rec.autos.simulators

-Larry

Of course not, you're misinterpreting me.

Like I said, I wasn't able to provide an alternative so therefore I had no
real right to complain. Besides, the <fast> setup was just as bad in
handling terms.

I wasn't able to be there, so didn't even bother to install the track.

Again, no bones there.

And I'm not begrudging that... these guys will beat me most of the time
regardless of setup.

No, you don't get it. You adjust down to a setup I consider stable, I have
to adjust up to drive a setup you consider perfectly adequate. It's one
thing to have walk a sturdy bridge with a bunch of guys who are afraid of
heights, it's another to have to walk a loosely strung tightrope with a
couple of no-fear loonies who bounce and wiggle the thing up and down and
from side to side.

JS's setup at Le Mans is a knife's edge. Especially through T1 and between
Arnage and Maison Blanc. You have to get it exactly right or it will kill
you (either literally or in terms of lap time). My setup you have to get it
exactly right to go really fast as well, but there's more chance of doing so
and there's less of a penalty for being not quite so accurate. Which one
gives you the more confidence in the car?

I'm not saying JS's Le Mans setup is a hotlapper abomination for he has a
reason to flaunt accepted practise with respect to spring rates. I don't
agree with the gearing, but that's more of a preference thing (and something
I can driver around).
Again: I haven't even tried the RA setup, but judging from 2nd hand
information (by people who's likes, dislikes and driving styles are intimate
knowledge to me) I can get a general idea.
Achim has no real excuse for his Sebring setup. He did what he did to make
the car faster in the sim, regardless of any real world vehicle dynamics
considerations. Also, he's introduced certain elements to help his style,
which, regardless of what he claims, employs various hotlapper techniques
(as evident from his Norisring hotlap using my setup) IMO.

I lost it at Kyalami though brainfade and Indianapolis/Le Mans due to the
poor natural balance of the setup. And, no, I don't care whether more
talented drivers can keep the car balanced regardless... for fixed setup
racing setups need to have a built in balance, bit like a 4wd car.

So you draw the line differently then I do.

It's fun in a sort of empty headed, get all the sliding out of your system
kind of way, but they require hardly anything in the way of discipline to
drive effectively and therefore there's hardly any reward in them for those
a bit further down on the absolute speed scale.

Jan.
=---

Speaking for myself, of course :)

-Larry

Achim

<vbg>

Jan.
=---

Achim

-Larry

On a road course, the potential of a setup is almost entirely driver
dependent.  There are a wide variety of styles for attacking a road
course, and each style requires a different kind of setup in order to
achieve consistency.  What feels good to Achim or David feels like a
school bus to me.  What feels good to me would probably have Achim or
David scratching their heads wondering how the hell I can drive it
with any consistency.

There are some good quotes from Steve Smith in the CART Racing
Strategy Guide (p. 123) on this subject:

"On an oval, there's basically one correct way to drive a lap...and
everything else is either a compromise or a mistake.  In road racing,
there are as many acceptable ways to attack the circuit as there are
driving styles."

"And while there are near-perfect setups for the ovals (all the
theories tend to converge on a single point), road racing setups are
far more nebulous."

Jason

Jason

How can someone of your ability level possibly stand a setup like
that? -Other than you made it yourself, obviously.

It just falls over and takes off, especially at the rear. Doesn't that
bother you?

Jan.
=---

For me, it's easy to drive, and feels stable. It has the balance I want,
that balance doesn't change much over the race distance, and it has good
wear characteristics. That's what I'm looking for in a setup.

Your Norisring setup is good, or else I couldn't have driven it to a
48.3 with just 9 laps of practice. But some prefer this, others prefer
that - all ways will take you to Rome, as the Romans used to say :)

Achim

--
ed_

It's not that I am thrilled by the huge body roll and pitch. I'm only
accepting it as a compromise between what I want, and what's possible
in N2k3.

Of course I'd like to have a stiffer and less roll/pitch-happy chassis
when I'm trying to simulate GT cars, TransAms or even Prototypes, more
like what Simbin's GTR2002 mod looked and felt like, there's no question
about it.

But, in N2k3, just stiffening the suspension for me personally doesn't
make the car feel (and look, from the driver seat) any more convincing
as a GT, TA or Prototype simulation than it is with my soft suspension
settings, as while things get stiffer, that specific type of visual
jitter the N2k3 cars produce in these circumstances to me doesn't look
anywhere nearer to what I think the simulated racecars should look like
from the inside than my soft setups. It spoils my suspense of disbelief,
as to me, this type of visual jitter indicates long springs with many
coils which haven't been properly dampened, and that's not what these
cars in my subconcious expectation should look like (I'd expect some
jitter, but it should look different <g>).

Since I find this visually annoying, I've decided for myself that since
in addition this is how N2k3's physics, which were originally made for
Nascars, work, I'll just accept this as something I can't change and go
with it.

And since when setting up a real car, you'll also try to make it as soft
as possible, and as hard as necessary, to get a good compromise between
grip, wear and driveability, that's what I'm trying to do. I try to use
N2k3's physics in the way they were meant to be used as that's how the
sim works, and accept the drawbacks as doing otherwise for me personally
doesn't have any advantages.

I can handle the softness well, and over the race distance it does have
advantages as it preserves the tires well, so I just accept it as part
of how N2k3 works and was meant to be used.

I'll of course gladly accept anyone's opinion who feels that to him
those stiffer suspensions make the car look or feel more real - I just
don't share these feelings.

But this notwithstanding, I'd like the roll and pitch to look more like
what Simbins GTR mod looked and felt like, there's no doubt about it.

AAMOF, I drove Jan's Norisring setup he posted in the RASCAR forum, and
felt comfortable with it right way. I didn't like that aforementioned
jitter, but that's merely a visual thing, not something that would
affect the driving.

I do think that Jan's setup will be harder on the tires over a race
distance, but that's a purely strategical consideration. It may also be
less controllable when you go over the curbs, but that shouldn't happen
too often at the Norisring anyway, so if I had to drive his setup, I
wouldn't mind.

Anyway, it's not that I _want_ to have the setups as soft as I use them.
I just try to accept the characteristics of N2k3's Cup car style physics
as doing otherwise doesn't get me nearer to what I'm trying to simulate
either, and does go a bit against how the sim was meant to be used -
only IMHO of course.

Achim