This may not be a great test to determine if burnout is an accurate
simulation but this is what I did.
on radials (245/45 16's), T-5 ***, 3.73 gears and a set of mufflers,
hollow converters, 88 upper intake and throttle body, synthetic fluids
everywhere and advanced timing, K&N filter...basically very small mods.
I assume the car makes about 220HP since the motor has about 130,000
miles on it. I took the spare tire and jack out when at the track. The
car weighs about 3000 without driver. or about 3160 with me in it.
OK...so I attempted to see if I could recreate this time in Burnout. I
chose the 66 stang and made a very mild 302 motor with a T5 (Borg).
Changed the gear ratios to 3.35, 1.92, 1.27, 1.00, .68 as those should
be what are in my car. The program claimed power output to be around 214
HP at around 4400 rpm and torque at 290lb at 3000 rpm.
I gave the car a set of standard radials. The car went high 16's at a
very low MPH (like 67). I was going through in top of 3rd (keep in mind
that I have changed tire height to 25.1" which is what I have on the
car). This is way off. I pass through at top of 4th at the stip.
I gave the car a set of high performance radials and looked like the
time dropped to high 15's at around 85mph. This is still way off.
If the 1st set of tires are less sticky, then I should be spinning the
tires harder off the line and should get a HIGHER trap speed than the
stickier tires.
Throwing a set of full slicks reports that my 200hp car can rip off high
10's???? No way!
Can anyone tell me what I may be doing wrong here? Am I expecting way
too much? I was hoping that It would be even close.
Quoted text (36 lines)
> This may not be a great test to determine if burnout is an accurate > simulation but this is what I did. > on radials (245/45 16's), T-5 ***, 3.73 gears and a set of mufflers, > hollow converters, 88 upper intake and throttle body, synthetic fluids > everywhere and advanced timing, K&N filter...basically very small mods. > I assume the car makes about 220HP since the motor has about 130,000 > miles on it. I took the spare tire and jack out when at the track. The > car weighs about 3000 without driver. or about 3160 with me in it. > OK...so I attempted to see if I could recreate this time in Burnout. I > chose the 66 stang and made a very mild 302 motor with a T5 (Borg). > Changed the gear ratios to 3.35, 1.92, 1.27, 1.00, .68 as those should > be what are in my car. The program claimed power output to be around 214 > HP at around 4400 rpm and torque at 290lb at 3000 rpm. > I gave the car a set of standard radials. The car went high 16's at a > very low MPH (like 67). I was going through in top of 3rd (keep in mind > that I have changed tire height to 25.1" which is what I have on the > car). This is way off. I pass through at top of 4th at the stip. > I gave the car a set of high performance radials and looked like the > time dropped to high 15's at around 85mph. This is still way off. > If the 1st set of tires are less sticky, then I should be spinning the > tires harder off the line and should get a HIGHER trap speed than the > stickier tires. > Throwing a set of full slicks reports that my 200hp car can rip off high > 10's???? No way! > Can anyone tell me what I may be doing wrong here? Am I expecting way > too much? I was hoping that It would be even close.Good grief, just leave the poor game alone will you, AFAIK you dont even
own the game and so are in no position to keep criticising it like you do
(on saying that I dont own the game either, but only 'cos it isn't out in
the UK yet, and I'm eagerly awaiting the demo which was supposedly out
"later this week" according to BETHESDA01).
Steve
AFAIK you dont even
AFAYK, but what makes you think so?
Trev
I have found that one of the biggest flaws with Burnout is the MPH reading. I
run a Pro-Modified car that consistently runs 155-160mph in the 1/8th mile and
195-200mph in 1/4 mile. It seems that the MPH in Burnout is about 20MPH too
low. The E.T.'s however, are pretty close if you have the horsepower and
torque input correct. It's still a great game.
Greg
Somebody asked:
No way! It's dumb! It's stupid! The game is for low lifes that have no
life! IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A***PIT VIEW! Of course, I've never even
SEEN the game, much less played it. However, this is a completely
UNBIASED opinion, if you want opinions. ;-)
Have fun burning out...
Andre
P.S. I was only KIDDING! I don't have any opinions on Burnout... but
couldn't resist having a little fun.
Burnout needs some code tweaking for more accuracy . Compared to some of the
other racing sims that have been released in the last 1 1/2 years Burnout is
really very good. I would like to see a good Top Fuel game in the future
but I really don't hold to much faith in this vaporware by Tantrum. Who?
Maybe we'll all get a surprise .
Craig
Quoted text (36 lines)
> This may not be a great test to determine if burnout is an accurate > simulation but this is what I did. > on radials (245/45 16's), T-5 ***, 3.73 gears and a set of mufflers, > hollow converters, 88 upper intake and throttle body, synthetic fluids > everywhere and advanced timing, K&N filter...basically very small mods. > I assume the car makes about 220HP since the motor has about 130,000 > miles on it. I took the spare tire and jack out when at the track. The > car weighs about 3000 without driver. or about 3160 with me in it. > OK...so I attempted to see if I could recreate this time in Burnout. I > chose the 66 stang and made a very mild 302 motor with a T5 (Borg). > Changed the gear ratios to 3.35, 1.92, 1.27, 1.00, .68 as those should > be what are in my car. The program claimed power output to be around 214 > HP at around 4400 rpm and torque at 290lb at 3000 rpm. > I gave the car a set of standard radials. The car went high 16's at a > very low MPH (like 67). I was going through in top of 3rd (keep in mind > that I have changed tire height to 25.1" which is what I have on the > car). This is way off. I pass through at top of 4th at the stip. > I gave the car a set of high performance radials and looked like the > time dropped to high 15's at around 85mph. This is still way off. > If the 1st set of tires are less sticky, then I should be spinning the > tires harder off the line and should get a HIGHER trap speed than the > stickier tires. > Throwing a set of full slicks reports that my 200hp car can rip off high > 10's???? No way! > Can anyone tell me what I may be doing wrong here? Am I expecting way > too much? I was hoping that It would be even close.Quoted text (8 lines)
> OK...so I attempted to see if I could recreate this time in Burnout. > I gave the car a set of high performance radials and looked like the > time dropped to high 15's at around 85mph. This is still way off. > Throwing a set of full slicks reports that my 200hp car can rip off high > 10's???? No way! > Can anyone tell me what I may be doing wrong here? Am I expecting way > too much? I was hoping that It would be even close.I think (and hope) that if we continue to pound on these E.T. items in
Burnout, Bethesda might listen. IF you notice.... the A.I. doesn't seem to
have a problem with the their trap speed(I got a 400hp Nova running 10.500
on race ready tires, my 60ft times are incredibly fast, but I still only
manage 100.00mph trap speed at best! oh well) being realistic. So maybe
Bethesda only needs to do some more tweaking! I certainly hope they
do!..... But the games got me having fun in racing sims again (haven't been
on the RAS in a long time, good to see allot of the same names).
FHLH
Mental Note: "Make sure I have a firesuit at home, it's more realistic"
was
>at the track. My 60ft was a 2.04 on radials. I just can recreate that in burnout.
>I can get the ET close with custom tires, but the mph will be way low at 90mph.
>Also, in the game it will spin the tires at the top of 1st. In reality, my car will
>not do that so the physics model leaves alot to be desired.
>Another thing anyone that has spent time at atrack will tell you: Going from street
>tires to cheater slicks or full slicks will do *very* little for your mph, but will improve
>your ET alot.
>Still a fun game, but it's more game than simulator. :|
>Markus
Quoted text (9 lines)
>> OK...so I attempted to see if I could recreate this time in Burnout. >> I gave the car a set of high performance radials and looked like the >> time dropped to high 15's at around 85mph. This is still way off. >> Throwing a set of full slicks reports that my 200hp car can rip off high >> 10's???? No way! >> Can anyone tell me what I may be doing wrong here? Am I expecting way >> too much? I was hoping that It would be even close.On Wed, 8 Apr 1998 10:46:35 -0500, "FogHornLegHorn"
..snip
It's a good sim alright. Back in 1967 I raced a 1957 chevy in the
ahra stock 2-bbl automatic class and just entered my machine
specs into Burnout and it predicted the exact best trap speed
I got: 89.00 mph with an et around the high 16's (very high :-)
This was done with the 1957 vette chassis.
The car had a 2-speed powerglide and stock 283
engine (four door sedan).
The only mods were:
Open headers, 4:56 rear gears, corvette 327/375 hp
solid lifter cam (over the counter chevy item) with
solid lifters, stock heads. I put in the corvette
dual point distributor, blocked the heat-riser
in the intake manifold and put a hood scoop
on the hood. With rear traction bars, the
car would not break the tires loose from
a wide open (but in gear) start. But if
you got her in a tight right hand turn
which unloaded the left rear, and punched
it you got massive tire smoke/squeal.
Also got a ticket driving the sucker
to hight school with open headers.
Cheers,
Bill Valentine
-------------------------------------------
