rec.autos.simulators

I'am looking for a league to join !!!!! As I have gotten tired of the so
called leagues that I have joined only to find out that they are really
unorganized and are there for there own egos. Looking for clean racing
with MATURE people. Any infomation on this would be greatly appreciated.

Charlie ((IronPony))

For ICR2..try  Indy Extended Circuit..very professionally done league....there
site is  IEC.home.ml.org...then click on IEC98.

Yes, i have to agree with Tom, the IEC league for ICR2, is in my
opinion, the fairest and best run league i have been involved in...
It is a very professionally run league with the emphasis on having a
good time and all drivers being honest with their racing results, with
no noticeable egomania.....
Cheers,
Ron Ayton

And I'll have to agree with them both. BTW, you can get news about the IEC
from "Inside The IEC", written by me. The location is at
http://members.tripod.com/~Rymer_Motorsports/inside.html . And while
you're there, visit Rymer Motorsports at
http://members.tripod.com/~Rymer_Motorsports/ .

Arthur B Rymer

   See these for the best 2 ICR2 leagues I know of;

http://members.aol.com/ccccracing/

http://168.23.240.35/~gparra/iec/

Oh well, there goes the theory of no egomania......   :-)
Still, the S&S team had better watch out,  Southern Racing has just
recieved their 98 Reynard package, so things could improve, especially
with the new lighter more powerfull Mercedes power plant.
Now all Southern Racing needs is another competitive driver to boost
the team's performance, and THEN, we will redefine the meaning of
egomania......     Anyone interested??
Cheers.

and improved features

Byron, i kid you not....
Myself and a friend have spent countless hours testing the different
chassis, tyre and engine combinations for ICR1, and ICR2, and while i
feel there are small benefits (or disadvantages) using the different
combinations, it ultimately boils down to driving style.
Having said that, i will now comment on the differences we have found,
and why i chose the Reynard Mercedes Firestone package.

Incidently, we are not talking about fast lap competitions here, but an
overall competitive package consisting of street circuits, ovals and
super speedways spread over a full season of racing, using our own
setups, not generic go fast setups that are available from the
internet.
A fast generic setup is perfect only for the driver who made it, using
his/her chassis/engine/tyre combination, and usually at low temperature

with no wind.

Firstly, i agree with your comments on the Firestones being on average
more sticky than the Goodyears, but the trade off here is more heat
build up, so driving style must be smoother with the Firestones to
achieve better lap times consistantly.  A more aggressive driver would
find the Goodyears to be a better proposition.  The difference is
really quite minor, with the ultimate choice being the aggression
factor of the driver and to wether the driver likes looking at yellow
rings or white rings around his front tyres.

Fuel usage, i totally disagree.  The Mercedes engine develops it's
torque curve much lower in revs than the the Honda or Ford, and
consequently requires much less downshifting which in turn uses less
fuel to achieve identical lap times in a similar chassis/tyre
combination.
Also with the Merc engine having a broader torque curve, at a lower
rpm, the gear ratios can be higher, with an obvious advantage in fuel
saving.  Running into a head wind with a Mercedes powered car, is a
much more fuel efficient proposition than with a Honda. (see torque)
Once again, the input from the driver can have different  ramifications
regarding fuel usage, but on general, the Mercedes engine is the most
fuel efficient of the three, by far!

Note: without having access to the engine parameters that Papy coded
into ICR2, i can just go off self testing findings here...

Engine Power...  I agree that the Honda and Ford do seem to have a
small advantage at the top of the useable rpm range, but keeping these
two engines in that rpm through differing weather conditions is much
harder than keeping the Mercedes in it's useable rpm range. As an
example, using two identical setups, with a Mercedes in one, and a
Honda in the other, (2 computers linked with null modem cable), rolling
acceleration tests, (side by side on the main straight at Portland),
showed that anything under 10,000 rpm, the Mercedes would pull out
initially about 5 car lengths over the Honda.  Positions were reversed
at
11,000 rpm and over, with the Honda having the edge. If you then add a
decent head wind to the equation, the Honda suffers more than the
Mercedes.
I found that for the Super Speedways, the Honda and the Ford are
probably a better choice, but the Merc is still capable of matching
these two with good driving and chassis setups.
For other circuits, where gear changing becomes more of a necessity
than a luxury, the Merc wins hands down, and that also includes ovals
where passing CC's becomes a major part of the equation.  Every time
you make a gear change, it effects the lap time, and over over a full
race length, it can be quite noticeable to your race finish time.
Especially in a league as competitive as the IEC is between the top
runners, a couple of tenths of a second could be the difference between
finishing 1st or 5th.

Chassis.  Your point that the Lola steers better is under contention
here. When i first started racing ICR i used a Lola chassis, mainly
because of the better feeling of stability at the quicker ovals, but
after running the first season with the Lola, it's lack of cornering
ability on the street circuits made me go for Reynard.  I feel the
Penske is the best all  
rounder, with the Reynard best at the circuits, and the  Lola best at
the ovals.
The Reynard, in my opinion, is a harder chassis to achieve a balanced
combination, without excesses in looseness or pushing, but once
achieved can be marginally quicker than the other two over a full
season of racing.    I find the Reynard responds more to chassis
tweaking than the Lola, and for my style of driving is a better unit.
The Reynard is a twitchier chassis than the Lola or Penske, but gives
more ultimate speed if you can be bothered to set it up correctly.

Anyway, i will be interested to hear your thoughts, or anyone elses for
that matter, regarding combinations of Chassis/tyres/engines for ICR2.

Maybe we should have renamed the posting heading to something more
appropiate to get more feedback!
Ps, see you at Indy.....   Good luck!
Cheers,
Ron

        This is good work Ron, and your right.  It comes down to driving style.  I
came to most of the same conclusions after fooling around with the options,
and testing for different leagues ( IRL vs. CART ), but it's always nice to
know that somebody else figured things out the same way.

Bobby Upward

etc., etc., etc.

   Yes, very interesting all this. On reflection I must admit that most of my observations
are based on ovals where you are running flat out and can do pretty consistant laps. Also,
from looking at many hotlap sites. I have never really bothered to compare on the street
courses because it's so hard to know whether it was a good lap or not in many cases. As
Ron mentions, it's a matter of getting the car setup right and simply driving it well in
the end.