rec.autos.simulators

RASCAR: RA

Larr

RASCAR: RA

by Larr » Sun, 18 Jan 2004 23:23:42

Mitch,

I don't know how others feel about this, but on the server fast setup would
it be possible to set the brake bias about 1% more forward ?

The current fast setup has the brake bias set too far rearward, and I fear
we may have a lot of brake-induced spins today.  It's really touchy...

I tried the anti-lock brake option, but it's no good.  You'll end up in the
fence coming into the last turn because there isn't enough braking power.

I think the Fast setup is pretty good, but I personally believe it needs
this one tweak to help us have a safer race.

-Larry

Larr

RASCAR: RA

by Larr » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 00:10:39

Actually, I just did some testing and changing it from the current 58% to
60% completely transforms the car into something that is very manageable.

I personally prefer about 61%, but that might be a bit much for some.  I
HATE a loose rear end under braking, and NR2003 isn't the best at brake
modulation.

I really do think that adjusting the pushed setup for the races to 60% will
be better for everyone all around.

Maybe we can test it during the practice race ?

-Larry


Ed Solhei

RASCAR: RA

by Ed Solhei » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 00:19:15

Is that the "fast" RA setup you guys are using?  It's completely undriveable
imho - and who ever made it must have a very "alien" driving style.

--
ed_

Jan Verschuere

RASCAR: RA

by Jan Verschuere » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 00:20:37

Joachim Trenz... 'nuff said. <vbg>

Jan.
=---

jason moy

RASCAR: RA

by jason moy » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 00:53:06

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 16:19:15 +0100, "Ed Solheim"


>Is that the "fast" RA setup you guys are using?  It's completely undriveable
>imho - and who ever made it must have a very "alien" driving style.

I heard it was made by a school bus driver. =)

Jason

Mitch_

RASCAR: RA

by Mitch_ » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 01:53:55

While I do totally agree with you about the setup, at this point its just
too late for a setup change.   I dont think it would be fair for guys that
spent time practicing.

Personally Ive given up shooting for 1.06's and am going to settle for
consistent 1.12's-13's and see what happens.

Mitch


Brian Farme

RASCAR: RA

by Brian Farme » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 01:51:01

A little late to be changing it now?

-Brian


> Actually, I just did some testing and changing it from the current 58% to
> 60% completely transforms the car into something that is very manageable.

> I personally prefer about 61%, but that might be a bit much for some.  I
> HATE a loose rear end under braking, and NR2003 isn't the best at brake
> modulation.

> I really do think that adjusting the pushed setup for the races to 60%
will
> be better for everyone all around.

> Maybe we can test it during the practice race ?

> -Larry



> > Mitch,

> > I don't know how others feel about this, but on the server fast setup
> would
> > it be possible to set the brake bias about 1% more forward ?

> > The current fast setup has the brake bias set too far rearward, and I
fear
> > we may have a lot of brake-induced spins today.  It's really touchy...

> > I tried the anti-lock brake option, but it's no good.  You'll end up in
> the
> > fence coming into the last turn because there isn't enough braking
power.

> > I think the Fast setup is pretty good, but I personally believe it needs
> > this one tweak to help us have a safer race.

> > -Larry

John DiFoo

RASCAR: RA

by John DiFoo » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 03:27:09

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 16:19:15 +0100, "Ed Solheim"


>Is that the "fast" RA setup you guys are using?  It's completely undriveable
>imho - and who ever made it must have a very "alien" driving style.

I find I usually have to tweak Achim's setups a bit, yes mainly
in the brake bias area (I can live with 59% at most roadies-I
loathe locking them up), but I also move the weight forward-how
he can get away with all that rear weight is a conundrum to me.
But his Monza setup gave me a big edge at Curva Grande in a
recent league race.  ;-)

           John DiFool

Greg Campbel

RASCAR: RA

by Greg Campbel » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 03:38:31


> Mitch,

> I don't know how others feel about this, but on the server fast setup would
> it be possible to set the brake bias about 1% more forward ?
> ...
> -Larry

You guys run FIXED setups???
I'm curious; what's the idea behind doing so?

-Greg

David G Fishe

RASCAR: RA

by David G Fishe » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 03:54:08

I think the setup is fantastic. I honestly haven't once got the feeling that
the brake bias needed adjusting. His replay time on his stite is 107.7, and
my best is a 108.4. Feels very stable and easy to drive IMO. From the first
moment I tried it (last Sat. after RASCAR race), I thought it was a great
setup. I posted a replay yesterday in case it might help
http://home.comcast.net/~davegf/  drivers to see where they are losing time.

It may feel good to me because I drive it like a modern F1 car, and F1C is a
tremendous trainer for these TA races. In comparison, the TA cars feel like
they are in slow motion.

David G Fisher


Joachim Trens

RASCAR: RA

by Joachim Trens » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 04:03:16

...

Yep, but he'll lap you with his schoolbus <g>

Achim

Larr

RASCAR: RA

by Larr » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 04:45:11

Yep.

-Larry


Larr

RASCAR: RA

by Larr » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 04:46:41

Not my call.  Just bringing it up.

-Larry


> A little late to be changing it now?

> -Brian



> > Actually, I just did some testing and changing it from the current 58%
to
> > 60% completely transforms the car into something that is very
manageable.

> > I personally prefer about 61%, but that might be a bit much for some.  I
> > HATE a loose rear end under braking, and NR2003 isn't the best at brake
> > modulation.

> > I really do think that adjusting the pushed setup for the races to 60%
> will
> > be better for everyone all around.

> > Maybe we can test it during the practice race ?

> > -Larry



> > > Mitch,

> > > I don't know how others feel about this, but on the server fast setup
> > would
> > > it be possible to set the brake bias about 1% more forward ?

> > > The current fast setup has the brake bias set too far rearward, and I
> fear
> > > we may have a lot of brake-induced spins today.  It's really touchy...

> > > I tried the anti-lock brake option, but it's no good.  You'll end up
in
> > the
> > > fence coming into the last turn because there isn't enough braking
> power.

> > > I think the Fast setup is pretty good, but I personally believe it
needs
> > > this one tweak to help us have a safer race.

> > > -Larry

Larr

RASCAR: RA

by Larr » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 04:48:01

Well, I've put 5 hours in, and I still can't control the rear lockups

Should be interesting then....

-Larry


Eldre

RASCAR: RA

by Eldre » Mon, 19 Jan 2004 08:00:19


writes:

To attempt to even out the field so that the guys who are 'setup-aware' won't
totally run away with the race...

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Member
Screamers Racing League
IICC League
GPLRank -2.4    MoGPL rank +302.38
ChallengeRank +54.48   MoC +743.77
Hist. +82.82  MoH in progress
N2k3 rank:in progress

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.


1. Time to Split into RAS.CART and ras.irl (Part 2)

2. there are more posts in the rascar complaint thread than rascar has posted

3. RASCAR: For Non-Rascar people that whined about it

4. RASCAR: Is the RASCAR site down?

5. RASCAR: What's the URL for RASCAR site again Uwe?

6. M'I.5,P ersecution C apital Ra dio - Chr is T arrant

7. Remote ADmin of NT Srv w/ RAS?

8. Ra(i)ce Story: Well Almost

9. The adventures of Ras Bulli Split (part 2)

rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.