rec.autos.simulators

by **Joachim Trens** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 03:19:56

> It doesn't matter if it's faster or not in fixed setup racing.
> Also, I want throttle controllable wheelspin in *BOTH* 1st and 2nd.

Like I said in my reply to Haqsau, it's really just a matter of personal
preference. A setup that's great to one, may be lousy to someone else.

I don't need throttle controllable wheelspin anywhere :) I want the
wheels to be just on the verge of spinning when I nail it.

However, sometimes other considerations come into play. Sometimes you
can use 1st very well in a corner where 2nd would be a tad long, and if
you'd make that shorter you'd lose the ability to use 3rd somewhere
where it's really nice to have it - so you give up the wheel spin in a
particularly slow section...

The laps I've uploaded in the past days were driven pretty much in 'race
mode'. I had less fuel on board, but the driving style was geared
towards keeping it on the track and being smooth, just like I'd drive in
a race, and not for maximum speed, like hotlappers would drive.

Achim

by **Falkentyn** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 03:34:13

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 18:43:36 -0500, "David G Fisher"

wisdom:

>David G Fisher

_________________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do not |
/ O O\__ feed the Trolls. |
/ \ Thank You. |
/ \ \ |
/ _ \ \---------------------
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________

Usenet troll
------------

Climate/Terrain: Any Usenet newsgroup (Also "Any IRC channel", as
they
frequent IRC as well.)
Frequency: Common
Organization: Thread
Activity cycle: Any
Diet: Lusers
Intelligence: Low (3-5)
Treasure: None
Alignment: Chaotic evil (neutral)
No. Appearing: 1
Armour Class: n/a
Movement: 'c'
Hit Dice: 100
THAC0: n/a
No. of Attacks: n/a
Damage/Attack: n/a
Special Attacks: See below
Special Defenses: See below
Magic Resistance: 100%
Size: Exists as mental force only
Morale: Elite (14)
XP Value: 1,800

The Usenet troll (Trollicus useneticus ***yirritatingus) is an
evil mental parasite found in all areas of Usenet, where it preys upon
the
brains of lusers (Homo stultissimus). Most clueful people avoid these
creatures, since Usenet trolls know no fear and attack unceasingly,
demanding responses from their prey.

Usenet trolls, unlike most trolls, are immune to flames (Flammae
useneticae), which is unfortunate, as most will try to attack them
with
these first. In fact, when a troll is attacked with flames, it will
actually be able to use these flames to create more, which it
will hurl back at its unfortunate attacker. Long-lived trolls may be
able
to render an entire newsgroup uninhabitable with all the flames it
creates.

The only form of attack a troll has is its ability to incite
responses, which it needs to feed from; hence, the best way to defend
yourself against a troll is simply to ignore it. Deprived of
nourishment,
it will soon starve.

Ancient legends (found in The Book of 1036) hint that a Usenet
troll
may be vulnerable to the Spell of Cancellation, but this powerful
incantation would have to be applied swiftly after the troll's birth;
once
engaged in battle, few survive unscathed.

=====================

This was copied WITHOUT permission, from Ninure Saunders' post....

<Gibs> When you kill 6 people in Unreal Tournament
it is "MonsterKill", In Quake3 it is "Excellent",
in Counter-Strike it is "Kicked by console"

by **Joachim Trens** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 03:41:37

> I am most definitely no setup expert but, like fine art, I know what I like
> ;) I think it's important not to judge a setup simply on your own
> experience. For example, I didn't like the RA setup at first and had to
> 'learn' how to drive it. After that, we could knock out qual pace laps lap
> after lap, all race long.

> At Sebring, the setup fitted much better. I stuffed up qualifying (as usual)
> and by the time I emerged from the pack I was over 20s behind the flying
> Dave and Ginger. By halfway, I had whittled 5 or 6 seconds off that and
> checked my tyres. They were hardly quarter used and I decided to pit early
> coming up to traffic and go like hell for the second half. Things didn't
> work out quite like that and instead Ginger was the one that turned an
> amazing series of laps after his bf.

> My point is, both at RA and Sebring, several of us were able to run very
> fast, consistent laps with low tyre wear. I'm not claiming the setups are
> realistic or otherwise - I wouldn't know. What I am saying is that you can
> adapt your style to make them into effective race setups. Equally, I would
> be very happy to run one of your setups - it would be fun if you made one
> for Norisring :)

Good points IMO. There'll never be any single setup which fits the
entire field. Whenever you drive someone else's setup, a few guys will
be lucky and 'dig' it right away, but the majority will have to work on
learning to understand how the setup works. Pretty much like when a real
life race driver joins a new team, he'll have to learn how that new car
works.

I am hence not offended when someone doesn't 'like' my setups. I read
comments applying a couple of 'for me' and 'IMO' and 'I could' or 'I
couldn't', as they're usually a description of a driver's personal luck
(or lack thereof) with a setup.

Achim

by **Jan Verschuere** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 03:49:26

Valid point if our trans-am weren't equipped with a NASCAR mandated Detroit
Locker (i.e. a solid rear axle under power). If you can't control wheelspin
off slow corners you'll have to run the car too loose everywhere just to get
off the slow corners. Which, BTW, your setup provides.

And if you do that, eventually, you're going to be watching a race from some
tight spot, you couldn't get out of because you couldn't spin the rear
tyres. 1st is for making standing starts and tight hairpins. Ok, so I'm old
fashioned, sue me.

LOL... the "I'm not a hotlapper" routine. ;-))

Race mode starts with 22 gallons of fuel, so by the time you get down to the
"fast" fuel load the tyres will have given up their best and you'll be
slower overall. Anything else is "qualifying mode" at best.

Jan.
=---

by **Joachim Trens** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 03:59:55

> Race mode starts with 22 gallons of fuel

Only in cars with fixed rear axles, Jan. In most other racing series
you're free to chose the fuel quantity you want, even at the start of a
race :)

Achim

by **Joachim Trens** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 04:10:43

Oh and I forgot to add... <g>

> LOL... the "I'm not a hotlapper" routine. ;-))

Versus the 'Tag him as a hotlapper to make the speed
differential look less big' routine? <g> ;) ;)

Achim

by **Jan Verschuere** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 09:57:46

Unlike you're doing? -Just because you and Achim can get this crock o' shit
around Sebring 5 seconds faster than I can doesn't lend any importance to
your opinion over mine (or anyone else's) whatsoever.

That's entirely beside the point. An at least equal and in effect greater
number didn't get on at all, including several drivers who can run with you
in open setup / open wheel racing.

The purpose, IMO, of fixed setup racing is to have a car that is, in a way,
limited by setup and to have drivers deal with this situation to a varying
degree, thus closing the field up. It is not about giving a select few what
they need to be fast an leave the rest floundering in their wake.

I will agree this is easier to acchieve in oval racing where it's beyond
hard to take a car and make it go faster than it's ready to go by it's own
devices, but this doesn't mean a setup without any natural balance should be
selected as the norm for everyone in road racing.

You'd better not... according to the corner weights these cars weigh about
2400lbs and it's safe to say they'll generated at least once or even twice
that as download. Running anything lower than an 800lbs spring at any corner
is therefore silly. As are the game's imposed rideheights/rake. These cars,
in RL, are to be run low and stiff. In the absense of "low", I suggest
running them as stiff as possible.

Absolute BS... I can adapt my style to suit any more or less correctly set
up car, but I can't turn these hotlapper abominations into effective
racecars by adapting my driving alone.

Already done so... get practising!! ;-)

It has taught me nothing other than the supposed TA physics in NR2003 are a
bunch of hot air. They do not represent anything like TA cars and it appears
there are no provisions for cars to have different handling characteristics
in the game. Personally, I'd rather run BGN races. The "TA" cars can't be
set up to handle like their RL counterparts and provide no challenge in
their own right. They are simly hard work( i.e. no fun) to drive without
anything resembling a reward in driving terms.

Jan.
=---

by **Haqsa** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:47:43

Jan, don't forget the rates you see in the setup screen are spring rates,
not wheel rates. If they had IRS I would agree with you but they still have
the trailing rear link live axle just like the cup cars. We don't know the
leverage ratio but it is certainly much different front to rear, that's why
on these types of cars the rear spring rates are always much lower than the
fronts. On top of that there is a certain amount of roll stiffness that
comes as a result of the rear link arrangement, independent of the springs.
Huge rear springs are not necessary IMO, in fact to get the normal
proportion of front deflection to rear deflection that is used on most RWD
cars the rear springs only need to be 1/3 to 1/2 the strength of the fronts.

----- Original Message -----

Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: N2003 Buggy POS Arcade Game

> ... according to the corner weights these cars weigh about
> 2400lbs and it's safe to say they'll generated at least once or even twice
> that as download. Running anything lower than an 800lbs spring at any
corner
> is therefore silly.

by **Brian Oste** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 14:57:16

Ya, I didn't think it felt that different either (except the gearing),
however, my times dropped a full second and a half instantly when I
went from Lablanc70 to Achims.

Brian Oster

>Funny part was after I lost my gears I went offline and ran some laps with
>Leblanc70 setup and it didnt feel all that diff from Achims. Go figure.

>Mitch

>> That is undoubtedly a very fast setup in the right hands, but a lot of us
>> didn't have the right hands. ;o)

>> Seriously, if you don't mind a little constructive criticism, it was well
>> suited to aliens but not well suited to less experienced drivers.
>Speaking
>> as a less experienced driver I had a great deal of difficulty with
>> directional control, and with sudden changes from understeer to oversteer.
>> It appears like what you did was take a typical GPL style alien setup and
>> make it somewhat more controllable by increasing the front damping. The
>> problem is that this only makes the car stable by causing understeer
>during
>> pitch and roll events, under any other conditions it is still a bit loose.
>> Also the setup allowed way too much roll, making directional changes very
>> difficult.

>> For a while I was practicing with my own variant of your setup, where
>among
>> other things I put on a much bigger front bar and adjusted the damping to
>> 5/4 front and 4/3 rear (rebound/bump). Very similar to setups I have used
>> in F1C and GTR. This was much easier to drive, but was hell on the right
>> front tire.

>> Honestly I think there is a serious flaw in the TA physics. It seems that
>> anything you do to give the car adequate roll control (bigger springs,
>> bigger bars) will eat the right front tire. The only way to control tire
>> wear is to use wimpy springs and bars. This allows huge suspension
>> deflections which are totally unrealistic for these types of cars. So I
>can
>> see how you ended up with that setup and it makes sense from a performance
>> and tire wear standpoint, but it gives a huge advantage to the aliens who
>> are used to driving that type of setup.

>> I still find the PWF expert setups for TA to be the easiest to drive.
>They
>> usually have a much bigger front bar than rear and more balanced damping.
>> The bigger front bar makes the car inherently stable, and the more
>balanced
>> damping allows you to lean on the car pretty heavily without pushing.
>> Usually they are not so bad for tire wear. Unfortunately the LeBlanc
>setup
>> for this track really felt a lot different than the typical PWF setup and
>> most people found it undrivable also.

>> Not sure what the magic setup is for this track. I really like the track
>> but I would like to think there is some way of setting up a drivable car
>> that is not hell on the tires. Tire wear is bad at the real life track
>from
>> what I have heard, but I don't think it is as bad as we experienced in the
>> race.

>> Again I question the TA physics. I still think the Papy tire model is
>> really not right for these cars, and the high CG complicates things even
>> further by making the car pitch and roll excessively. I wonder if they
>plan
>> on addressing this at all or if we are just going to have to live with it.
>> Granted it's a fantasy series, but one would hope it would at least be
>> similar to real life series like SCCA Trans-Am, V8 Supercars, or DTM, and
>I
>> honestly think it is not even remotely like any of them.

>> > > No offense Joachim, but that was bad.

>> > None taken, but I didn't see any complaints from those who tested it
>> > before the race, so what makes you say Dave was the _only_ one who could
>> > drive it? What was your prob with it?

>> > Regarding the gears, I'd noticed in my tests before uploading the setup
>> > that I was faster with these longer gear ratios than with shorter ones.
>> > That, plus the goal to have some margin for drafting, made me chose
>> > these ratios.

>> > That 1:55.901 I uploaded today was done with that setup btw, the only
>> > difference being tape = 70, and I started with only 10 laps worth of
>fuel.

>> > Achim

by **David G Fishe** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 22:33:48

Somewhere on here, I said the same thing. My lap time instantly dropped 1.5
seconds the first time I tried it. The only significant adjustment I had to
make was getting used to the gearing, which only took a couple of laps.

David G Fisher

> Ya, I didn't think it felt that different either (except the gearing),
> however, my times dropped a full second and a half instantly when I
> went from Lablanc70 to Achims.

> Brian Oster

> >Funny part was after I lost my gears I went offline and ran some laps
with
> >Leblanc70 setup and it didnt feel all that diff from Achims. Go figure.

> >Mitch

> >> That is undoubtedly a very fast setup in the right hands, but a lot of
us
> >> didn't have the right hands. ;o)

> >> Seriously, if you don't mind a little constructive criticism, it was
well
> >> suited to aliens but not well suited to less experienced drivers.
> >Speaking
> >> as a less experienced driver I had a great deal of difficulty with
> >> directional control, and with sudden changes from understeer to
oversteer.
> >> It appears like what you did was take a typical GPL style alien setup
and
> >> make it somewhat more controllable by increasing the front damping.
The
> >> problem is that this only makes the car stable by causing understeer
> >during
> >> pitch and roll events, under any other conditions it is still a bit
loose.
> >> Also the setup allowed way too much roll, making directional changes
very
> >> difficult.

> >> For a while I was practicing with my own variant of your setup, where
> >among
> >> other things I put on a much bigger front bar and adjusted the damping
to
> >> 5/4 front and 4/3 rear (rebound/bump). Very similar to setups I have
used
> >> in F1C and GTR. This was much easier to drive, but was hell on the
right
> >> front tire.

> >> Honestly I think there is a serious flaw in the TA physics. It seems
that
> >> anything you do to give the car adequate roll control (bigger springs,
> >> bigger bars) will eat the right front tire. The only way to control
tire
> >> wear is to use wimpy springs and bars. This allows huge suspension
> >> deflections which are totally unrealistic for these types of cars. So
I
> >can
> >> see how you ended up with that setup and it makes sense from a
performance
> >> and tire wear standpoint, but it gives a huge advantage to the aliens
who
> >> are used to driving that type of setup.

> >> I still find the PWF expert setups for TA to be the easiest to drive.
> >They
> >> usually have a much bigger front bar than rear and more balanced
damping.
> >> The bigger front bar makes the car inherently stable, and the more
> >balanced
> >> damping allows you to lean on the car pretty heavily without pushing.
> >> Usually they are not so bad for tire wear. Unfortunately the LeBlanc
> >setup
> >> for this track really felt a lot different than the typical PWF setup
and
> >> most people found it undrivable also.

> >> Not sure what the magic setup is for this track. I really like the
track
> >> but I would like to think there is some way of setting up a drivable
car
> >> that is not hell on the tires. Tire wear is bad at the real life track
> >from
> >> what I have heard, but I don't think it is as bad as we experienced in
the
> >> race.

> >> Again I question the TA physics. I still think the Papy tire model is
> >> really not right for these cars, and the high CG complicates things
even
> >> further by making the car pitch and roll excessively. I wonder if they
> >plan
> >> on addressing this at all or if we are just going to have to live with
it.
> >> Granted it's a fantasy series, but one would hope it would at least be
> >> similar to real life series like SCCA Trans-Am, V8 Supercars, or DTM,
and
> >I
> >> honestly think it is not even remotely like any of them.

> >> > > No offense Joachim, but that was bad.

> >> > None taken, but I didn't see any complaints from those who tested it
> >> > before the race, so what makes you say Dave was the _only_ one who
could
> >> > drive it? What was your prob with it?

> >> > Regarding the gears, I'd noticed in my tests before uploading the
setup
> >> > that I was faster with these longer gear ratios than with shorter
ones.
> >> > That, plus the goal to have some margin for drafting, made me chose
> >> > these ratios.

> >> > That 1:55.901 I uploaded today was done with that setup btw, the only
> >> > difference being tape = 70, and I started with only 10 laps worth of
> >fuel.

> >> > Achim

by **David G Fishe** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:10:54

How was a select few given what they need to be fast? It's the same setup
for everyone. No one got together and said, "let's find setups that are best
for us."

For Kyalami, we used the setup that came with the track.

At LeMans, we could not use the <fast> setup because engines would of been
blowing up left and right. JS provided the only alternative setup, and
that's what we used.

At RA, we used the setup that came with the track. No one provided an
alternative.

At Sebring, we used Joachim's setup because after polling the group, not one
single person objected to a switch to his form the leblanc setup. Also, most
said it was better than the leblanc setup. They may have not been thrilled
with it, but they thought it was better, and it was the only alternative as
well.

Who's been the fastest drivers in all those races? Setups came from
different sources, but the results have been the same.

I remember Brian Farmer saying he initially didn't like the Sebring setup
too much, but he apparently adjusted quite well to it after some laps.
Everyone needs to adjust to every setup.

I just don't get it. I tried Joachim's LeMans setup, then JS's, then yours.
It took no effort to adjust from one to the other. All I had to do was get
used to the gearing. The times were close (1.7 seconds difference between
Joachim's and yours). You adjust.

How are they hotlapper abominations? They aren't even all from the same
source. Of the four TA races we've run, I think the only race where I've
looped it or gone off the track (unless caused by a screen freeze like at
Sebring)was LeMans. Hotlapper setups are setups that are easy to lose, and
usually lousy for a full race. These setups haven't been like that at all.
RA felt like it was glued to the track.

They are fun as h*ll for me to drive, and very rewarding.

David G Fisher

by **John Simmon** » Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:55:01

says...

> > > What I am saying is that you can adapt your style to make them
> > > into effective race setups.

> > Absolute BS... I can adapt my style to suit any more or less correctly set
> > up car, but I can't turn these hotlapper abominations into effective
> > racecars by adapting my driving alone.

Everyone write this down - I agree with Dave.

My setups (when I feel like working on one) are the furthest thing from
hotlapper setups that you'll ever find. I have no interest in running
two or three laps at a time to find the absolute best lap time at the
expense of tires and fuel consumption. I ALWAYS make race setups, and I
even my race setups for qualifying.

Like Dave said, adapting to a setup is what it's all about. If that
means changing your driving style a bit to compensate for perceived
weaknesses in the setup, so be it.

On the other hand, fixed setups at roadies are kinda pointless because
you don't slow the fast guys down as much as you slow the slow guys
down. As Dave pointed out, the same guys are always in the front at road
course events, and I witnessed that when I was running a GPL league - in
Season 1, it was almost always Graeme Nash, Tony Rickard, and then me.

For road events, I simply try to turn the best, most consistent laps I
can, try my best to stay out of trouble and on the racing surface
pointed in the right direction, and pray that the fast guys abuse their
car a little too often or magically develop a nervous twitch at a
critical moment and run off the course so I can gain a few seconds on
them.

by **Jan Verschuere** » Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:36:18

Yes, I know that.

At Le Mans the rear suspension bottoms while running in a straight line,
that's six inches of suspension travel or, in other words, at least 1500lbs
of load per wheel. If that were my racecar, I'd only want to give up about 1
inch of suspension travel to download. That's where I arrived at the 800lbs
spring (absolute minimum), then I would balance it up at the front getting
to whatever ratio feels comfortable to the driver.

Yes, my Norisring setup is like that after I found the rear springs only go
up to 650lbs. Still a bit soft for my liking.

Jan.
=---

by **Larr** » Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:05:26

Damn, I agree :)

-Larry

> Fixed-setups on road courses is a stupid idea. On ovals it makes
> sense, on road courses it is utterly ridiculous.

> Jason

by **David G Fishe** » Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:02:01

I don't remember it ever being an issue during the first two RASCAR seasons.

David G Fisher

> >He had a few screen lock ups while leading our Sebring race. I think he
was
> >quite far in the lead too.
> >Dave being the only one that could drive that setup. I never hit 6th gear
> >during the whole practice and race.
> >No offense Joachim, but that was bad.

> Fixed-setups on road courses is a stupid idea. On ovals it makes
> sense, on road courses it is utterly ridiculous.

> Jason