The gearing multiplication will increase the effect of engine braking, but only if the engine braking effect is strong enough. For the most part friction isn't strong enough to create a useful engine braking effect, but manifold vacuum is.
Friction in engines is mostly negated by the fact that when one piston isn't firing another one is, in an inline 4, when 3 pistons are running through a powerless cycle, 1 is providing power, so theres never a time where the engine isn't producing power, even during deceleration. This also means that compression is paired with a power stroke, so you still get more power back than you lose in a compression stroke.
On diesel engines the throttle is controled by increasing or decreasing the fuel injected into the engine, so when you release the throttle, it basicaly cuts down the fuel to what it would be if the engine was running steady at idle. This means that diesels tend to have quicker throttle off responce and less of the friction is negated because the combustion isn't at full power like it would be in a gasoline engine. So friction is higher in diesel engines, but it still isn't as high as vacuum braking.
One of the devices used to create engine braking on a diesel is a compression release brake. It works by releasing the compression before it has a chance to act as a spring, this way the high compression of the diesel engine can slow down the vehicle as if it where being slowed down by vacuum. Thats one of the devices though, there are many different ones that work differently.
Compression braking as most people hear it is created by the device I mentiond and not present on gasoline engines. you'd be suprized at how many people belive that its the engine compression slowing down there vehicle though. It seems to be a very common miss conception.
Friction in engines is mostly negated by the fact that when one piston isn't firing another one is, in an inline 4, when 3 pistons are running through a powerless cycle, 1 is providing power, so theres never a time where the engine isn't producing power, even during deceleration. This also means that compression is paired with a power stroke, so you still get more power back than you lose in a compression stroke.
On diesel engines the throttle is controled by increasing or decreasing the fuel injected into the engine, so when you release the throttle, it basicaly cuts down the fuel to what it would be if the engine was running steady at idle. This means that diesels tend to have quicker throttle off responce and less of the friction is negated because the combustion isn't at full power like it would be in a gasoline engine. So friction is higher in diesel engines, but it still isn't as high as vacuum braking.
One of the devices used to create engine braking on a diesel is a compression release brake. It works by releasing the compression before it has a chance to act as a spring, this way the high compression of the diesel engine can slow down the vehicle as if it where being slowed down by vacuum. Thats one of the devices though, there are many different ones that work differently.
Compression braking as most people hear it is created by the device I mentiond and not present on gasoline engines. you'd be suprized at how many people belive that its the engine compression slowing down there vehicle though. It seems to be a very common miss conception.
I'm glad people here understand compression rebound, Trying to explain that to people at my school is like talking to a brick wall.
But you are right Tristancliffe, diesels have more friction in the engine which causes a braking effect. But it is never as drastic as the vacuum braking on a gasoline engine. Which as you said, makes diesels more efficient.
Most diesel transport trucks have special devices to create an effect similar to vacuum braking. If they didn't they'd actualy have to use a different braking system so the wheel brakes didn't overheat on hills.
As for diesel cars, I'm not sure, but I think they actualy use a system to create more engine braking so people that drive gasoline cars don't have to adjust to driving a diesel. It can't be the same as on a big truck though, because they tend to be very loud unless they have a muffler. I've never been able to test it though, the only diesel I have access to is an automatic. It's a cargo van, and I'm not alowed to take the heaps of plastic off the top of the engine to check it out.
But you are right Tristancliffe, diesels have more friction in the engine which causes a braking effect. But it is never as drastic as the vacuum braking on a gasoline engine. Which as you said, makes diesels more efficient.
Most diesel transport trucks have special devices to create an effect similar to vacuum braking. If they didn't they'd actualy have to use a different braking system so the wheel brakes didn't overheat on hills.
As for diesel cars, I'm not sure, but I think they actualy use a system to create more engine braking so people that drive gasoline cars don't have to adjust to driving a diesel. It can't be the same as on a big truck though, because they tend to be very loud unless they have a muffler. I've never been able to test it though, the only diesel I have access to is an automatic. It's a cargo van, and I'm not alowed to take the heaps of plastic off the top of the engine to check it out.
Unless LFS models manifold vacuum, which I'm sure it does, you won't get the full engine braking effect of a real car. When I drive the FBM I use engine braking as a backup if I over shoot a corner by a couple km/h, so I assume it actualy works like it does in real life.
On gasoline engines it's actualy the intake stroke that provides braking effects. Because the engine is still firing, there's virtualy no loss on the compression stroke. Infact, the compression stroke tends to act as a spring and because of the absence of a butterfly valve on diesel engine, you don't get engine braking on them at all without special equipment.
This is a break down of how it actualy works.
The butterfly valve closses when you let off the throttle restricting air flow into the pistons, because they where previously taking in alot more air. It generates a powerful vacuum in the intake manifold, the effect of this is alot of restriction during the intake stroke, now the engine has to act as a pump, but not a pressure pump, a vacuum pump. The bigger the bore, or the smaller the idle airflow into the engine, the more engine braking occurs.
Just consider the fact that vacuum is the only thing preventing the engine from screaming its head off and blowing, its a manifold vacuum that keeps it at idle when the throttle is closed.
A good example of this is my single piston engine on my dirt bike, If I lift off in first gear, The engine drops to idle and my speed drops accordingly. If I accelerate so that the engine is spinning at 5000rpm in 2nd gear and downshift to 1st, the engine will go up to about 7000rpm or around there. but if I keep the throttle open, I will not experiance any kind of braking effect provided the throttle is open enough to alow air flow for that engine speed. I can even cut spark which would completely turn the engine into a compressor, and the only thing that would slow down the bike by a noticable amount is closing the throttle.
Engine braking on my bike is extreemly severe in first and second, its strong enough that I've slid up to the bars once because I snapped off the throttle to fast. If it where compression, I'd almost fly off the bike if I where going 7000rpm in second and the spark suddenly cut.
On gasoline engines it's actualy the intake stroke that provides braking effects. Because the engine is still firing, there's virtualy no loss on the compression stroke. Infact, the compression stroke tends to act as a spring and because of the absence of a butterfly valve on diesel engine, you don't get engine braking on them at all without special equipment.
This is a break down of how it actualy works.
The butterfly valve closses when you let off the throttle restricting air flow into the pistons, because they where previously taking in alot more air. It generates a powerful vacuum in the intake manifold, the effect of this is alot of restriction during the intake stroke, now the engine has to act as a pump, but not a pressure pump, a vacuum pump. The bigger the bore, or the smaller the idle airflow into the engine, the more engine braking occurs.
Just consider the fact that vacuum is the only thing preventing the engine from screaming its head off and blowing, its a manifold vacuum that keeps it at idle when the throttle is closed.
A good example of this is my single piston engine on my dirt bike, If I lift off in first gear, The engine drops to idle and my speed drops accordingly. If I accelerate so that the engine is spinning at 5000rpm in 2nd gear and downshift to 1st, the engine will go up to about 7000rpm or around there. but if I keep the throttle open, I will not experiance any kind of braking effect provided the throttle is open enough to alow air flow for that engine speed. I can even cut spark which would completely turn the engine into a compressor, and the only thing that would slow down the bike by a noticable amount is closing the throttle.
Engine braking on my bike is extreemly severe in first and second, its strong enough that I've slid up to the bars once because I snapped off the throttle to fast. If it where compression, I'd almost fly off the bike if I where going 7000rpm in second and the spark suddenly cut.
I saw the one with the puppy being thrown and the one with the dog getting shot with a smoke grenade, didn't see the others. And I don't want to.
What I will say though is this is the product of war, and retarded training practices. These people are taught to be completely heartless, and completely re-programed to be mindless killers following orders. They don't give a shit about life when it comes to being on the battle field, there programed to kill without feeling.
What I will say though is this is the product of war, and retarded training practices. These people are taught to be completely heartless, and completely re-programed to be mindless killers following orders. They don't give a shit about life when it comes to being on the battle field, there programed to kill without feeling.
thanks alot, I'll check it out.
It is a 4 stroke, but an older one.
Last edited by DragonCommando, .
I noticed that too, if it's a crysis mod, its going to kick majour butt.
Lately big budget game developers don't seem to be able to provide the kind of game play experiance that mods can. Playing COD4 and then Insurgency, which is a mod for source. Insurgency, despite all the bugs in the current beta, just seems so much better, so much fresher. It realy makes COD4 look like what it is, just another COD game with a different setting.
Lately big budget game developers don't seem to be able to provide the kind of game play experiance that mods can. Playing COD4 and then Insurgency, which is a mod for source. Insurgency, despite all the bugs in the current beta, just seems so much better, so much fresher. It realy makes COD4 look like what it is, just another COD game with a different setting.
The pin can't be vertical, it would bounce up and down.
It has to move to the side to contact. It also has to be set so it doesn't deflect in any direction.
Also, the pin is spring loaded, so bouncing and g-forces woulden't have to much effect on it since it's so small. Even with a weak spring, it shoulden't contact when the bike is running under normal conditions.
It has to move to the side to contact. It also has to be set so it doesn't deflect in any direction.
Also, the pin is spring loaded, so bouncing and g-forces woulden't have to much effect on it since it's so small. Even with a weak spring, it shoulden't contact when the bike is running under normal conditions.
100% agreed, thats all I can say
The last mechwarrior I played was Mechwarrior 2.
After that, I didn't like the direction it took.
It just seemed to me that it got less technical, it became more of an FPS with robots than a mech fighting game.
After that, I didn't like the direction it took.
It just seemed to me that it got less technical, it became more of an FPS with robots than a mech fighting game.
There isn't a rev limiter on it already, so I'm not trying to get it to rev higher, I'm trying to prevent it from reving higher than the motor was designed to.
The power band on this motor is relatively flat, so Its got almost as much low end as it does high end. It's also got a close ratio gear box, the bike's max speed is around 67km/h last time I did the top speed calculation. But it is capable of going faster if you put the right rear gearing in. with the shortest ratio at the rear, you can get up to about 84km/h. After that, you need to swap the gears in the transmission to go any faster.
However its a mini motocross, so going faster than 70 was never intended, its designed to accelerate like mad. Which it does a bit too well for what I use it for.
Basiclay, there are 2 reasons I want to put a rev limiter on it.
1. I'm not the only one who uses the bike, and I don't want someone comming back to me with a blown motor. I got the bike for free, and anything I spend on it is going to be for general repairs, not an engine rebuild. Which it just had a year ago.
2. It would just be plain cool to do it, its a project that would be interesting to work on.
On a final note, the bike is almost considered vintage, 1977 XRs arn't that common anymore. From what I read, about the only thing you can do to kill the motor on this thing is rev it like mad untill something breaks inside. Other than that, its practicaly bullet proof.
The power band on this motor is relatively flat, so Its got almost as much low end as it does high end. It's also got a close ratio gear box, the bike's max speed is around 67km/h last time I did the top speed calculation. But it is capable of going faster if you put the right rear gearing in. with the shortest ratio at the rear, you can get up to about 84km/h. After that, you need to swap the gears in the transmission to go any faster.
However its a mini motocross, so going faster than 70 was never intended, its designed to accelerate like mad. Which it does a bit too well for what I use it for.
Basiclay, there are 2 reasons I want to put a rev limiter on it.
1. I'm not the only one who uses the bike, and I don't want someone comming back to me with a blown motor. I got the bike for free, and anything I spend on it is going to be for general repairs, not an engine rebuild. Which it just had a year ago.
2. It would just be plain cool to do it, its a project that would be interesting to work on.
On a final note, the bike is almost considered vintage, 1977 XRs arn't that common anymore. From what I read, about the only thing you can do to kill the motor on this thing is rev it like mad untill something breaks inside. Other than that, its practicaly bullet proof.
Last edited by DragonCommando, .
I'm going to build a prototype, but I have to wait a while to test it because the bike is in storage for the winter. I've got my fingers crossed that it works, because if it does, I can make more of them and sell them.
Just one thing.
If you can't afford to go to a track day, how the hell are you going to street race? With a stock used minivan?
Over here it costs $60 canadian to run on a drag strip for a WHOLE DAY. and if you want turns, they have realy cheap prices on race tracks in the area, I don't know how much it is for a track day, but its not that much at all.
If you can't get on a track to do it, DON'T DO IT.
If you can't afford to go to a track day, how the hell are you going to street race? With a stock used minivan?
Over here it costs $60 canadian to run on a drag strip for a WHOLE DAY. and if you want turns, they have realy cheap prices on race tracks in the area, I don't know how much it is for a track day, but its not that much at all.
If you can't get on a track to do it, DON'T DO IT.
NFS:PU was probably the best NFS of all time, It's where I learned to do 360º skids doing 100km/h, and a whole lot of other car control techniques and tricks. I got realy good at the car delivery missions, but corsica always pissed me off with the cone challenge. I got lost at least 5 times the first time I played that level, it has so many side roads.
Oddly enough, everything I learned in NFS:PU actualy works in LFS, like the 360º lane change (not something they teach you, more of an adaptation of it). I used it to avoid a crasher in the Blackwood back straight once, they had no idea what happend when I past them in reverse going nearly 150km/h in the XRT. and then put the car back in a straight line and raced like nothing happend. It was so hilarious seeing the Ilivetocrash: :), Ilivetocrash: >8O. (thats not the real name of the crasher)
I was a showoff when I first started playing, I did all kinds of stunts and tricks while driving around the track.
I should have had the replay, the guy came very close to me, but I reformated my computer since then, and I can't demonstrate it because my pedals are broken.
Oddly enough, everything I learned in NFS:PU actualy works in LFS, like the 360º lane change (not something they teach you, more of an adaptation of it). I used it to avoid a crasher in the Blackwood back straight once, they had no idea what happend when I past them in reverse going nearly 150km/h in the XRT. and then put the car back in a straight line and raced like nothing happend. It was so hilarious seeing the Ilivetocrash: :), Ilivetocrash: >8O. (thats not the real name of the crasher)
I was a showoff when I first started playing, I did all kinds of stunts and tricks while driving around the track.
I should have had the replay, the guy came very close to me, but I reformated my computer since then, and I can't demonstrate it because my pedals are broken.
The problem is, they used the wrong mustang from the wrong year.
http://www.copcarsonline.com/i ... OUSE_FHP_92_SSP_Red_2.jpg
LOL
but seriously, they used the wrong car.
http://www.dragonstar-ms.com/images/talonfrt.jpg (edit: thats a bad image, just look at google for a better one)
Just imagine that, only black.
With a modest body kit, nothing rice-ish, and add the red light strip into the little grill between the lights.
My only problem with the talon, it doesn't have those wicked vacum powerd flip out lights.
The new kitt NEEDS to be AWD, with a crazy AI controled traction control system.
http://www.copcarsonline.com/i ... OUSE_FHP_92_SSP_Red_2.jpg
LOL
but seriously, they used the wrong car.
http://www.dragonstar-ms.com/images/talonfrt.jpg (edit: thats a bad image, just look at google for a better one)
Just imagine that, only black.
With a modest body kit, nothing rice-ish, and add the red light strip into the little grill between the lights.
My only problem with the talon, it doesn't have those wicked vacum powerd flip out lights.
The new kitt NEEDS to be AWD, with a crazy AI controled traction control system.
possible cheapo rev limiter for dirt bikes.
I've been thinking of a way to make a cheap rev limiter for my dirt bike. I think it would be cool to make one, and then watch other people do the same after posting the design. The problem is, I can't test different setups, and I don't know if it would work.
The design I came up with involves grounding the power to the coil with a conditional switch. This presents a problem though, because the bike's wiring is so simple. It's actualy its simplisity that causes the problem.
The problem is, theres only two wires on the whole bike. One goes from the AC generator to the coil, and has another wire branch off of it to the kill switch. This means that if I draw any power from the wire it will shut down the bike because it will go to ground.
I came up with a design for a switch though, that might alow the system to work. The generator's output power increases as engine RPM increases, So if I have a switch that activates at a set voltage, I can set it to ground when the motor hits redline. (10,500rpm)
The switch I came up with works on an electro magnet, as voltage increases, the electro magnet increases it's pull. The electro magnet is connected between the generator and coil and is next to a spring loaded metal pin that is grounded, when the voltage hits the level it would at redline, the pin is pulled so that it contacts the metal pad on the electro magnet, thus grounding the generator and cutting the ignition untill the rpm drops low enough to cause the pin to disconnect. The pin could be screwed in and out so it gets closer or farther away from the metal pad, this way you can adjust the limiter.
The only problems I can see with this is the electro magnet providing to much resistance between the generator and coil and causing the bike to just not run, or it heating up and burning out.
Tell me what you think, I don't have much experiance with this kind of thing so consider that I could just be completely off.
The design I came up with involves grounding the power to the coil with a conditional switch. This presents a problem though, because the bike's wiring is so simple. It's actualy its simplisity that causes the problem.
The problem is, theres only two wires on the whole bike. One goes from the AC generator to the coil, and has another wire branch off of it to the kill switch. This means that if I draw any power from the wire it will shut down the bike because it will go to ground.
I came up with a design for a switch though, that might alow the system to work. The generator's output power increases as engine RPM increases, So if I have a switch that activates at a set voltage, I can set it to ground when the motor hits redline. (10,500rpm)
The switch I came up with works on an electro magnet, as voltage increases, the electro magnet increases it's pull. The electro magnet is connected between the generator and coil and is next to a spring loaded metal pin that is grounded, when the voltage hits the level it would at redline, the pin is pulled so that it contacts the metal pad on the electro magnet, thus grounding the generator and cutting the ignition untill the rpm drops low enough to cause the pin to disconnect. The pin could be screwed in and out so it gets closer or farther away from the metal pad, this way you can adjust the limiter.
The only problems I can see with this is the electro magnet providing to much resistance between the generator and coil and causing the bike to just not run, or it heating up and burning out.
Tell me what you think, I don't have much experiance with this kind of thing so consider that I could just be completely off.
I would realy be happy if they made the cars fully distructable without exploding, so you can total a car to the point of being undrivable but it doesn't just randomly catch fire and go boom.
In a real racing situation, brake force is controled by the drivers foot, there's no brake force adjustment on a real car setup. So for LFS to be realistic, then brake force should be done by the player, not by the settings in there setup.
This doesn't mean that you can't play with a keyboard like people seem to think is the case. I've been playing it with the keyboard since my crappy pedals broke, and even with my setups that lock the wheels at 100%, I still manage to get similar times without locking the wheels at all. I've lost about 1-2 seconds, but thats because I'm not used to using the keyboard to steer.
This doesn't mean that you can't play with a keyboard like people seem to think is the case. I've been playing it with the keyboard since my crappy pedals broke, and even with my setups that lock the wheels at 100%, I still manage to get similar times without locking the wheels at all. I've lost about 1-2 seconds, but thats because I'm not used to using the keyboard to steer.
seriously, WTF?
If we want LFS to be the most realistic racing sim there is, things need to change to prevent people from doing unrealistic things.
The whole point of LFS is to be a racing sim, NOT a racing game.
It's even in the title, Live for Speed: Online Racing Simulator.
For it to be a simulator, it must be as realistic as possible.
I'm not just talking about max brake force here, EVERYTHING needs to be limmited to realistic values.
The thing that annoyes me the most about this is, now that I know about this kind of cheating, I understand why I'm not one of the faster drivers. And it sucks, all this time I thaught people where setting the brake force to reasonable levels, and now I realize that I'm one of the probably fue people who actualy uses the threshhold braking technique.
How am I supposed to look at other drivers times now compared to mine? Knowing that all this time I've been playing it the hard way and that there's a possibilty that they are faster because of there ability to just mash the brakes without worrying like I do?
The problem with that is that you don't actualy syncronize the shaft speed to the gear speed that way, it will still be spinning slower than it needs to be. So if you are driving with an un-syncronized transmission you will still crash the dogs if you don't match the speeds.
I had crappy combined pedals and a garbage wheel that cost me $12 canadian, and I got along just fine modulating brake force. I've never used any aids. So saying that you can't modulate brake force because you don't have the g-forces is bull. I almost never lock the wheels of my car when racing. I only do it when I'm not concerned about it.
I think the only way LFS can move forward is to start removing all of the variables that alow people to make unrealistic setups for there cars, untill then, you will still get people who don't want to learn the right way. And that is what holds LFS back from being the best of the best in sims.
And taking away the brake force adjustment will not hinder the keyboarders if they know how to set it up anyway. They can just use the control rate option. Thats what I've been doing for now, since I haven't finnished building my DIY pedals and wheel.
As for LFS being a sim, It IS being used for race training, and it's also being used for another one of those new race driver competitions. Calling GT4 a sim is a joke, after playing that, and then driving one of the cars from that game for real, I have to say they realy got it wrong. In LFS I set up the XRG using real world variables, and then took it for a spin in the parking lot. After that, I drove a similar car, since I coulden't get my hands on a Starion. The dynamics of the car where almost spot on.
I think the only way LFS can move forward is to start removing all of the variables that alow people to make unrealistic setups for there cars, untill then, you will still get people who don't want to learn the right way. And that is what holds LFS back from being the best of the best in sims.
And taking away the brake force adjustment will not hinder the keyboarders if they know how to set it up anyway. They can just use the control rate option. Thats what I've been doing for now, since I haven't finnished building my DIY pedals and wheel.
As for LFS being a sim, It IS being used for race training, and it's also being used for another one of those new race driver competitions. Calling GT4 a sim is a joke, after playing that, and then driving one of the cars from that game for real, I have to say they realy got it wrong. In LFS I set up the XRG using real world variables, and then took it for a spin in the parking lot. After that, I drove a similar car, since I coulden't get my hands on a Starion. The dynamics of the car where almost spot on.
Last edited by DragonCommando, .
I've found there's no right way to downshift, its just up to what ever you are comfortable with.
You could heel-toe, but if you find that to much and you want to be racing instead of practicing fancy foot work, you can always try just keeping the clutch in, and blipping only once as you come out of the braking zone.
Heel-toe in short is like this:
-Apply the brakes with the front part of your foot.
-Put the clutch in.
-Put the car in nutral.
-Pull the clutch out.
-Blip the throttle with the side or heel of your foot.
-Put the clutch in.
-Put the car in the next gear down.
-Pull the clutch out.
All of this happens very quickly and can be alot to do, especialy when you have to do it multiple times in a row. You'll also notice that there is a double clutch thrown in there. Alot of LFS players forget about that part, which is required for matching shaft speed to gear speed.
On syncronized transmissions, you don't have to let out the clutch in nutral, but it's a good practice because it saves the syncros.
Then there's the single downshift. I used this alot when I had combined pedals, and I haven't gotten around to shaking it yet. It IS done by pro racers, but you won't find many videos of them doing it unless you realy look hard because everyone is still stuck on the "Heel-Toe is the ONLY way racers do it!" craze.
-You start by braking like you would anyway.
-Then you put the clutch in.
-At this point you can put it in nutral so that in the event you need power it's one throw away, but it's up to you.
-As you come to the end of the braking zone, you ease off the brakes and pad the throttle with your foot as you start the turn in.
-If you put the car in nutral before you can pull the clutch out continue to pad the throttle and re-apply the clutch here.
-Then you put the car in gear and continue through the turn easing on or off the throttle as required.
It's not as complicated as heel-toe, but if you have a need to race and don't want to get kicked from a server for practicing heel-toe and crashing, it works just fine.
I've had a fue races with people who heel-toe for the first time, online is not the best place to practice something like that. And single downshifts are alot easier to get the hang of quickly.
You could heel-toe, but if you find that to much and you want to be racing instead of practicing fancy foot work, you can always try just keeping the clutch in, and blipping only once as you come out of the braking zone.
Heel-toe in short is like this:
-Apply the brakes with the front part of your foot.
-Put the clutch in.
-Put the car in nutral.
-Pull the clutch out.
-Blip the throttle with the side or heel of your foot.
-Put the clutch in.
-Put the car in the next gear down.
-Pull the clutch out.
All of this happens very quickly and can be alot to do, especialy when you have to do it multiple times in a row. You'll also notice that there is a double clutch thrown in there. Alot of LFS players forget about that part, which is required for matching shaft speed to gear speed.
On syncronized transmissions, you don't have to let out the clutch in nutral, but it's a good practice because it saves the syncros.
Then there's the single downshift. I used this alot when I had combined pedals, and I haven't gotten around to shaking it yet. It IS done by pro racers, but you won't find many videos of them doing it unless you realy look hard because everyone is still stuck on the "Heel-Toe is the ONLY way racers do it!" craze.
-You start by braking like you would anyway.
-Then you put the clutch in.
-At this point you can put it in nutral so that in the event you need power it's one throw away, but it's up to you.
-As you come to the end of the braking zone, you ease off the brakes and pad the throttle with your foot as you start the turn in.
-If you put the car in nutral before you can pull the clutch out continue to pad the throttle and re-apply the clutch here.
-Then you put the car in gear and continue through the turn easing on or off the throttle as required.
It's not as complicated as heel-toe, but if you have a need to race and don't want to get kicked from a server for practicing heel-toe and crashing, it works just fine.
I've had a fue races with people who heel-toe for the first time, online is not the best place to practice something like that. And single downshifts are alot easier to get the hang of quickly.
I'm positive that you can push the brakes hard enough on any race car that they will lock the wheels. It's possible that after a while they will heat up enough that fade comes in and prevents them from locking at high speeds, but thats not where it counts.
We are talking at corners where you do alot of braking, like T1 at blackwood. Thats also a spot where the car's weight lifts a bit as you come over the hump before the corner. any real car would lock if you put the brake pedal down 100%. On real cars 100% is putting as much force on the pedal as possible, so it's garanteed to lock.
Pedal modulation is key when you run a realistic setup, I've run a realistic setup ever since I started playing LFS. I haven't been playing as long as my accounts been active, but I've been playing long enough that I've perfected some very realistic setups in the time I've been racing. I started with Racer though, and I was basicaly a car "fixer" for that simulation. My goal was and still is to make car setups that act as close to the real thing as possible.
I guess my lap times show it though, because I'm not the fastest. But I'm not the slowest either.
Take the adjustment away, and I bet I'd be faster than at least 60% of the faster racers here though. Because I already have practice doing it the realistic way.
I just refuse to run unrealistic setups.
In the end, LFS is a sim, so a wheel and pedals is the right way to play it. Just because the devs have been nice enough to put other control methods in doesn't mean they have to keep unrealistic features to make keyboard players happy.
We are talking at corners where you do alot of braking, like T1 at blackwood. Thats also a spot where the car's weight lifts a bit as you come over the hump before the corner. any real car would lock if you put the brake pedal down 100%. On real cars 100% is putting as much force on the pedal as possible, so it's garanteed to lock.
Pedal modulation is key when you run a realistic setup, I've run a realistic setup ever since I started playing LFS. I haven't been playing as long as my accounts been active, but I've been playing long enough that I've perfected some very realistic setups in the time I've been racing. I started with Racer though, and I was basicaly a car "fixer" for that simulation. My goal was and still is to make car setups that act as close to the real thing as possible.
I guess my lap times show it though, because I'm not the fastest. But I'm not the slowest either.
Take the adjustment away, and I bet I'd be faster than at least 60% of the faster racers here though. Because I already have practice doing it the realistic way.
I just refuse to run unrealistic setups.
In the end, LFS is a sim, so a wheel and pedals is the right way to play it. Just because the devs have been nice enough to put other control methods in doesn't mean they have to keep unrealistic features to make keyboard players happy.
Last edited by DragonCommando, .
Most race classes restrict you to curtain configurations, some don't even alow you to run big(er) brakes in the first place, but you will never see a car with brakes too small to lock the wheels. Because that would mean that brake fade would decrease stoping power to the point it might become a hazard.
Last edited by DragonCommando, .
Most stock cars have the brake balance adjustment fixed, you can not adjust it at all. This is for safety reasons, because people would mess with it. If you give people that option, they will abuse it and kill themselfs and other people around them.
Just imagine some one who thinks they know what they are doing, they figure setting brake power to 50/50 front/rear is better than the stock setting. That would be a very hazardous situation for them, and for other drivers. If they press the brakes to hard they are garanteed to spin and crash, possibly into someone else, especialy since they probably don't know enough about the dynamics of a car to control the spin.
Brake force isn't adjustable by any means on any vehicle. The only thing that regulates brake force is the drivers foot. The brake booster can be adjusted on some cars, but it just means that you have to press the pedal harder to lock the wheels, because the assist is gone.
And saying that LFS alows so much adjustment of other things that it should alow force adjustment is just wrong. The only way LFS can continue to get more realistic is by starting to fix some of the variables they alow people to change now. A large portion of the setup screen should be locked for the road cars. There should be pre-set options for gearing and suspension.
It doesn't have to be too restrictive, but it should be more realistic, and brake force adjustment is the most unrealistic thing in LFS next to the gearing ratios.
Just imagine some one who thinks they know what they are doing, they figure setting brake power to 50/50 front/rear is better than the stock setting. That would be a very hazardous situation for them, and for other drivers. If they press the brakes to hard they are garanteed to spin and crash, possibly into someone else, especialy since they probably don't know enough about the dynamics of a car to control the spin.
Brake force isn't adjustable by any means on any vehicle. The only thing that regulates brake force is the drivers foot. The brake booster can be adjusted on some cars, but it just means that you have to press the pedal harder to lock the wheels, because the assist is gone.
And saying that LFS alows so much adjustment of other things that it should alow force adjustment is just wrong. The only way LFS can continue to get more realistic is by starting to fix some of the variables they alow people to change now. A large portion of the setup screen should be locked for the road cars. There should be pre-set options for gearing and suspension.
It doesn't have to be too restrictive, but it should be more realistic, and brake force adjustment is the most unrealistic thing in LFS next to the gearing ratios.
I think LFS should have brake forces for each car set as they would in real life. The only thing that should be adjustable on the vehicles is brake balance, and that should only be for the cars that it is adjustable in real life.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG