rec.autos.simulators

> First, it's not a theory, the numbers are right there in the file.
> Secondly, define "tons of neg cam".  The setups I have looked at at Team
> Redline or gpx.it typically use just slightly more than 3 degrees of neg.
> camber.  Not 5 or 6, 3 or sometimes 4.  So where are all these simmers
that
> are supposedly using tons of neg. camber?  Three degrees is perfectly
> consistent with the numbers in my previous post.  I do think it's a bit
> higher than what is used in real life, but it is not inconsistent with the
> numbers in the tire file.  The amount of camber that people are actually
> using seems to be getting exaggerated with each telling.  Three to four
> degrees is all I have seen in any setup that I have downloaded.  I
wouldn't
> call that tons.  And if someone thinks he is getting more grip by running
6
> degrees or more (or whatever "tons" means) then let's see the evidence, in
> telemetry files, showing that he is actually pulling more G's.

> > Nice theory, but if it were true, simmers wouldn't be running tons of
neg
> > cam to increase grip.

>message

>> >> I guess what I'm asking is for other people's take on this. Does
>everyone
>> >> experience this? If so, and offset tyre temps are required, what setup
>> >> rationale do you use to decide on the degree of camber. What's the
>> >physics
>> >> behind it all?

>> >Once I've got each tyre balanced if the temps are too high I stiffen the
>> >shocks, if they are too low I soften them.

>> This I don't quite understand.  Maybe my logic is a bit off.  I take it
>> that you are talking about 'wheel rate' in GPL, yes?  I've just checked
>> this in GPL at Kyalami and the temps did go up, though not by much, when
>> I softened the wheel rate, but I don't understand why.  I thought if you
>> stiffen a wheel's suspension then you're making that wheel do more work
>> because the suspension is less able to dissipate the energy/load as
>> easily.  If the wheel is having to absorb more energy/load then surely
>> its temperatures should rise not fall.  What is is that I am missing
>> here?

>I only know that it works, but the way I see it is that the tyre bounces
>more, and so has less contact with the road. Less contact = less grip = less
>heat.
>I thought wheel rate was the spring, not the dampers. I was talking about
>the dampers.

> Okay Steve let me come at it from a different angle: 6 degrees may have
> worked, but was it necessary?  Did it really feel like you had more grip
> than 3 degrees?  Were your lap times better?  I agree that it should be
> undrivable.  I'm not trying to claim it's realistic (at least I don't
think
> I did :).  I'm just saying that it looks to me like 3 degrees is all
anybody
> should really *need* (slightly more if you have very soft springs/bars).
I
> think the only reason people are using 6 (if they are, I still haven't
seen
> it) is that the model doesn't appear to penalize you much for using more
> than the optimal amount.

> > 1. Anything in an .ini file is a theory in my book...unless it's a RW
> > number...and/or until I've tried it in vitro.

> > 2. Yes, 3 deg. is reasonable, but 6 deg. (as in some online claims)
isn't.
> > Six deg. isn't just unrealistic, it should be undriveable!

> > 3. OK, I haven't d/l many setups with -6 deg., but after all the posts,
I
> > did try it, and damned if it didn't seem to work as advertised!  But no,
I
> > didn't analyze the telemetry; I'm more a seat-o'-th'-pants kinda guy.