Hello,

FOX is inspired Formule Renault 2000.

Thus is it possible to have the same differential and we can not change.

This may be coming in a future patch when an option for limited setups is implemented.

ok thank you

And formula Renault 2000 has no anti-roll bar so it would be possible to replace

Erm - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi ... ormula_Renault_engine.jpg
An anti-roll bar is clearly visible. At the front roll stiffness is provided by the monoshock assembly, which is approximated by LFS's anti-roll bar settings.

In short - you're wrong, they do have anti-roll bars.

There it is again in your picture. One lovely anti-roll bar ready and willing to resist twisting.

Edit: Is that even a FR2.0? That rear wing looks mighty fancy, and the wishbones look rather beefy. Oh, and the exhausts are a bit massive for a 2.0. Is it not a 3.5 World Series car?

there is a spring

Yes, there is a spring. Well done. 10/10 for observation.

But there is also an anti-roll bar. It's not a "conventional" type like on that wiki picture, but it's a vertical twisting type that also doubles up as the lever for the spring I think.

I just want the same system on the FOX

An anti-roll bar? The FOX already has one. The exact mechanism isn't modelled, so it doesn't make any difference. Plus your picture is not of a FR2.0, and the FOX is not meant to be an exact replica of a FR2.0.

You, my friend are talking to a wall =D

"I want an antiroll bar"

"The fox has it already, see?"

"It is a spring"

See

Anti-roll bars are springs.

Personally, I love roll. 50+ degrees of roll feels awesome. :biggrinfl

Quote from Forbin :

50+ degrees of roll feels awesome.

have fun doing barrel rolls in the corner

Just for your information David, the anti-roll bar in a monoshock suspension is the part marked in orange:



The anti-roll strength is determined by how much this bar resists twisting (blue arrows, twisting in a direction depending on which wheel tries to move upwards).

If both both left and right suspension move equally, there is no twisting and only spring and damper influence the wheel's vertical movement. In this case the whole T-shaped segment moves back and forth (green arrow), compressing the spring.

If for example only the right wheel drives over a kerb and is thus pushed up, the triangle part rotates counter-clockwise (it rotates around the green part which is where it's mounted), pushing the damper rod and pulling on the spring rod. Since only the right wheel tries to move up, the anti-roll bar now has to twist clockwise to allow (or not allow) this to happen.


Obviously this means if LFS tries to simulate a monoshock suspension (front susp. of FBM for example) the ARB should have a very limited adjustability and be rather strong in general, which isn't the case at the moment. Though this should be fixable very easily with simple setup restrictions in the future.

Quote from blakehoo88 :

Quote from Forbin :

Anti-roll bars are springs.

Personally, I love roll. 50+ degrees of roll feels awesome. :biggrinfl

have fun doing barrel rolls in the corner

Or this:

Whoa there, look at that badly tuned suspension. You really should put some anti-roll bars on it!

Quote from tristancliffe :

There it is again in your picture. One lovely anti-roll bar ready and willing to resist twisting.

Edit: Is that even a FR2.0? That rear wing looks mighty fancy, and the wishbones look rather beefy. Oh, and the exhausts are a bit massive for a 2.0. Is it not a 3.5 World Series car?

If it's any interest, it's running treaded tyres - therefore presumably not either of them.

Is it just me or does it look like there is no pivot for the control arms, only what appears to be a leaf spring? At least on the right rear wheel, upper rear control arm.

I wondered the same thing, actually. Maybe it's bendy metal - then that bar would act as a weak spring, too, but that seems like a strange design decision.

Quote from AndroidXP :

Just (...) (pic) future.

Cunning!

I guess specs of this suspension differs from what we use in lfs to get the same result?

Not sure if I understand your question correctly, but to semi-accurately simulate a monoshock suspension in LFS all we need to do is:

1) Only allow symmetrical editing of the spring strength since there is only a single spring (this is already the case, as we cannot modify spring stiffness asymmetrically anyway)

2) Set the ARB to a high value and lock it or only allow minimal editing

The second point is the reason why the default FBM setup has 100 N/mm front ARB. Other than that nothing else needs to be done to get nearly the same behaviour. Of course a proper simulation (that allows you to use more realistic values) would be preferable, and I believe a few details are different - at least the spring plays a different role on resisting body roll in addition to the anti-roll bar.

Quote from duke_toaster :

If it's any interest, it's running treaded tyres - therefore presumably not either of them.

Well, grooved slicks, but yes I agree, it must be something else. Yet I can't think of an F1 car with that livery (not that you often see an F1 car at that angle), and it doesn't have the F1 quality to it...

Quote from Forbin :

Is it just me or does it look like there is no pivot for the control arms, only what appears to be a leaf spring? At least on the right rear wheel, upper rear control arm.

I don't get which bit you mean. the twisting 'roll bar' is pivoted fore-aft at the bottom to transmit movement/forces into the shock. Although I think it would bend a lot itself too.

As I understood he means the rear mounting point of the upper wishbone.

Yep, right next to the rear mounting point of the shocks.

Ah, a flexure. Widely used in single seaters these day (albeit in the upper echelons!), as it removes the stiction of a joint. Whilst there is obviously more resistance in a flexure, it's a consistent, measurable resistance that can be used in the suspension stiffness calculations. Stiction (i.e. friction in a joint - stiction is generally an aeronautical term... On a tangent, I remember when people on this forum got confused what a yump is in rallying; oh, those were the days) isn't predictable or consistent. It's there, is quite noticeable, and then suddenly drops away. Not good.

Flexures - first seen on the front wishbones of F1 cars about 10 years ago - are simply better. As long as you life them (i.e. replace them after a certain mileage or time, because they will work harden and suffer from fatigue).