N4 Major Physics Problem or ?????

I just picked up and installed the game. I am using an analog wheel and pedals, Simulation model, Linear steering and no cheats besides automatic clutch. I also tried several different steering gear settings (garage). The problem is that once the car begins to oversteer due to throttle application, no amount of opposite lock has any effect whatsoever. Clearly in a car with race tires you should be able to recover completely from throttle oversteer (not lift throttle oversteer) at low speeds. The effect of this is that as you are driving around a road course if you make a mistake you cannot recover. This seems like such an obvious mistake that it is hard to believe it slipped into the game. I would love to hear that there is a setting I have missed which will put the handling back where it should be. I have had one friend that also has the game confirm that he is seeing the same behavior. Thanks, Eric Fesler

What happens if you engage the clutch when the spin starts? Like GPL, even if you let off the gas, there is still a whack of HP flowing to the rear wheels under these circumstances (i.e., immediately following throttle-induced oversteer). (I don't have my copy of N4 yet, but the same thing will happen in GPL, so I am extrapolating.) Marc. "Eric Fesler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> I just picked up and installed the game. I am using an analog wheel > and pedals, Simulation model, Linear steering and no cheats besides > automatic clutch. I also tried several different steering gear > settings (garage). > > The problem is that once the car begins to oversteer due to throttle > application, no amount of opposite lock has any effect whatsoever. > Clearly in a car with race tires you should be able to recover > completely from throttle oversteer (not lift throttle oversteer) at > low speeds. > > The effect of this is that as you are driving around a road course if > you make a mistake you cannot recover. This seems like such an > obvious mistake that it is hard to believe it slipped into the game. > I would love to hear that there is a setting I have missed which will > put the handling back where it should be. > > I have had one friend that also has the game confirm that he is seeing > the same behavior. > > Thanks, > Eric Fesler

Try to use less than full throttle when exiting the corners. You can't expect to throw all that HP onto the road at once and easily drive away! Once you start spinning the rear tires, you have lost most grip in the rear end so it will oversteer! If you use less throttle, that lets you accelerate without spinning the tires, so you keep the grip in the rear, and accelerate faster...or is using partial throttle a new concept to you? JB "Eric Fesler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> I just picked up and installed the game. I am using an analog wheel > and pedals, Simulation model, Linear steering and no cheats besides > automatic clutch. I also tried several different steering gear > settings (garage). > > The problem is that once the car begins to oversteer due to throttle > application, no amount of opposite lock has any effect whatsoever. > Clearly in a car with race tires you should be able to recover > completely from throttle oversteer (not lift throttle oversteer) at > low speeds. > > The effect of this is that as you are driving around a road course if > you make a mistake you cannot recover. This seems like such an > obvious mistake that it is hard to believe it slipped into the game. > I would love to hear that there is a setting I have missed which will > put the handling back where it should be. > > I have had one friend that also has the game confirm that he is seeing > the same behavior. > > Thanks, > Eric Fesler

On 09 f�vr. 2001, you wrote in rec.autos.simulators:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 03:14:42 GMT, Eric Fesler <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>The problem is that once the car begins to oversteer due to throttle >>application, no amount of opposite lock has any effect whatsoever. >>Clearly in a car with race tires you should be able to recover >>completely from throttle oversteer (not lift throttle oversteer) at >>low speeds. > >You have a total loss of traction at the rear, somewhat akin >to applying a handbrake. The rear may definitely keep going. > >Have you ever been to a race? > >

More over, if i remember correctly, the WC cars have 2 tons weight !! And GPL cars have avg. 600 kg ! That's a LOT of inertia . -- Seb Game Developer GPLRank -41.68 http://magicfr.multimania.com

IIRC one of the motor simulation sites (BlackHole?) has a review by a Nascar driver of a Nascar sim who ststes that, in real life, once the car is beyond (I think) 15 degrees, it is uncatchable. Maybe someone else can be less vague than me! Ben S�bastien Tixier wrote in message ...

Quoted text (26 lines)

>On 09 f�vr. 2001, you wrote in rec.autos.simulators: > >>On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 03:14:42 GMT, Eric Fesler <[email hidden]> >>wrote: >> >>>The problem is that once the car begins to oversteer due to throttle >>>application, no amount of opposite lock has any effect whatsoever. >>>Clearly in a car with race tires you should be able to recover >>>completely from throttle oversteer (not lift throttle oversteer) at >>>low speeds. >> >>You have a total loss of traction at the rear, somewhat akin >>to applying a handbrake. The rear may definitely keep going. >> >>Have you ever been to a race? >> >> > >More over, if i remember correctly, the WC cars have 2 tons weight !! >And GPL cars have avg. 600 kg ! That's a LOT of inertia . > >-- >Seb >Game Developer >GPLRank -41.68 >http://magicfr.multimania.com

"Ben Coleman" <[email hidden]> wrote ... > IIRC one of the motor simulation sites (BlackHole?) has a review by aNascar > driver of a Nascar sim who ststes that, in real life, once the car is > beyond (I think) 15 degrees, it is uncatchable. Maybe someone else can be > less vague than me! > > BenOh no! IRL Nascars have a canned spin routine built in ;-) -- Tony Whitley GPLRank +10.65

I don't know about this guy, but I've been to a race. They're fun!! I am flying out to Vegas in March for the Winston Cup race. That will be fun, too. "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 03:14:42 GMT, Eric Fesler <[email hidden]>wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > >The problem is that once the car begins to oversteer due to throttle > >application, no amount of opposite lock has any effect whatsoever. > >Clearly in a car with race tires you should be able to recover > >completely from throttle oversteer (not lift throttle oversteer) at > >low speeds. > > You have a total loss of traction at the rear, somewhat akin > to applying a handbrake. The rear may definitely keep going. > > Have you ever been to a race? >

>"Eric Fesler" <[email hidden]> wrote > The problem is that once the car begins to oversteer due to throttle > application, no amount of opposite lock has any effect whatsoever. That's perfectly normal Eric. Those Winston Cup cars weight over 2 tons, you can't expect (even if you are on banking) to catch a car easily as that, even at low speeds. I suggest you perhaps tap the brakes a little -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

no they dont weigh over 2 tons. If you dont think they can be corrected in real life racing, you have not watched the career of Dale Earnhardt SR "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MKQg6.6857$[email hidden]... > >"Eric Fesler" <[email hidden]> wrote > > The problem is that once the car begins to oversteer due to throttle > > application, no amount of opposite lock has any effect whatsoever. > > That's perfectly normal Eric. Those Winston Cup cars weight over 2 tons, > you can't expect (even if you are on banking) to catch a car easily asthat,

Quoted text (14 lines)

> even at low speeds. I suggest you perhaps tap the brakes a little > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how > hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > >

"Eric Fesler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > The problem is that once the car begins to oversteer due to throttle > application, no amount of opposite lock has any effect whatsoever. It could be accurate. > Clearly in a car with race tires you should be able to recover > completely from throttle oversteer (not lift throttle oversteer) at > low speeds. Clearly??? Clearly you need less throttle. > The effect of this is that as you are driving around a road course if > you make a mistake you cannot recover. This seems like such an It is certainly possible. > obvious mistake that it is hard to believe it slipped into the game. > I would love to hear that there is a setting I have missed which will > put the handling back where it should be. Try using less throttle. One last thing. Duh :-) -- [email hidden]

It could be accurate. Clearly??? Clearly you need less throttle. It is certainly possible. Try using less throttle. One last thing. Duh :-) --

"Jerry" <[email hidden]> wrote in <YBRg6.44599$[email hidden]>: >no they dont weigh over 2 tons. If you dont think they can be corrected >in real life racing, you have not watched the career of Dale Earnhardt Sorry, in France, Nascar is not very popular, and the last time i saw nascar on Eurosport they say that they weighed 1.8t, Engine was 6L , 4 cylinders, and about 400bhp ... I will be pleased to know the new values ! And i don't say that you can't correct it but it is very more difficult than a 1967 F1 car because of the weight. So it's a compliment for Nascar drivers, even if IMO F1 pilots are better drivers ... but anyway we can't compare those two style of driving. -- Seb Game Developer GPLRank -41.68 N4Rank ... err.. where is the web site ;o) http://magicfr.multimania.com

[email hidden] (S�bastien Tixier) writes:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> "Jerry" <[email hidden]> wrote in > <YBRg6.44599$[email hidden]>: > > >no they dont weigh over 2 tons. If you dont think they can be corrected > >in real life racing, you have not watched the career of Dale Earnhardt > > Sorry, in France, Nascar is not very popular, and the last time i saw > nascar on Eurosport they say that they weighed 1.8t, Engine was 6L , 4 > cylinders, and about 400bhp ... I will be pleased to know the new values ! > And i don't say that you can't correct it but it is very more difficult than > a 1967 F1 car because of the weight. So it's a compliment for Nascar > drivers, even if IMO F1 pilots are better drivers ... but anyway we can't > compare those two style of driving.

You've probably seen it already, but check the post from rreved where he qoutes Dale Earnhard jr. who sais 3400 pound stock car. That's approximately 1.7 - 1.8 tonnes :) -- Olav K. Malmin remove .spam when replying

700 HP "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On 9 Feb 2001 14:21:20 GMT, [email hidden] (S�bastien Tixier)wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > >"Jerry" <[email hidden]> wrote in > ><YBRg6.44599$[email hidden]>: > > > >>no they dont weigh over 2 tons. If you dont think they can be corrected > >>in real life racing, you have not watched the career of Dale Earnhardt > > > >Sorry, in France, Nascar is not very popular, and the last time i saw > >nascar on Eurosport they say that they weighed 1.8t, Engine was 6L , 4 > >cylinders, and about 400bhp ... I will be pleased to know the new values

! > > 8 cylinders / ?600-700 hp?. >

let summurise this, 1.7t / 700 bhp / 8 cylinders ( flat ? twin ? ) Tyres : slick ? ... not very wide anyway Well, now we can tell that it's difficult to correct a slide so Nascar 4 IS accurate :o) CQFD ! that means in French " That what it needs to be demonstrated " :o) -- Seb Game Developer GPLRank -41.68 http://magicfr.multimania.com

>"Jerry" <[email hidden]> wrote > no they dont weigh over 2 tons. Depends on what kind of ton your talking about. Anyway I think we get the point that a WC is "heavy". So often people loose the point and nitpick. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

On 9 Feb 2001 15:24:28 GMT, [email hidden] (S�bastien Tixier) wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>let summurise this, > > 1.7t / 700 bhp / 8 cylinders ( flat ? twin ? ) >Tyres : slick ? ... not very wide anyway > >Well, now we can tell that it's difficult to correct a slide >so Nascar 4 IS accurate :o)

But ofcourse easier to tell whether it is *going* into a slide, because of the same inertia. BTW, the width of the tires don't matter much in friction, if at all. Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/

"S�bastien Tixier" wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> "Jerry" <[email hidden]> wrote in > <YBRg6.44599$[email hidden]>: > > >no they dont weigh over 2 tons. If you dont think they can be corrected > >in real life racing, you have not watched the career of Dale Earnhardt > > Sorry, in France, Nascar is not very popular, and the last time i saw > nascar on Eurosport they say that they weighed 1.8t, Engine was 6L , 4 > cylinders, and about 400bhp ... I will be pleased to know the new values ! > And i don't say that you can't correct it but it is very more difficult than > a 1967 F1 car because of the weight. So it's a compliment for Nascar > drivers, even if IMO F1 pilots are better drivers ... but anyway we can't > compare those two style of driving.

Sebastian, 1.7 - 1.8 tons is close - technically the car itself is 3400 pounds + 200 pounds (minimum) for the driver; 700+ hp (I think I read once where Robert Yates's crew got 742 peak on one engine), I'm going to guess that 6L is correct as I don't know what the volume conversion is. Anyhow it's measured as a 358 cubic inch volume. The 700+ bhp is generated by a V-8 engine (2 or 4 valves anyone?) with a 830 4-barrell carburator. The tires used are 9.5 inches wide when inflated to 60 psi. Once you change the pressure you change the contact patch and at that point it's part science and part art - and why crew chiefs get paid the big bucks. As to better drivers, I tend to liken it to runners. Enduro drivers are similar to tri-athletes; drag racers are the sprinters, short track drivers are similar to intermediate distance runners and the big boys of stock cars are rather like marathoners. Road racing is rather like cross country. I will say that it's much easier for a driver to alter his style than a track runner.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (S�bastien Tixier) writes: >Sorry, in France, Nascar is not very popular, and the last time i saw >nascar on Eurosport they say that they weighed 1.8t, Engine was 6L , 4 >cylinders, and about 400bhp ... I will be pleased to know the new values ! Roughly 1.7 tons, 5.6 liters, 8 cylinders, and 700 hp. These are not new values. They dropped 100 pounds a couple of years ago, and horsepower always creeps up, but the formula has been stable for about 20 years. Did they really say 6 liter 4 cyl? Don McCorkle

"S�bastien Tixier" <[email hidden]> wrote ... > > Sorry, in France, Nascar is not very popular, and the last time i saw > nascar on Eurosport they say that they weighed 1.8t, Engine was 6L , 4 > cylinders, and about 400bhp ... I will be pleased to know the new values ! > And i don't say that you can't correct it but it is very more difficultthan > a 1967 F1 car because of the weight.Never having driven either, I should imagine that the (much) heavier car would be easier to catch as everything would happen much slower. Certainly true of road cars I have driven, but there may be other factors involved there.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> So it's a compliment for Nascar > drivers, even if IMO F1 pilots are better drivers ... but anyway we can't > compare those two style of driving. > > > -- > Seb > Game Developer

Well I'm a developer and game for anything too ;-) -- Tony Whitley GPLRank +10.65

[email hidden] (Woodie 83) wrote in >Roughly 1.7 tons, 5.6 liters, 8 cylinders, and 700 hp. These are not >new values. They dropped 100 pounds a couple of years ago, and >horsepower always creeps up, but the formula has been stable for about >20 years. Did they really say 6 liter 4 cyl?Hi, Well, They said 6liters, but 4 cylinders, maybe i didn't remember correctly :o) Maybe they said rounded numbers for the TV audiance.( 2tons, 6liters ). > > >Don McCorkle > regards, -- Seb Game Developer GPLRank -41.68 http://magicfr.multimania.com

Mike Donnelly Jr <[email hidden]> wrote in <[email hidden]>: >Sebastian, 1.7 - 1.8 tons is close - technically the car itself is 3400 >pounds + 200 pounds (minimum) for the driver; 700+ hp (I think I read >once where Robert Yates's crew got 742 peak on one engine), I'm going to >guess that 6L is correct as I don't know what the volume conversion is. >Anyhow it's measured as a 358 cubic inch volume. 1 inch = 2.54cm, so 358 cubuc inches = 5866 cubic cm, equal 5.866 liters.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>The 700+ bhp is generated by a V-8 engine (2 or 4 valves anyone?) with a >830 4-barrell carburator. > >The tires used are 9.5 inches wide when inflated to 60 psi. Once you >change the pressure you change the contact patch and at that point it's >part science and part art - and why crew chiefs get paid the big bucks.

Thanks, for those thechnicals infos ! ... jezzz... 9.5 inches ... front and rear tires ??? My car has 9.5 inches ( 25cm ) tires and don't has 700 bhp ! regards, -- Seb Game Developer GPLRank -41.68 http://magicfr.multimania.com