rec.autos.simulators

It is, I realise, a case of "to each, his own" but as I lived and spectated
(from afar....except for the Tasman Cup, which was from very near!) through
that period I just like to have my little GPL world set up to suit
historical accuracy.

Because I only race off-line, I can do what I like in regard to recreating
an accurate simulation and that includes everything from the car setups to
the on-track graphics.

This sim has not ceased to delight me snce I bought it.

--
Regards,
Bruce.
------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------

"if it's sitting on the bumpstops, it doesn't matter what springs and
bars and shocks are used. The results will be confusing and frustrating"-Mark
Donohue

The reason the above qoute doesn't hold more importance in regards to GPL is the
fact that there are no high frequency bumps modeled in the sim. Trying to drive a
real car (67 GP car or otherwise) on the bump ***s (i.e. 1.00 ride height in
the sim) would result in a car that would be quite unpredictable and I would
assume very uncomfortable.

Well, if you're referring to the ride height, then Alison's setups are more
realistic (or authentic if you prefer). As far as spring rates etc. that I am
sure would be more a matter of personal taste, although it is certainly possible
that there would have been a popular trend as regards to these settings as there
usually is in any era of motorsport.

It seems that the major advantage to be gained from running a low ride height is
that there is less weight transfer in regards to pitch and roll. Are they
historically accurate? certainly not. Are they a true representation of how a
real car would behave under similar real world circumstances? (i.e. baby's ***
smooth surfaces)...I don't think so, but who can really say?

Since there is no ruling body to arbitrate whether or not this setting or that is
cheating, there will probably continue to be a lot of quibbling back and forth.

On a personal note, I think that the cars are far more interesting at authentic
ride heights and are in fact more of a challenge to get low laptimes in. I think
this should be reflected in future hotlap compettitions as low laptimes with high
ride height should be interesting to see, and more difficult to attain.

TJSB

        they had wet weather that day

        the Kyalami track is badly simulated:

                the grip level of the surface is wrong

                some of the corners are the wrong shape

Any of these could have a big impact on the times - it doesn't
necessarily mean the cars themselves are badly simulated.

TJSB

Remco

Ironically it's probably quite easy to do, as well!

The race was held in the first week of 1967.  The teams were still running
their 1966 cars.  The debut of the Lotus 49 was still several months away.
Ferrari didn't even attend.  In GPL, you get the cars at their peak during
the season for all the tracks.  If you look at the results to the 1968 race
at Kyalami, when they were still using the 1967 cars, you will find the
times to be very close to what the game models.

Dave Ewing

No problem ;-)

I was just wondering, since it confused me hehe.

But going into this, I guess when you master the GPL cars, you don't find
them much over-powered in a sense that the same over-power gives you a great
control over a car.  It's easy to tell when you make a switch from the GP
cars to per example the trainee car.  Sure, they are much different, but you
really try to get the same rage and pure power of those GP cars when driving
the F3.  And you can't :)

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard/Nas-Frank>
-- NROS Nascar sanctioned Guide http://www.nros.com/
-- SimRacing Online http://www.simracing.com/
-- Official mentally retarded guy of r.a.s.
-- May the Downforce be with you...

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

It's what makes ice-racing so much fun.  We race inexpensive stock
Chevettes on ice.  Take a low-powered vehicle like a Chevette, put
it on a frozen lake with normal *** tires, and you've got
yourself a race car!  Under those conditions, even a Chevette has
more than enough power to spin its wheels in any gear.

People always ask, "How fast can you go on ice?"  But top speed is
completely irrelevant as long as everyone is racing under the same
conditions.  Acceleration and deceleration is all that counts.  Top
speed is merely a function of how long the straightaways are.

Typically top speed is about 70 mph (110 km/h), but it takes a while
to get there and then you have to start braking a LONG way before
reaching the next corner!

My only complaint is that ice-racing circuits are usually devoid of
any elevation changes.  On the other hand, judging from how often I
crash at the Nurburgring in GPL, maybe that's not such a bad thing.

See <http://www.racesimcentral.net/~trauttf/Ice/> for ice-race stories
and in-car videos.

        -Ferdinand-

1. The drivers of the era are as talent in real F1 as the top sim
racers today are in sim racing.
2. The top sim racers cant die in GPL, which results in driving
extremly close to kerbs and track edges, all the time, everywhere.
They can also try out things the real driver wouldn't even think of,
cause of the danger level.
3. The top sim racers practice a lot more and a lot more frequent,
which results in knowing every inch of the tracks. My practice time
alone as sim racer equals almost 1000 real F1 races, or almost 20 real
F1 seasons (50 race like sessions per year), in time that is.
4. The weather is always the same in GPL, which makes the tracks work
exactly the same from race to race, which makes number 3 so much more
significant.

Number 2 alone should result in the top sim racers driving circles
around the pole times of 1967. Number 3 should just add to this. When
looking at the pole times of -67 I find that the top sim racers do not
drive circles around them, thus something must be wrong. The top sim
racers are also using somewhat unrealistic setups (low rider should
give more grip if the physics in GPL is correct) to reach their times
and they are also speed shifting, which they didn't do back in -67.
Taking all this into consideration makes me wonder about the grip
levels in GPL :o).

/Christer, thankful for the respect :o)

/Christer

/Christer

"Imagination is more important than knowledge" /Einstein

<snip>

One can very fast AND consistant with the low-rider setups in a race
also. Usually the guys who are on top in the hotlaps-pages are the
most consistant and fastest in long online-races even with the
low-rider setups.

Alison's setups are great for those who can't or don't want to drive
with the low-rider setups in longer races and for beginners. But for
example, her new Ferrari setups are just too pushy for me and I can't
go faster than with my old setups. I also tend to crash more with
Alison's setups because they don't suit my driving style and I'm
trying to push the car a bit too much.

I would like GPL as realistic as possible, but in the end it's just a
game and I want to have fun with it. If you want full realism, go
drive real racing cars. ;)

Oh, why didn't Papy set the minimum ride height to 3.5 - 4.0 inch
right from the start? Is there a good reason for this? I would think
that they have done some research.. and why set the minimum ride
height to only 2.5 inch with the patch if it's still way off?

Just a few questions, hopefully someone from Papy can answer these.

--
Greger Huttu

Then it wouldn't surprise you to know that it took me only 21 laps of
practice at the ring to go below 8mins and take the WR(since beaten
twice by wolfi and risto) :)

This is using a setup that has ride height of 3.75 at the front and
4.25 at the rear, and after a break from the ring of many months.

Ian