rec.autos.simulators

by **Tom Pabs** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:57:43

Francois....

First of all, "when you can have both a driver's track and a fan's
track"......you have a winner that will simply see more racing, bigger
events and more accessibility to us all (better sim reproduction as
well....any developer's sim ever***up Talladega or Daytona?).

Next....the "bristol-ization" of Sears.....as you call it......wasn't the
reason the course was changed. The WC course was changed nearly 5 years
ago. The terracing and "stadium" seating wasn't even conceptualized until
two years ago. The two are not related in any way, shape or form! The
primary reason for this was the fact that the way the "lay of the land"
was....you couldn't get more than a few hundred "fans" into the area
represented by T5 through T6 (the carousel) and that meant that nearly 1/3rd
of the track was raced on with no one (or very few) being able to see it.
The cars would disappear into this area, come out 30 seconds later.....and
you had no idea what happened while they were out of sight. That is
primarily why the WC Chute concept was first developed. It had nothing to
do with the later "stadium seating" that evolved.

You are probably not the only one confused about this fact.

Tom

> > From the standpoint of an "at race" fan.....

> Well Tom, most of us here on r.a.s. really don't care about what fans
think.
> We want a racetrack for the drivers, not the fans. I'm sorry, but the
> "Bristolised" Sears Point is a very boring track compared to the old,
longer
> layout.

> > The track is now on their "possible" list of alternate tracks for a
USAGP

> Won't ever happen. Yeah I can SO much see F1's doing sub-1minute laps at
SP
> with absolutely no realistic safety zones for high velocity cars like
> Formula Ones. And don't tell me it's safe for F1 with whatever 100-line
> proof. It's BS, the track is not safe for F1.

> --
> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> -- http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
> Corporation - helping America into the New World...

by **ymenar** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 13:05:29

> Which turns do you think would pose a problem for F1? The only one I
> could think of as a problem was T7 (assuming that was the flat-out
> righthand sweeper that was changed) but that's been tightened and
> there's a long paved runoff area (which is good since FIA has
> determined that paved runoff areas are safer than grass or sand).
> Since FIA bases dangerous corners on G-forces I don't think SP would
> be a problem. I think it would generate a big traffic jam with all of
> the slow corners but the elevation changes are definitely more
> interesting than anything currently on the F1 calendar.

I'm talking mostly about the safety around the track, not the road itself.
The layout is ok (while way too short), but the run-off areas and safety
zones are made for Stock-cars, not F1's.

The last corner is *way* too dangerous, considering they would be coming
extremely fast in the pit complex. The run-off area is just not appropriate
(if you can call this a run-off area hehe), it would need to be run with the
chicane in the corner before that I think the bikes take to cut down the
speed into the last corner.

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...

by **ymenar** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 13:08:21

> I agree with you, Francois.....but unfortunately, the WC drivers we had
test
> three different versions of the track in our sims, disagreed with both of
> us. The config that was built (and mostly represented in N2K2....T7 is
> quite wrong in the sim, however) was the one they selected by vote (more
> than 30 drivers).

Yeah well that's not a big problem, it's just my opinion here no? They
didn't like the corner, I liked it ;)

Yes it would had been similar to the old layout, exiting the long sweeping
downhill left hander into the end portion of the drag strip, but reversed
and 180 degrees :)

That would had been good, but it would had been "Bristolised" a little too
much at my taste. It's already too simple as it is now.

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...

by **Tom Pabs** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 13:13:10

David...

1:24's is not "blazing"....but its a good time if you can run that lap time
consistently, lap after lap in race trim and traffic. I can run consistent
1:21's and 22's - race laps. I just got off the phone with George
Sandman....while writing this reply.....he's running 1:18's.....but he's an
"alien"......lol.... Dang, George is fast!

Tom

> I just spent my first hour and a half with this track and while I think
it's
> an excellent track overall, and would probably be great to visit due to
the
> setting and other reasons Tom described, I don't like it AT ALL with a
> NASCAR car. "Tedious" is the best word to describe the experience. WG
isn't
> much better. It really is like steering a boat.

> Another type of car at SP would probably be a blast, but not a NASCAR car.

> Is a 1:24 a ***time?

> David G Fisher

> > > From the standpoint of an "at race" fan.....

> > Well Tom, most of us here on r.a.s. really don't care about what fans
> think.
> > We want a racetrack for the drivers, not the fans. I'm sorry, but the
> > "Bristolised" Sears Point is a very boring track compared to the old,
> longer
> > layout.

> > > The track is now on their "possible" list of alternate tracks for a
> USAGP

> > Won't ever happen. Yeah I can SO much see F1's doing sub-1minute laps
at
> SP
> > with absolutely no realistic safety zones for high velocity cars like
> > Formula Ones. And don't tell me it's safe for F1 with whatever 100-line
> > proof. It's BS, the track is not safe for F1.

> > --
> > -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> > -- http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
> > Corporation - helping America into the New World...

by **Tom Pabs** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 13:16:53

You guys....you are still "thinking" of the old (older) track.....what the
FIA saw was the new track. None of you have seen it unless you've been to
Sears in the last 5 days....its just been paved.

Tom

> > Which turns do you think would pose a problem for F1? The only one I
> > could think of as a problem was T7 (assuming that was the flat-out
> > righthand sweeper that was changed) but that's been tightened and
> > there's a long paved runoff area (which is good since FIA has
> > determined that paved runoff areas are safer than grass or sand).
> > Since FIA bases dangerous corners on G-forces I don't think SP would
> > be a problem. I think it would generate a big traffic jam with all of
> > the slow corners but the elevation changes are definitely more
> > interesting than anything currently on the F1 calendar.

> I'm talking mostly about the safety around the track, not the road itself.
> The layout is ok (while way too short), but the run-off areas and safety
> zones are made for Stock-cars, not F1's.

> The last corner is *way* too dangerous, considering they would be coming
> extremely fast in the pit complex. The run-off area is just not
appropriate
> (if you can call this a run-off area hehe), it would need to be run with
the
> chicane in the corner before that I think the bikes take to cut down the
> speed into the last corner.

> --
> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/
> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
> Corporation - helping America into the New World...

by **David G Fishe** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 13:43:54

I wnet back after a break (always helps) and I posted here in the wrong part
of this thread at 9:30 that I did a 1:22. Still way off, but getting better.
I basically just watched the track lesson and memorized the speeds they
showed we could run at the various sections.

David G Fisher

> David...

> 1:24's is not "blazing"....but its a good time if you can run that lap
time
> consistently, lap after lap in race trim and traffic. I can run
consistent
> 1:21's and 22's - race laps. I just got off the phone with George
> Sandman....while writing this reply.....he's running 1:18's.....but he's
an
> "alien"......lol.... Dang, George is fast!

> Tom

> > I just spent my first hour and a half with this track and while I think
> it's
> > an excellent track overall, and would probably be great to visit due to
> the
> > setting and other reasons Tom described, I don't like it AT ALL with a
> > NASCAR car. "Tedious" is the best word to describe the experience. WG
> isn't
> > much better. It really is like steering a boat.

> > Another type of car at SP would probably be a blast, but not a NASCAR
car.

> > Is a 1:24 a ***time?

> > David G Fisher

> > > > From the standpoint of an "at race" fan.....

> > > Well Tom, most of us here on r.a.s. really don't care about what fans
> > think.
> > > We want a racetrack for the drivers, not the fans. I'm sorry, but the
> > > "Bristolised" Sears Point is a very boring track compared to the old,
> > longer
> > > layout.

> > > > The track is now on their "possible" list of alternate tracks for a
> > USAGP

> > > Won't ever happen. Yeah I can SO much see F1's doing sub-1minute laps
> at
> > SP
> > > with absolutely no realistic safety zones for high velocity cars like
> > > Formula Ones. And don't tell me it's safe for F1 with whatever
100-line
> > > proof. It's BS, the track is not safe for F1.

> > > --
> > > -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> > > -- http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> > > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
> > > Corporation - helping America into the New World...

by **David G Fishe** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 18:53:47

Worked on a setup and got down to 1:21. I still think I'm going to get in
some people's way tomorrow.

David G Fisher

> I wnet back after a break (always helps) and I posted here in the wrong
part
> of this thread at 9:30 that I did a 1:22. Still way off, but getting
better.
> I basically just watched the track lesson and memorized the speeds they
> showed we could run at the various sections.

> David G Fisher

> > David...

> > 1:24's is not "blazing"....but its a good time if you can run that lap
> time
> > consistently, lap after lap in race trim and traffic. I can run
> consistent
> > 1:21's and 22's - race laps. I just got off the phone with George
> > Sandman....while writing this reply.....he's running 1:18's.....but he's
> an
> > "alien"......lol.... Dang, George is fast!

> > Tom

> > > I just spent my first hour and a half with this track and while I
think
> > it's
> > > an excellent track overall, and would probably be great to visit due
to
> > the
> > > setting and other reasons Tom described, I don't like it AT ALL with a
> > > NASCAR car. "Tedious" is the best word to describe the experience. WG
> > isn't
> > > much better. It really is like steering a boat.

> > > Another type of car at SP would probably be a blast, but not a NASCAR
> car.

> > > Is a 1:24 a ***time?

> > > David G Fisher

> > > > > From the standpoint of an "at race" fan.....

> > > > Well Tom, most of us here on r.a.s. really don't care about what
fans
> > > think.
> > > > We want a racetrack for the drivers, not the fans. I'm sorry, but
the
> > > > "Bristolised" Sears Point is a very boring track compared to the
old,
> > > longer
> > > > layout.

> > > > > The track is now on their "possible" list of alternate tracks for
a
> > > USAGP

> > > > Won't ever happen. Yeah I can SO much see F1's doing sub-1minute
laps
> > at
> > > SP
> > > > with absolutely no realistic safety zones for high velocity cars
like
> > > > Formula Ones. And don't tell me it's safe for F1 with whatever
> 100-line
> > > > proof. It's BS, the track is not safe for F1.

> > > > --
> > > > -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> > > > -- http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> > > > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
> > > > Corporation - helping America into the New World...

by **Jan Verschuere** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 21:18:49

Not as badly as I will.... 1m26.8s. Not a problem, provided you guys don't
press the issue in silly places.

Jan.
=---

by **Jan Verschuere** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 21:33:41

Silly question perhaps, but does it make any difference which brand one pics
(Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Pontiac)? -Can't seem to find how to change the chassis
for the player car (#83 Papyrus) or is it all just a graphical difference
now?

I'll have the #17 DeWalt Ford for the race later, if that's ok.

Jan.
=---

by **Eldre** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 21:52:11

Boy, I'd like to see the chat log after THAT one...<g>

Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank - under construction...

Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

by **Phil Le** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 22:15:35

Not a silly question at all. In real life, the car make does make a
difference. As far as I can tell, in N2002, there is no performance
difference between the different car makes. I may be wrong of course.
Maybe Eric Busch can give us a definitive answer. Eric, are you out there?

Phil
---
Racesim Central Administrator
http://www.racesimcentral.com

by **Eldre** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 21:59:44

Ok, Sears Point - 15% race(17 laps) with 30 min. practice starting at 1pm
Eastern. It *should* run a second race right after that with 10 minutes
practice. We'll see...
Password is "ras".
Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank - under construction...

Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

by **Andre Warring** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 22:16:02

On Sun, 24 Mar 2002 01:29:48 GMT, "David G Fisher"

>I just spent my first hour and a half with this track and while I think it's
>an excellent track overall, and would probably be great to visit due to the
>setting and other reasons Tom described, I don't like it AT ALL with a
>NASCAR car. "Tedious" is the best word to describe the experience. WG isn't
>much better. It really is like steering a boat.

>Another type of car at SP would probably be a blast, but not a NASCAR car.

>Is a 1:24 a ***time?

>David G Fisher

To be frank that's not too fast, my quali times are in the 19s and
racing laps are between 20-22. And I think like with every track Sears
only becomes fun when you are starting to drive on the limit.. those
first two lefthanders are great fun when you slide through them,
barely avoiding that wall on the left side, and you can take those
esses allmost at full speed, using all of the curbs.

Andre

by **Phil Le** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 22:17:26

Jan

Watch the driving lesson on Sears Point. It really helped me to reduce my
lap times from 1:24's to 1:22's and a single mid 1:21.

Cheers

Phil
---
Racesim Central Administrator
http://www.racesimcentral.com

by **Dave Henri** » Mon, 25 Mar 2002 23:02:10

I work most Saturdays Schoon....
dang Postal Service ....:)

Sunday Morning, the earlier the better, to A: avoid conflict with my Cart
league late Sunday Afternoon, and B: to avoid conflict with my family who
only seem to 'need' me when I'm racing.

dave henrie

rec.autos.simulators

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?

R.a.s. N2002 Race On For This Weekend?