V for Victory! 8/10

Quote from deggis :

But yes RBR rules on gravel. Tarmac is a bit dull though.

I don't understand why everybody complains about RBR's tarmac physics.. I think they're spot on. "Stable" but "elastic" in low speeds and very "sensitive" and "lively" in high speeds.

Quote from noob4ever :

fzr hatch(er)?
http://rs-r.freepgs.com/media/wallpapers/FZRhatch.jpg

Peugeot 407 hatchback

Quote from HighRoad :

nice but where did u get that realistic smoke...i cant find it anywhere...on the second picture

http://www.marcls-home.de/file ... d=69&p13_versionid=69

This is slightly off topic but here are some 1080i (1920 x 1080) car videos but they need a very powerful CPU. Nice sounds also!

http://www.hdinmotion.com/local_links.php?catid=7

At the moment

Quote from Bob Smith :

Those sets were made for the physics in patch P/Q. They understeer too much when used with S/T/U, IMO. I keep meaning to get around to "fixing" them, but it's a slow and somewhat laborious process when I have to do all the testing alone.

And the RAC actually handles great with the latest physics, it used to be all understeer then oversteer, now it's just sweet. Dunno what all the fuss is about. Just drive the damn thing.

Sorry, I posted a wrong version. I fixed it. But I still want that everyone tests different tire pressures because those have a huge effect on car's handling and balance in LFS.

The secret is to increase tire pressures almost to max. Then all cars act more firmly. For FZ50 I use 3.45 bars for front and 3.50 bars for rear. This might sound unrealistic and fool but after increased tire pressures FZ50 and RAC won't slide all the time and have a realistic amount of basic understeer like Porsche 911.

LFS's current tire flexibility is bit exaggerated and I think that ~3.5 bars is more likely around 2.5-3.0 bars.

I strongly recommend to test the increasement of tire pressures.

Here is Bob's Easy to drive setup pack.
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=278

Last edited by Antsa, Sat 28 Oct 2006, 09:25.

I like the new rev limiter. vroooOOOMM-TAK-TAK-TAK!!

I have my prejudices but I hope...

Demo has been released!

http://gameshadow.vo.llnwd.net ... 17/race/racedemosetup.exe

Again, I forgot to hide those lap times... :doh:

I think that they have a different TC-setting for tire warm up. It limits the revs. Otherwise they would spin their car because modern F1 engine is so sensitive and powerful.

Anyone?

How about the ride height?

If I want to make USA std suspension is the ride height:

Front:
207mm-18mm=189mm?

Rear:
280mm-25mm=255mm?

Could someone calculate these suspension values for me, please? I don't understand how to convert them for LFS...

Here's all you need:
http://www.pca.org/panorama/sample_article_3.html

BTW: Porsche's ride height is rather high isn't it...?
http://www.dieselstation.com/w ... a/Porsche-Carrera-004.jpg

:sheep: :heartbeat

Quote from TravisS :

the driver of the NSX

Motoharu "Gan-San" Kurosawa, 60+

Quote from Tomas Stiborek :

next one

Skoda Octavia...

GOT TORQUE?!! (10bars of boost) :revs:
http://www.realoldspower.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=12862

Last edited by Antsa, Wed 4 Jan 2006, 12:19.

Here's my updated setup. Now the spring rates are correct and anti-roll bars are softer. I'm not so sure about the ride height.. Gear ratios are GT3's because FZ50 engine specs are the same as GT3's. Gear ratios seems to be very wide but they are real.
Now FZ50 has the porsche feel. The steering balance is almost neutral when you warm up your (rear)tires.
¨

Thanks!
How about the ride height? It can't be 0.138m/0.148m in LFS. Should I first stiffen the springs to max and put those values (0.138m/0.148m) and then put the right spring rates (29.78 kN/m 45.55 kN/m) and then increase the ride height with an eye until the actual ride height is as high as at beginning?

BTW I found some information about sway bar stiffnesses and GT3s sway bar specs:
http://www.optionimports.com/sitemap.html

GT-3/996 Front bar: 26.8mm, 5-way adjustable with adjustable droplinks and bushings
GT-3/996 Rear bar: 20.7mm, 4-way adjustable with adjustable droplinks and bushings

Last edited by Antsa, Fri 30 Dec 2005, 09:04.

I found some more information and I tried to make RoW Sport and GT3 setups by myself:

RoW Sport:
Front ride height: 138mm
Rear ride height: 148mm
(I don't know how to convert the spring rates (front 170lbs/in rear 260lbs/in)to kN/m...
...so I guessed them)
Front spring rate: 60kN/m
Rear spring rate: 75kN/m
I don't know the anti-rollbar stiffness but I know the ratio between front and rear - 0.436. (I calculated from it from the table 2) So, if the front stiffness is lets say 35kN/m the rear stiffness is 15.3kN/m.
You can calculate the damper values from the chart 9 and 10. I can't...
Steering lock:
(911 GT2: ratio: 16.9:1, turns, lock-to-lock: 2.98)
So it's nearly 32 degrees which is quite low actually...
LSD:
(Again from 911 GT2)
40% power, 60% coast
Camber:
Front -0.5 degrees
Rear -1.25 degrees
Toe-in:
Front ~0.1 degrees
Rear ~0.2 degrees
Tire pressure (for Boxter 17" wheels):
Front 29psi ->2 bars
Rear 36psi->2.5bars

GT3:
Front ride height: 112mm
Rear ride height: 125mm
I don't know the spring rates so I guessed:
Front 75kN/m
Rear 90kN/m
Both of them are very stiff but GT3 has very harsh ride I think..
Camber:
Front -1 degrees
Rear: -1.83 degrees
Tire pressure:
Front 32psi->2.2bars
Rear 39psi->2.7bars

Sources:
http://www.pca.org/panorama/sample_article_3.html
http://www.pca.org/tech/tech_q ... B-4BAC-8DE2-5762DAAB1EC6}
http://www.pca.org/tech/tech_q ... 8-422B-851C-5BBD4A3E2B8B}
http://www.pca.org/tech/tech_q ... 7-4DC1-8B36-9BFB817DF141}
http://www.pca.org/tech/tech_q ... 9-4A20-BDFB-2351E45810E1}
http://www.automobilemag.com/r ... pes/0104_porsche_911_gt2/
http://www.motorsportscenter.com/article_124.shtml


Comments and corrections please!

I uploaded my current setups. You'll have to have a full gas tank and a "drop" before the camber values match with the real ones.

Last edited by Antsa, Thu 29 Dec 2005, 19:02.

Hi! I found a website where is some useful suspension data of Porsche 911.
So, could somebody "convert" these values and make a setup for FZ50, please?

http://www.pca.org/panorama/sample_article_3.html

Quote from ajp71 :

Kerbing is an expression used in racing circles, it's pretty self explanitory. In real racing kerbing is very definatley a bad thing, apart fromrisking damage to the car it can be plain dangerous, both in terms of sending the car out of control and weakening compnents. At a Formula 4 (1600/1800 cc. single seaters) race on the Silverstone a Formula Renault clipped the kerb at Becketts too hard on the last lap, the car carried on, seemingly without damage until the rear suspension collapsed coming over the finish line, then hit by another car, causing a big accident after the race had finished.

IRL you simply couldn't kerb the FOX like you have to be fast at Fern Bay. Modern racing cars are designed to take kerbs, but only some kerbs can be taken, if you look at the lap of the Radical SR8, a car completely capable of taking normal kerbs, at the 'ring he doesn't touch a single kerb, this is because the kerbs there, like some of the nasty ones in LFS are quite simply like pulling a car onto the pavement at 150 mph (which you would do would you ). Road cars and older racing cars are even more likely to fall to pieces when you touch a kerb.

Nice pictures btw. have they been edited a bit, or does LFS look that good on your system

Thanks for your detailed explanation! At least my subconscious was right...

And those pics aren't edited. After I took them I suprised how good LFS's graphic engine still is without any directx 9 effects..