shortcomings. I see no point slamming the low riders because that will simply change
nothing. Ride heights of 1.00 and 1.25, even on smooth tracks, are not a good idea anyway.
The car gets twitchy under braking and will break away or understeer badly in many cases
where the car is heavily loaded.
In any case, I'd have to say Papy missed the boat here. Hopefully this will be
addressed in the patch. Probably a little research to see what the minimum ride heights
actually were back then would be a good idea. If the minimum was, say, 2.5, then that
should be the minimum in the sim.
Something I don't remember ever being cleared up (have not been on this ng for a while)
was what it means when you have max bump *** settings combined with minimum ride
heights. Anyone care to recap? ie if it means that your riding on the bumps with bumps set
at 1.00 and ride height at 1.00, then what's the story on ride height of 1.00 and bumps of
2.5???????????
> gpl low riders must die
> Before going gold GPL allowed bump ***s of .5 in. This was raised because
> low rider
> setups were much faster. ie low center of gravity, less weight transference,
> whatever.
> Low riders run on bump stops. In reallity small road surface variants would
> bounce
> such a car making it undriveable. This was a release time RAS subject. GPL
> does not model
> small road surface variants. Thus, low riders are very fast in GPL and
> riding at 1.0 in.
> the lowest legal ride height.
> This is a problem. 1967 cars didnt run on bump stops. I like to compare my
> times to the
> fast net guys. Im a 106 at watkins, 123 at mosport with the Ferrari. Not
> Bad. I down
> loaded some low riders and in 6 laps broke by best times. I wasnt even
> trying too hard. I
> was pissed off.
> I dont like riding on bump stops. I like the realest sim possible. GPL. Low
> riders take
> advantage of the unmodeled road surface; its only physics flaw?. Its a lot
> like CHEATING.
> Now theres nothing to achieve. Make a low rider, learn to drive it and be
> fast. Boring.
> No more tweeking. I admire speedy net guys skill though.
> Same thing happened with GP2. Low riders with packers longer than suspension
> travel.
> I never could figure that out. But it was fast and killed my fun in the
> game.
> Dave could maybe fix it. Add high speed vibation term, depending on speed,
> that bump
> ***s cant damp. Not realistic but would***the low riders. Now finding
> ride height
> would be a challenge again.
> In the race for fastest lap times low riders are winning big. By exploiting
> the Flaw they
> are putting up amazing times. The setups dont make sense for the era
> modelled. Advice on
> setups in 4WD and Doud Arano's rules of thumb are pointless. Whats to be
> learned of that
> era of racing technology? It doesnt apply because of a flaw.
> Im writing to***off speedy net dudes, raise a fuss and get flamed. And
> maybe Papyrus
> can help.
> Anyone..., Beuller.
> PS
> Sorry for negative post, I love GPL, been waiting since indycar for such
> realism.
> I know its in the game, but Papyrus isnt EA. Their better.
Byron Forbes
Captain of Team Lightning Bolt
http://www.racesimcentral.net/~HOSHUMUNGUS
and
http://www.racesimcentral.net/~godsoe/bolt/home.htm