Thank you guys! Some progress in the following sequence:
1 external shape
2 external shape mesh + SubD
3 semifinal mesh + Subd
4 check
5 after shrinkwrap (3) to mesh (1)
6 final mesh
7 final

Last edited by Egor K, Thu, 12 Jan 2023 13:20. Reason : rearranged images

Quote from Gutholz :

If I sneak a camera into a cinema and upload the recording then that is still illegal. Even if I make small edits like cropping out areas of the movie or mirroring it.

Quote from Scawen :

I agree with everything you said.

If you agree with everything that weisenheimer said while the shape of a car is obviously copyrighted, how can precise recreation of a real model be legal at all without permission from the copyright holder even if car named different, but you can instantly recognize what car it really is?

Quote from Scawen :

... Please visit the 20th Anniversary page to see the screenshots ...

Second screenshot from Fairfield Test Centre pack shows a straight of regular artificial bumps, it would be cool to have also random ones, like Belgian Pavé

Quote from Evolution_R :

LFS needs that!

Yes!

I could not even dream of such a program in the foreseeable future. It is a pity that mainly big V8 engine is demonstrated and the 747cc motor is a bit more bass than you'd expect.

Quote from Flame CZE :

something similar is in review

It is similar ONLY way it looks! It contains default frame (center of gravity and moment of inertia not relevant, at all), engine and fuel tank coordinates = 0,0,0 and so on we have Ambulance Truck lighter than Miata with kart-grade handling. I do not wish Mr. Dygear judge the accuracy of LFS mods by hususu9633 made mods.

As I see workflow:
1 make shape (no mouldings and gaps)
2 make sure general shape is ok
3 apply subdivision
4 make gaps and mouldings by offset edge slide
Gaps and mouldings in low-poly mesh are:
5 hindrance to shape correction
6 enemy of smooth shape transition (not visible on your screenshots because there is no matcap)
Am I wrong?

Indirectly related to mods suggestion for future improvement It would be great to move and rotate view in LFS Editor by means of 3Dconnection SpaceMouse, which is already recognized by LFS and displays correct device axes position.

Spoiler - click to reveal

First post would be updated as I work on mod and know something new about. Questions and problems on development I will mark Improvement suggestions are welcome.

Vehicle Class

Thanks to this post now I get difference between touring and saloon.

Mass

According to book "Driving Ambition" kerb weight (incl half tank): 1138kg. Distribution front/rear: 41.2/58.8
Real CoG is currently unknown to me. Model CoG is 0.385 above ground.
Compared to LFS cars (XRT — 0.470; FZ5 — 0.412; LX6 — 0.370; RAC — 0.366) and Blackbird (0.392), say, for first approximation it is acceptable, but need to be clarified later, since a mm make difference.

Mass > Engine

According to audiosignal.co.uk, engine mass 303kg automatically determined by Vehicle Editor a bit heavy: engine+all ancillaries, the exhaust and silencer is 266kg.

Mass > Suspension

Book "Driving Ambition" claims unsprung corner weights are 42kg front and 55kg rear (total 97kg), which I believe consist wheels and suspension. Meanwhile, minimum unsprung weight that LFS Editor allows over 200% target consists of the sum 202 kg:
wheels (within chosen dimensions not customisable) — 81 kg and
suspension (minimal mass constant = 0.1) — 121 kg.

Engine

Quote from Jason Barlow :

it hasn’t got a flywheel.

Plate claims idle 900 rpm and another engine settings, most of all I like ignition timing string. Whole video by James Cottingham (DK Engineering TV) worth watching.

Steering

• Maximum Lock — I figured maximum lock is 33 degrees while testing on Layout Square — according to Autocar magazine turning circle is 13 m.
  
• Steering Wheel Turn (ONE WAY) 504 degrees — according to Autocar magazine lock to lock 2.8 turns.
  
• Parallel steer — quote from C466/007/93 (Concept and design of the McLaren F1 suspension systems), see attachments to post by user flemke on 26-09-2019 (hereinafter the "C466/007/93"): "...around 40% of full ackerman was adopted for F1."
  

Suspension

• Camber — planned: 45' F&R, but user tortoise claimed: 1.75 F; 0.75 R.
  
• Inclination. Front — according to audiosignal.co.uk — 8 degrees. Rear I tentatively figured by freeze frame tracking. Whole video by Tim McNair (Grand Prix Concours) worth watching.
  
• Caster — according to audiosignal.co.uk — 4.6 degrees (46 is written — I think point just lost).
  
• Scrub radius — according to audiosignal.co.uk is 25 mm.
  
• No rear anti-roll bar. Here's what Gordon Murray said about the anti-roll bar at the front only (interview with Henry Catchpole on Carfection YouTube channel):
  Quote from Gordon Murray :

  When you look at the basic physics of roll compensation in a car you are trying to stop the roll in a corner. And you can, if you get frequency balance and percentage, you don't get too crazy on the percentage of roll compensation that's coming from the roll bar, you can do it all at one end. The reason why I never do it at the rear is you'll get all this trouble for traction. Particulary in a racing car. To get best bossible traction, best possible independent suspension ... and then you join left and right axles with the bar. It's nonsense. So on one wheel bump or coming out of a corner on roll you're unloading one side of the car. Artificially. Which is nonsense. If you want the best traction — you don't join the axles.
  
  
  Quote from Driving Ambition page 159 :

  Jonathan Palmer decided the car rolled too much and argued against Gordon's long aversion to using rear anti-roll bars. Ultimately a very thin and flexible one — which should have had minimal effect — was made up and fitted: "To Palmer's credit he came in after a lap, admitting "I see what you mean! It was virtually undriveable."
  
  
• Roll centre — according to C466/007/93: 3.1 Roll centre "...the centres be placed at 30mm and 60mm above the ground, front and rear respectively."
  
• Roll compensation — planned 75% roll compensation (4.4 degrees for 80 mm travel). Later in C466/007/93: "...55-65% roll compensation...". So let's set it to about 3.7 degrees for 80mm travel.
  
• Motion Range — according to audiosignal.co.uk: 170mm (90 bump + 80 rebound).
  
• Ground clearance — 120mm, and there is a little problem. I figure that way:
  
  Lowest: front axle height=192mm-80(rebound)=112mm and rear axle height=228mm-80(rebound)=148mm
  Front corner load: 1138kg*41.2%/2=234kg and rear corner load: 1138kg*58.8%/2=334kg, but spring load does not include unsprung weight — wheels and suspension.
  Wheels unsprung weight: atomatically determined by Vehicle Editor mass of four identical wheels 235/45R17: 69kg. In case URC1 — two 235/45R17 plus two 315/45R17: 81kg. Therefore mass of one front wheel 69kg/4=17.25kg and rear wheel (81kg-17.25kg*2)/2=23.25kg. But!
  Suspension unsprung weight: target ground clearance (120mm) can only be obtained by subtracting front and rear unsprung suspension mass in very strange proportions, namely (per axle): front 10.2kg (8.4% suspension mass) and rear 67.8kg (56% suspension mass). Can't be true.
  Front spring: Load 234-17.25(front wheel)- 5.1(unsprung suspension per corner)=212kg. Stiffness 26N/mm. 212/(26/9.8)=~80mm.
  Rear spring: Load 334-23.25( rear wheel)-33.9(unsprung suspension per corner)=277kg. Stiffness 34N/mm. 277/(34/9.8)=~80mm.
  I must say right away that inclination of the spring is not the case: in the LFS stiffness is set in a vertical projection.
  

No anti-dive confirmed.

Quote from Jason Barlow :

more body roll than was fashionable in supercars

Quote from Tiff Needell :

rolled too much on the track

I like road car behavior with noticeable suspension travel, that real feel no other sim but LFS simulates so well.

Final drive

Lock is 40% — according to netcarshow.com.
Maximum speed with claimed gearbox ratios from Autocar magazine allegedly doesn't match well-known record 386.7 kph as redline was raised for record run, detailed information on Racing Line magazine.

Tyres

Tyre pressure information.

Aerodynamics

Maybe the coolest thing about this car, described by Gordon Murray (on Speedvision channel):

Quote from Gordon Murray :

did a little bit of styling and a lot of aerodynamic ... Styling was part of the process rather than dictating what the car should be

Mesh

Mainly using this main reference sketch, which has accurate object positions.
Some progress (GIF)




Sizes correspond to manual.

Rims modelled by converting NURBS spoke profile to mesh with shrinkwrap modifier.

Rear lights: red COBO 02.279, amber COBO 02.282.
Article in Racecar Engineering (June 1996) has very detailed monocoque description, including center beams dimensions: height 250mm (match main reference sketch) and width 150mm on floor, as well as distance between them — 22 inches.

Vehicle Editor does not allow place two kinda-rear passengers due well-known unique three-seat layout.
Steering wheel was modelled using pic from book "Driving Ambition" which I redrawn to better mesh align.

Clocks
Interesting statement about about the first implemented feature:

Quote from Gordon Murray :

Ron Dennis suggested the needles swept the dials on start-up. This is now mimicked by many others.

Thanks to Jay Leno we can see McLaren F1 fuel cell and know it must be replaced proximly every five years (same tells whichcar.com.au).

People working on IRL

Barry Lett had arrived from Lotus to oversee body engineering.
Paul Martin was in charge of composites.
Steve Randle did stress analysis and ended up working on the car’s suspension.
(source)
Peter Stevens — stylist

Last edited by Egor K, Thu, 25 Jan 2024 11:00. Reason : add some info (engine and suspension, also quotes), add ARB info, deleted Bellm's complaint — it concerns GTR, added quote about rear ARB

Quote from pärtan :

ability to move the bearing objects in 2D (x and z) directly from the suspension diagram view

A good idea.
It would also be very useful to see in real time: coordinates of roll center and its offset from COG.

Trying to understand units of measure in dashboard texture.
It's 512*512px centered, and X and Y coordinates of speedo and tacho are unitless fractions of half (256px) of texture (see attachment).
One unit of dimension of multi function display is 1/64 of whole texture width 512/64=8px

But radius of speedo and tacho does not correspond to fractions nor pixels.

Quote from terga :

...increase the upper caster limit ... only 6 degrees. It's also less than some real cars are capable of.

I vote for it, even regular everyday normal e34 has caster almost of 8 degrees

Snoop serious as always!

I like the fact that stock version comes first. Despite stock wheels sinking in arches (which is real).

Quote from Amynue :

I have an idea how to make different rims for the front and the back, but not sure if it will work.

Can we know-how?

Trying to understand why there is custom access to mods since there is no way to monetize?

I don't complain about custom access at all. Of course, the right of the author to decide who to give access to the mod. Sometimes I ask author online for access, but quite often they ignore it — can't blame them, cause what's the point of custom access when you're ready to give access to random dude online?

But why do I even see here on the forum when it's private? It makes it some kind half-private: see, but don't touch?
Also, why is custom access mods moderation is public?
Isn't this one of the reasons for delay of "public mods" reviews?
How about at least making viewing public mods a priority over custom access mods? Or even make it true private.

Is it possible to set distance of spokes from edge of rim (or from center) separately for front and rear?
When editing either rim or spokes, I did not find buttons to switch axis.