)

Also there are other factors that make it even more difficult to compare to real life, in a sim there is too much consistency in the road surface and tyre integrity, there is a lack of chassis flex and suspensions types in LFS aren't fully supported or modeled (i.e. the trailing arm types don't effect dynamic camber how they should, not 100% sure on that but remember descusions about it)

So with those in mind I'd be suprised if LFS didn't actually achieve higher latteral G than real life for a comparable car and suspension. That's without even considering that hybrids and road supers are stickier compounds than you would likely find an a real life road car