Trans-Am Mod

I just dl'd the long-awaited T/A mod. Let me qualify this by saying that I'm not a great road racer; I run GPL (intermittently) and with a very modest amount of success and I even (gasp) try to watch and follow the road racing series in the world. Maybe it's me but I don't see a significant difference between the T/A and the US Pits latest version of their Touring Car mod. The graphics are definately better but I can't see a great deal of difference hustling a car through the esses at Watkins Glen betweeen the busch mod, tptcc and the new T/A mod. Am I wrong? I think that all of the programmers involved have done a splendid job just in getting the mods available to us. I'm not trying to favor one over the other. They all deserve our gratitude (as well as some donations) but I just can't see a real difference. What's the consensus? Timmy

I havent played the pits one in a while but this this one i had to take the caster way down cause the FF seemed much stronger... is it just me? "Timmy Ferrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TVg0c.954$[email hidden]... > I just dl'd the long-awaited T/A mod. > Let me qualify this by saying that I'm not a great road racer; I run GPL > (intermittently) and with a very modest amount of success and I even(gasp)

Quoted text (10 lines)

> try to watch and follow the road racing series in the world. > Maybe it's me but I don't see a significant difference between the T/A and > the US Pits latest version of their Touring Car mod. > The graphics are definately better but I can't see a great deal of > difference hustling a car through the esses at Watkins Glen betweeen the > busch mod, tptcc and the new T/A mod. > Am I wrong? > I think that all of the programmers involved have done a splendid job just > in getting the mods available to us. I'm not trying to favor one over the > other. They all deserve our gratitude (as well as some donations) but I

just > can't see a real difference. > What's the consensus? > Timmy > >

They use the same physics so you shouldn't see any difference in the way the car handles at all! Keep both Mods - TPTCC is great - they do GT40 etc. Wag "Timmy Ferrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TVg0c.954$[email hidden]... I just dl'd the long-awaited T/A mod. Let me qualify this by saying that I'm not a great road racer; I run GPL (intermittently) and with a very modest amount of success and I even (gasp) try to watch and follow the road racing series in the world. Maybe it's me but I don't see a significant difference between the T/A and the US Pits latest version of their Touring Car mod. The graphics are definately better but I can't see a great deal of difference hustling a car through the esses at Watkins Glen betweeen the busch mod, tptcc and the new T/A mod. Am I wrong? I think that all of the programmers involved have done a splendid job just in getting the mods available to us. I'm not trying to favor one over the other. They all deserve our gratitude (as well as some donations) but I just can't see a real difference. What's the consensus? Timmy

If they use the same physics, than why make this mod or use this mod? Sorry if this question sounds dumb, but I'm new to NR2003 (picked it up for $9.99). "B Wegner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... They use the same physics so you shouldn't see any difference in the way the car handles at all! Keep both Mods - TPTCC is great - they do GT40 etc. Wag "Timmy Ferrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TVg0c.954$[email hidden]... I just dl'd the long-awaited T/A mod. Let me qualify this by saying that I'm not a great road racer; I run GPL (intermittently) and with a very modest amount of success and I even (gasp) try to watch and follow the road racing series in the world. Maybe it's me but I don't see a significant difference between the T/A and the US Pits latest version of their Touring Car mod. The graphics are definately better but I can't see a great deal of difference hustling a car through the esses at Watkins Glen betweeen the busch mod, tptcc and the new T/A mod. Am I wrong? I think that all of the programmers involved have done a splendid job just in getting the mods available to us. I'm not trying to favor one over the other. They all deserve our gratitude (as well as some donations) but I just can't see a real difference. What's the consensus? Timmy

Both mods use totally different car models and damage. So although the same underlying car physics may be the same, different mods can have a totally different look and feel. "Fatbob" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:7bm0c.87$[email hidden]... If they use the same physics, than why make this mod or use this mod? Sorry if this question sounds dumb, but I'm new to NR2003 (picked it up for $9.99). "B Wegner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... They use the same physics so you shouldn't see any difference in the way the car handles at all! Keep both Mods - TPTCC is great - they do GT40 etc. Wag "Timmy Ferrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TVg0c.954$[email hidden]... I just dl'd the long-awaited T/A mod. Let me qualify this by saying that I'm not a great road racer; I run GPL (intermittently) and with a very modest amount of success and I even (gasp) try to watch and follow the road racing series in the world. Maybe it's me but I don't see a significant difference between the T/A and the US Pits latest version of their Touring Car mod. The graphics are definately better but I can't see a great deal of difference hustling a car through the esses at Watkins Glen betweeen the busch mod, tptcc and the new T/A mod. Am I wrong? I think that all of the programmers involved have done a splendid job just in getting the mods available to us. I'm not trying to favor one over the other. They all deserve our gratitude (as well as some donations) but I just can't see a real difference. What's the consensus? Timmy

"Fatbob" wrote... > If they use the same physics, than why make this mod or > use this mod? Sorry if this question sounds dumb, but > I'm new to NR2003 (picked it up for $9.99). Good question. Weight, power delivery and gearbox are different, but there's a lot of stock car stuff which seems to be hardcoded into the game and does, IMO, detract too much from the experience to make it worthwhile. F1C mods do a much better job of "hiding" the underlying game from a driving perspective. Jan. =---

Thanks for the replies guys. "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QJm0c.17156$n%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> "Fatbob" wrote... > > If they use the same physics, than why make this mod or > > use this mod? Sorry if this question sounds dumb, but > > I'm new to NR2003 (picked it up for $9.99). > > Good question. > > Weight, power delivery and gearbox are different, but there's a lot of

stock > car stuff which seems to be hardcoded into the game and does, IMO, detract > too much from the experience to make it worthwhile. > > F1C mods do a much better job of "hiding" the underlying game from adriving > perspective. > > Jan. > =--- > >

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:32:16 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>"Fatbob" wrote... >> If they use the same physics, than why make this mod or >> use this mod? Sorry if this question sounds dumb, but >> I'm new to NR2003 (picked it up for $9.99). > >Good question. > >Weight, power delivery and gearbox are different, but there's a lot of stock >car stuff which seems to be hardcoded into the game and does, IMO, detract >too much from the experience to make it worthwhile. >

Such as what? Not an accusation, but I keep seeing people saying this, but they never give specifics. For this admitted layman (I'm not as hardcore as some of you), the "feel" of the TA physics (in whatever guise) is just fine and dandy for me. I can think of one thing, and that is the tire temp "bug" imbalance between LF and RF (a consequence of the NASCAR oval physics)-that doesn't bother me much tho. John DiFool

The mod seems great with the exception on the corvette modelling which is better in The Pits mod. Any how is good to see these physics not go to waste on roundy rounds IMO.

Little Joe <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > The mod seems great with the exception on the corvette modelling which is > better in > The Pits mod. Any how is good to see these physics not go to waste onroundy > rounds IMO. > Yep, better to not "waste" the physics on this.....................what exactly is being modeled in this mod again ?

Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QJm0c.17156$n%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> "Fatbob" wrote... > > If they use the same physics, than why make this mod or > > use this mod? Sorry if this question sounds dumb, but > > I'm new to NR2003 (picked it up for $9.99). > > Good question. > > Weight, power delivery and gearbox are different, but there's a lot of

stock > car stuff which seems to be hardcoded into the game and does, IMO, detract > too much from the experience to make it worthwhile. > > F1C mods do a much better job of "hiding" the underlying game from adriving > perspective. > > Jan. > =--- > Agreed. Unfortunately, it's a mish-mash of racing series that detracts to much for me too.

"John DiFool" wrote... > > <snip> > Such as what? Not an accusation, but I keep seeing > people saying this, but they never give specifics. Stock car imposed chassis heights and rake, stock car (high sidewall) tyres, stock car differential (may not be a bad thing seeing as it's not adjustable and therefore can't be set up wrong as done by most in GPL) and inability to run stiff enough springs at the rear, for starters. > For this admitted layman (I'm not as hardcore as some > of you), the "feel" of the TA physics (in whatever > guise) is just fine and dandy for me. There's nothing wrong with the feel of the game. Running a NC/BGN/CTS in one of it's native habitats (that includes the two original roadcourses in the game) feels great, I love it. TA/TPTCC doesn't look like Trans-Am from the outside (online car in local replay looks about right, but clipping and wheel position ruin the picture then) nor from the inside (too much chassis roll and windshield wiper effect). Even with a somewhat decent setup, it feels way too bouncy, vague and generally insufficiently "poised" to convince me I'm driving a Trans Am car. It's a sedan/GT type car, relatively heavy but with sufficient power/grip and a high cockpit workload, but it doesn't remind me of any current form of motorsport. Perhaps it can do a passable Porsche 917 impression if they lighten it a bit further, but anything roadracing younger than that... no. > I can think of one thing, and that is the tire temp "bug" > imbalance between LF and RF (a consequence of the NASCAR > oval physics)-that doesn't bother me much tho. That's the one thing I haven't really seen... perhaps the people who've grown up on the ovals are just pushing harder when they turn left? Jan. =---

TPTCC and the PWF TA mod use the same physics as each other, but it's not the same as the cup car physics. There are 4 physics models available to modders, the cup cars, trucks, grand national cars, and the "TA" cars. The TA physics are not really correct for any current racing series but they are close enough to typical touring cars to make it enjoyable. They feel much more at home on a road course than any of the other three models and therefore they are the best thing currently available for on line road racing. Regarding the difference between the TPTCC mod and the PWF mod, the big thing for me is that the TPTCC mod does not yet have correct collision detection or visible damage. Also the PWF car models and cockpit are more highly detailed, which is good if you have a PC that can handle it but perhaps not good if you have an older PC. Other than that it all comes down to personal preferences. > "Fatbob" <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:7bm0c.87$[email hidden]... > If they use the same physics, than why make this mod or use this mod?Sorry if this question sounds dumb, > but I'm new to NR2003 (picked it up for $9.99).

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:32:16 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >F1C mods do a much better job of "hiding" the underlying game from a driving >perspective. Unfortunately they do a worse job at everything else. Jason

The front tire bug is pretty easy to fix in most cases. Doesn't even seem to happen at all tracks, for example I didn't really see it at Silverstone, but OTOH it was quite nasty at LeMans Sarthe and at Monza. But in most cases a little bit of de-wedge, a little bit of rear weight bias, and slightly less camber on the RF than on the LF will fix it and still gives reasonable handling. For example I usually end up with about 49.4% front weight, 49.4% wedge, and 0.10 deg less camber on the RF. Equal front weight and wedge will keep the left side weights equal and just shift weight from RF to RR, which seems to be what it needs. Then you de-camber the RF to keep it from getting too loose, plus that also usually lowers the RF temp a tad more. That won't necessarily get the temperatures exactly equal but it equalizes the wear and still gives good handling. Once I have the wear equalized I don't mess with it any further. "John DiFool" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > I can think of one thing, and that is the tire temp "bug" imbalance > between LF and RF (a consequence of the NASCAR oval > physics)-that doesn't bother me much tho. > > John DiFool >

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:35:31 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: <snip a large pile of stuff> PTA = Papyrus Trans Am = Fictional Cars It's kinda pointless arguing the physics parameters of cars that don't exist. PTA was a last minute thing for the 1.2.0.1 patch to give road racers something to drive that doesn't feel like a dump truck on monster truck tires (unless you use Achim's setups <vbg>). The performance of the cars is closer to early 70's F1 than trans am. I actually kinda like that PTA uses nascar setup parameters because it makes it much easier to get your crossweight setup right. Instead of playing around with assymetrical springs for 5 hours at Watkins Glen you can just lower the wedge all the way. >That's the one thing I haven't really seen... perhaps the people who've >grown up on the ovals are just pushing harder when they turn left? It happens when you're driving down Mulsanne. =) Jason

"Jason Moyer" wrote... > <snip> PTA was a last minute thing for the 1.2.0.1 patch > to give road racers something to drive that doesn't feel > like a dump truck on monster truck tires (unless you use > Achim's setups <vbg>). LOL!! ;-) > <snip> > It happens when you're driving down Mulsanne. =) Really? -Hmmm... perhaps the majority of righthanders masks it from me. Jan. =---

LOL!! ;-) Really? -Hmmm... perhaps the majority of righthanders masks it from me. Jan. =---

As Achim pointed out (in open forum, I hope), you *can* get the RF temp down, but then the car becomes squirrelly. Monza is the best example: it is virtually devoid of left turns, so if you jack everything around to make the RF temp lower, the setup is out of whack. Apparently the RF is *supposed* to run ca. 5 deg. hotter than the LF, so that's what you should aim for. Wedge can be used to equalize temps/weights, but then the handling becomes wildly asymmetrical, loose as a goose on RH turns, say, and plowing like a Farmall on LH turns. "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > The front tire bug is pretty easy to fix in most cases. Doesn't even seem > to happen at all tracks, for example I didn't really see it atSilverstone, > but OTOH it was quite nasty at LeMans Sarthe and at Monza. But in most > cases a little bit of de-wedge, a little bit of rear weight bias, and > slightly less camber on the RF than on the LF will fix it and still gives > reasonable handling. For example I usually end up with about 49.4% front > weight, 49.4% wedge, and 0.10 deg less camber on the RF. Equal frontweight > and wedge will keep the left side weights equal and just shift weight from > RF to RR, which seems to be what it needs. Then you de-camber the RF to > keep it from getting too loose, plus that also usually lowers the RF tempa > tad more. That won't necessarily get the temperatures exactly equal butit

Quoted text (15 lines)

> equalizes the wear and still gives good handling. Once I have the wear > equalized I don't mess with it any further. > > > "John DiFool" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > I can think of one thing, and that is the tire temp "bug" imbalance > > between LF and RF (a consequence of the NASCAR oval > > physics)-that doesn't bother me much tho. > > > > John DiFool > > > >

Wow Jan we actually agree on SOMETHING! ;) "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QJm0c.17156$n%[email hidden]... > > Weight, power delivery and gearbox are different, but there's a lot ofstock > car stuff which seems to be hardcoded into the game and does, IMO, detract > too much from the experience to make it worthwhile. > > F1C mods do a much better job of "hiding" the underlying game from adriving > perspective. > > Jan. > =--- > >

"Mitch_A" wrote... > Wow Jan we actually agree on SOMETHING! ;) There is hope for you yet, Mitch. <vbg> Jan. =---

THE ONLY THING THE Nx SERIES HAS GOING FOR IT IS THE ONLINE CODE. The rest is a sad re-hash of 4-5 yr old game engine (which was dumbed down anyway, remember). The TA mod is a bad joke. Basically give a Stock car 6 gears and call it a Sports car.... Yea right :-) Ive spent many hours with each, have you? Whenever someone tries to tell me white is black and I know different Ill argue till Im blue. If you have sub par hardware or a 56k connection then yea, by all means continue running NR2003 as you cant compare them fairly. But IF you meet these conditions and spend the TIME setting up F1C correctly youre in for a real sports car/muscle car treat. Mitch "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:32:16 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > Unfortunately they do a worse job at everything else. > > Jason

I have not had a problem with assymetrical handling. De-wedge takes weight off the RF and LR, making it looser on left turns and tighter on right turns. Decambering the RF fixes the left turns, moving the weight rearward fixes the right turns. Taken together those three things bring the RF temp down without assymetrical handling problems. IIRC the PWF Expert setup for Kyalami uses this technique, so you can try that if you want to see how it works. Regarding the "5 deg. hotter" point, as I said in my previous post I don't worry if the RF is a little bit high as long as the wear is equalized, so perhaps I have arrived at that point by trial and error. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xwo0c.52033$[email hidden]... > As Achim pointed out (in open forum, I hope), you *can* get the RF temp > down, but then the car becomes squirrelly. Monza is the best example: itis > virtually devoid of left turns, so if you jack everything around to makethe

Quoted text (10 lines)

> RF temp lower, the setup is out of whack. Apparently the RF is *supposed* > to run ca. 5 deg. hotter than the LF, so that's what you should aim for. > > Wedge can be used to equalize temps/weights, but then the handling becomes > wildly asymmetrical, loose as a goose on RH turns, say, and plowing like a > Farmall on LH turns. > > "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > The front tire bug is pretty easy to fix in most cases. Doesn't even

seem > > to happen at all tracks, for example I didn't really see it at > Silverstone, > > but OTOH it was quite nasty at LeMans Sarthe and at Monza. But in most > > cases a little bit of de-wedge, a little bit of rear weight bias, and > > slightly less camber on the RF than on the LF will fix it and stillgives > > reasonable handling. For example I usually end up with about 49.4%front > > weight, 49.4% wedge, and 0.10 deg less camber on the RF. Equal front > weight > > and wedge will keep the left side weights equal and just shift weightfrom > > RF to RR, which seems to be what it needs. Then you de-camber the RF to > > keep it from getting too loose, plus that also usually lowers the RFtemp

Quoted text (20 lines)

> a > > tad more. That won't necessarily get the temperatures exactly equal but > it > > equalizes the wear and still gives good handling. Once I have the wear > > equalized I don't mess with it any further. > > > > > > "John DiFool" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > I can think of one thing, and that is the tire temp "bug" imbalance > > > between LF and RF (a consequence of the NASCAR oval > > > physics)-that doesn't bother me much tho. > > > > > > John DiFool > > > > > > > > >

I don't think you'll see any handling differences. Both are based on the same physics engine provided by Papy in the Patch. -Larry "Timmy Ferrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TVg0c.954$[email hidden]... > I just dl'd the long-awaited T/A mod. > Let me qualify this by saying that I'm not a great road racer; I run GPL > (intermittently) and with a very modest amount of success and I even(gasp)

Quoted text (10 lines)

> try to watch and follow the road racing series in the world. > Maybe it's me but I don't see a significant difference between the T/A and > the US Pits latest version of their Touring Car mod. > The graphics are definately better but I can't see a great deal of > difference hustling a car through the esses at Watkins Glen betweeen the > busch mod, tptcc and the new T/A mod. > Am I wrong? > I think that all of the programmers involved have done a splendid job just > in getting the mods available to us. I'm not trying to favor one over the > other. They all deserve our gratitude (as well as some donations) but I

just > can't see a real difference. > What's the consensus? > Timmy > >

Personally, I think the PWF Mod is a little more polished in the Graphics design, frame rates, and while it will take me a while to get used to them, the sounds. -Larry "Fatbob" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:7bm0c.87$[email hidden]... If they use the same physics, than why make this mod or use this mod? Sorry if this question sounds dumb, but I'm new to NR2003 (picked it up for $9.99). "B Wegner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... They use the same physics so you shouldn't see any difference in the way the car handles at all! Keep both Mods - TPTCC is great - they do GT40 etc. Wag "Timmy Ferrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TVg0c.954$[email hidden]... I just dl'd the long-awaited T/A mod. Let me qualify this by saying that I'm not a great road racer; I run GPL (intermittently) and with a very modest amount of success and I even (gasp) try to watch and follow the road racing series in the world. Maybe it's me but I don't see a significant difference between the T/A and the US Pits latest version of their Touring Car mod. The graphics are definately better but I can't see a great deal of difference hustling a car through the esses at Watkins Glen betweeen the busch mod, tptcc and the new T/A mod. Am I wrong? I think that all of the programmers involved have done a splendid job just in getting the mods available to us. I'm not trying to favor one over the other. They all deserve our gratitude (as well as some donations) but I just can't see a real difference. What's the consensus? Timmy

And thats the real problem :)) "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4Kp0c.17306$TT5.11329@lakeread06... > I don't think you'll see any handling differences. Both are based on the > same physics engine provided by Papy in the Patch. > > -Larry >

Jan Verschueren Wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> Even with a somewhat decent setup, it feels way too bouncy, vague > and generally insufficiently "poised" to convince me I'm driving a > Trans Am > car. > > It's a sedan/GT type car, relatively heavy but with sufficient > power/grip > and a high cockpit workload, but it doesn't remind me of any current > form of > motorsport. Perhaps it can do a passable Porsche 917 impression if > they > lighten it a bit further, but anything roadracing younger than > that... no. >

That's a common mistake people in general and especially those outside of the U.S. seem to make. They see "trans am" and see some corvettes and mustangs and think that the cars should be roughly equal to their local "sedan/touring car/GT" series. Unfortunately the real Trans Am cars are anything but. The american Trans Am series is not really equivalent to any touring car or sedan series around the world (Australian V8 supercars probably being the closest). They have loads more power and loads more grip. Of course the cars in the game have even more than that but that's another topic. At any rate, if these cars were modeled absolutely spot on for the American Trans Am series, they would still be too girppy, too powerful, and too fast for people expecting something similar to their local touring car racing... John -- JnPrather ------------------------------------------------------------------------ JnPrather's Profile: http://www.setup-guru.com/member.php?u=381 View this thread: http://www.setup-guru.com/showthread.php?t=2203 _______________________________________________________________________________ Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

Mitch_A Wrote: > But IF you meet these conditions > and spend the TIME setting up F1C correctly youre in for a real > sports > car/muscle car treat.Yes, a great treat with all of 10 other players. F1C's net code is so sad as to be utterly and completely pathetic. What's the friggin' point of doing a sports car race online when you can't run with more than 15 cars? N2K3 is the only sim that allows accurate online modeling of one of the biggest challenges in sports-car racing: Dealing with heavy traffic. Until F1C gets decent netcode that allows 40+ car grids, it'll remain a poor stepchild in the eyes of simracers, because simracing is about competing with human opponents, and F1C's online racing capabilities are weak to nonexistent. -- FCYTravis ------------------------------------------------------------------------ FCYTravis's Profile: http://www.setup-guru.com/member.php?u=2503 View this thread: http://www.setup-guru.com/showthread.php?t=2203 _______________________________________________________________________________ Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

To expand upon what Prather mentioned... The American Trans-Am Series is *not* a touring-car series. The cars are not in any way based on stock sports car running gear. Rather, Trans-Am cars and their SCCA GT1 cousins are "funny cars" - purpose-built racing tube frame chassis with a live rear axle, fiberglass body that kinda-sorta-maybe looks like a stock car and (usually) carbureted racing V8. They're attached to the asphalt by racing suspensions shod in huge, meaty BFGoodrich slick tyres. IOW, they have huge amounts of grip and ungodly amounts of power. -- FCYTravis ------------------------------------------------------------------------ FCYTravis's Profile: http://www.setup-guru.com/member.php?u=2503 View this thread: http://www.setup-guru.com/showthread.php?t=2203 _______________________________________________________________________________ Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

What did I say again? Oh yea OTHER than online code :-) F1C online is hardly non-existent. Matter of fact I was in a ETCC race at Donny the other night on F1RST with 22 racers and it was AS stable as anything Ive done with Papy. Is that the exception and not the rule? YES! Do 56k'ers work good on F1RST? Like I said, no way. BUT IF YOU MEET THE CONDITIONS I MENTIONED ITS A GREAT SIMULATION OF SPORTS CAR RACING. I havent raced offline for many years with Papy sims yet I find myself having terrific battles against the AI in F1C/mods. Im a hardcore mode kinda guy so none of what I say applies to roof-riding aids users :-) Mitch "FCYTravis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > Yes, a great treat with all of 10 other players. F1C's net code is so > sad as to be utterly and completely pathetic. What's the friggin' point > of doing a sports car race online when you can't run with more than 15 > cars? N2K3 is the only sim that allows accurate online modeling of one > of the biggest challenges in sports-car racing: Dealing with heavy > traffic. > > Until F1C gets decent netcode that allows 40+ car grids, it'll remain a > poor stepchild in the eyes of simracers, because simracing is about > competing with human opponents, and F1C's online racing capabilities > are weak to nonexistent. > > > -- > FCYTravis > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > FCYTravis's Profile: http://www.setup-guru.com/member.php?u=2503 > View this thread: http://www.setup-guru.com/showthread.php?t=2203 > > >

____________________________________________________________________________ ___ > Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -http://www.uncensored-news.com > <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source<><><><><><><><> >

Mitch_A wrote: > > And thats the real problem :)) Why ? It's not like it's a bad "generic road course physics set", it's quite enjoyable even if it's not dead accurate, furthermore it's not like we're stuck with the same physics set for all the mods that will come out, the .exe was hacked a long time ago, it's the lack of an anti cheat tool and a matching server app that has made it more sensible to stick with one of the 4 basic physics set for the time being, work is in progress in that area as well btw Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

Gee, wow, 22 drivers. I'm so impressed. Not. Come back and talk to me when F1C can support 40+ car races with almost no lag on my cable modem like N2K3 does. I'm not disputing F1C's simulation qualities. But face it, F1C's online play is nothing short of a disaster. It's not worth running an unstable 20-car race with more dropouts than my local high school with F1C when I can run a clean, solid 40-car race with N2K3. -- FCYTravis ------------------------------------------------------------------------ FCYTravis's Profile: http://www.setup-guru.com/member.php?u=2503 View this thread: http://www.setup-guru.com/showthread.php?t=2203 _______________________________________________________________________________ Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

On 29 Feb 2004 18:54:01 GMT, FCYTravis <[email hidden]> wrote: >Yes, a great treat with all of 10 other players. F1C's net code is so >sad as to be utterly and completely pathetic. It's not that bad, just don't forget to move the SERVER CAR. Jason

Hehe, I NEVER said it was PERFECT :)) "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On 29 Feb 2004 18:54:01 GMT, FCYTravis > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Yes, a great treat with all of 10 other players. F1C's net code is so > >sad as to be utterly and completely pathetic. > > It's not that bad, just don't forget to move the SERVER CAR. > > Jason >

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:07:39 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Hehe, I NEVER said it was PERFECT :)) =) I don't see the point really of bickering between the sims. They each do some things better. N2004 was supposed to have brake wear which F1C does fairly well, N2003 has better tracks and multi, F1C has incredible dynamic weather, etc. If you look at what the top simracers (and real drivers) are driving, it's pretty much GPL/N2003/F1C with GTR and RBR hopefully being added to that this year. If you want to talk NT2004 on the other hand I'm game. =p Jason

"FCYTravis" wrote: > Gee, wow, 22 drivers. I'm so impressed. Not. > > Come back and talk to me when F1C can support 40+ car races with almost > no lag on my cable modem like N2K3 does. The current open wheel sim with decent on-line support allows for 20 drivers. Which seems a suitable number for this genre. The EA series couldn't get close to this only recently. So 22 seems pretty good. > I'm not disputing F1C's simulation qualities. But face it, F1C's online > play is nothing short of a disaster. It's not worth running an unstable > 20-car race with more dropouts than my local high school with F1C when > I can run a clean, solid 40-car race with N2K3. I've yet to get F1C working to my tastes, perhaps I haven't taken the time I don't know. However, unless they are all lying there are guys I would respect on RAS who are regularly racing F1C and mods on-line. If it was that crap I am sure they would not persevere. Running such large fields is more of a Nascar requirement. Heck, they're running bigger fields in F1C than real life F1...how unrealistic! Cheers Tony

Im obviously an old fuddy duddy :) I just find it hard to accept that this could be the "best" were going to get. Papy has shortcomings that I just cna't accept any longer and EA sims (although they have failings also) are a step in the right direction, especially the Physics. The Papy tracks are nearly perfectly flat. The bumps that are there feel as though they were just stuck onto this perfectly flat track, the grahics and physics seem dated and most importanly it can be exploited way to easily. But the Online code is still the best. I used to play RBI baseball for the orig 8bit nintendo. Ellis Burks could hit nearly any strike over the fence every at bat. I relate this to Papy's Nx series now. The guys that understand the games failings and can take advantage of them have an absolute advantage and it shows. Even in fixed racing. Were to that point now with Papys GAMES and IMO it's WAY past time to move to something new that is able to overcome these major shortcomings. Some of the shortcomings have been around since N1. Guys seem to take it as though I hate Papy, nothing could be further from the truth. Part of my attitude/resentment comes from knowing Papy didnt pay the piper and give us something better with all the hard earned money I gave them in support. IMO they should have released 2 versions of Nascar with 5 major patches instead of the 7 they did release as NEW.. Go to the RASCAR website and look at the picture on the main page upper left. Can you tell me what version of Papy's Nascar that should have been? I'll bet you'll be shocked when I tell ya. Actually you probably know already :-) Mitch "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (25 lines)

> > > Mitch_A wrote: > > > > And thats the real problem :)) > > Why ? > > It's not like it's a bad "generic road course physics set", it's quite > enjoyable even if it's not dead accurate, furthermore it's not like > we're stuck with the same physics set for all the mods that will come > out, the .exe was hacked a long time ago, it's the lack of an anti cheat > tool and a matching server app that has made it more sensible to stick > with one of the 4 basic physics set for the time being, work is in > progress in that area as well btw > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > "goyl at nettx dot no" > > http://www.theuspits.com > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > --Groucho Marx--

I wont comment on Thuinder much anymore. It still looks good but afetr spending some time I realized it has major issues. You cant actually spin the other guy (among other things). This IMO makes it a no sale. Hopefully 05 will be better. GTR2003 gets my blood pumpin, I cant wait. If it's half as good as GTR02 mod I doubt Ill be running much else. Mitch "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:07:39 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Hehe, I NEVER said it was PERFECT :)) > > =) > > I don't see the point really of bickering between the sims. They each > do some things better. N2004 was supposed to have brake wear which > F1C does fairly well, N2003 has better tracks and multi, F1C has > incredible dynamic weather, etc. If you look at what the top > simracers (and real drivers) are driving, it's pretty much > GPL/N2003/F1C with GTR and RBR hopefully being added to that this > year. > > If you want to talk NT2004 on the other hand I'm game. =p > > Jason >

Oh yea, took me awhile to figure out what RBR was. Well if all the other Rally games are any indication (including CM04) then its going to be nothing but an arcade game. I hope Im wrong but my hopes have been dashed so many times on rally sims Ive given up ever getting one. Maybe rallying is just to difficult to simulate realistically on the current crop of 2d non feedback PCs? Mitch "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:07:39 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > GPL/N2003/F1C with GTR and RBR hopefully being added to that this > year. > > > Jason >

FCYTravis <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > Gee, wow, 22 drivers. I'm so impressed. Not. > > Come back and talk to me when F1C can support 40+ car races with almost > no lag on my cable modem like N2K3 does. > > I'm not disputing F1C's simulation qualities. But face it, F1C's online > play is nothing short of a disaster. It's not worth running an unstable > 20-car race with more dropouts than my local high school with F1C when > I can run a clean, solid 40-car race with N2K3. > > > -- > FCYTravis > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > FCYTravis's Profile: http://www.setup-guru.com/member.php?u=2503 > View this thread: http://www.setup-guru.com/showthread.php?t=2203 > > >

____________________________________________________________________________ ___ > Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -http://www.uncensored-news.com > <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source<><><><><><><><> I'd love to see a replay of a "clean, solid" 40 car race as you mention. Never seen a clean race online with that many cars, in or out of a league setting. Care to share a replay ? >

In article <yXr0c.18529$[email hidden]>, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> writes: >Go to the RASCAR website and look at the picture on the main page upper >left. Can you tell me what version of Papy's Nascar that should have been? >I'll bet you'll be shocked when I tell ya. Actually you probably know >already :-) Looks like the 'hi-res' version of Dover in Nascar 1...<g> 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

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) writes:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>On 29 Feb 2004 18:54:01 GMT, FCYTravis ><[email hidden]> wrote: > >>Yes, a great treat with all of 10 other players. F1C's net code is so >>sad as to be utterly and completely pathetic. > >It's not that bad, just don't forget to move the SERVER CAR.

Now *that* is a stupid fucking 'feature'...argh! One of these days I'm gonna walk in the front door of ISI and ask them WHY can't you get rid of an idle car automatically...? 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

Not even close :-) I know its not a great pic <g> but N1 sure never looked anywhere near that good and I had the fastest CPU available at the time (P-90) and a V1000. "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <yXr0c.18529$[email hidden]>, "Mitch_A" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >Go to the RASCAR website and look at the picture on the main page upper > >left. Can you tell me what version of Papy's Nascar that should havebeen?

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >I'll bet you'll be shocked when I tell ya. Actually you probably know > >already :-) > > Looks like the 'hi-res' version of Dover in Nascar 1...<g> > > 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 Sun, 29 Feb 2004 21:01:38 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Oh yea, took me awhile to figure out what RBR was. Well if all the other >Rally games are any indication (including CM04) then its going to be nothing >but an arcade game. I hope Im wrong but my hopes have been dashed so many >times on rally sims Ive given up ever getting one. Maybe rallying is just >to difficult to simulate realistically on the current crop of 2d non >feedback PCs? Have you seen the feauture list yet Mitch? http://www.richardburnsrally.com You should check that out. Even if the physics are crap (i.e. Rally Trophy) it's going to have more sim features than any rally sim ever, even Mobil 1. The stages are going to be full length with dynamic time of day and weather conditions, narrow roads based on the real rallies, potholes, etc. The cars have fully functional cockpits, engines that are modelled based on the mechanical workings rather than torque curves, fully independent suspension with active differentials, etc. There's no 'reset car' function when you crash, you have to hope spectators are nearby to roll the car over or you're out and get the helicopter rescue treatment. It looks pretty mind blowing, even if the physics are merely passable. Jason

On 29 Feb 2004 21:35:19 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: >Now *that* is a stupid fucking 'feature'...argh! One of these days I'm gonna >walk in the front door of ISI and ask them WHY can't you get rid of an idle car >automatically...? Yeah, they weren't allowed to have a dedicated server, which I understand, but it's a shame they didn't include a hack so people could start up the game, host, and not actually join the race. =/ Jason

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:28:14 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>I just find it hard to accept that this could be the "best" were going to >get. Papy has shortcomings that I just cna't accept any longer and EA sims >(although they have failings also) are a step in the right direction, >especially the Physics. The Papy tracks are nearly perfectly flat. The >bumps that are there feel as though they were just stuck onto this perfectly >flat track, the grahics and physics seem dated and most importanly it can be >exploited way to easily.

I dunno, I've driven on professional racing circuits. They aren't littered with high amplitude oscillations, just a lot of high frequency bumps. When I see posts about the tracks being too flat, I wonder if you're comparing them to streets in Pittsburgh or something, because that's about the only thing I can think of that could be bumpier. Surely you don't think the rollercoasters at Monza and Silverstone represent reality in any way? Jason

"FCYTravis" wrote...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> To expand upon what Prather mentioned... > > The American Trans-Am Series is *not* a touring-car > series. The cars are not in any way based on stock > sports car running gear. > > Rather, Trans-Am cars and their SCCA GT1 cousins are > "funny cars" - purpose-built racing tube frame chassis > with a live rear axle, fiberglass body that kinda-sorta- > maybe looks like a stock car and (usually) carbureted > racing V8. They're attached to the asphalt by racing > suspensions shod in huge, meaty BFGoodrich slick tyres. > > IOW, they have huge amounts of grip and ungodly amounts > of power.

Yes, we know (actually, I didn't know about the live rear axle part, but Hal told me), but that doesn't mean the cars in the game portray the same kind of stable aero platform and poise the occasional footage that makes its way across the Atlantic of their RL counterparts indicates. Jan. =---

"JnPrather" wrote...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> That's a common mistake people in general and especially > those outside of the U.S. seem to make. They see "trans > am" and see some corvettes and mustangs and think that > the cars should be roughly equal to their local "sedan/ > touring car/GT" series. <snip> > At any rate, if these cars were modeled absolutely spot > on for the American Trans Am series, they would still be > too girppy, too powerful, and too fast for people > expecting something similar to their local touring car > racing...

In case you hadn't noticed, I'm describing the cars in the game, not Trans-Am's. Also, I said sufficient grip and power, not too much. Jan. =---

[email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:28:14 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I just find it hard to accept that this could be the "best" were going to > >get. Papy has shortcomings that I just cna't accept any longer and EA sims > >(although they have failings also) are a step in the right direction, > >especially the Physics. The Papy tracks are nearly perfectly flat. The > >bumps that are there feel as though they were just stuck onto this perfectly > >flat track, the grahics and physics seem dated and most importanly it can be > >exploited way to easily. > > I dunno, I've driven on professional racing circuits. They aren't > littered with high amplitude oscillations, just a lot of high > frequency bumps. When I see posts about the tracks being too flat, I > wonder if you're comparing them to streets in Pittsburgh or something, > because that's about the only thing I can think of that could be > bumpier. > > Surely you don't think the rollercoasters at Monza and Silverstone > represent reality in any way? > > Jason

Don't forget that this is fundamental to the design of the N4+/GPL engine - it's actually on of the things that Papy did "right" (from one way of looking at it). I don't see that there's any resolution to the argument - both sims have fundamental strengths and flaws. Papy did a good thing in decoupling the graphics engine from the underlying physics engine - the tracks are modeled at a higher resolution than diplayed on the monitor (rather than 'riding the polygons' like you do in F1C), and driving feel is less affected by frame rate (you can drive GPL/N2k3 @ 36fps with alot more feel than you can in F1C). I'd imagine this is also a big factor in why Papy's multiplayer is so much better. OTOH - F1c has it *all over* Papy on the modability side. Thank goodness ISI at least saw what mods have added to all sorts of gaming genres. I bought F12k1/2 only because of GTR, discovered there was a good game there, and picked up F1C without any particular mod driving the sale (but knowing good mods would be on the way). If Papyrus had made the N2k3 engine as open and modifiable as ISI's, they could have potentially owned the sim market (and we'd have GPL2 by now!). Just means the the Holy Grail of sim racing is still out there - I certainly don't feel cheated by any of what we already have. Just think what's coming - GPL65 - various F1C mods, N2k3 mods from the cracked .exe, Simbin's GT sim, RBR. Why the hell are we all whining ;)? Kendt

FWIW. I've been a Papy fan since the beginning. (Indy 500 the Sim on Amiga) Papyrus is the reason I own a computer and have a career in the IT field. The only thing great multiplayer code gives is competition. Net code doesnt make the sim any more realistic to drive except for the fact that those are other people driving next/into you. With that said I'd much rather drive test sessions alone in a car if it was more realistic behind the wheel.. I drive the AussieV8 mod with a few Aussie nutbags on F1RST practically every night. I dont think I've loaded up N2k3 in months, I downloaded the transam mod but havent bothered to try it yet.

Is the Aussie V8 mod available for the public? URL? Does that mod show up as F1C V8 in F1RST? Thx "Charlie B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cpA0c.15915$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> FWIW. > > I've been a Papy fan since the beginning. (Indy 500 the Sim on Amiga) > > Papyrus is the reason I own a computer and have a career in the IT field. > > The only thing great multiplayer code gives is competition. Net code

doesnt > make the sim any more realistic to drive except for the fact that thoseare > other people driving next/into you. > > With that said I'd much rather drive test sessions alone in a car if itwas

Quoted text (13 lines)

> more realistic behind the wheel.. > > I drive the AussieV8 mod with a few Aussie nutbags on F1RST practically > every night. I dont think I've loaded up N2k3 in months, I downloaded the > transam mod but havent bothered to try it yet. > > > > > > > >

http://www.v8gaming.com/ yes it shows up as F1C-V8 Beta in F1RST. "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vFA0c.32067$[email hidden]... > Is the Aussie V8 mod available for the public? URL? Does that mod showup

Quoted text (12 lines)

> as F1C V8 in F1RST? > > Thx > > > "Charlie B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:cpA0c.15915$[email hidden]... > > FWIW. > > > > I've been a Papy fan since the beginning. (Indy 500 the Sim on Amiga) > > > > Papyrus is the reason I own a computer and have a career in the IT

field.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > > The only thing great multiplayer code gives is competition. Net code > doesnt > > make the sim any more realistic to drive except for the fact that those > are > > other people driving next/into you. > > > > With that said I'd much rather drive test sessions alone in a car if it > was > > more realistic behind the wheel.. > > > > I drive the AussieV8 mod with a few Aussie nutbags on F1RST practically > > every night. I dont think I've loaded up N2k3 in months, I downloaded

the

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > transam mod but havent bothered to try it yet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

[email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:28:14 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I just find it hard to accept that this could be the "best" were going to > >get. Papy has shortcomings that I just cna't accept any longer and EA sims > >(although they have failings also) are a step in the right direction, > >especially the Physics. The Papy tracks are nearly perfectly flat. The > >bumps that are there feel as though they were just stuck onto this perfectly > >flat track, the grahics and physics seem dated and most importanly it can be > >exploited way to easily.

*cough* EA FANBOY *cough*

Mitch i cant beleive your comparing F1RC to Nascar 2003. F1C is a fucking toy compared to NC 2003 in every single way.In fact its a joke and inferior in everyway the biggest being the physics side. The papy cars feel "alive" and the handling is totally dynamic and natural as opposed to the F1C cars which give you the feeling of driving blindfolded. You have no clue as to whats going to happen and why it happened it just happens. Its very simplistic and lacks the depth of the papy sim. How can you call the Papy engine dated when it was totally revised in 2003 with actual data and help from winston cup engineers? The fact that its a generic type physics model has nothing negative to do with their fundamental realism it only means they are not simulating a specific real life racing car.. IF there was a car designed with the papy specifications you could bet your bottom dollar that if would handle very closely to it. Its not even close mate:) "cronik" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote in messagenews:<[email hidden]>... > > On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:28:14 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >I just find it hard to accept that this could be the "best" were goingto > > >get. Papy has shortcomings that I just cna't accept any longer and EAsims > > >(although they have failings also) are a step in the right direction, > > >especially the Physics. The Papy tracks are nearly perfectly flat.The > > >bumps that are there feel as though they were just stuck onto thisperfectly > > >flat track, the grahics and physics seem dated and most importanly itcan be > > >exploited way to easily. > > > *cough* EA FANBOY *cough*

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 19:34:44 +1100, "Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Mitch i cant beleive your comparing F1RC to Nascar 2003. Are you talking about F1C or F1RC?? Jason

F1C sorry. Its all the same old crap anyway:) "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 19:34:44 +1100, "Dan" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Mitch i cant beleive your comparing F1RC to Nascar 2003. > > Are you talking about F1C or F1RC?? > > Jason

Dan wrote: > F1C sorry. Dan, I think you're doing F1C wrong. ISI's physics model is highly complex and extremely configurable, to the extent where we could probably get closer to GT or Prototype simulation with it than with the current N2k3 physics. The only serious shortcoming in this respect is the rudimentary tire model. If ISI one day takes the time to give their sims a new tire model, they may immediately have state of the art physics at hand. Of course, that still leave the multiplayer to be sorted out, but anyway, the physics are much better than they appear, it's mainly the tire model which lacks detail. The configurability is btw in general a strong point in ISI sims. I once was in a project where I with just a few minor mods was able to add this slight shaking effect brake discs which have become too hot can cause, where the wheel shakes slightly with a slow oscillation at slow speeds, and then the shaking becomes an almost unnoticeable high speed vibration at higher speeds, and that felt _so_ real. I'm really a fan of Papyrus and have always been, but credit should be given where credit is due. Achim

All I know is that the best thing a person can do if they want to be good with the Papy TA cars is to spend time driving the F1 cars in F1C. F1C's physics are excellent, and give me more feedback than the Papy cars. David G Fisher "Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> Mitch i cant beleive your comparing F1RC to Nascar 2003. > F1C is a fucking toy compared to NC 2003 in every single way.In fact its a > joke and inferior in everyway the biggest being the physics side. > The papy cars feel "alive" and the handling is totally dynamic and natural > as opposed to the F1C cars which give you the feeling of driving > blindfolded. > You have no clue as to whats going to happen and why it happened it just > happens. > Its very simplistic and lacks the depth of the papy sim. > > How can you call the Papy engine dated when it was totally revised in 2003 > with actual data and help from winston cup engineers? > The fact that its a generic type physics model has nothing negative to do > with their fundamental realism it only means they are not simulating a > specific real life racing car.. > IF there was a car designed with the papy specifications you could bet

your > bottom dollar that if would handle very closely to it. > > Its not even close mate:)

"Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:40430541$1 @duster.adelaide.on.net:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> F1C sorry. > Its all the same old crap anyway:) > "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 19:34:44 +1100, "Dan" <[email hidden]> >> wrote: >> >> >Mitch i cant beleive your comparing F1RC to Nascar 2003. >> >> Are you talking about F1C or F1RC?? >> >> Jason > >

Fire up the ETCC mod, set your configurations to get good high framerates and run some laps with the super touring cars. They move, they wiggle, and you can have FWD & AWD drive cars in the same field as Rear Drivers. That is not possible with the Papyrus engine but it is also not a problem with the single type cars in the Trans AM or Nascar fields, but sportscar racing really benefits from the variety available in the ISI engine. dave(who owns and races both)henrie

Joachim Trensz <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<c1v55u$1l0i73$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (26 lines)

> Dan wrote: > > F1C sorry. > > Dan, I think you're doing F1C wrong. ISI's physics model is highly > complex and extremely configurable, to the extent where we could > probably get closer to GT or Prototype simulation with it than with the > current N2k3 physics. The only serious shortcoming in this respect is > the rudimentary tire model. > > If ISI one day takes the time to give their sims a new tire model, they > may immediately have state of the art physics at hand. Of course, that > still leave the multiplayer to be sorted out, but anyway, the physics > are much better than they appear, it's mainly the tire model which lacks > detail. > > The configurability is btw in general a strong point in ISI sims. I once > was in a project where I with just a few minor mods was able to add this > slight shaking effect brake discs which have become too hot can cause, > where the wheel shakes slightly with a slow oscillation at slow speeds, > and then the shaking becomes an almost unnoticeable high speed vibration > at higher speeds, and that felt _so_ real. > > I'm really a fan of Papyrus and have always been, but credit should be > given where credit is due. > > Achim

Totally agree - ISI is *so close*, but without the multiplayer, tiremodel, and track modelling it doesn't quite make it. I've got to admit I've had more *fun* with F12k2/F1C and mods than N2k3 (multiplayer is hopeless for me - modem only). You can only watch AI cars launch into the air over the curbs so many times at Suzuka before the immersion is ruined, though ;). BTW - can you reveal what mod had this braking feature? Kendt

On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 08:02:59 -0600, Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> wrote: > Fire up the ETCC mod, set your configurations to get good high framerates >and run some laps with the super touring cars. They move, they wiggle, and >you can have FWD & AWD drive cars in the same field as Rear Drivers. That >is not possible with the Papyrus engine but it is also not a problem with >the single type cars in the Trans AM or Nascar fields, but sportscar racing >really benefits from the variety available in the ISI engine. This is one of the reasons why I'm looking forward to GTR. That, and I know that they're taking the time to gather good first-hand data on the cars and tracks. I hate most ISI mods because it's obvious just looking through the hdv's that things were tweaked until they suited the person doing the tweaking, without necessarily having any correlation with reality. ETCC/DTM are awesome but I think they still suffer somewhat from the focus on eye candy over everything that's prevalent in that particular 'scene'. While I'm on the subject of mods, has anyone released a newer version of Bathurst for F1C without all of the poly jumps? I'd like to give it a good thrashing in ETCC but the only version I can find is the original conversion, which has the same issues that the original Nordschleife conversion had before Simbin smoothed the surface planes out. Jason

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 07:47:48 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >All I know is that the best thing a person can do if they want to be good >with the Papy TA cars is to spend time driving the F1 cars in F1C. F1C's >physics are excellent, and give me more feedback than the Papy cars. I dunno if I'd agree with 'more feedback' (keep in mind i don't use FF) but I think too many people sell the F1 cars short. Arnao and friends did a fucking brilliant job creating a convincing F1 model, and it doesn't feel any different to me than a papy F1 sim would, tracks aside. The only thing I don't like about the physics for the F1 cars is the lack of tunable traction control in the garage and cockpit (which was rumored to be part of a patch that was scrapped). Jason

LOL Hardly though :-) I want the "best" possible SIM regardless of who makes it. "Sim fanboy" Papy's NR2003 just has that "been there done that feel" to me. What more can I say? I'd much rather be talking about brake wear and such with NR2004 but we got F*^&ed. I for one won't be running NR2003 this time next year so Im always on the lookout for something better. Im not bashing Papy (except not paying for the rights) but there stuff is just old and full of holes. I dont wear blinders. Mitch "cronik" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote in message > > > *cough* EA FANBOY *cough*

Kendt Eklund wrote: > BTW - can you reveal what mod had this braking feature? It never got published... <g> Achim

You can spew all the propaganda you like Dan. Oh yea, totally revised. Are you that gullible? Back to reality now. The NR2003 engine is nothing more than a tweaked N4 game engine. The N3 engine (origianl alpha) was origianlly going to use the GPL physics but at some point the suits decided GPL was too difficult so they released N3 (based on N1 engine) and then dumbed down the GPL physics into N4 which eventually became NR2003. Yea it's a new game engine alright.... Ignorance is bliss eh? Mitch "Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> Mitch i cant beleive your comparing F1RC to Nascar 2003. > F1C is a fucking toy compared to NC 2003 in every single way.In fact its a > joke and inferior in everyway the biggest being the physics side. > The papy cars feel "alive" and the handling is totally dynamic and natural > as opposed to the F1C cars which give you the feeling of driving > blindfolded. > You have no clue as to whats going to happen and why it happened it just > happens. > Its very simplistic and lacks the depth of the papy sim. > > How can you call the Papy engine dated when it was totally revised in 2003 > with actual data and help from winston cup engineers? > The fact that its a generic type physics model has nothing negative to do > with their fundamental realism it only means they are not simulating a > specific real life racing car.. > IF there was a car designed with the papy specifications you could bet

your > bottom dollar that if would handle very closely to it. > > Its not even close mate:) > > >

Steve Smith wrote: > As Achim pointed out (in open forum, I hope) It was _not_ open forum <g>. But anyway. I meanwhile think that a little excess heat at the RF is probably not even unrealistic due to the torque and momentum engendered by the engine, just the amount of excess heat as compared to the LF is probably exaggerated in N2k3. But who cares, it's a minor nuisance, just one of these things. You know I've always been an extreme advocate of extreme realism, and I still am much for realism, but I've also learnt that realism in some aspects matters more than in others for the simming/racing experience, and when we think someone is 'realistic', that does not at all mean that is really is, or that it is among the important aspects of realism, important in the sense that you're getting a realistic racing experience. The tire heat issue is one of the less important IMO. Achim

Mitch_A wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> ...and then dumbed down the GPL physics into N4 which > eventually became NR2003. > > Yea it's a new game engine alright.... > > Ignorance is bliss eh? > > Mitch

I don't think I'd call the N2003 physics dumbed down as compared to GPL. They are really the next higher level, rather, with a much better tire model, for example. I don't think Kaemmer would ever dumb anything down voluntarily. His commitment to realism is 100%. Achim

Kaeammer is right up there next to god in my book :-) I bow with trembling knees just mentioning his name ;) It's too bad he couldnt make ALL the decisions for us instead of those retards in suits. I was being somewhat generic in my assesment. Yea NR2003 has been tweaked a bunch since N4/GPL, no denying that. NR2003 can't hide the legacy of the N4 game engine either which is my main concern. Mitch "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:c1vqjt$1ohf9q$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > I don't think I'd call the N2003 physics dumbed down as compared to GPL. > They are really the next higher level, rather, with a much better tire > model, for example. > > I don't think Kaemmer would ever dumb anything down voluntarily. His > commitment to realism is 100%. > > Achim >

You lost all the pissy credibility you had when you called NR2003 engine a dumbed down GPL engine. And whats wrong with it being a tweaked N4 or GPL engine when those engines were and are benchmarks of computer simulations? Unlike the rest of the simulation programmers papyrus dont need to bring out "revolutionary" new physics engines every release because they crossed that bridge way back in 98 and when you get so high there is only a little more you can go each time. EA have been making rubbish for years now so its expected they make big steps.= even though they are still a class below. And achim im glad you enjoy the ISI physics model but to me it still feels archaic,and the fact that the physics can be "adjusted" by any jo blow until they "feel right" just has no credibility with me. Mitch im betting the papy sims are too realistic for you hence your shit at them so your talking up the toy game that you can actually do laps in. Dont take it out on papyrus dude,take it out on your parents:) "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NCJ0c.18778$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> LOL > > Hardly though :-) > > I want the "best" possible SIM regardless of who makes it. "Sim fanboy" > > Papy's NR2003 just has that "been there done that feel" to me. What more > can I say? I'd much rather be talking about brake wear and such with

NR2004 > but we got F*^&ed. I for one won't be running NR2003 this time next yearso > Im always on the lookout for something better. Im not bashing Papy(except > not paying for the rights) but there stuff is just old and full of holes.I

Quoted text (11 lines)

> dont wear blinders. > > Mitch > > "cronik" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote in message > > > > > *cough* EA FANBOY *cough* > >

cronik <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote in messagenews:<[email hidden]>... > > On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:28:14 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >I just find it hard to accept that this could be the "best" were goingto > > >get. Papy has shortcomings that I just cna't accept any longer and EAsims > > >(although they have failings also) are a step in the right direction, > > >especially the Physics. The Papy tracks are nearly perfectly flat.The > > >bumps that are there feel as though they were just stuck onto thisperfectly > > >flat track, the grahics and physics seem dated and most importanly itcan be > > >exploited way to easily. > > > *cough* EA FANBOY *cough* *cough* Papy Blinder Brigade Member *cough*

N4 did use a variation of GPL's game engine. Perhaps "dumbed down" was a poor choice of words but IMO it was ;) There is nothing wrong with NR2003 per se, it's getting long in the tooth and I want something better.. IMO the N4 game engine is too limited and full of holes. They have made it better every version for sure and I cant/wont deny that. My problem is the weaknesses are glaring and arent going to be fixed anytime soon so we need an alternative. At this point Papy ISNT the alternative. Am I the only one that see's this or do you all know something I dont? Somewhere along the lines you said it was a entirely new game. I was just setting the record straght :) Im not sure I get your meaning "can be adjusted by anyone'? How is this any diff than Papy's Nx series .ini's? Ive qualified my point quite a few times and after spending quite a bit of time with F1C/mods I feel it's a better game engine from which to work for the future. Ive spent 100's of thousands of hours in Papy sims so I have a good foundation from which to judge. How many hours did you spend with F1c/mods? Less than one I'd bet ;) I like the PWF TA mod just fine. Problem is other than some eye candy it's still NR2003 and all of it's legacy baggage. Mitch "Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:404376a9$[email hidden]... > You lost all the pissy credibility you had when you called > NR2003 engine a dumbed down GPL engine. > And whats wrong with it being a tweaked N4 or GPL engine when thoseengines > were and are benchmarks of computer simulations? > Unlike the rest of the simulation programmers papyrus dont need to bringout > "revolutionary" new physics engines every release because they crossedthat

Quoted text (7 lines)

> bridge way back in 98 and when you get so high there is only a little more > you can go each time. > EA have been making rubbish for years now so its expected they make big > steps.= even though they are still a class below. > > And achim im glad you enjoy the ISI physics model but to me it still feels > archaic,and the fact that the physics can be "adjusted" by any jo blow

until > they "feel right" just has no credibility with me. > Mitch im betting the papy sims are too realistic for you hence your shitat > them so your talking up the toy game that you can actually do laps in. > Dont take it out on papyrus dude,take it out on your parents:) > > >

> And achim im glad you enjoy the ISI physics model but to me it still feels > archaic,and the fact that the physics can be "adjusted" by any jo blow > until > they "feel right" just has no credibility with me. On a serious note, not being a fan of FF, are there non FF users who have found a decent controller setting for F1C et al. I find it lifeless compared with Papy sims. Not through lack of trying. Either there is a magic setting for my Thrustmaster Formula/Nascar Pro and car setup or it just doesn't suit my brain! I also have a Momo but gave up on FF some while ago. Cheers Tony

I haven't had the patience to test tire wear. If it is infested with the same bug as the RF temps, then presumably the RF wear would be higher as well. If it isn't, then tire wear would certainly be the preferred way to set up the car for longer races. Could I talk you into sending me a few of yer roadie setups? "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I have not had a problem with assymetrical handling. De-wedge takesweight > off the RF and LR, making it looser on left turns and tighter on right > turns. Decambering the RF fixes the left turns, moving the weightrearward > fixes the right turns. Taken together those three things bring the RFtemp > down without assymetrical handling problems. IIRC the PWF Expert setupfor

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Kyalami uses this technique, so you can try that if you want to see how it > works. > > Regarding the "5 deg. hotter" point, as I said in my previous post I don't > worry if the RF is a little bit high as long as the wear is equalized, so > perhaps I have arrived at that point by trial and error. > > > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:xwo0c.52033$[email hidden]... > > As Achim pointed out (in open forum, I hope), you *can* get the RF temp > > down, but then the car becomes squirrelly. Monza is the best example:

it > is > > virtually devoid of left turns, so if you jack everything around to make > the > > RF temp lower, the setup is out of whack. Apparently the RF is*supposed* > > to run ca. 5 deg. hotter than the LF, so that's what you should aim for. > > > > Wedge can be used to equalize temps/weights, but then the handlingbecomes > > wildly asymmetrical, loose as a goose on RH turns, say, and plowing likea

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > Farmall on LH turns. > > > > "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > The front tire bug is pretty easy to fix in most cases. Doesn't even > seem > > > to happen at all tracks, for example I didn't really see it at > > Silverstone, > > > but OTOH it was quite nasty at LeMans Sarthe and at Monza. But in

most

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > cases a little bit of de-wedge, a little bit of rear weight bias, and > > > slightly less camber on the RF than on the LF will fix it and still > gives > > > reasonable handling. For example I usually end up with about 49.4% > front > > > weight, 49.4% wedge, and 0.10 deg less camber on the RF. Equal front > > weight > > > and wedge will keep the left side weights equal and just shift weight > from > > > RF to RR, which seems to be what it needs. Then you de-camber the RF

to > > > keep it from getting too loose, plus that also usually lowers the RF > temp > > a > > > tad more. That won't necessarily get the temperatures exactly equalbut > > it > > > equalizes the wear and still gives good handling. Once I have thewear

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > > equalized I don't mess with it any further. > > > > > > > > > "John DiFool" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > I can think of one thing, and that is the tire temp "bug" imbalance > > > > between LF and RF (a consequence of the NASCAR oval > > > > physics)-that doesn't bother me much tho. > > > > > > > > John DiFool > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Jeez, Achim, I screwed up again. You share these gems with me in confidence and I go blabbing them all over the Internet. Next time I slip up, I guess I should quote "a usually reliable source." "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:c1vptb$1nfq4a$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> Steve Smith wrote: > > > As Achim pointed out (in open forum, I hope) > > It was _not_ open forum <g>. But anyway. I meanwhile think that a little > excess heat at the RF is probably not even unrealistic due to the torque > and momentum engendered by the engine, just the amount of excess heat as > compared to the LF is probably exaggerated in N2k3. But who cares, it's > a minor nuisance, just one of these things. > > You know I've always been an extreme advocate of extreme realism, and I > still am much for realism, but I've also learnt that realism in some > aspects matters more than in others for the simming/racing experience, > and when we think someone is 'realistic', that does not at all mean that > is really is, or that it is among the important aspects of realism, > important in the sense that you're getting a realistic racing > experience. The tire heat issue is one of the less important IMO. > > Achim

Steve Smith wrote: > Jeez, Achim, I screwed up again. You share these gems with me in confidence > and I go blabbing them all over the Internet. Next time I slip up, I guess > I should quote "a usually reliable source." No problem at all, as long as you don't remember _how_ the heat problem can be cured :) ;) And keep them coming - even if sometimes a tidbit should slip out, what does it matter. I enjoy discussing these issues with you, and I have learnt so much from you every time you let me take a look at your wealth of knowledge - seriously. We get around to talking about these issues far too seldom! :) Achim

On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 17:24:47 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Kaeammer is right up there next to god in my book :-) I bow with trembling >knees just mentioning his name ;) It's too bad he couldnt make ALL the >decisions for us instead of those retards in suits. Wait....I found something I agree with this guy on.

>"Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote > THE ONLY THING THE Nx SERIES HAS GOING FOR IT IS THE ONLINE CODE. Yeah I mean F1C's tracks are so much better modeled with such accuracy. And the feeling of being there, nobody does it better than EA. <roll eyes> -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Check your e-mail. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ooN0c.53328$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I haven't had the patience to test tire wear. If it is infested with the > same bug as the RF temps, then presumably the RF wear would be higher as > well. If it isn't, then tire wear would certainly be the preferred way to > set up the car for longer races. > > Could I talk you into sending me a few of yer roadie setups? >

Because they're not here yet! ;o) "Kendt Eklund" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Just think what's coming - GPL65 - various F1C mods, N2k3 mods from > the cracked .exe, Simbin's GT sim, RBR. Why the hell are we all > whining ;)? > > Kendt

In article <[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: >All I know is that the best thing a person can do if they want to be good >with the Papy TA cars is to spend time driving the F1 cars in F1C. F1C's >physics are excellent, and give me more feedback than the Papy cars. Then that sounds counterproductive. If the F1C cars give more feedback, then wouldn't you have a problem when you go back to Papy TA? Those cars would then give you relatively little warning when they're about to step out... 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

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) writes:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>On 29 Feb 2004 21:35:19 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: > >>Now *that* is a stupid fucking 'feature'...argh! One of these days I'm >gonna >>walk in the front door of ISI and ask them WHY can't you get rid of an idle >car >>automatically...? > >Yeah, they weren't allowed to have a dedicated server, which I >understand, but it's a shame they didn't include a hack so people >could start up the game, host, and not actually join the race. =/

There's actually a line in the .ini file - "idle car timeout", or something to that effect. Doesn't work, though. Maybe they were just teasing us, or maybe there's another 'switch' in the file that needs to be flipped for it to work. 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

In article <Q4t0c.18548$[email hidden]>, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> writes: >Not even close :-) > >I know its not a great pic <g> but N1 sure never looked anywhere near that >good and I had the fastest CPU available at the time (P-90) and a V1000. I know, it's NT2003... 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 Mon, 01 Mar 2004 17:44:05 +0100, Joachim Trensz <[email hidden]> wrote: >Kendt Eklund wrote: > >> BTW - can you reveal what mod had this braking feature? > >It never got published... <g> And I'm still pissed off about it. Jason

On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 20:04:44 GMT, "Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> And achim im glad you enjoy the ISI physics model but to me it still feels >> archaic,and the fact that the physics can be "adjusted" by any jo blow >> until > they "feel right" just has no credibility with me. > >On a serious note, not being a fan of FF, are there non FF users who have >found a decent controller setting for F1C et al. 50% linearity. 0% deadzone. All sliders on the other page fully to the left except head movement at 100%. Jason

Ill just use Rock as an example of how great Papy track modeling is seeing how we just ran it. Lets see, real life 3 distinct grooves, in NR03 3/4 of a groove. Yep thats right on the money Mr. President ;) See you get me caught up in this NR2003 vs F1C debate but really each has a fair share of major problems. For some reason you guys take it as a personal insult if I complain about Papy's shortcomings. I like em both about the same but does that mean Im satisfied with either? No, thats my point I want something better sooner than later and at this point Papy isnt in the picture. Mitch "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:dfQ0c.6273$[email hidden]... > > Yeah I mean F1C's tracks are so much better modeled with such accuracy.And

Quoted text (15 lines)

> the feeling of being there, nobody does it better than EA. > > > <roll eyes> > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >

"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<kNK0c.259$[email hidden]>... > *cough* Papy Blinder Brigade Member *cough* :)

[email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 17:44:05 +0100, Joachim Trensz <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Kendt Eklund wrote: > > > >> BTW - can you reveal what mod had this braking feature? > > > >It never got published... <g> > > And I'm still pissed off about it. > > Jason

SBDT F1-77 - we hardly knew ye :( Kendt - just guessing...

Exactly my pov too. And don't get me started on Papy track modeling, or the lack thereof is more like it <g> Mitch_A <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:GDU0c.19063$[email hidden]... > Ill just use Rock as an example of how great Papy track modeling is seeing > how we just ran it. Lets see, real life 3 distinct grooves, in NR03 3/4of > a groove. Yep thats right on the money Mr. President ;) > > See you get me caught up in this NR2003 vs F1C debate but really each hasa > fair share of major problems. For some reason you guys take it as a > personal insult if I complain about Papy's shortcomings. I like em both > about the same but does that mean Im satisfied with either? No, thats my > point I want something better sooner than later and at this point Papyisnt

Quoted text (27 lines)

> in the picture. > > Mitch > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:dfQ0c.6273$[email hidden]... > > > > Yeah I mean F1C's tracks are so much better modeled with such accuracy. > And > > the feeling of being there, nobody does it better than EA. > > > > > > <roll eyes> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > > > >

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:06:46 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Ill just use Rock as an example of how great Papy track modeling is seeing >how we just ran it. Lets see, real life 3 distinct grooves, in NR03 3/4 of >a groove. I have no problems running multiple lines there with a good setup. Jason

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 07:05:48 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Exactly my pov too. And don't get me started on Papy track modeling, or >the lack thereof is more like it <g> Are you joking or just fucking stupid? Jason

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 11:53:59 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: >*cough* Papy Blinder Brigade Member *cough* Poof Patrol Jason

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 07:05:48 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > Exactly my pov too. And don't get me started on Papy track modeling,or > >the lack thereof is more like it <g> > > Are you joking or just fucking stupid? > > Jason You say something ?

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:06:46 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Ill just use Rock as an example of how great Papy track modeling isseeing > >how we just ran it. Lets see, real life 3 distinct grooves, in NR03 3/4of > >a groove. > > I have no problems running multiple lines there with a good setup. > > Jason He's talking about doing it and being competitive, not *just* the ability to do it. In the real racing, the high line is one of the lines of choice at the Rock. Try that in an 03 race and see what it gets you. Or Michigan......or California........or Charlotte.......etc, etc.

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 11:53:59 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >*cough* Papy Blinder Brigade Member *cough* > > Poof Patrol > > Jason

My, you're an angry young man. Hate being shown to be wrong on something don't you ?

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 17:28:11 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

> >Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:06:46 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> >> >Ill just use Rock as an example of how great Papy track modeling is >seeing >> >how we just ran it. Lets see, real life 3 distinct grooves, in NR03 3/4 >of >> >a groove. >> >> I have no problems running multiple lines there with a good setup. >> >> Jason > > He's talking about doing it and being competitive, not *just* the ability >to do it. In the real racing, the high line is one of the lines of choice >at the Rock. > Try that in an 03 race and see what it gets you. Or Michigan......or >California........or Charlotte.......etc, etc.

I've noticed the real stock car guys running lines very close to the wall in the turns (most notably the Rock and Michigan)-try this in a NR2003 race and you'll drift into the wall in a hurry. <shrug> Overall tho I am much more impressed with the TA/TPTCC model than I am of the base F1C model-the feel is so much better there's no comparison. However, once I get my broadband connection up and running I'll be able to DL those huge F1C mods and see how they measure up. John DiFool

Danke schoen! "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Check your e-mail. > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ooN0c.53328$[email hidden]... > > I haven't had the patience to test tire wear. If it is infested withthe > > same bug as the RF temps, then presumably the RF wear would be higher as > > well. If it isn't, then tire wear would certainly be the preferred wayto > > set up the car for longer races. > > > > Could I talk you into sending me a few of yer roadie setups? > > > >

Danke schoen. "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:c20a0p$1n7ud4$[email hidden]... > Steve Smith wrote: > > > Jeez, Achim, I screwed up again. You share these gems with me inconfidence > > and I go blabbing them all over the Internet. Next time I slip up, Iguess

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > I should quote "a usually reliable source." > > No problem at all, as long as you don't remember _how_ the heat problem > can be cured :) ;) > > And keep them coming - even if sometimes a tidbit should slip out, what > does it matter. I enjoy discussing these issues with you, and I have > learnt so much from you every time you let me take a look at your wealth > of knowledge - seriously. > > We get around to talking about these issues far too seldom! :) > > Achim

John DiFool <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 17:28:11 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:06:46 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > >> > >> >Ill just use Rock as an example of how great Papy track modeling is > >seeing > >> >how we just ran it. Lets see, real life 3 distinct grooves, in NR03

3/4

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >of > >> >a groove. > >> > >> I have no problems running multiple lines there with a good setup. > >> > >> Jason > > > > He's talking about doing it and being competitive, not *just* the

ability > >to do it. In the real racing, the high line is one of the lines ofchoice

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >at the Rock. > > Try that in an 03 race and see what it gets you. Or Michigan......or > >California........or Charlotte.......etc, etc. > > I've noticed the real stock car guys running lines very close to the > wall in the turns (most notably the Rock and Michigan)-try this in a > NR2003 race and you'll drift into the wall in a hurry. <shrug> > > Overall tho I am much more impressed with the TA/TPTCC model > than I am of the base F1C model-the feel is so much better there's > no comparison. However, once I get my broadband connection up > and running I'll be able to DL those huge F1C mods and see how > they measure up. > > John DiFool

Well, it's not so much of drifting into the wall, as that the high lines at various tracks aren't modeled well, if at all, compared to the way the actual tracks are run. For one thing, the Papy tracks are, or at least look(as in perception) like they are from the 03 cockpit, to narrow compared to the actual tracks. Don't know if it's an incorrect grip in the Papy tracks outside of the low line along with the above or what. But virtually no where in the sim can you run competitive high lines, that they do in actual racing. As long as you get a lot of dedicated help, you can at the 03 ss's though, but I'm referring to the non- ss tracks. Several non-ss tracks where two and three wide is the norm, whereas in the game, the low line is it; it leaves the others in the dust. >

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 01:32:49 GMT, John DiFool <[email hidden]> wrote: >I've noticed the real stock car guys running lines very close to the >wall in the turns (most notably the Rock and Michigan)-try this in a >NR2003 race and you'll drift into the wall in a hurry. <shrug> With the fast and expert setups maybe. I make my own and have no problems, but you should try Andy Wilke's sometime as they're perfectly capable of running multiple lines as well. The "problem" with ovals in N2003 imho is that everyone sets up the car way too tight or too loose. You need to find the point where you can get oversteer if you need it while still being able to turn consistent laps. With the <fast> or <expert> you'll be in the wall within 10 laps trying to keep up with the field even if you run a normal line. Jason

In article <CM81c.27$[email hidden]>, "JP" <[email hidden]> writes: > He's talking about doing it and being competitive, not *just* the ability >to do it. In the real racing, the high line is one of the lines of choice >at the Rock. > Try that in an 03 race and see what it gets you. Or Michigan......or >California........or Charlotte.......etc, etc. It gets *me* a quick trip into the outside wall. Maybe one of the *good* drivers has a different experience...<g> 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:20040302224904.05957.00000820@mb- > > It gets *me* a quick trip into the outside wall. Maybe one of the *good* > drivers has a different experience...<g> Damn Papy anyway for leaving the wall magnets in! :-)

"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >All I know is that the best thing a person can do if they want to be good > >with the Papy TA cars is to spend time driving the F1 cars in F1C. F1C's > >physics are excellent, and give me more feedback than the Papy cars. > > Then that sounds counterproductive. If the F1C cars give more feedback,

then > wouldn't you have a problem when you go back to Papy TA? Those cars wouldthen > give you relatively little warning when they're about to step out... > > Eldred What I mean is that it's very difficult to drive the F1 cars fast, and string together a lot of fast laps. It's very easy to make a mistake, even a slight one, that can ruin a lap or a race. If someone gets sim 'training' with those F1 cars, the TA and Cup cars in N2003 seem quite a bit easier. They physics are good in both, but the F1 cars are much more of a challenge. David G Fisher

"John DiFool" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 17:28:11 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:06:46 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > >> > >> >Ill just use Rock as an example of how great Papy track modeling is > >seeing > >> >how we just ran it. Lets see, real life 3 distinct grooves, in NR03

3/4

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >of > >> >a groove. > >> > >> I have no problems running multiple lines there with a good setup. > >> > >> Jason > > > > He's talking about doing it and being competitive, not *just* the

ability > >to do it. In the real racing, the high line is one of the lines ofchoice

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >at the Rock. > > Try that in an 03 race and see what it gets you. Or Michigan......or > >California........or Charlotte.......etc, etc. > > I've noticed the real stock car guys running lines very close to the > wall in the turns (most notably the Rock and Michigan)-try this in a > NR2003 race and you'll drift into the wall in a hurry. <shrug> > > Overall tho I am much more impressed with the TA/TPTCC model > than I am of the base F1C model-the feel is so much better there's > no comparison. However, once I get my broadband connection up > and running I'll be able to DL those huge F1C mods and see how > they measure up. > > John DiFool

You may have poor setups, and even more probable, your wheel isn't set up correctly for the game. Many people think that 50% linearity is how all wheels should be set up, but I find between 30 and 35% is much better for my wheel. You also have to have your steering lock set correctly. Too much or too little, and there's no way the car will do what you want. David G Fisher

In article <ySa1c.46$[email hidden]>, JP <[email hidden]> writes ><snip>

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > Well, it's not so much of drifting into the wall, as that the high lines >at various tracks aren't modeled well, if at all, compared to the way the >actual tracks are run. For one thing, the Papy tracks are, or at least >look(as in perception) like they are from the 03 cockpit, to narrow compared >to the actual tracks. > > Don't know if it's an incorrect grip in the Papy tracks outside of the low >line along with the above or what. But virtually no where in the sim can >you run competitive high lines, that they do in actual racing. As long as >you get a lot of dedicated help, you can at the 03 ss's though, but I'm >referring to the non- ss tracks. > > Several non-ss tracks where two and three wide is the norm, whereas in the >game, the low line is it; it leaves the others in the dust. >> > >

In my experience with NR2003, if you go wider than the darkened groove the grip reduces drastically. So, depending on how wide the groove is, that's how much choice you've got when choosing a line through the corners. This is when running the non-SS tracks, of course. It may well be there in the SS tracks as well, but because of the steeper banking, it doesn't show as much. -- Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <ySa1c.46$[email hidden]>, JP <[email hidden]> > writes > > > <snip> > > > > Well, it's not so much of drifting into the wall, as that the highlines > >at various tracks aren't modeled well, if at all, compared to the way the > >actual tracks are run. For one thing, the Papy tracks are, or at least > >look(as in perception) like they are from the 03 cockpit, to narrowcompared > >to the actual tracks. > > > > Don't know if it's an incorrect grip in the Papy tracks outside of thelow > >line along with the above or what. But virtually no where in the sim can > >you run competitive high lines, that they do in actual racing. As longas > >you get a lot of dedicated help, you can at the 03 ss's though, but I'm > >referring to the non- ss tracks. > > > > Several non-ss tracks where two and three wide is the norm, whereas inthe

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >game, the low line is it; it leaves the others in the dust. > >> > > > > > In my experience with NR2003, if you go wider than the darkened groove > the grip reduces drastically. So, depending on how wide the groove is, > that's how much choice you've got when choosing a line through the > corners. This is when running the non-SS tracks, of course. It may > well be there in the SS tracks as well, but because of the steeper > banking, it doesn't show as much. > -- > Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) > Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email > If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) > GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

Yep, exactly. Problem is, that's not how it is at several of the actual tracks during actual racing <g>

In article <8Ws1c.94$[email hidden]>, JP <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted text (20 lines)

> >Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in >> > >> > >> In my experience with NR2003, if you go wider than the darkened groove >> the grip reduces drastically. So, depending on how wide the groove is, >> that's how much choice you've got when choosing a line through the >> corners. This is when running the non-SS tracks, of course. It may >> well be there in the SS tracks as well, but because of the steeper >> banking, it doesn't show as much. >> -- >> Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) >> Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email >> If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) >> GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01 > >Yep, exactly. Problem is, that's not how it is at several of the actual >tracks during actual racing <g> > >

So is the groove just wider in some of the actual tracks and that's why they can run several lines on them? -- Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> In article <8Ws1c.94$[email hidden]>, JP <[email hidden]> > writes > > > >Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in > >> > > >> > > >> In my experience with NR2003, if you go wider than the darkened groove > >> the grip reduces drastically. So, depending on how wide the groove is, > >> that's how much choice you've got when choosing a line through the > >> corners. This is when running the non-SS tracks, of course. It may > >> well be there in the SS tracks as well, but because of the steeper > >> banking, it doesn't show as much. > >> -- > >> Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) > >> Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email > >> If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) > >> GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01 > > > >Yep, exactly. Problem is, that's not how it is at several of the actual > >tracks during actual racing <g> > > > > > So is the groove just wider in some of the actual tracks and that's why > they can run several lines on them? > -- > Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) > Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email > If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) > GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

Well, it's not so much as "a" groove, as there's just multiple lines. The "groove" in the game at various tracks, doesn't exist on the actual tracks, at least as an all or nothing, well defined affair, as in the game. I.e., outside line is one of the preferred ones at Rockingham, Charlotte, Michigan, California, Atlanta, etc. in actual racing. Try that online in 03(don't know about offline) sometime. Irregardless of the setup being used.

In article <[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: >What I mean is that it's very difficult to drive the F1 cars fast, and >string together a lot of fast laps. It's very easy to make a mistake, even a >slight one, that can ruin a lap or a race. If someone gets sim 'training' >with those F1 cars, the TA and Cup cars in N2003 seem quite a bit easier. >They physics are good in both, but the F1 cars are much more of a challenge. > Ah, ok. My problem with the F1 is that the car breaks loose without any (noticeable) warning. I'm backwards into a wall before I know what's happened. With the cup cars, I can feel the car breaking loose, but once that happens it's gone - I can't save it. Full opposite lock can't bring it back in line. I agree that F1 cars are more of a challenge, but the cup cars are a challenge to me as well. 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

>"Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote > Ill just use Rock as an example of how great Papy track modeling is seeing > how we just ran it. Lets see, real life 3 distinct grooves, in NR03 3/4of > a groove. Yep thats right on the money Mr. President ;) But then again just watch the VRW guys run multiple grooves during their online race. It's the drivers/setups that are at fault if you can't do it that way. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 23:49:30 +0000, Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote: >So is the groove just wider in some of the actual tracks and that's why >they can run several lines on them? Not commenting on real life here, but in N2003 each surface type has 1 grip value per track. Some of the modified tracks will use 2 separate surface types to add more grip in the high part of the banking than there is in the low part (which is totally unrealistic, but to each their own). The Papyrus tracks use one kind of surface type for tarmac and one kind for concrete. For instance, at Rockingham, you have the exact same amount of grip just above the apron as you do running 1 foot away from the wall. Of course, as I said before, the inability to run the high line has more to do with setup than a failing in the game engine. Jason

In article <Oou1c.100$[email hidden]>, JP <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted text (46 lines)

> >Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in >message >news:[email hidden]... >> In article <8Ws1c.94$[email hidden]>, JP ><[email hidden]> >> writes >> > >> >Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in >> >> > >> >> > >> >> In my experience with NR2003, if you go wider than the darkened >groove >> >> the grip reduces drastically. So, depending on how wide the groove is, >> >> that's how much choice you've got when choosing a line through the >> >> corners. This is when running the non-SS tracks, of course. It may >> >> well be there in the SS tracks as well, but because of the steeper >> >> banking, it doesn't show as much. >> >> -- >> >> Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) >> >> Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email >> >> If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) >> >> GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01 >> > >> >Yep, exactly. Problem is, that's not how it is at several of the actual >> >tracks during actual racing <g> >> > >> > >> So is the groove just wider in some of the actual tracks and that's why >> they can run several lines on them? >> -- >> Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) >> Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email >> If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) >> GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01 > > Well, it's not so much as "a" groove, as there's just multiple lines. The >"groove" in the game at various tracks, doesn't exist on the actual tracks, >at least as an all or nothing, well defined affair, as in the game. > > I.e., outside line is one of the preferred ones at Rockingham, Charlotte, >Michigan, California, Atlanta, etc. in actual racing. Try that online in >03(don't know about offline) sometime. Irregardless of the setup being >used. > >

So the darkened groove in real life tracks is something that is created over the course of a weekend because the cars are able to run those lines in the first place. Yes? Whereas, with NR2003 all you are given is the 1 groove, as wide as it happens to be depending upon the track. If it ain't dark in the first place, you can't run there. Yep? -- Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

In article <[email hidden]>, EldredP <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted text (20 lines)

>In article <[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" ><[email hidden]> writes: > >>What I mean is that it's very difficult to drive the F1 cars fast, and >>string together a lot of fast laps. It's very easy to make a mistake, even a >>slight one, that can ruin a lap or a race. If someone gets sim 'training' >>with those F1 cars, the TA and Cup cars in N2003 seem quite a bit easier. >>They physics are good in both, but the F1 cars are much more of a >challenge. >> > >Ah, ok. My problem with the F1 is that the car breaks loose without any >(noticeable) warning. I'm backwards into a wall before I know what's >happened. > With the cup cars, I can feel the car breaking loose, but once that happens >it's gone - I can't save it. Full opposite lock can't bring it back in line. >I agree that F1 cars are more of a challenge, but the cup cars are a >challenge >to me as well. >

Only way of saving it with any consistency, I've found, is to hit the brakes. How hard you need to do this will depend of how far gone the car is and its guaranteed to f**k-up your tyres if you have to do so for more than a fraction of a second, and of course, doing this in traffic can cause other problems, especially online. :) -- Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

"ymenard" wrote... > > <snip> > But then again just watch the VRW guys run multiple grooves > during their online race. It's the drivers/setups that are > at fault if you can't do it that way. You have to realise, Fran�ois, there's only six reasonably good drivers in RASCAR: Neil, Ginger, Mark, Brian Oster, Eldred and myself(*) and we're not up to VRW standard. Also we're stuck with either the <fast> or <expert> setup, neither of which is ideal. Jan ;-)) =--- (*): I'd count Robert Huggings among those if he ever got any real opposition.

In article <[email hidden]>, Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted text (18 lines)

>On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 23:49:30 +0000, Peter Ives ><[email hidden]> wrote: > >>So is the groove just wider in some of the actual tracks and that's why >>they can run several lines on them? > >Not commenting on real life here, but in N2003 each surface type has 1 >grip value per track. Some of the modified tracks will use 2 separate >surface types to add more grip in the high part of the banking than >there is in the low part (which is totally unrealistic, but to each >their own). The Papyrus tracks use one kind of surface type for >tarmac and one kind for concrete. For instance, at Rockingham, you >have the exact same amount of grip just above the apron as you do >running 1 foot away from the wall. > >Of course, as I said before, the inability to run the high line has >more to do with setup than a failing in the game engine. >

Why would this be? I can do alright when on the inside at Rockingham. Now, if I drive 1 lane out, so to speak, I'm not really making much of a change to the steering angle (perhaps a couple of degrees). Without getting too technical, does such a minor change in steering angle through a corner require that much of a major setup change for things to work as well as on the inside line? Why shouldn't the current setup that works for the inside line not work anywhere near as well for 1 lane out? I would have thought the track itself is pretty even from inside to outside and track temp should also be the same. I wouldn't imagine Papy has put that much detail into its track model so that there are varieties in how it affects the car depending upon what line you are taking (ie. dark groove compared to rest of track), no varying camber etc. So all you are left with is how much you need to turn the wheel and the speed you can maintain without sliding. Am I being too simplistic? -- Peter Ives - (AKA Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying No person's opinions can be said to be more correct than another's, because each is the sole judge of his or her own experience.

Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> In article <Oou1c.100$[email hidden]>, JP <[email hidden]> > writes > > > >Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in > >message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> In article <8Ws1c.94$[email hidden]>, JP > ><[email hidden]> > >> writes > >> > > >> >Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> In my experience with NR2003, if you go wider than the darkened > >groove > >> >> the grip reduces drastically. So, depending on how wide the groove

is,

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >> >> that's how much choice you've got when choosing a line through the > >> >> corners. This is when running the non-SS tracks, of course. It may > >> >> well be there in the SS tracks as well, but because of the steeper > >> >> banking, it doesn't show as much. > >> >> -- > >> >> Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) > >> >> Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email > >> >> If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) > >> >> GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01 > >> > > >> >Yep, exactly. Problem is, that's not how it is at several of the

actual

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >> >tracks during actual racing <g> > >> > > >> > > >> So is the groove just wider in some of the actual tracks and that's why > >> they can run several lines on them? > >> -- > >> Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) > >> Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email > >> If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) > >> GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01 > > > > Well, it's not so much as "a" groove, as there's just multiple lines.

The > >"groove" in the game at various tracks, doesn't exist on the actualtracks, > >at least as an all or nothing, well defined affair, as in the game. > > > > I.e., outside line is one of the preferred ones at Rockingham,Charlotte,

Quoted text (17 lines)

> >Michigan, California, Atlanta, etc. in actual racing. Try that online in > >03(don't know about offline) sometime. Irregardless of the setup being > >used. > > > > > So the darkened groove in real life tracks is something that is created > over the course of a weekend because the cars are able to run those > lines in the first place. Yes? > > Whereas, with NR2003 all you are given is the 1 groove, as wide as it > happens to be depending upon the track. If it ain't dark in the first > place, you can't run there. Yep? > -- > Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) > Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email > If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) > GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

Yes, and of course, because they choose to run there vs. somewhere else on the track. Sort of; can run there, just not worth a damn. And it has nothing to do with the setup being used. I never got a response for a clip showing a clean 40 car online race as a poster was mentioning the other day. Anyone have a clip of an online race showing the outside and/or middle line of a non-ss track working in 03 as it does in real life ? Never seen one in person or via replay myself, in any of the Nx series.

Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (28 lines)

> In article <ySa1c.46$[email hidden]>, JP <[email hidden]> > writes > > > <snip> > > > > Well, it's not so much of drifting into the wall, as that the high lines > >at various tracks aren't modeled well, if at all, compared to the way the > >actual tracks are run. For one thing, the Papy tracks are, or at least > >look(as in perception) like they are from the 03 cockpit, to narrow compared > >to the actual tracks. > > > > Don't know if it's an incorrect grip in the Papy tracks outside of the low > >line along with the above or what. But virtually no where in the sim can > >you run competitive high lines, that they do in actual racing. As long as > >you get a lot of dedicated help, you can at the 03 ss's though, but I'm > >referring to the non- ss tracks. > > > > Several non-ss tracks where two and three wide is the norm, whereas in the > >game, the low line is it; it leaves the others in the dust. > >> > > > > > In my experience with NR2003, if you go wider than the darkened groove > the grip reduces drastically. So, depending on how wide the groove is, > that's how much choice you've got when choosing a line through the > corners. This is when running the non-SS tracks, of course. It may > well be there in the SS tracks as well, but because of the steeper > banking, it doesn't show as much.

I have pretty limited knowledge of how the "groove" is modelled in NR2003 tracks, but isn't this something that could be fixed by a competent track modeller? If there's a line that has better grip - wouldn't this actually be defined in the track model? Kendt

"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:aPv1c.109$[email hidden]... > >> > Yes, and of course, because they choose to run there vs. somewhere elseon

Quoted text (8 lines)

> the track. > > Sort of; can run there, just not worth a damn. And it has nothing to do > with the setup being used. I never got a response for a clip showing a > clean 40 car online race as a poster was mentioning the other day. > Anyone have a clip of an online race showing the outside and/or middle > line of a non-ss track working in 03 as it does in real life ? Never seen > one in person or via replay myself, in any of the Nx series.

This conversation has taken place before here at ras. You won't get the replay you're looking for. Trust me. :-) David G Fisher

Just purely from a technical standpoint the biggest difference between an inside line and an outside line is that on the outside line you are going faster, which could change your aero balance and which will slightly increase the downforce and cornering force. How big of a difference this is I don't know. From a more practical standpoint, whenever I have watched somebody taking the outside line on TV they don't just go high and stay high, they use a high diamond or double apex line. IOW when they turn in initially they go down about one lane width, slide back up to the wall between 1-2 or 3-4, and then turn down a lane width again before sliding out on the exit. This, and the fact that you are going over a much bigger transition from the straight to the banking, would seem to require some setup changes. You need a looser car to make a double apex line work or your speed will drop too much in the middle. And the bigger banking transition might require different dampers. "Peter Ives" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (26 lines)

> > Why would this be? I can do alright when on the inside at Rockingham. > Now, if I drive 1 lane out, so to speak, I'm not really making much of a > change to the steering angle (perhaps a couple of degrees). > > Without getting too technical, does such a minor change in steering > angle through a corner require that much of a major setup change for > things to work as well as on the inside line? Why shouldn't the current > setup that works for the inside line not work anywhere near as well for > 1 lane out? > > I would have thought the track itself is pretty even from inside to > outside and track temp should also be the same. I wouldn't imagine Papy > has put that much detail into its track model so that there are > varieties in how it affects the car depending upon what line you are > taking (ie. dark groove compared to rest of track), no varying camber > etc. So all you are left with is how much you need to turn the wheel > and the speed you can maintain without sliding. Am I being too > simplistic? > -- > Peter Ives - (AKA Ivington) > Remove ALL_STRESS before replying > > No person's opinions can be said to be > more correct than another's, because each is > the sole judge of his or her own experience.

David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:aPv1c.109$[email hidden]... > > > >> > > Yes, and of course, because they choose to run there vs. somewhereelse > on > > the track. > > > > Sort of; can run there, just not worth a damn. And it has nothing todo > > with the setup being used. I never got a response for a clip showing a > > clean 40 car online race as a poster was mentioning the other day. > > Anyone have a clip of an online race showing the outside and/or middle > > line of a non-ss track working in 03 as it does in real life ? Neverseen

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > one in person or via replay myself, in any of the Nx series. > > > This conversation has taken place before here at ras. > > You won't get the replay you're looking for. Trust me. :-) > > David G Fisher

Didn't expect too, but thanks <g> > >

ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:C3v1c.16637$[email hidden]... > >"Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Ill just use Rock as an example of how great Papy track modeling isseeing

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > how we just ran it. Lets see, real life 3 distinct grooves, in NR03 3/4 > of > > a groove. Yep thats right on the money Mr. President ;) > > > > But then again just watch the VRW guys run multiple grooves during their > online race. It's the drivers/setups that are at fault if you can't do it > that way. > > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World...

I've watched VRW replays in the past. Never seen this happen, and the outside car keep/gain position in an online track that they do lap after lap in real life, on a non-ss track. Sure, you can run multiple grooves, that's not the problem. Just not with realistic results. > >

Boy did this thread drift from TA to nascar. Oh well so goes any meanigful discussion about the new Trans Am mod.

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:42:16 -0500, "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote: > You need a looser >car to make a double apex line work or your speed will drop too much in the >middle. Exactly. And all of the <fast> and <expert> setups that ship with the game are tight as fuck. Pardon the language, but they're horrible. Run about 25 laps as hard as you can in either and then measure the tire temps. With the fast setups, your front will average about 20 degrees hotter than the rear, with the experts anywhere from slightly above 0 to 20. By contrast, my own setups are typically at least 5 degrees warmer in the rear, which is about as loose as I can personally go without sliding (altho at Atlanta I tend to run even looser). Jason

On 3 Mar 2004 18:00:21 -0800, [email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) wrote: >I have pretty limited knowledge of how the "groove" is modelled in >NR2003 tracks, but isn't this something that could be fixed by a >competent track modeller? If there's a line that has better grip - >wouldn't this actually be defined in the track model? Yes. However, if you actually made the groove grippier (and even in real life, the groove is marginally grippier at best) it would just make the "I can't drive the high line" problem worse. Most of the track modelling fixes people have done actually increase the track grip up high where there should be less. Jason

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 01:30:48 +0000, Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote: >Without getting too technical, does such a minor change in steering >angle through a corner require that much of a major setup change for >things to work as well as on the inside line? Why shouldn't the current >setup that works for the inside line not work anywhere near as well for >1 lane out? Haqsau explained it better than I can, but in a nutshell if you race the high line you're slowing later for the corner, carrying more speed into and through the corner, and taking a different radius. In order for a setup to be comfortable running high, it has to be slightly loose running low. With setups that are neutral or pushy when running a normal line, you'll never be able to do competitive alternate lines without hitting the wall. Go to http://www.sim-replays.de/ if you haven't already and try out a setup or two there. I haven't tried his latest, but typically the ones I have tried (at Bristol, for instance) I was more comfortable running 1 to 1.5 car lengths away from the apron in the corners because the car was more neutral/stable there and I'm not skilled enough to drive a car that loose on a tight radius. Jason

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:50:50 -0500, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >But then again just watch the VRW guys run multiple grooves during their >online race. It's the drivers/setups that are at fault if you can't do it >that way. Yeah, it's weird hearing people complaining about this sort of thing when their N2003 experience consists entirely of running unrealistically tight setups. If a real cup driver were stuck in a car that handled like a <fast> seutp they'd pull in after 3 laps and wonder wtf was wrong with it. Jason

I think WRT a groove, it is perfectly credible that any line where many or most cars drive, is cleaner (cleaned of dirt) and has more rubber on it (which allegedly increases grip) and is hence faster than other sections of the track where nobody drives, due to these two circumstances. I.e., the drivers can create their own second or third grooves by driving these lines. The shortcoming of the sim as compared to the real world is that while in reality if enough drivers decide to try a different line, that line becomes a second groove, and on some tracks there may even a third groove be created that way, in our sims, we only have the one groove defined by the programmers. That's IMO why there's such a preference for the groove on some tracks, while in real life there may be up to three identically fast lines on that same track. N2005 needs a feature where the amount of laps drivers drive on a certain line determines the grip that line has over the weekend :) Achim

YM is wrong about VRW running multiple grooves at Rockingham. I can guarantee you there is only 1 groove at Rock. Only way we can get multi-grooves at these tracks is to modify the track type and adjust the grip on the outer areas. I run in VRW and had the best car at the Rock race this year and no one was running a high line there. Only way to pass was off of 2 (underneath) and off of 4 (underneath). Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:0Bv1c.22360$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> "ymenard" wrote... > > > <snip> > > But then again just watch the VRW guys run multiple grooves > > during their online race. It's the drivers/setups that are > > at fault if you can't do it that way. > > You have to realise, Fran�ois, there's only six reasonably good drivers in > RASCAR: Neil, Ginger, Mark, Brian Oster, Eldred and myself(*) and we're

not

Quoted text (10 lines)

> up to VRW standard. Also we're stuck with either the <fast> or <expert> > setup, neither of which is ideal. > > Jan ;-)) > =--- > > (*): I'd count Robert Huggings among those if he ever got any real > opposition. > >

Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line style works. I can tell you that we can make tracks that "race" like real life. They are being done already. The problem is that few people know about it yet. I don't think it will be popular until someone comes out with a total "mod" that has all of the tracks fixed at one time, not just one track at a time. Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> On 3 Mar 2004 18:00:21 -0800, [email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) > wrote: > > >I have pretty limited knowledge of how the "groove" is modelled in > >NR2003 tracks, but isn't this something that could be fixed by a > >competent track modeller? If there's a line that has better grip - > >wouldn't this actually be defined in the track model? > > Yes. However, if you actually made the groove grippier (and even in > real life, the groove is marginally grippier at best) it would just > make the "I can't drive the high line" problem worse. Most of the > track modelling fixes people have done actually increase the track > grip up high where there should be less. > > Jason

Hehe.....can't wait until some of the guys here try to tell this guy he can't/doesn't know how to run the high line. He's forgot more about sim racing than this whole ng probably knows <g> Bill Bollinger <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line style > works. I can tell you that we can make tracks that "race" like real life. > They are being done already. The problem is that few people know about it > yet. I don't think it will be popular until someone comes out with atotal > "mod" that has all of the tracks fixed at one time, not just one track ata

Quoted text (26 lines)

> time. > > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On 3 Mar 2004 18:00:21 -0800, [email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) > > wrote: > > > > >I have pretty limited knowledge of how the "groove" is modelled in > > >NR2003 tracks, but isn't this something that could be fixed by a > > >competent track modeller? If there's a line that has better grip - > > >wouldn't this actually be defined in the track model? > > > > Yes. However, if you actually made the groove grippier (and even in > > real life, the groove is marginally grippier at best) it would just > > make the "I can't drive the high line" problem worse. Most of the > > track modelling fixes people have done actually increase the track > > grip up high where there should be less. > > > > Jason > >

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:50:50 -0500, "ymenard" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >But then again just watch the VRW guys run multiple grooves during their > >online race. It's the drivers/setups that are at fault if you can't doit

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >that way. > > Yeah, it's weird hearing people complaining about this sort of thing > when their N2003 experience consists entirely of running > unrealistically tight setups. > > If a real cup driver were stuck in a car that handled like a <fast> > seutp they'd pull in after 3 laps and wonder wtf was wrong with it. > > Jason

Lol, yeah, right.

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 01:19:28 +0000, Peter Ives wrote: > Only way of saving it with any consistency, I've found, is to hit the > brakes. How hard you need to do this will depend of how far gone the > car is and its guaranteed to f**k-up your tyres if you have to do so for > more than a fraction of a second, and of course, doing this in traffic > can cause other problems, especially online. :) Not in F1C, though. Tyre wear is next to non-existent on the standard setting ("1x"), I really have no idea what ISI was thinking when they "modelled" tyre wear in F1C. But then again, maybe I'm just not going fast enough in F1C to wear down the tyres noticeably over 20 laps (even on soft rubber ;-) F1C online: While I've seen a couple of 10+ races that worked out reasonably well online, I'm amazed by the amount of traffic f1c generates. 20-30MB for 15 mins on online play is nothing, and quickly turns into a problem that costs real money for those of us on volume accounted DSL lines with a volume cap of say, a gigabyte a month and two other surfing family members ;-) Judging by traffic volume alone F1C should be excellent online. Judging by online gameplay, well... 8-P 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

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:13:29 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I run in VRW and had the best car at the Rock race this year Really..... Jason

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:19:00 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line style >works. Depends on what you mean by 'works' I guess. I don't see how building a track with more grip outside of the main groove is improving the accuracy of the sim at all, but I guess YMMV. Jason

Youre dreamin frankie ole boy. Ive ran at one time or another most of the guys in VRW and you act like they have some kind of special skills or magic potions. Most arent any different than anyone here except they spend more time and effort getting fast (than I do anyway). Ego's rule in that deal. The high groove works good on dega and daytona if ya get a few guys that hang in up there. The "Rock"? No way does the high line work and if you insist you'll just lose what little credibility you still have... Mitch "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:C3v1c.16637$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > But then again just watch the VRW guys run multiple grooves during their > online race. It's the drivers/setups that are at fault if you can't do it > that way. > > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >

>Exactly. And all of the <fast> and <expert> setups that ship with the >game are tight as fuck. Pardon the language, but they're horrible. > I find the <fast> setups very LOOSE. I'm constantly trying to keep from spinning out... I must be the only one who feels that way. 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

Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]:

Quoted text (24 lines)

> In article <8Ws1c.94$[email hidden]>, JP <[email hidden]> > writes >> >>Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in >>> > >>> > >>> In my experience with NR2003, if you go wider than the darkened groove >>> the grip reduces drastically. So, depending on how wide the groove is, >>> that's how much choice you've got when choosing a line through the >>> corners. This is when running the non-SS tracks, of course. It may >>> well be there in the SS tracks as well, but because of the steeper >>> banking, it doesn't show as much. >>> -- >>> Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) >>> Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email >>> If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) >>> GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01 >> >>Yep, exactly. Problem is, that's not how it is at several of the actual >>tracks during actual racing <g> >> >> > So is the groove just wider in some of the actual tracks and that's why > they can run several lines on them?

A 'groove' and a 'line' are two different things. A groove usually follows the preferred line. What a groove is a buildup of tire rubber on the track surface. The more rubber is laid down, the more visibly apparent the groove is and the better the overall grip. I'm not talking about the loose stray marbles that fall off of tires and usually get blown off to the outer edges of the track, but the small particles that are wedged into the rough surface of the track. The more rubber squeezed onto the track, the greater the grip. So when a track has more than one groove, it means that the drivers have found they can run more than one line and thus more rubber gets laid down so it's easier to drive high or low. Cart has found recently that even different rubber compounds affects their lap times. For Instance when they share a weekend with the Trans Am cars, they have to waste a set of tires scrubbing the Trans Am rubber and covering it with the CART Spec rubber. This, as is my usual, is an oversimplification, but does cover the basics. For a sim like Nr2k3 to deal with a groove, we'd have to have some code for the track surface that deals with increased rubber...i.e. for X amount of cars and XX amount of laps the track surface gets .xxx gripier, but only were the cars are running so that the center of the groove might be .xxxx grippy but the edges might be only .xx. Clear? lol dave henrie

[email hidden] (EldredP) wrote in news:[email hidden]: > I find the <fast> setups very LOOSE. I'm constantly trying to keep from > spinning out... > I must be the only one who feels that way. > > Eldred nope...some tracks are ok, but I often have to drop the trackbar a notch or two or my backside is facing the fans in no time. yer not alone. dave henrie

JP wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > Hehe.....can't wait until some of the guys here try to tell this guy he > can't/doesn't know how to run the high line. He's forgot more about sim > racing than this whole ng probably knows <g> > > Bill Bollinger <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line style > > works. I can tell you that we can make tracks that "race" like real life. > > They are being done already. The problem is that few people know about it > > yet. I don't think it will be popular until someone comes out with a > total > > "mod" that has all of the tracks fixed at one time, not just one track at

He sucks at road courses though.... :-D Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 21:05:33 +0100, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote: >He sucks at road courses though.... :-D I'm waiting for the final mod. Jason

In article <0Bv1c.22360$[email hidden]>, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> writes: >You have to realise, Fran�ois, there's only six reasonably good drivers in >RASCAR: Neil, Ginger, Mark, Brian Oster, Eldred and myself(*) and we're not >up to VRW standard. Also we're stuck with either the <fast> or <expert> >setup, neither of which is ideal. Um, I think you meant to put someone else's name where you put mine. I'm flattered, but I'm nowhere NEAR as good as the others you mentioned... It's a goal, though. :-) 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

In article <aPv1c.109$[email hidden]>, "JP" <[email hidden]> writes: > Sort of; can run there, just not worth a damn. And it has nothing to do >with the setup being used. I never got a response for a clip showing a >clean 40 car online race as a poster was mentioning the other day. I think the 'clean' 40 car online race that he meant was dealing with net code. Meaning you could have that many cars without warp taking out half the field. Now, *drivers* not taking out half the field is a different story.<g> 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

The point Bill is trying to get across with regards to the BR tracks is that they have managed to increase the grip factor to the upper groove of the 2 SS tracks that I've tested. In real life, once the upper groove is worked in by cars running there and laying rubber down, I'm not so sure the grip factor between the 2 lines is much different. The difference is, the upper groove allows a driver to carry more speed through the turn simply because of the radius of the turn itself, which compensates for the larger circumference of the oval he drivers vs the lower line. I've only tested the DaytonaBR track, with positive results I might add. The end result is more side by side racing, and while the the grip factors in the BR tracks may not reflect real life physics, it improves the quality of online racing, and that's all that matters to me. I'm not affiliated with BR, but if you'de like to take a look their site is http://www.brianring.net/NR2003.html. On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:19:00 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line style >works. I can tell you that we can make tracks that "race" like real life. >They are being done already. The problem is that few people know about it >yet. I don't think it will be popular until someone comes out with a total >"mod" that has all of the tracks fixed at one time, not just one track at a >time. > > >Bill Bollinger >www.gsxn.com

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:0Bv1c.22360$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> "ymenard" wrote... > > > <snip> > > But then again just watch the VRW guys run multiple grooves > > during their online race. It's the drivers/setups that are > > at fault if you can't do it that way. > > You have to realise, Fran�ois, there's only six reasonably good drivers in > RASCAR: Neil, Ginger, Mark, Brian Oster, Eldred and myself(*) and we're

not

Quoted text (8 lines)

> up to VRW standard. Also we're stuck with either the <fast> or <expert> > setup, neither of which is ideal. > > Jan ;-)) > =--- > > (*): I'd count Robert Huggings among those if he ever got any real > opposition.

???? Jan's drunk. David G Fisher

Well, the tracks(among other things; it is just a game) don't reflect real life physics as is, so this shouldn't be a problem <g> T. Wortman <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> The point Bill is trying to get across with regards to the BR tracks > is that they have managed to increase the grip factor to the upper > groove of the 2 SS tracks that I've tested. In real life, once the > upper groove is worked in by cars running there and laying rubber > down, I'm not so sure the grip factor between the 2 lines is much > different. The difference is, the upper groove allows a driver to > carry more speed through the turn simply because of the radius of the > turn itself, which compensates for the larger circumference of the > oval he drivers vs the lower line. > > I've only tested the DaytonaBR track, with positive results I might > add. The end result is more side by side racing, and while the the > grip factors in the BR tracks may not reflect real life physics, it > improves the quality of online racing, and that's all that matters to > me. > > I'm not affiliated with BR, but if you'de like to take a look their > site is http://www.brianring.net/NR2003.html. > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:19:00 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line style > >works. I can tell you that we can make tracks that "race" like real

life. > >They are being done already. The problem is that few people know aboutit > >yet. I don't think it will be popular until someone comes out with atotal > >"mod" that has all of the tracks fixed at one time, not just one track ata > >time. > > > > > >Bill Bollinger > >www.gsxn.com >

"EldredP" wrote... > > <snip> > Um, I think you meant to put someone else's name where you put > mine. I'm flattered, but I'm nowhere NEAR as good as the others > you mentioned... It's a goal, though. :-) No mistake... I just use different criteria than most people (including yourself it seems). Guys like Ginger, Neil and Brian have all their ducks in a row, obviously, but IMO they're still good drivers first and quick second. Jan. =---

"David G Fisher" wrote... > > <snip> > ???? > > Jan's drunk. No, just a realist. Which bit don't you understand, David? -If it's the remark about Robert, that's easily explained. Most races he's been in nobody was able to push him hard enough for me to determine whether he's a good driver or not. My shortlist is a combination of their performance in areas which I regard as important for an online racer (and which speed doesn't factor into... we don't need natural speed to sustain our "career") and my perception of their racecraft, intelligence and situational awareness, which is not as easily explained. Jan. =---

In article <[email hidden]>, Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > This, as is my usual, is an oversimplification, but does cover the >basics. For a sim like Nr2k3 to deal with a groove, we'd have to have some >code for the track surface that deals with increased rubber...i.e. for X >amount of cars and XX amount of laps the track surface gets .xxx gripier, >but only were the cars are running so that the center of the groove might >be .xxxx grippy but the edges might be only .xx. Clear? >

Clear enough. :) Only one small problem with that excellent idea. You'd also have to make the AI drivers vary their lines through the corners in order to find the ideal one, instead of pre-determining their line in the track files. -- Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

In article <[email hidden]>, Uwe =?iso- 8859-15?Q?Sch=FCrkamp?= <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted text (14 lines)

>On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 01:19:28 +0000, Peter Ives wrote: > >> Only way of saving it with any consistency, I've found, is to hit the >> brakes. How hard you need to do this will depend of how far gone the >> car is and its guaranteed to f**k-up your tyres if you have to do so for >> more than a fraction of a second, and of course, doing this in traffic >> can cause other problems, especially online. :) > >Not in F1C, though. Tyre wear is next to non-existent on the standard >setting ("1x"), I really have no idea what ISI was thinking when they >"modelled" tyre wear in F1C. But then again, maybe I'm just not going >fast enough in F1C to wear down the tyres noticeably over 20 laps >(even on soft rubber ;-) >

Sorry, was refering to NR2003, only. -- Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

Quoted text (14 lines)

>> >> This, as is my usual, is an oversimplification, but does cover the >>basics. For a sim like Nr2k3 to deal with a groove, we'd have to have >>some code for the track surface that deals with increased >>rubber...i.e. for X amount of cars and XX amount of laps the track >>surface gets .xxx gripier, but only were the cars are running so that >>the center of the groove might be .xxxx grippy but the edges might be >>only .xx. Clear? >> > > Clear enough. :) Only one small problem with that excellent idea. > You'd also have to make the AI drivers vary their lines through the > corners in order to find the ideal one, instead of pre-determining > their line in the track files.

Oh of course..and we could use XxX as the formulae to determine the X amount of lines in Groove X eh? Hmmm, then you would need ai BOTS that could think enough to know a good line from a bad one. Or you could just program groove boundries and let the area inside that gets traveled over the most get the greatest amount of .xxx grip. dave henrie :)

This is a holdover from GPL's infamous "stab save" (Kaemmer's descrip), a totally unrealistic way of stopping the car from rotating. It works great in GPL, much less well in N2003...but it's still there. "Peter Ives" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QNc$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, EldredP > <[email hidden]> writes > >In article <[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" > ><[email hidden]> writes: > > > >>What I mean is that it's very difficult to drive the F1 cars fast, and > >>string together a lot of fast laps. It's very easy to make a mistake,

even a > >>slight one, that can ruin a lap or a race. If someone gets sim'training' > >>with those F1 cars, the TA and Cup cars in N2003 seem quite a biteasier.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >>They physics are good in both, but the F1 cars are much more of a > >challenge. > >> > > > >Ah, ok. My problem with the F1 is that the car breaks loose without any > >(noticeable) warning. I'm backwards into a wall before I know what's > >happened. > > With the cup cars, I can feel the car breaking loose, but once that

happens > >it's gone - I can't save it. Full opposite lock can't bring it back inline.

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >I agree that F1 cars are more of a challenge, but the cup cars are a > >challenge > >to me as well. > > > > Only way of saving it with any consistency, I've found, is to hit the > brakes. How hard you need to do this will depend of how far gone the > car is and its guaranteed to f**k-up your tyres if you have to do so for > more than a fraction of a second, and of course, doing this in traffic > can cause other problems, especially online. :) > -- > Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) > Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email > If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) > GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -25.01

Yes, no doubt I had the best car in VRW at the Rock this year. Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:13:29 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I run in VRW and had the best car at the Rock race this year > > Really..... > > Jason

I guess that is why Dale Jr. just posted on his site that it is more accurate. He wouldn't know would he? Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:19:00 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line style > >works. > > Depends on what you mean by 'works' I guess. I don't see how building > a track with more grip outside of the main groove is improving the > accuracy of the sim at all, but I guess YMMV. > > Jason

The high groove will NOT work at dega or daytona. Chris Shearburn and myself proved that at the last Dega race in VRW. NO ONE would have passed us on the high line unless it was 4 on 2. The high line does NOT work, that is why all of the big time SS only leagues have switched tracks to the BR series. Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:1LI1c.33428$[email hidden]... > Youre dreamin frankie ole boy. Ive ran at one time or another most of the > guys in VRW and you act like they have some kind of special skills ormagic

Quoted text (14 lines)

> potions. Most arent any different than anyone here except they spend more > time and effort getting fast (than I do anyway). Ego's rule in that deal. > > The high groove works good on dega and daytona if ya get a few guys that > hang in up there. The "Rock"? No way does the high line work and if you > insist you'll just lose what little credibility you still have... > > Mitch > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:C3v1c.16637$[email hidden]... > > > > But then again just watch the VRW guys run multiple grooves during their > > online race. It's the drivers/setups that are at fault if you can't do

it

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > that way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > > > >

I can't even pit to save my life either LOL! Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > JP wrote: > > > > Hehe.....can't wait until some of the guys here try to tell this guyhe > > can't/doesn't know how to run the high line. He's forgot more aboutsim > > racing than this whole ng probably knows <g> > > > > Bill Bollinger <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside linestyle > > > works. I can tell you that we can make tracks that "race" like reallife. > > > They are being done already. The problem is that few people knowabout it > > > yet. I don't think it will be popular until someone comes out with a > > total > > > "mod" that has all of the tracks fixed at one time, not just one trackat

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > He sucks at road courses though.... :-D > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > "goyl at nettx dot no" > > http://www.theuspits.com > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > --Groucho Marx--

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:XSP1c.23471$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> "David G Fisher" wrote... > > > <snip> > > ???? > > > > Jan's drunk. > > No, just a realist. Which bit don't you understand, David? -If it's the > remark about Robert, that's easily explained. Most races he's been in

nobody > was able to push him hard enough for me to determine whether he's a good > driver or not. > > My shortlist is a combination of their performance in areas which I regard > as important for an online racer (and which speed doesn't factor into...we > don't need natural speed to sustain our "career") and my perception oftheir > racecraft, intelligence and situational awareness, which is not as easily > explained. > > Jan. To be honest, I thought there was a good chance you were just trying to stir things up as a joke when you said, "You have to realise, Fran�ois, there's only six reasonably good drivers in RASCAR: Neil, Ginger, Mark, Brian Oster, Eldred and myself(*)" There are plenty of good drivers (not just reasonably good) in RASCAR. Whether they take offense to your comment and respond is up to them. I know I do....and I'm going to respond (surprise!). Just to make sure I wasn't going crazy, I just looked at our most recent Winter Series results, and I finished fourth (7 points behind third place). This despite being disco'd twice, once while in a strong first at IRP (was running stronger in that race than in any RASCAR oval race ever btw---ended up 15th), and being punted out of third at Kyalami (6 seconds behind first) with 6 laps to go, which ended my race at 11th. The lapped driver who hit me immediately accepted responsibility for what he did (by yelling at himself on TS), and apologized at the forum. I also had a screen freeze put me into the wall at Sebring when I was two seconds behind the first place driver, and another later which put me into the wall again (ended up 7th due to damage). If I throw out one of the discos (since the others ahead of me each missed a race, but had no discos that I could find), I still probably lost 85 points due to connection problems alone. I'm not even "reasonably good" though. The Winter Series oval truck tracks/setups were new to all of us. I finished as strong as Neil and Ginger on the ovals (Robert was #1, and Brian was excellent), and Neil, Ginger and I were clearly the top 3 on the road courses whether it was practice times, qualifying, or the races. Look at the results at the web site, or the more detailed results posted here at ras every week. The guys you mention are *excellent*, excellent drivers. There's no debate about that. I'm sure they know I think *very* highly of them, and have a great time racing against them each week. I doubt I'll ever understand how you perceive what goes on on the track in RASCAR, but I know myself (and I'm confident others in RASCAR) have to laugh when you say most of us aren't even reasonably good, but *you* are. Hate to say it, but I can think of a number of RASCAR drivers who I'd rate above you, even when speed is completely taken out of the equation. You shouldn't be irked by that statement, considering what you've said. "You have to realise, Fran�ois, there's only six reasonably good drivers in RASCAR: Neil, Ginger, Mark, Brian Oster, Eldred and myself(*)" That above quote by you ranks right up there with some of Simmons' most obnoxious all-timers. David G Fisher

I read at a forum (not sure which one) that he said recently on his web site that the real Cup cars have more grip than they do in the game. Anyone know for sure if he said this? David G Fisher "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> I guess that is why Dale Jr. just posted on his site that it is more > accurate. He wouldn't know would he? > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:19:00 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line

style

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > >works. > > > > Depends on what you mean by 'works' I guess. I don't see how building > > a track with more grip outside of the main groove is improving the > > accuracy of the sim at all, but I guess YMMV. > > > > Jason > >

Sorry, I missed a lot of this thread. This is an addon for N2003? How do you load it? Just run the executable? Thanks!

Yes... Kevin (aka tlgtr) **** Zip slowly, medical statistics show that over 100,000 people are injured annually by their clothing.

Be sure to read the Readme file as there are a couple of steps to do after you do the install, before you run the mod the first time. Kevin (aka tlgtr) **** Zip slowly, medical statistics show that over 100,000 people are injured annually by their clothing.

Thanks. I have an exe file. Does it unpack to an install directory with a readme file? I just bought N2003 and haven't played it much. It looks great though! "TlgtrProd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Be sure to read the Readme file as there are a couple of steps to do afteryou

Quoted text (8 lines)

> do the install, before you run the mod the first time. > > > Kevin (aka tlgtr) > **** > Zip slowly, medical statistics show that over 100,000 people are injured > annually by their clothing. >

I didnt qualify how many it takes to make the high line work did I? It works if you get a few guys to stick with it high. Will two guys high pass 3 guys low, no. Will three guys high pass 2 guys low, yea Ive done it and seen it many many times. Mitch "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > The high groove will NOT work at dega or daytona. Chris Shearburn and > myself proved that at the last Dega race in VRW. NO ONE would have passed > us on the high line unless it was 4 on 2. The high line does NOT work,that

Quoted text (7 lines)

> is why all of the big time SS only leagues have switched tracks to the BR > series. > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > >

It worked perfectly in N4 :-) Not so good now but yea it's still there. Mitch "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:SKZ1c.123456$%[email hidden]... > This is a holdover from GPL's infamous "stab save" (Kaemmer's descrip), a > totally unrealistic way of stopping the car from rotating. It works great > in GPL, much less well in N2003...but it's still there. >

Just to stay within the scope of this segment of the thread. Rockingham DOESNT have an upper line period, unlike what Frankie described. There is the small footprint of the whirlpool effect but its so small it doesnt effect the high line. Dega and Tona do have a high line under the right circumstances. Mitch > "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > The high groove will NOT work at dega or daytona. Chris Shearburn and > > myself proved that at the last Dega race in VRW. NO ONE would havepassed > > us on the high line unless it was 4 on 2. The high line does NOT work, > that > > is why all of the big time SS only leagues have switched tracks to theBR

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > series. > > > > Bill Bollinger > > www.gsxn.com > > > > > >

David G Fisher wrote: ... > To be honest, I thought there was a good chance you were > just trying to stir things up as a joke I don't know what you're complaining about. At least he recognized that there are other racers in RASCAR, and didn't say everybody but himself are hotlappers <g> Achim

Dont take it to personal. There was a time this may have upset me, now that we know Jan's political motives I can accept it for what its worth. Squat ;) Mitch "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:XSP1c.23471$[email hidden]... > > "David G Fisher" wrote... > > > > <snip> > > > ???? > > > > > > Jan's drunk.

I seem to remember that the exe finds your version of NR03 and install to there...no temp directory...I think? Kevin (aka tlgtr) **** Zip slowly, medical statistics show that over 100,000 people are injured annually by their clothing.

On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 15:42:17 GMT, "ZeeOhSix" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Thanks. I have an exe file. Does it unpack to an install directory with a >readme file? >I just bought N2003 and haven't played it much. It looks great though! It will automatically search for your N2003 directory. If it doesn't find it, just browse to it (after you run the installer), as that's where the installer needs to be pointed. It will create a launcher, but you don't need to use it unless you want to use the PWF soundpacks or the triangle-shaped dash. Jason

On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 08:35:56 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I guess that is why Dale Jr. just posted on his site that it is more >accurate. He wouldn't know would he? Which forum is that in? I don't see that post. Jason

thank you very much. "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 15:42:17 GMT, "ZeeOhSix" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Thanks. I have an exe file. Does it unpack to an install directory witha

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >readme file? > >I just bought N2003 and haven't played it much. It looks great though! > > It will automatically search for your N2003 directory. If it doesn't > find it, just browse to it (after you run the installer), as that's > where the installer needs to be pointed. > > It will create a launcher, but you don't need to use it unless you > want to use the PWF soundpacks or the triangle-shaped dash. > > Jason

"Mitch_A" wrote... > Dont take it to personal. There was a time this may have > upset me, now that we know Jan's political motives I can > accept it for what its worth. Squat ;) Here we go... "Jan doesn't like me so everything he says is just to spite/overthrow me". Bullshit Mitch, pure horsepucky and you know it. There is a reason there are a lot of yellows at difficult tracks and that reason is the general standard of driving and, worse still, driver application is average to poor. Some of that may be structural, but some of that can be changed. Everyone needs to be critical of their own driving all the time. I'm sure my selection is (Eldred may be doing it for the wrong reason, I don't know, but he's doing it). Others may or may not be, or maybe I didn't notice it, yet. I had no real motive(*) when I posted the original message (ok, I'll admit there is an in-joke for Fran�ois in it, but not on the obvious level) and it's not like there's no close runners up to that list, but looking back on it I'm very pleased with the implied meaning of "reasonably good". -If this jarrs or insults the other drivers and they go out an actually prove me wrong over the next couple races, I'll be the happiest bunny in RASCAR. Jan. =--- (*)Rem.: like I've said before, I have no time to busy myself with managing any aspect of the series, so I consider any impression of me campaigning against you to be paranoia on your part. We just disagree on some issues, which you seem to be less comfortable with than I am. I may or may not get around to elaborating and explaining my views on track safety in the online environment some more as work is terrible at the moment and I have some extra online duties.

On 04 Mar 2004 00:41:38 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: >Ah, ok. My problem with the F1 is that the car breaks loose without any >(noticeable) warning. I'm backwards into a wall before I know what's happened. > With the cup cars, I can feel the car breaking loose, but once that happens >it's gone - I can't save it. Full opposite lock can't bring it back in line. >I agree that F1 cars are more of a challenge, but the cup cars are a challenge >to me as well. Mid-engined cars (generally) = better performance but less margin for error. Jason

Lol, I've been wondering if that would come up. Wonder if those here who go by the "Jr. likes it" comments a week or so ago still go by that, or will change their tune..........again, lol Bill Bollinger <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> I guess that is why Dale Jr. just posted on his site that it is more > accurate. He wouldn't know would he? > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:19:00 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line

style

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > >works. > > > > Depends on what you mean by 'works' I guess. I don't see how building > > a track with more grip outside of the main groove is improving the > > accuracy of the sim at all, but I guess YMMV. > > > > Jason > >

Hehe.........I seem to remember something along the lines that the Cup series was the most unrealistic of the three according to him, at that site. David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I read at a forum (not sure which one) that he said recently on his website

Quoted text (33 lines)

> that the real Cup cars have more grip than they do in the game. > > Anyone know for sure if he said this? > > David G Fisher > > "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I guess that is why Dale Jr. just posted on his site that it is more > > accurate. He wouldn't know would he? > > > > Bill Bollinger > > www.gsxn.com > > > > > > "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:19:00 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > >Snuh? You need to run the DegaBR track to see if his outside line > style > > > >works. > > > > > > Depends on what you mean by 'works' I guess. I don't see how building > > > a track with more grip outside of the main groove is improving the > > > accuracy of the sim at all, but I guess YMMV. > > > > > > Jason > > > > > >

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 08:35:56 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I guess that is why Dale Jr. just posted on his site that it is more > >accurate. He wouldn't know would he? > > Which forum is that in? I don't see that post. > > Jason

Right on his site's forums, front and center. Here is the post. Just recently our server started using BrianRings SS tracks. As with any new track we were as skeptical as most about how well received a new track would be. One thing being different about these tracks is they had a cult following of sorts already. We enjoyed the SS tracks right from the get go. Our minds soon began to wonder what other tracks could benefit from these changes. In time we heard BrianRing had released "The Rock" a version of Rockingham. We began testing this track and again, found it to be much more realistic than the original track. Martin Truex and I began talking about what other tracks could use these changes. Obviously multigroove racing would be great everywhere, but we are hard core racers who wish for realistic environments. So with that in mind, we have decided to offer up our opinion to BrianRing about what tracks within the game could use his help the most. Starting with 3 groove tracks. 1. Atlanta - We run slam against the wall these days, at no more than 10 laps into a tire run. This track makes the top if the list. 2. Michigan - This track seems to offer three groove racing every time we go there. With it being an online fav we pushed it up to #2. 3. Dover - The last of our choices of three groove tracks. Dover is in serious need of an overhaul. 80% of this track is pretty much useless at this point. Now on to the two groove tracks. 1. Darlington - Really, the only thing Darlington needs is a little help up high in turns 3-4. 2. California - Over the last 2 years Cali has developed a nice middle groove. 3. Martinsville - With the grinding of the bottom groove, the top groove is the preferred line now. Totally the opposite from the game version. 4. Richmond - Richmond has always had a second groove as long as I have run there. A help with grip entering turn 1 would be nice. 5. Kansas - This track developed a second groove just recently, the game is really close to offering on, and a small change would be all she needs. 6. Lowes - Lowes has a nice middle and even a third groove in turns 3-4. Turns 1-2 are basically one groove corners, The game is real close in turns 1-2. 7. Chicagoland - This place is one of the tracks the needs the least help. I little grip added to a middle groove would make this place much more enjoyable. 8. Las Vegas - The bottom always seems fast here, but a second groove is usable. Not at the top of the list by any means. We understand that the team over at BrianRing probably doesn't plan on redoing all these tracks. As BrianRing has stated, not all the tracks in the game can benefit from such changes. This thread is merely two professional drivers opinions. We only hope that BrianRing takes this into consideration in planning any future releases. If anyone can pass this post along to the folks at BrianRing.... we'd all appreciate it. DMP-Jr

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (TlgtrProd) writes: >Be sure to read the Readme file as there are a couple of steps to do after >you >do the install, before you run the mod the first time. > Are there? Oops, I don't remember doing anything but installing... 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

In article <[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: >I read at a forum (not sure which one) that he said recently on his web site >that the real Cup cars have more grip than they do in the game. > >Anyone know for sure if he said this? Didn't someone say that about GPL as well? I wonder if it's a case of not being *able* to give the same grip in the game(s), or choosing NOT to...? Eldre -- 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

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) writes:

Quoted text (14 lines)

>On 04 Mar 2004 00:41:38 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: > >>Ah, ok. My problem with the F1 is that the car breaks loose without any >>(noticeable) warning. I'm backwards into a wall before I know what's >happened. >> With the cup cars, I can feel the car breaking loose, but once that happens >>it's gone - I can't save it. Full opposite lock can't bring it back in >line. >>I agree that F1 cars are more of a challenge, but the cup cars are a >challenge >>to me as well. > >Mid-engined cars (generally) = better performance but less margin for >error.

It seems that others can save a car that's stepped out on them, but I can't. Now, maybe they're using the 'stab' technique that's been mentioned. Without seeing a replay, I don't know. Since N2k3 shows brake/throttle input, that might help me determine what I'm doing wrong. I ran a race at Vegas last night in the Cup cars, and had a handful all night. I *really* need to figure out what's going on(hardware,controller, or display problems). That was NOT fun, and I was almost 2 seconds per lap slower than the next car up... 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 Fri, 5 Mar 2004 09:34:33 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I read at a forum (not sure which one) that he said recently on his web site >that the real Cup cars have more grip than they do in the game. > >Anyone know for sure if he said this? Yes he did. I agree with him. IMHO top speeds in N2003 are too high and cornering speeds are too low. The lines you drive in the trucks are a lot closer to reality for cup cars, going by interviews and television coverage, altho the power to grip ratio seems a tad low (comparing CTS-physics to cup cars not trucks). This would possibly explain why road course and short track times tend to be higher than reality while speedway times are faster. In reality, the cup cars can drive a track like Atlanta flat out for the first few laps of a tire run, yet their times are slower than what we see in the sim. If I had to guess, I'd guess that both drag and grip are still too low, even post-patch. Jason

On 06 Mar 2004 01:18:37 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>It seems that others can save a car that's stepped out on them, but I can't. >Now, maybe they're using the 'stab' technique that's been mentioned. Without >seeing a replay, I don't know. Since N2k3 shows brake/throttle input, that >might help me determine what I'm doing wrong. I ran a race at Vegas last night >in the Cup cars, and had a handful all night. I *really* need to figure out >what's going on(hardware,controller, or display problems). That was NOT fun, >and I was almost 2 seconds per lap slower than the next car up...

Do you have n2003 replay analyzer? If you enable full telemetry in that and save a replay, you can see graphs of driver inputs. Might be useful for troubleshooting a possible controller problem. Jason

On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 16:34:53 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

>LOL > >Hardly though :-) > >I want the "best" possible SIM regardless of who makes it. "Sim fanboy" > >Papy's NR2003 just has that "been there done that feel" to me. What more >can I say? I'd much rather be talking about brake wear and such with NR2004 >but we got F*^&ed. I for one won't be running NR2003 this time next year so >Im always on the lookout for something better. Im not bashing Papy (except >not paying for the rights) but there stuff is just old and full of holes. I >dont wear blinders.

Blame Sierra if anyone, altho I'm sure if they had a choice they would have paid to renew. I still can't believe nascar signed an exclusive software agreement. I just can't see that they're making more money off 1 license than they were when EA, Sierra, and Infogrames were all buying licenses. On the other hand, if they are making more than that, I guess we know why they Sierra wasn't willing to compete. Jason

On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 18:09:26 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >There is nothing wrong with NR2003 per se, it's getting long in the tooth >and I want something better.. IMO the N4 game engine is too limited and >full of holes. They have made it better every version for sure and I >cant/wont deny that. My problem is the weaknesses are glaring and arent >going to be fixed anytime soon so we need an alternative. At this point >Papy ISNT the alternative. I wouldn't say that until we see their next product. Since they're incopoating Havoc physics into their engine for their next sim, I'm expecting it may have a few growing pains, but I wouldn't count them out until we see what they're doing next. Jason

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 17:28:58 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > My, you're an angry young man. Hate being shown to be wrong on something >don't you ? I love being shown wrong. Unfortunately, you just spew nonsense on here which takes away time I could be having constructive arguments with Mitch or Dave, and possibly learning something in the process. Hence the fact I tend to not even read your replies anymore. Jason

>Do you have n2003 replay analyzer? If you enable full telemetry in >that and save a replay, you can see graphs of driver inputs. Might be >useful for troubleshooting a possible controller problem. No I don't. I hadn't decided to shell out for it yet. However, if Martin and Jonas saw fit to send me an 'evaluation/testing' copy, I wouldn't complain...<g> But how would that help troubleshoot a controller problem? Different rates of turning might be because of someone else having a different steering lock than I do. Not saying the program won't help, but not understanding that part... 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

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 17:28:58 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > My, you're an angry young man. Hate being shown to be wrong onsomething

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >don't you ? > > I love being shown wrong. Unfortunately, you just spew nonsense on > here which takes away time I could be having constructive arguments > with Mitch or Dave, and possibly learning something in the process. > Hence the fact I tend to not even read your replies anymore. > > Jason

That's supposed to make me upset or something, right ? That you don't read my replies ? Sorry, anyone that says "are you fucking stupid" to me gets the respect they deserve.

It will NOT happen with two studs on the bottom. "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wd12c.6260$[email hidden]... > I didnt qualify how many it takes to make the high line work did I? It > works if you get a few guys to stick with it high. Will two guys highpass

Quoted text (9 lines)

> 3 guys low, no. Will three guys high pass 2 guys low, yea Ive done it and > seen it many many times. > > Mitch > > "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > The high groove will NOT work at dega or daytona. Chris Shearburn and > > myself proved that at the last Dega race in VRW. NO ONE would have

passed > > us on the high line unless it was 4 on 2. The high line does NOT work, > that > > is why all of the big time SS only leagues have switched tracks to theBR

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > series. > > > > Bill Bollinger > > www.gsxn.com > > > > > >

http://www.dmp-trucks.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=1794 "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 08:35:56 -0500, "Bill Bollinger" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I guess that is why Dale Jr. just posted on his site that it is more > >accurate. He wouldn't know would he? > > Which forum is that in? I don't see that post. > > Jason

Fixing that straight away speeds and cornering speeds can be fixed with track edits. We can also make two groove tracks. Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 09:34:33 -0500, "David G Fisher" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I read at a forum (not sure which one) that he said recently on his website

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >that the real Cup cars have more grip than they do in the game. > > > >Anyone know for sure if he said this? > > Yes he did. I agree with him. > > IMHO top speeds in N2003 are too high and cornering speeds are too > low. The lines you drive in the trucks are a lot closer to reality > for cup cars, going by interviews and television coverage, altho the > power to grip ratio seems a tad low (comparing CTS-physics to cup cars > not trucks). This would possibly explain why road course and short > track times tend to be higher than reality while speedway times are > faster. In reality, the cup cars can drive a track like Atlanta flat > out for the first few laps of a tire run, yet their times are slower > than what we see in the sim. If I had to guess, I'd guess that both > drag and grip are still too low, even post-patch. > > Jason

Are you trying to tell me something Bill ;) "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> It will NOT happen with two studs on the bottom. > > > "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:wd12c.6260$[email hidden]... > > I didnt qualify how many it takes to make the high line work did I? It > > works if you get a few guys to stick with it high. Will two guys high > pass > > 3 guys low, no. Will three guys high pass 2 guys low, yea Ive done it

and > > seen it many many times. > > > > Mitch

"David G Fisher" wrote...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > <snip> > To be honest, I thought there was a good chance you were > just trying to stir things up as a joke when you said, > "You have to realise, Fran�ois, there's only six reasonably > good drivers in RASCAR: Neil, Ginger, Mark, Brian Oster, > Eldred and myself(*)" > > There are plenty of good drivers (not just reasonably good) > in RASCAR. Whether they take offense to your comment and > respond is up to them. I know I do....and I'm going to > respond (surprise!).

No shit, Holmes... > Just to make sure I wasn't going crazy, I just looked at our > most recent Winter Series results, <snip recent acchievements> > I'm not even "reasonably good" though. Sucks, doesn't it? <g> > The Winter Series oval truck tracks/setups were new to > all of us. <snip> I knew some of them quite well due to my racing with ESCORS. I had particularly high hopes for Thompson as the setup felt really comfortable for me, but Huggings was there and I got caught up in some on-track stuff which is best forgotten. <g> > The guys you mention are *excellent*, excellent drivers. > There's no debate about that. I'm sure they know I think > *very* highly of them, and have a great time racing > against them each week. David, let's not get into a discussion about adjectives. The "reasonably good drivers"-bit was a link to an earlier discussion on the difference to what one can get away with in sims vs real life (and where I really got obnoxious) as an in-joke for Fran�ois, but, looking at the greater picture and judging by my experience of drivers who run in the top series, it's not that far off the mark, I'm afraid. If you look at our GPLRanks and MonsterRanks in the distribution, we're all average or just above average at best. It's sobering to look at it this way, I know, but if you ask the guys on my list whether they think they're doing anything really special, I doubt you'd get a "yes". > I doubt I'll ever understand how you perceive what goes > on on the track in RASCAR, There's no perception about that. I think it's pretty clear things go right by sheer luck rather frequently and, in most of the overtaking manouvres, success is more dependant on the goodwill and skill of the one being overtaken, than the other way around. If some of us slower guys were to actually defend our track position there wouldn't be any green flag running. Look at me vs Hal at Rockingham for an example. After having passed me and held me up considerably earlier on in the race, I made him work for it the next time around. Really dumb of me, obviously, as sure enough he got me and I was the one that spun out. I've basically stopped racing some people out of an instict for self-preservation and a desire for our races to have few yellows. It's gotten beyond silly: they go 2/10ths quicker in qualifying and then seem to assume they're enough quicker to pass at will in the race. That's utter bullshit: one can't get enough of an advantage into a turn without sliding up into me if I decide to put up a fight, end of story, so one should sit and wait for a mistake (I do make those, ya know). Yet this tactic is employed over and over and over again... drives me up the wall (and up near the wall) no end. And when I do decide to hold my ground, I "block"... oh please, just grow up!! It is in my nature to let people around if I feel I'm holding them up, but for some the slightest whiff of a slipstream is enough to make them feel like Superman and I'm left with the choice of lifting or having an accident at the very first turn we get to together. ---> NO RESPECT. > but I know myself (and I'm confident others in RASCAR) have > to laugh when you say most of us aren't even reasonably good, > but *you* are. Come back and talk to me when most of you have two series wins under your belts. Admittently, there's very little chance of me winning RASCAR. There's just too much trouble and I'm not quick enough to outrun it (and I can't make all of the races). > Hate to say it, but I can think of a number of RASCAR drivers > who I'd rate above you, even when speed is completely taken > out of the equation. You shouldn't be irked by that statement, > considering what you've said. Water off a duck's back, no problem. > "You have to realise, Fran�ois, there's only six reasonably > good drivers in RASCAR: Neil, Ginger, Mark, Brian Oster, > Eldred and myself(*)" > > That above quote by you ranks right up there with some of > Simmons' most obnoxious all-timers. Hey!! -Not bad, seeing as it was unintentional. <vbg> Jan. =---

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. Please enlighten me, privately. "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3GZ2c.27191$[email hidden]... > > Look at me vs Hal at Rockingham for an > example. After having passed me and held me up considerably earlier on in > the race, I made him work for it the next time around. Really dumb of me, > obviously, as sure enough he got me and I was the one that spun out. I've > basically stopped racing some people out of an instict forself-preservation > and a desire for our races to have few yellows. >

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3GZ2c.27191$[email hidden]... > > David, let's not get into a discussion about adjectives. The "reasonably > good drivers"-bit was a link to an earlier discussion on the difference to > what one can get away with in sims vs real life (and where I really got > obnoxious) as an in-joke for Fran�ois, but, looking at the greater picture > and judging by my experience of drivers who run in the top series, it'snot > that far off the mark, I'm afraid. If you look at our GPLRanks and > MonsterRanks in the distribution, we're all average or just above averageat > best. It's sobering to look at it this way, I know, but if you ask theguys > on my list whether they think they're doing anything really special, Idoubt > you'd get a "yes". I don't know much about GPLRanks and MonsterRanks. I do know that I checked my times in the TA/TPTCC series with the VRW times (since those drivers were referenced earlier in this thread) for Kyalami and Mosport (only two we've both raced), and I'd easily be competitive for a top 3 Q time. They used open setups as well. Don't know what my times would be if I could tweak the setups to fit me better, or if I actually practiced more than the little I do. David G Fisher

"David G Fisher" wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> I don't know much about GPLRanks and MonsterRanks. I do know that I > checked my times in the TA/TPTCC series with the VRW times (since > those drivers were > referenced earlier in this thread) for Kyalami > and Mosport (only two we've both raced), and I'd easily be > competitive for a top 3 Q time. > They used open setups as well. Don't know what my times would be > if I could tweak the setups to fit me better, or if I actually > practiced more than the little I do.

I think you have missed Jan's point about the "reasonable" drivers group being fairly average in out and out speed. I am sure we all have our own list of drivers we are happy to race wheel to wheel with and I am sure they are all different. I am also sure we have different criteria, but I know who I would trust to go in deep on the brakes side by side with. Stats can't show you racecraft. FWIW from my limited experience racing with you I'd certainly rate you as a quality racer, but then it is Jan's personal list and we each have one of those so I wouldn't worry about it :) Cheers Tony