Difference between GPL cars

I've only been playing GPL for a couple of weeks and I'm hooked. I've played F1 games and done quite well: but GPL..... learning curve very steep, to say the least! My question is.... Why is the Lotus so fast? It doesn't seem to have the most power (I don't see any torque figures for the cars in GPL). It seems (to me) to be the hardest to 'handle' Whats the best car for a GPL newbie to learn on? I keep going for the Ferrari, but even on novice I only come 3rd or lower. Thanks guys Clive

"Clive" wrote...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> I've only been playing GPL for a couple of weeks and > I'm hooked. > > I've played F1 games and done quite well: but GPL..... > learning curve very steep, to say the least! > > My question is.... Why is the Lotus so fast? It doesn't > seem to have the most power (I don't see any torque > figures for the cars in GPL). It seems (to me) to be the > hardest to 'handle'

There's info on the performance characteristics of the cars in GPL in the GPL Race Engineer (setup utility), which I think can be found on this site: http://eaglewoman.racesimcentral.com > Whats the best car for a GPL newbie to learn on? The Cooper, IMO. > I keep going for the Ferrari, but even on novice I only > come 3rd or lower. The "difficulty" setting in GPL doesn't affect AI strenght, only the race distance and the amount of damage collisions do. You're pretty quick for a beginner, I'm usually down the wrong end of the top-10 and I've been at it since '98. Jan. =---

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 11:07:22 GMT, "Clive" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I've only been playing GPL for a couple of weeks and I'm hooked. > >I've played F1 games and done quite well: but GPL..... learning curve very >steep, to say the least! > >My question is.... Why is the Lotus so fast? It doesn't seem to have the >most power (I don't see any torque figures for the cars in GPL). It seems >(to me) to be the hardest to 'handle'

It's fast, but if you're using full damage you'll notice it fails fast aswell.... :-) Almost as bad than the Eagle. Cheers! Remco

> >Whats the best car for a GPL newbie to learn on? I keep going for the >Ferrari, but even on novice I only come 3rd or lower. > You've only been driving for a couple of weeks, and you can finish 3rd in the Ferrari? Well done - most of us weren't that good so quickly. Eldred -- http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Screamers League IICC League GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 Hist. +82.34 MoH:na N2k3 rank:in progress Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro US East

>>My question is.... Why is the Lotus so fast? It doesn't seem to have the >>most power (I don't see any torque figures for the cars in GPL). It seems >>(to me) to be the hardest to 'handle' > >It's fast, but if you're using full damage you'll notice it fails fast >aswell.... :-) Almost as bad than the Eagle. Gotta just be different driving styles. I've never had many mechanical problems with the Lotus. Eldred -- http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Screamers League IICC League GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 Hist. +82.34 MoH:na N2k3 rank:in progress Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro US East

"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > >Whats the best car for a GPL newbie to learn on? I keep going for the > >Ferrari, but even on novice I only come 3rd or lower. > > > > You've only been driving for a couple of weeks, and you can finish 3rd inthe

Quoted text (14 lines)

> Ferrari? Well done - most of us weren't that good so quickly. > > Eldred > -- > http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > Screamers League > IICC League > GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 > Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 > Hist. +82.34 MoH:na > N2k3 rank:in progress > Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin > Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro > US East

I've played the 'modern' GP/racing games for several years. I've also had several goes in 'real' karts, which 'drift' very similar to the cars in GPL Clive

Did your copy of GPL come w. the strategy guide I wrote 5 years ago? They edited out my Ferrari comments, the gist of which is that the Ferrari is the best all-around car. The Cooper is the easiest to drive, but slow. The Lotus is the fastest car, based on a fat mid-range. The Eagle is the fastest in a straight line. (The Honda *should* be, based on RW figures, but it weighs as much as a Hummer.) The Brabham is the fastest on tight courses, like Monaco (where its small size is also an advantage). The BRM is fairly easy to drive (it has a high vertical moment), has 6 speeds to play with, but is ultimately clueless. Using aftermarket utils, it's possible to cobble up a Lotus 43, with the BRM H16, but it still isn't a race-winner any more than it was in real life. "Clive" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:KHTCc.2425$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> I've only been playing GPL for a couple of weeks and I'm hooked. > > I've played F1 games and done quite well: but GPL..... learning curve very > steep, to say the least! > > My question is.... Why is the Lotus so fast? It doesn't seem to have the > most power (I don't see any torque figures for the cars in GPL). It seems > (to me) to be the hardest to 'handle' > > Whats the best car for a GPL newbie to learn on? I keep going for the > Ferrari, but even on novice I only come 3rd or lower. > > Thanks guys > > Clive > >

"Clive" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:fwZCc.2714$[email hidden]:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>> Ferrari? Well done - most of us weren't that good so quickly. > I've played the 'modern' GP/racing games for several years. I've also > had several goes in 'real' karts, which 'drift' very similar to the > cars in GPL > > Clive

Looks like you are well on your way to 'alien' status. ;-) -- Ped Xing GPLRank -31.657 "A good racing driver doesn't really look like he's going that fast; but in fact it's a clean, smooth, progressive performance that supplies the real speed." -Sir Jackie Stewart

Clive wrote: > I've played F1 games and done quite well: but GPL..... learning curve very > steep, to say the least! It is. But in part because of this, it's also particularly rewarding if you can learn to drive (and race) these cars. > My question is.... Why is the Lotus so fast? It doesn't seem to have the > most power (I don't see any torque figures for the cars in GPL). It seems > (to me) to be the hardest to 'handle' Well... It's main advantages are nimble handling, relatively low weight w/good power, good top speed, and especially, good acceleration. Throw all that together and you'll always have a winner, of course - although it's real-life reliability in 67 left something to be desired, and even in GPL, it's best not to rev it over the limit. > Whats the best car for a GPL newbie to learn on? I keep going for the > Ferrari, but even on novice I only come 3rd or lower. The very best car would probably be the 1965 Cooper... Download the 65 Mod, hop in, and have fun because of it's good handling. Very soon you'll be able to step up to a faster car like the Lotus 33 or BRM. Once you mastered those and want a real challenge, the 1967 Eagle would be the best car IMHO, since it's both one of the fastest cars yet more forgiving than Ferrari or Lotus. Regards, Rudy -------------------- GPLRank: -22

Before collapsing in a drunken stupor "Clive" <[email hidden]> managed to mumble the following:

Quoted text (18 lines)

> I've only been playing GPL for a couple of weeks and I'm > hooked. > > I've played F1 games and done quite well: but GPL..... learning > curve very steep, to say the least! > > My question is.... Why is the Lotus so fast? It doesn't seem to > have the most power (I don't see any torque figures for the > cars in GPL). It seems (to me) to be the hardest to 'handle' > > Whats the best car for a GPL newbie to learn on? I keep going > for the Ferrari, but even on novice I only come 3rd or lower. > > Thanks guys > > Clive > >

I'd say stick with the Ferrari. It's been my car of choice since '99 because it handles so well and is fast enough for someone of mediocre skill to be competitive. Plus, it's very reliable, unlike the super fast Lotus and Eagle. If all I was interested in was sprint races and hotlaps though, those are the two cars I would go with. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

>I'd say stick with the Ferrari. It's been my car of choice since >'99 because it handles so well and is fast enough for someone of >mediocre skill to be competitive. Plus, it's very reliable, >unlike the super fast Lotus and Eagle. If all I was interested in >was sprint races and hotlaps though, those are the two cars I >would go with. The Eagle? That's about my 4th best car. I've never come to grips with what seems like knife-edge handling. The Cooper may be slower, but I'm a lot more confident using that than the Eagle - so on some tracks I'm faster with the Coop. Eldred -- http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Screamers League IICC League GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 Hist. +82.34 MoH:na N2k3 rank:in progress Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro US East

Agreed. The Eagle is surprisingly difficult to drive...altho not as finicky as the twitchy Brabham. Gurney--who is NOT into sims, altho his son Alex is--says the RW car was a dream to drive. It had an unusually long wheelbase 'cuz Dan is so tall, and was particularly comfortable on long tracks and fast bends. IMO, it is the least realistically modeled car in GPL (altho the Brabham's ludicrous top speed always raises some eyebrows). "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >I'd say stick with the Ferrari. It's been my car of choice since > >'99 because it handles so well and is fast enough for someone of > >mediocre skill to be competitive. Plus, it's very reliable, > >unlike the super fast Lotus and Eagle. If all I was interested in > >was sprint races and hotlaps though, those are the two cars I > >would go with. > > The Eagle? That's about my 4th best car. I've never come to grips with

what > seems like knife-edge handling. The Cooper may be slower, but I'm a lotmore > confident using that than the Eagle - so on some tracks I'm faster withthe

Quoted text (14 lines)

> Coop. > > Eldred > -- > http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > Screamers League > IICC League > GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 > Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 > Hist. +82.34 MoH:na > N2k3 rank:in progress > Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin > Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro > US East

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 12:08:29 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Agreed. The Eagle is surprisingly difficult to drive...altho not as finicky >as the twitchy Brabham. Gurney--who is NOT into sims, altho his son Alex >is--says the RW car was a dream to drive. It had an unusually long >wheelbase 'cuz Dan is so tall, and was particularly comfortable on long >tracks and fast bends. IMO, it is the least realistically modeled car in >GPL (altho the Brabham's ludicrous top speed always raises some eyebrows). >

Hmm the Brab is about the slowest car as it is in GPL-you mean in real life it was even slower? John DiFool

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 16:36:47 GMT, John DiFool wrote: > > Hmm the Brab is about the slowest car as it is in GPL-you mean in > real life it was even slower? > > John DiFool The Brab is right up there with the Ferrari and maybe even the Lotus, if you know how to deal with its massive low end grunt. It's small, light, nimble and sturdy. Personally I find it the best car in 67 GPL by far (for my personal driving tastes). Cheers, uwe PS: I'll go, hear and see a "real" Lotus 49b on Saturday, yay! 8-) -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

Hey Uwe, Klaus Graf (sp?) had a pretty good run at Sears. Hopefully he is going to run more Nextel races. As tough a nut is Nascar Cup is to break into I was pretty impressed all around with KG. Mitch "Uwe Sch�rkamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (25 lines)

> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 16:36:47 GMT, John DiFool wrote: > > > > Hmm the Brab is about the slowest car as it is in GPL-you mean in > > real life it was even slower? > > > > John DiFool > > The Brab is right up there with the Ferrari and maybe even the Lotus, > if you know how to deal with its massive low end grunt. It's small, > light, nimble and sturdy. Personally I find it the best car in 67 GPL > by far (for my personal driving tastes). > > Cheers, > > uwe > > PS: I'll go, hear and see a "real" Lotus 49b on Saturday, yay! 8-) > > > > -- > mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) > Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ > Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) > GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

Steve Smith wrote: > Agreed. The Eagle is surprisingly difficult to drive...altho not as finicky > as the twitchy Brabham. Agree on the latter, advice to change your setup on the former ;) The Eagle is a relatively easy and forgiving car to drive in GPL, contrary to the Brabham, which is twitchy indeed. I used the Eagle as my basic 'learner car' without too much trouble (and I'm no alien) until I gradually moved onto Lotus and other motoring giants. > tracks and fast bends. IMO, it is the least realistically modeled car in > GPL (altho the Brabham's ludicrous top speed always raises some eyebrows). Hm, I've always thought the GPL Brabham mainly was probably a bit more twitchy than it probably was in real life... It's so on edge I'm having trouble anybody could drive that rig for 15 laps anywhere and not get in dire trouble. (I always thought Brabham built his cars for 'easy drifting', not 'drift and be likely to lose rear end on most occasions'. I can do that in the Ferrari more comfortably than the Brab...) But hey, what do I know. Gimme a real 67 car and I'll be happy to report the differences (from hospital, probably ;) . Regards, Rudy -------------------- GPLRank: -22

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 21:20:57 GMT, Mitch_A wrote: > Hey Uwe, Klaus Graf (sp?) had a pretty good run at Sears. Hopefully he is > going to run more Nextel races. As tough a nut is Nascar Cup is to break > into I was pretty impressed all around with KG. > > Mitch Spelling is right on, Mitch, and yes, it's refreshing to see a german driver in a NASCAR race. No wonder they let him have a go at a road course first ;-) Cheers, uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

"Uwe Sch�rkamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Spelling is right on, Mitch, and yes, it's refreshing to see a german > driver in a NASCAR race. No wonder they let him have a go at a road > course first ;-) I believe he finished 2nd in an ARCA race at Nashville Superspeedway a couple months ago. -jde

The Brabham, with its hot-rodded Buick engine (originally a pushrod; later w. sohc heads), was the slowest IN A STRAIGHT LINE; probably 10-15 mph slower than the Eagle at, say, Spa or Monza. But its light weight and small size gave it a terrific advantage in turns, particularly slow corners. "John DiFool" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 12:08:29 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Agreed. The Eagle is surprisingly difficult to drive...altho not asfinicky > >as the twitchy Brabham. Gurney--who is NOT into sims, altho his son Alex > >is--says the RW car was a dream to drive. It had an unusually long > >wheelbase 'cuz Dan is so tall, and was particularly comfortable on long > >tracks and fast bends. IMO, it is the least realistically modeled car in > >GPL (altho the Brabham's ludicrous top speed always raises someeyebrows).

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > > Hmm the Brab is about the slowest car as it is in GPL-you mean in > real life it was even slower? > > John DiFool >

Both the Brabham and the Eagle are harder to drive in GPL than in real life. (Indeed, Dave Kaemmer once admitted to me that ALL the cars in GPL were harder to drive than their RW counterparts.) "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cc2j4i$hqf$[email hidden]... > Steve Smith wrote: > > Agreed. The Eagle is surprisingly difficult to drive...altho not asfinicky

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > as the twitchy Brabham. > > Agree on the latter, advice to change your setup on the former ;) > > The Eagle is a relatively easy and forgiving car to drive in GPL, > contrary to the Brabham, which is twitchy indeed. I used the Eagle as my > basic 'learner car' without too much trouble (and I'm no alien) until I > gradually moved onto Lotus and other motoring giants. > > > tracks and fast bends. IMO, it is the least realistically modeled car

in > > GPL (altho the Brabham's ludicrous top speed always raises someeyebrows).

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > Hm, I've always thought the GPL Brabham mainly was probably a bit more > twitchy than it probably was in real life... It's so on edge I'm having > trouble anybody could drive that rig for 15 laps anywhere and not get in > dire trouble. (I always thought Brabham built his cars for 'easy > drifting', not 'drift and be likely to lose rear end on most occasions'. > I can do that in the Ferrari more comfortably than the Brab...) > > But hey, what do I know. Gimme a real 67 car and I'll be happy to report > the differences (from hospital, probably ;) . > > Regards, Rudy > -------------------- > GPLRank: -22

Steve Smith <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:odeFc.373$[email hidden]... > Both the Brabham and the Eagle are harder to drive in GPL than in reallife. > (Indeed, Dave Kaemmer once admitted to me that ALL the cars in GPL were > harder to drive than their RW counterparts.) I recall seeing Sentell say the same thing. Same can be said for the Nx series.

I bit of rain and he may have won ;) "Uwe Sch�rkamp" <[email hidden]> wrote . No wonder they let him have a go at a road

Quoted text (11 lines)

> course first ;-) > > Cheers, > > uwe > > -- > mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) > Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ > Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) > GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

I bit of rain and he may have won ;) . No wonder they let him have a go at a road

Don't agree. I've driven stock cars (admittedly 20 years ago) and they were absolute beasts: no grip below about six or seven tenths (because 1. unless you're very brave, you're not leaning on them hard enough to develop camber thrust, and 2. them 'tars' take forever to warm up - this was on a road course). Same thing for the brakes (which were still grotty even when they WERE working). The tranny felt like it was full of rocks. The steering felt like it was connected to a very thin, whippy torsion bar. The suspension felt like it had siezed. The shocks were skull-rattling. The noise was unbearable. And the vibration blurred my vision like I'd smeared peanut butter on my goggles. The Cup cars in N2003 are pussycats by comparison. (OTOH, NASCAR Racing before N4 was almost as undriveable as GPL, altho I didn't think the stockers in NASCAR Legends felt anything like the 427-cu. in. monsters I'd driven years before.) "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:e0fFc.285$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > Steve Smith <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:odeFc.373$[email hidden]... > > Both the Brabham and the Eagle are harder to drive in GPL than in real > life. > > (Indeed, Dave Kaemmer once admitted to me that ALL the cars in GPL were > > harder to drive than their RW counterparts.) > > > > I recall seeing Sentell say the same thing. Same can be said for the Nx > series. > >

Well, since N03 is based on current stock cars, and not twenty year old ones....<g> To me, the cup cars in 03 still got that "floating on air" feeling, instead of driving something with mass, that all the papy nx games had. Heat was the best at simulating this imo. Do agree with your 04 and Legends comments. Steve Smith <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:KtjFc.161$[email hidden]... > Don't agree. I've driven stock cars (admittedly 20 years ago) and theywere > absolute beasts: no grip below about six or seven tenths (because 1.unless > you're very brave, you're not leaning on them hard enough to developcamber > thrust, and 2. them 'tars' take forever to warm up - this was on a road > course). Same thing for the brakes (which were still grotty even whenthey > WERE working). The tranny felt like it was full of rocks. The steering > felt like it was connected to a very thin, whippy torsion bar. The > suspension felt like it had siezed. The shocks were skull-rattling. The > noise was unbearable. And the vibration blurred my vision like I'dsmeared

Quoted text (16 lines)

> peanut butter on my goggles. > > The Cup cars in N2003 are pussycats by comparison. > > (OTOH, NASCAR Racing before N4 was almost as undriveable as GPL, altho I > didn't think the stockers in NASCAR Legends felt anything like the 427-cu. > in. monsters I'd driven years before.) > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:e0fFc.285$[email hidden]... > > > > Steve Smith <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:odeFc.373$[email hidden]... > > > Both the Brabham and the Eagle are harder to drive in GPL than in real > > life. > > > (Indeed, Dave Kaemmer once admitted to me that ALL the cars in GPL

were > > > harder to drive than their RW counterparts.) > > > > > > > > I recall seeing Sentell say the same thing. Same can be said for theNx > > series. > > > > > >

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 14:20:57 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >The Brabham, with its hot-rodded Buick engine (originally a pushrod; later >w. sohc heads), was the slowest IN A STRAIGHT LINE; probably 10-15 mph >slower than the Eagle at, say, Spa or Monza. But its light weight and small >size gave it a terrific advantage in turns, particularly slow corners. How about the Cosworth DFV? I've heard from somewhere that the early DFVs didn't have *anything* below 7000rpm. The GPL version seems to pull like a John Deere from 4500...

My understanding is that the DFV had a robust mid-range--as modeled in the sim--but this may not have been true of the early DFV (however unlikely - the DFV has the same heads and breathing apparatus as the all-conquering F2 engines, two of which were mated on a common crank to create the V8). "Magnus Svensson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 14:20:57 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >The Brabham, with its hot-rodded Buick engine (originally a pushrod;later > >w. sohc heads), was the slowest IN A STRAIGHT LINE; probably 10-15 mph > >slower than the Eagle at, say, Spa or Monza. But its light weight andsmall > >size gave it a terrific advantage in turns, particularly slow corners. > > How about the Cosworth DFV? I've heard from somewhere that the early > DFVs didn't have *anything* below 7000rpm. The GPL version seems to > pull like a John Deere from 4500... >

Steve Smith wrote: >>>The Brabham, with its hot-rodded Buick engine (originally a pushrod; later >>>w. sohc heads), was the slowest IN A STRAIGHT LINE; probably 10-15 mph You mean there was anything on track actually slower in top speed than the Cooper? That thing has about as much aero flow in GPL as a WWI tank... (I'm surprised the Brab could then hang on to the Honda at Monza though, even in slipstreamin' - one false move in 40 laps would then mean the tow was gone and you'd be dead in the water..) Regards, Rudy -------------------- GPLRank: -22

Yes, the Italian GP was the high-point for the BT24. Everybody was amazed it hung on...for lap after lap. Maybe had an overbore engine or hydrazine or something. No explanation for it, actually. "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cc5m15$rta$[email hidden]... > Steve Smith wrote: > > >>>The Brabham, with its hot-rodded Buick engine (originally a pushrod;later

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >>>w. sohc heads), was the slowest IN A STRAIGHT LINE; probably 10-15 mph > > You mean there was anything on track actually slower in top speed than > the Cooper? That thing has about as much aero flow in GPL as a WWI tank... > > (I'm surprised the Brab could then hang on to the Honda at Monza though, > even in slipstreamin' - one false move in 40 laps would then mean the > tow was gone and you'd be dead in the water..) > > Regards, Rudy > -------------------- > GPLRank: -22

Steve Smith wrote: > Yes, the Italian GP was the high-point for the BT24. Everybody was amazed > it hung on...for lap after lap. Maybe had an overbore engine or hydrazine > or something. No explanation for it, actually. Well, going from GPL experiences, maybe just good driving - in the sim it's possible at Monza to get in the Brab (which is still slower on top speed than the Lotus, Eagle, Honda and probably Ferrari - I had some trouble getting it to do a 1:29) and hang on behind a faster car if you keep braking very late *and* if you nail Lesmo and Parabolica right every time, thus keeping in the slipstream. But as stated, one false move, lose the tow and you'd be dead in the water. Which would mean Jack did just about everything right lap after lap after lap in that particular race. PS. People got naughty with hydrazine back then? From what I read, that stuff is NASTY - far worse than highly flammable petrol, real scary muck. Regards, Rudy -------------------- GPLRank: -22

Ruud Dingemans wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Steve Smith wrote: > >> Yes, the Italian GP was the high-point for the BT24. Everybody was >> amazed it hung on...for lap after lap. Maybe had an overbore engine >> or hydrazine or something. No explanation for it, actually. > > Well, going from GPL experiences, maybe just good driving - in the sim > it's possible at Monza to get in the Brab (which is still slower on > top speed than the Lotus, Eagle, Honda and probably Ferrari - I had > some trouble getting it to do a 1:29) and hang on behind a faster car > if you keep braking very late *and* if you nail Lesmo and Parabolica > right every time, thus keeping in the slipstream.

Hill's engine blew while he was one minute ahead of the second place car. Clark went a lap down with a flat tire and was back in the lead when he ran out of gas. The Brabham hung on to the Honda-Lola, a car making it's debut, but was utterly outclassed by the Lotus.