rec.autos.simulators

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

Mitch_

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Mitch_ » Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:46:54

I was thinking more along the lines of a larger static groove which has
dynamic elements on the edges.


Mitch_

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Mitch_ » Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:48:16

Dont kid yourself.  There is only one way to go fast.


> Did a race yesterday at Michigan and was 2 and 3 wide all race. Must be
your
> drivers.

> EL



> > First off this isn't a Papy bashing post.  That company did more for
> > Simracing than any other period, and I for one do appreciate what
they've
> > done that has given me many many thousands of hours of enjoyment (all
the
> > way back to Indy 500 and every single title since).

> > That being said I wonder why or what prevented Papy from giving us a
more
> > accurate experience.  As I sit and watch the Michigan race I clearly see
> > that Papy's efforts have a weakness that they NEVER over came.  Each
> > successive title improved (or hid) the weakness but it has always been
> their
> > since N1.  The BR tracks again seem to just "hide" the issue not
overcome
> > it.

> > My question (more for fun than anything) is what do you all think this
> > inherent weakness is and why do you think Papy was never able to solve
it?

> > Mitch

Pez

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Pez » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 02:26:41

but then they wouldve been running on it all weekend long.

track grip varies depending on many things.

papyrus tracks have uniform grip, which creates ONE distinct 'best line'
around any track.

hardware speed and time to implement are the reasons for not having dynamic
track grip.

pez


>   Not reall


> > You may be on to something Pez.  A dynamic groove/grooves may have been
> the
> > main contributor.  The key is, we as drivers need to be able to identify
> the
> > change and till this point we haven't had the level of detail needed to
> > identify the change.  Very well could be hardware related then, no?

> > Mitch

> Not really.  Take Michigan, Rock, whatever.  Real race, they can run the
> same as they do later in the race.  iow, they're not waiting for a groove
to
> be laid down.

Pez

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Pez » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 02:27:43

theyve announced that it is going to have dynamic track grip, so that
offline will be covered in marbles and hence slippery, online will be tacky
and grippy.

= no overtaking, just like the real thing!

pez


> Why are you concerned that GTR is going to be more realistic?

> --
> Mike Beauchamp
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/ - custom electro-theremins and stuff.
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/ - mike's personal site.



> > variable track grip. talent of drivers.

> > those are the 2 biggies, if you could *** up parts of the track, have
> > marbles form elsewhere, have track grip alter constantly then youd get
> more
> > 'lines' opening up.

> > my concern with GTR is that it will be harder to pass people due to the
> > variable track grip option theyre going to have. itll be just like in
real
> > life, impossible to pass in most places because it gets dirty offline.

> > pez



> > > First off this isn't a Papy bashing post.  That company did more for
> > > Simracing than any other period, and I for one do appreciate what
> they've
> > > done that has given me many many thousands of hours of enjoyment (all
> the
> > > way back to Indy 500 and every single title since).

> > > That being said I wonder why or what prevented Papy from giving us a
> more
> > > accurate experience.  As I sit and watch the Michigan race I clearly
see
> > > that Papy's efforts have a weakness that they NEVER over came.  Each
> > > successive title improved (or hid) the weakness but it has always been
> > their
> > > since N1.  The BR tracks again seem to just "hide" the issue not
> overcome
> > > it.

> > > My question (more for fun than anything) is what do you all think this
> > > inherent weakness is and why do you think Papy was never able to solve
> it?

> > > Mitch

Peter Ive

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Peter Ive » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 02:35:09




>message


>Mitch_A

>>What's the point of putting in multiple lines when the only
>> driver using those lines is going to be you, whilst all the AI drivers
>> use the same line as each other.

>Online racing, no?

Well they could do that for online racers, but seeing as I would
estimate that there are a great deal more offline racers than online
ones, they are sure going to***off more people than they are going to
please.
--
Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington)
Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email
If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :)
GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01
Steve Blankenshi

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Steve Blankenshi » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 02:49:14


Correct for the intended application.  However, in the context of oval
racing which was the original gist of this thread, if enough drivers were
using the high line and laid down some "virtual ***" and "swept" it free
of marbles, then you should be able to develop a viable high line under
dynamic grip.  If enough drivers used it, it could even be conceivably
faster than the "ideal" line.  But as in real life, it would be
unpredictable and would vary from race to race on a given track.  Nice...
;-)

Jason Moy

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Jason Moy » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 03:28:08

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:43:08 -0400, "Haqsau"


>I think more downforce would allow people to run the outside groove.
>Downforce is proportional to speed squared, so the more you have, the more
>important it becomes to keep your speed up, thus making the outside line
>preferable.  Then increase the drag so that the increased downforce doesn't
>allow unrealistic speeds overall. That is essentially what Papy did from
>NR2002 to NR2003, and it did improve things, but it appears they didn't go
>quite far enough.  I know they were working with one of the teams but it is
>likely that team didn't want to show the other teams how good they thought
>they were, so they probably dumbed down the data they gave Papy.

I dunno if it's downforce, but I've had the impression since N2003
came out that there wasn't enough drag or grip.

The BR tracks with the CTS physics (I prefer the 88 mod) are pretty
nice, altho it feels really odd if you run the low line and drift up
and suddenly the car snaps into place because of the extra grip.  Or
you do a really hot qualifying lap without coming anywhere near the
apex of the corners (more of a problem at MichiganBR than say, CaliBR
or TheRock).

Jason

Jason Moy

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Jason Moy » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 03:37:19



If you set the car up fairly loose for a long fuel run, it's a lot
faster and easier to run the high line until the tires start to come
in about 1/3 of the way in before attacking the low line.  Without
dynamic grip you'll never get truly realistic lines, but you can run
multiple lines with some success if your setup can handle it.  I'm
also pretty sure passing on the outside would be easier if each car
had did different performance characterstics.  Jeff Gordon is someone
who tends to set his car up really loose while running the high line
early in fuel runs and he can power past people because he has the
power and the aero to do it.  And then of course there's the
constantly changing grip on a real track as the surface temperature
changes, cars lay down ***, kick marbles out of the way, leave
debris/oil on the track, etc.  If Papy modelled every detail that
affected the grip available on the surface of the track I think
multi-line racing would be easier to do.  The BR tracks aren't
particularly realistic in the way grip is distributed across the track
surface but it's a decent compromise if you want multiple static
grooves.

Jason

Jason Moy

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Jason Moy » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 03:38:04


> itll be just like in real
>life

Which is why I'm not concerned about it. =)
JP

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by JP » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 06:49:00

  Umm, they were running on it all weekend.


> but then they wouldve been running on it all weekend long.

> track grip varies depending on many things.

> papyrus tracks have uniform grip, which creates ONE distinct 'best line'
> around any track.

> hardware speed and time to implement are the reasons for not having
dynamic
> track grip.

> pez



> >   Not reall


> > > You may be on to something Pez.  A dynamic groove/grooves may have
been
> > the
> > > main contributor.  The key is, we as drivers need to be able to
identify
> > the
> > > change and till this point we haven't had the level of detail needed
to
> > > identify the change.  Very well could be hardware related then, no?

> > > Mitch

> > Not really.  Take Michigan, Rock, whatever.  Real race, they can run the
> > same as they do later in the race.  iow, they're not waiting for a
groove
> to
> > be laid down.

JP

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by JP » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 06:49:10

  Ah, k.


> I was thinking more along the lines of a larger static groove which has
> dynamic elements on the edges.



> > Not really.  Take Michigan, Rock, whatever.  Real race, they can run the
> > same as they do later in the race.  iow, they're not waiting for a
groove
> to
> > be laid down.

JP

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by JP » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 06:49:27

  True enough.


> Perhaps, but the crew chief involved made the statement that he did not
give
> Papy the exact data.



> >   I don't think the team, Jasper Motorsports, had anything to hide from
> any
> > of the others.......they're a backmarkers backmarker, always have been.

> >   Its safe to say, not many other teams are concerned with how good they
> > are.

JP

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by JP » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 06:54:00


> On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:43:08 -0400, "Haqsau"

> >I think more downforce would allow people to run the outside groove.
> >Downforce is proportional to speed squared, so the more you have, the
more
> >important it becomes to keep your speed up, thus making the outside line
> >preferable.  Then increase the drag so that the increased downforce
doesn't
> >allow unrealistic speeds overall. That is essentially what Papy did from
> >NR2002 to NR2003, and it did improve things, but it appears they didn't
go
> >quite far enough.  I know they were working with one of the teams but it
is
> >likely that team didn't want to show the other teams how good they
thought
> >they were, so they probably dumbed down the data they gave Papy.

> I dunno if it's downforce, but I've had the impression since N2003
> came out that there wasn't enough drag or grip.

> The BR tracks with the CTS physics (I prefer the 88 mod) are pretty
> nice, altho it feels really odd if you run the low line and drift up
> and suddenly the car snaps into place because of the extra grip.  Or
> you do a really hot qualifying lap without coming anywhere near the
> apex of the corners (more of a problem at MichiganBR than say, CaliBR
> or TheRock).

> Jason

  Try using the cts physics with the cup cars, and that can make that snap
disappear usually.  That snap is really bad at Dover imo.

  But since the cts mod is supposedly what the cup "mod" should be like,
give it a go.

Haqsa

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by Haqsa » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:48:13

I definitely think setup is a big contributing factor, and even more to the
point, fixed setups are a big part of it.  Arguably there is only one best
line for a given setup, and therefore if everybody is using the same setup
there is only one best line.  In the real races most drivers start out
trying to keep the car on the bottom, and only go up high if the car isn't
working on the bottom.  You have to adapt the line to the car if you want to
get the most out of it.  If everybody used different setups there would be
different optimal lines for everybody.


JP

Why can't we race 3-4 wide at Mich?

by JP » Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:35:40

   Actually, it's the same in open setup leagues too.


> I definitely think setup is a big contributing factor, and even more to
the
> point, fixed setups are a big part of it.  Arguably there is only one best
> line for a given setup, and therefore if everybody is using the same setup
> there is only one best line.  In the real races most drivers start out
> trying to keep the car on the bottom, and only go up high if the car isn't
> working on the bottom.  You have to adapt the line to the car if you want
to
> get the most out of it.  If everybody used different setups there would be
> different optimal lines for everybody.



> > If you set the car up fairly loose for a long fuel run, it's a lot
> > faster and easier to run the high line until the tires start to come
> > in about 1/3 of the way in before attacking the low line.  Without
> > dynamic grip you'll never get truly realistic lines, but you can run
> > multiple lines with some success if your setup can handle it.  I'm
> > also pretty sure passing on the outside would be easier if each car
> > had did different performance characterstics.  Jeff Gordon is someone
> > who tends to set his car up really loose while running the high line
> > early in fuel runs and he can power past people because he has the
> > power and the aero to do it.  And then of course there's the
> > constantly changing grip on a real track as the surface temperature
> > changes, cars lay down ***, kick marbles out of the way, leave
> > debris/oil on the track, etc.  If Papy modelled every detail that
> > affected the grip available on the surface of the track I think
> > multi-line racing would be easier to do.  The BR tracks aren't
> > particularly realistic in the way grip is distributed across the track
> > surface but it's a decent compromise if you want multiple static
> > grooves.

> > Jason


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.