rec.autos.simulators

by **Greger Hut** » Wed, 23 Jun 1999 04:00:00

1:33.76 is still my best time (Lotus). Did it a few days ago and
haven't been trying to improve it yet.

--
Greger Huttu

by **Mike Wes** » Wed, 23 Jun 1999 04:00:00

Erm, did you ignore the rest of the thread?

I think the previous posts may have been the ***iest bit sarcastic......

Mike West
3DNow! UK: www.3dnow.freeserve.co.uk

> Get in an F3 car. I couldn't complete a lap either but I learned the
track
> in a F3 then moved up to F1. Also in the F3, try following some AI
around.
> It will give you an idea of where to brake. I thought I was doing good
with
> 1:37's (Ferrari F1 car) but then I went to race the AI and they were down
in
> the 1:35's and 36's! Oh well, off to drone around hopelessly looking for a
> fast time.

> Jesse

> >Downloaded Brands when it came out...still trying to complete one ( 1 )
> > uno ) ( un ) lap...

> >=:-D

by **Philste** » Wed, 23 Jun 1999 04:00:00

> >That was with Alison Hine's Zandvoort Ferrari - I figured it was the
> >track most similar to Brands Hatch in terms of difficulty.

> Am I the only person to believe that Mosport is the GPL track that is
> most similar to Brands Hatch?

> --
> Matthias Flatt

No, I do too, and that's the reason why I use the setups I use at
Mosport. Must be a Canuck thing.

Philster

by **Mark Seer** » Wed, 23 Jun 1999 04:00:00

It is certainly far more slippery than the real thing Bruce. Having driven
round the place in real life, I can tel lyou that Brands has quite a high
grip surface. On the day of it's release I thought along the same lines as
you and many of the people on GSB were in agreement.

--
Mark Seery
GPML league director
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/mark.seery/

by **Driver** » Wed, 23 Jun 1999 04:00:00

I wasn't being sarcastic, I really am that slow. I do enjoy driving those
'67 racers though.

by **Jan Koh** » Wed, 23 Jun 1999 04:00:00

>No.
>I also have used the Mosport setups as a basis for Brands.
>However, I believe (and would be interested in comment) that the track
>surface at Brands appears to have been issued with a certain degree of
>"slipperiness" that the other tracks don't have. Is this so or just my
>imagination?

Bruce, only yours. Our download tracker software detected a "Bruce" on the
pipe, and passed you the "Bruce Hatch" (otherwise known as "Hatch Bruce").
;]

Cheers!

??Jan Kohl?? **The Pits Performance Team**
Computer Systems Programmer
USAF Air-Ground Operations School
Hurlburt Field, FL

Castle Graphics - http://www.castlegraphics.com/
The Pits - http://www.theuspits.com/

by **Bruce Kennewel** » Thu, 24 Jun 1999 04:00:00

No.
I also have used the Mosport setups as a basis for Brands.
However, I believe (and would be interested in comment) that the track
surface at Brands appears to have been issued with a certain degree of
"slipperiness" that the other tracks don't have. Is this so or just my
imagination?

--
Best regards,
Bruce.
======
The Stunned Mullet........seriously satirical stuff!
http://welcome.to/the_stunned_mullet
===============================================

>>That was with Alison Hine's Zandvoort Ferrari - I figured it was the
>>track most similar to Brands Hatch in terms of difficulty.

>Am I the only person to believe that Mosport is the GPL track that is
>most similar to Brands Hatch?

>--
>Matthias Flatt

by **Sam Seni** » Thu, 24 Jun 1999 04:00:00

On Tue, 22 Jun 1999 09:51:24 -0700, "Ed Trainer"

>I use my Mosport setups, seems to work well.

I can do nothing w/ Mosports sets, seems like too much thrust. Painted
every Armco red. Slicker than goosepoop. Went back to Glen sets, at
least consistent laps. Got some ideas, tho. Haven't tried the Lotus
yet. Love the Brab sounds. Wish someone would create the Isle of Man.
Ran that a few times on the BMW. Wind, rain, and fog. Do they have
anything else? Congrats to the guys getting quick at Brands. I can't
even repeat my 38 lap.
Sam

by **John Walla** » Thu, 24 Jun 1999 04:00:00

On Wed, 23 Jun 1999 00:12:03 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell"

>However, I believe (and would be interested in comment) that the track
>surface at Brands appears to have been issued with a certain degree of
>"slipperiness" that the other tracks don't have. Is this so or just my
>imagination?

If it is then we are imagining the same thing. I also feel the car is
more slippery than the other tracks. I wouldn't say more slippery than
it should be, but certainly more than I'd expect given experience at
the other tracks.

Cheers!
John

by **Bruce Kennewel** » Thu, 24 Jun 1999 04:00:00

HAAAAA! LOL!
Thanks for that, Jan!!!
My own special slippery surface :o)
--
Best regards,
Bruce.
======
The Stunned Mullet........seriously satirical stuff!
http://welcome.to/the_stunned_mullet
===============================================

>>No.
>>I also have used the Mosport setups as a basis for Brands.
>>However, I believe (and would be interested in comment) that the track
>>surface at Brands appears to have been issued with a certain degree of
>>"slipperiness" that the other tracks don't have. Is this so or just my
>>imagination?

>Bruce, only yours. Our download tracker software detected a "Bruce" on the
>pipe, and passed you the "Bruce Hatch" (otherwise known as "Hatch Bruce").
>;]

>Cheers!

>??Jan Kohl?? **The Pits Performance Team**
>Computer Systems Programmer
>USAF Air-Ground Operations School
>Hurlburt Field, FL

>Castle Graphics - http://www.castlegraphics.com/
>The Pits - http://www.theuspits.com/

by **Bruce Kennewel** » Thu, 24 Jun 1999 04:00:00

Hmmmm.......thanks Mark.
When someone (in this case, David) creates a track is there an ability to
set parameters for the (searching for the correct term!) "coefficient of
friction" for the track or what???

--
Best regards,
Bruce.
======
The Stunned Mullet........seriously satirical stuff!
http://welcome.to/the_stunned_mullet
===============================================

>It is certainly far more slippery than the real thing Bruce. Having driven
>round the place in real life, I can tel lyou that Brands has quite a high
>grip surface. On the day of it's release I thought along the same lines as
>you and many of the people on GSB were in agreement.

>--
>Mark Seery
>GPML league director
>http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/mark.seery/

by **Bj?rn Nyhl??** » Thu, 24 Jun 1999 04:00:00

> On Wed, 23 Jun 1999 00:12:03 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell"

> >However, I believe (and would be interested in comment) that the track
> >surface at Brands appears to have been issued with a certain degree of
> >"slipperiness" that the other tracks don't have. Is this so or just my
> >imagination?

> If it is then we are imagining the same thing. I also feel the car is
> more slippery than the other tracks. I wouldn't say more slippery than
> it should be, but certainly more than I'd expect given experience at
> the other tracks.

> Cheers!
> John

The turns seem to lack (enough) camber, that may be why it seems so
slippery.

-Bj?rn

by **Mark Seer** » Thu, 24 Jun 1999 04:00:00

No, the cambers are ok. In fact part of the challenge at Brands is the fact
that a lot of the turns have negative camber on them. Paddock bend is the
most notable of these. It is quite marked and in conjunction with the very
steep drop, makes for a white knuckle ride every time round.

Mark

> > On Wed, 23 Jun 1999 00:12:03 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell"

> > >However, I believe (and would be interested in comment) that the track
> > >surface at Brands appears to have been issued with a certain degree of
> > >"slipperiness" that the other tracks don't have. Is this so or just my
> > >imagination?

> > If it is then we are imagining the same thing. I also feel the car is
> > more slippery than the other tracks. I wouldn't say more slippery than
> > it should be, but certainly more than I'd expect given experience at
> > the other tracks.

> > Cheers!
> > John

> The turns seem to lack (enough) camber, that may be why it seems so
> slippery.

> -Bj?rn

by **Marko Viitane** » Thu, 24 Jun 1999 04:00:00

Try my Brabham setups, I did 1:34.95 with them and they has already 2.5
riding height :)
(They aren't perfect, but...)

You'll find them here:
http://members.xoom.com/_XOOM/mikataka/mv/index.html

by **Neil Rain** » Thu, 24 Jun 1999 04:00:00

> > >That was with Alison Hine's Zandvoort Ferrari - I figured it was the
> > >track most similar to Brands Hatch in terms of difficulty.

> > Am I the only person to believe that Mosport is the GPL track that is
> > most similar to Brands Hatch?

> > --
> > Matthias Flatt

> No, I do too, and that's the reason why I use the setups I use at
> Mosport. Must be a Canuck thing.

I just checked out the Mosport setup - it's identical to the Zandvoort
setup in all but two ways: the ride height is 3.75 inches rather than
4.00 inches, and the drivetrain is completely different.

Thing is, the drivetrain always needs to be completely changed for each
circuit anyway: the ratios on the Mosport setup seem way too tall for
Brands - I can only just get into 5th at the end of the straight leading
to Hawthorn's.

As a matter of interest: if I leave everything alone but just reduce the
ride height to 2.5 inches, it seems to change the handling so the car
oversteers more: am I imagining this, or is it what ought to happen?

rec.autos.simulators

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times

Brands Hatch Times