Opposite lock help

Does anyone know exactly opposite lock help does.i have tried it with it on and off and can see no difference. Thanks for any help. Wayne Chapple

Oposite Lock Help, assists you in catching the car as it starts to spin. This allows the driver to get on the power sooner and harder than someone who is doing all of the driving on thier own. Oposite Lock Help is extremely un-realistic, and I consider it to be cheating (not that my opinion matters) You can tell when someone is using Oposite Lock Help, by thier setup. They will be running less Rear wing, than Front wing. the advantage of less rear wing is that it causes much less drag. (less drag = higher-straight line speed) With Oposite lock Help turned OFF, having less rear wing than front wing, would give the car severe oversteer, which is extremely hard to catch on your own. This results in lurid slides in the corners (causing you to lose speed) which outweighs the advantage gained by the higher straigh line speed. Sean Alexander http://www.ccse.net/~greybane/

This is absolutely false, Sean. My qualifying setup at Monza has wing settings of 9 at the front and 1 at the back, and I use no aids whatsoever. Josh

Josh, You must have a very highly developed talent for car control. I myself prefer a lightly oversteering car (up to 2 settings less rear than front) but find that I scrub way too much speed sliding through corners if I go with any less rear wing. Sean Sean Alexander http://www.ccse.net/~greybane/

Hi Sean, Agreed, although "cheating" may be putting it a little stongly :) It may be true that some of those with such set-ups have opposite lock help, but don't tar everyone with the same brush. I don't use any aids (don't need to as I have a wheel/pedals - others may need to in order to get any enjoyment out of the game), but I always have less rear wing than front as it is the only way to get fast times. Correct use of the dampers can compensate a lot for the reduced downforce and produce a pretty stable car with good top speeds. Even at places like Silverstone or Brazil, I will run (sometimes!) with a rear wing of only 1 when hotlapping - takes some controlling but it can be done. For races I would have rather more rear wing, but generally still less than the front wing. Cheers, Richard

Quoted text (15 lines)

> Josh writes: > >This is absolutely false, Sean. My qualifying > >setup at Monza has wing settings of 9 at the > >front and 1 at the back, and I use no aids whatsoever. > >Josh > Josh, > You must have a very highly developed talent for car control. I myself > prefer a lightly oversteering car (up to 2 settings less rear than front) > but find that I scrub > way too much speed sliding through corners if I go with any less rear > wing.

I had pretty much the same problem at Monza, the answer might be to look at the suspension. Previously I was running the car very stiff, but could only handle 2-3 deg more front wing than rear. Now the front runs 9 deg to 1 on the rear. I took the rear roll bar off (ok set it at 0) and softened the back end considerably (dampers and springs) at the same time tightening the front. The result is a car that is less agile, less responsive to changes in steering, but much more predictable, much easier to get it back into shape if you run too much kerb or get sideways. I have managed to shave over two seconds off my Monza time, going from 1:26.524 down to 1:24.082 in several hours of track time. F7 the only aid used, Steering Help and Opposite Lock help both off and the processor occupancy hovering round about 80%. -- Suck The Goat

On Sun, 08 Sep 96 22:57:30 GMT, Piers Samwell-Smith

Quoted text (9 lines)

>I had pretty much the same problem at Monza, the answer might be to look >at the suspension. Previously I was running the car very stiff, but >could only handle 2-3 deg more front wing than rear. Now the front runs >9 deg to 1 on the rear. I took the rear roll bar off (ok set it at 0) >and softened the back end considerably (dampers and springs) at the same >time tightening the front. The result is a car that is less agile, less >responsive to changes in steering, but much more predictable, much >easier to get it back into shape if you run too much kerb or get >sideways.

Bad news possibly Piers, but you may have to reverse the changes to get much lower times! I had a set-up pretty much as you describe and could get in the mid 1:23s. I then experimented with stiffening _everything_ up and immediately got down to the high 1:22s and within half an hour to 1:22.0 (no aids). Cheers, Richard

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > Does anyone know exactly opposite lock help does? > >I have tried it with it on and off and can see no difference. > Oposite Lock Help, assists you in catching the car as it > starts to spin. This allows the driver to get on the power > sooner and harder than someone who is doing all of the > driving on thier own. > Oposite Lock Help is extremely un-realistic, and I consider > it to be cheating (not that my opinion matters) You can tell > when someone is using Oposite Lock Help, by thier setup. > They will be running less Rear wing, than Front wing. the > advantage of less rear wing is that it causes much less drag. > (less drag = higher-straight line speed) With Oposite lock Help > turned OFF, having less rear wing than front wing, would give > the car severe oversteer, which is extremely hard to catch on > your own. This results in lurid slides in the corners (causing you > to lose speed) which outweighs the advantage gained by the > higher straigh line speed. > Sean Alexander > http://www.ccse.net/~greybane/

I agree with your description of opposite lock help but you can not tell if someone is using it by their setup of the wings. One of the first things I did when I got GP2 was turn off steering and opposite lock help. For Monza, I had a front wing of 10 and a rear wing of 2. This does not show I have opposite lock help on. Of course sometimes I do get on the power too soon and lose it coming out of a turn.

writes Driving talent is one aspect of it, but setup talent has a FAR greater role to play. You need to adjust the ride height and springs to create mechanical grip (as opposed to aerodynamic grip from the wings) - this will compensate for the relatively small amount of rear wing. The problem then is the weight transfer will still spin the car, so you need to use the anti-roll bars and dampers to control weight transfer such that the shift in weight during cornering won't cause the car to snap into oversteer (known, strangely enough, as "snap oversteer"!). As you said, this will allow much less rear wing to be used, and more speed to be carried. All of my setups, race, qualifying and hotlap have less rear wing than front, and some of those are still set up for mild understeer, depending upon the circuit. Cheers! John _________________________________ __ _____| |_____ __ ________| |__| :| John Wallace | |__| |________ \ :| |::| :| Team WW Racing TSW | |::| | / > :| |::| :|_________________________________| |::| | < / :|__|::|____/ * Sim Racing News * \____|::|__| \ /______:/ \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm \::/ \._____\ http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~harmon/simnews

Quoted text (15 lines)

> Josh writes: > >This is absolutely false, Sean. My qualifying > >setup at Monza has wing settings of 9 at the > >front and 1 at the back, and I use no aids whatsoever. > >Josh > Josh, > You must have a very highly developed talent for car control. I myself > prefer a lightly oversteering car (up to 2 settings less rear than front) > but find that I scrub > way too much speed sliding through corners if I go with any less rear > wing.

The high speed circuits are a different matter as steering transitions happens at much higher speed than other tracks, eg Lesmos, Parabolica and Ostkurve, or at very low speed, eg. Variante Goodyear and the chicanes at Hockenheim. Just like in the real world of F1. (If you watched any car through Variante Goodyear this weekend you would have seen of how much front wing and how little rear wing they use.) -- --- Terje Wold Johansen --- http://www.ifi.uio.no/~terjjo/ --- "I am your inferior superior." O.W.

Quoted text (15 lines)

> On Sun, 08 Sep 96 22:57:30 GMT, Piers Samwell-Smith > >I had pretty much the same problem at Monza, the answer might be to look > >at the suspension. Previously I was running the car very stiff, but > >could only handle 2-3 deg more front wing than rear. Now the front runs > >9 deg to 1 on the rear. I took the rear roll bar off (ok set it at 0) > >and softened the back end considerably (dampers and springs) at the same > >time tightening the front. The result is a car that is less agile, less > >responsive to changes in steering, but much more predictable, much > >easier to get it back into shape if you run too much kerb or get > >sideways. > Bad news possibly Piers, but you may have to reverse the changes to > get much lower times!

Eeek! Well, usually I do like to run a stiff car. Indeed I started with one at Monza. Still, it's always worth saving various developments of the setup and occasionally going back a few steps. I'm never 100% confident that the setup changes I am making are the reason the car goes faster, rather than just me getting a better line. Using the soft rear, I got it down to 1:23.548 yesterday evening with pretty consistent runs in the low 1:25 to mid 1:24's. I also improved on the 1:23 split times, but then came a cropper at the parabolica. Isn't it annoying when that happens. -- Suck The Goat