Exciting isn't it I've ridden a few trends like that in the past myself. The trend has certainly steepened in the last few months.

Interestingly we are seeing a surge of investors entering the housing market again here and haven't seen that in quite some time so money is definitely on the move at the moment. There is always money to be made and lost in turbulent times!

Like you I have to wonder if this is one last rush in the gold price before a correction back down to the 1600-1700 level as a minimum. If it drops below 1580 I'd say it would be over, if it stays above 1580 after a correction then most likely see another rally (imo with a 5 sec look at yearly chart ).

When you see a trend that strong though one thing I know is that it will be driven by greed and will eventually be turned around by fear.

So Intrepid do you have an exit strategy? Or are you just going for the roller coaster experience I confess I've done both in the past

Quote from bunder9999 :

what, in the 70's?

http://goldprice.org/30-year-gold-price-history.html

Woops got my facts mixed up a bit, was going of my foggy memory

I must have it confused with futures or a warrant I was trading at the time, been a while since I have traded. The principles still apply though

I was referring to the period around 2001

Some interesting reading on gold as an investment in relation to inflation here http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/historical-gold-prices-and/536575

Again I'm not saying gold hasn't been a good investment or will not continue to be, I'm just saying don't buy it just because it is going up and everyone else is buying it

Donald Trumph has said about property "It's not what you sell it for that counts, it's what you buy it for" but can equaly aply to all asset areas.

Last edited by Glenn67, Sun 14 Aug 2011, 06:22.

Quote from Intrepid :

I wouldn't recommend investing more than 20-30% of your savings into gold because it is a risk, like anything. You have to diversify. So don't feel too bad. I took a big risk, and it paid off, but that's because I'm stupid

Your not stupid at all the smart money is always invested money, the real smart money though is not following the crowd...

Investing when you did was a good move as gold was in an upward trend with a strong likely hood of continued trend, if you had invest 40% of your funds at that point the risk reward ratio would have been well in your favour and I wouldn't have called it stupid. The smart money though would have likely invested bucket loads in the early part of the trend and now be slowly selling portions as it rises and investing in other areas that are considered brocken currently but have strong fundamentals.

I remember when a local Australian personality went public and bought 50 million as a position in the Asutralian dollar at the time it was trading at about 49c US, every one thought he was a bit loopy as there wasn't any clear signs (technical analysis) at the time indicating it wouldn't fall further. He wasn't looking at the technicals though and invested believing the fundamentals indicated a turn around. It did and now is trading above $1.00 US. I'd bet my bottom dollar though that he has sold out of that position at a handsome profit and has it invest somewhere else now, even though the A$ still looks strong.

flymike and you obviously have your heads screwed on with diversment etc, the real trick to good investment returns long term though is knowing when to alter your allocations in the different areas (property/cash/comodities/stocks)

Your right gold might continue to rise for years to come, thats not the question that needs answering though, the real question is what investment at this point in time give me the best risk vs reward ratio the answer to that is rarely obvious

I think gold's value is much the same as currency value in this day and age but in a more dangerous way as it acts as a leveraged position against the strength of certain economies in comparison to less strong economies. If we had a worldwide economic meltdown gold would devalue some what as on the whole people would be selling more than buying to survive, also countries that have large reserves of gold may sell causing further downward pressure on gold at that time. Gold is not immune to a dramatic drop in value by any means.

I remember not too long ago when gold was US$180/ounce all the commentators at that time declared gold broken forever and that it would never recover again! It was at that time it turned around and has grown steadily in value since.

Once all the commentators and public are saying gold is the best investment I'd advise you to sell pretty quick if history is anything to go by

Quote from Postman Pat :

What do you think the chances are ...

Add screen, input and ffb lag on top of all that


With this new tyre model there actually has had to be quite a lot of adjustment for the average joe to get their head arround, there has been changes to force feed back, the whole way tyre sounds are delt with and the tyre model itself. Then there is the fact that the GT is a new car so little setup knowledge on it. So it is little wonder that its been a bumpy ride.


I actually have it sorted mostly now and am quite happy with the GT, the biggest let downs of the 2.0 release is that we all expected the NTM to be more finnished as in tyre wear etc


On testing and doing research I actually don't think they have got the pressures too wrong it just seems that the tyres dont overheat or build excess pressure all that much (which may be realistic I wouldn't know).


The lowest setting in the garage is 35PSI the tyres are prewarmed so if you pit out and then return to the garage you will see that the pressure is approx 37PSI, there has been a huge backlash saying this is far from realistic on the iRacing forums.


But imo when you take into account how the tyre builds temperature this is about right for the absoloute minimum working pressure recomendation from tyre suppliers. A lot of guys are quoting 35PSI is the minimum recomendation for hot pressure (lower will possibly cause tyre failure) but they are not taking into consideration the weight of the GT or the usage of the tyre. Without direct communication with tyre suppliers I would estimate that the recommended safe Ford GT tyre pressure operating range should infact be between 37PSI and mid 40s for track conditions. I estimate this from the same source material others a quoting to say it is wrong.


If you do a burnout until one of the rears pops the remaining rear has a last hot pressure reading of 42PSI with a 35PSI start pressure, so it would seem that the range of pressures doesn't exceed tyre manufacturers recomendations.


It is pretty obvious though that the tyre life characteristics are either not being modeled at all in the NTM or are way off.


Also I was hoping that the low speed characteristics would be better than what they are, Todd Wasson gave a very good discription on the iRacing site regarding this (a lot are confusing it with thinking that its about not being able to catch slides when infact Todd is talking about the behaviour of the car in these situations not ones ability to catch slides)


Overall I'm fairly happy with the NTM but it is still not where I'd hoped it would be...

Quote from Mackie The Staggie :

Whatever has been done is better than what we had...

"One step forward two steps backwards" comes to mind though

Anyway I will give them the benifit of doubt until they release the NTM on the V8SC and if the situation hasn't improved significantly by then I swear I am going to dismantle my sim rig in protest!

The biggest issue I have is not how much they have seemed to botch the release but the fact that you can't find one response from a staff memeber at all which would have gone a long way to settling things down.

Edit: - Oops looks like I was wrong there is one post 7 pages deep into Alex's thread lol but there is certainly no real feed back at all about anyones concerns.

Last edited by Glenn67, Wed 3 Aug 2011, 01:39.

Quote from Tuze :

back to square one it seems

Well it depends on your perspective, it definetly an improvement over the old model in many respects but on the other hand its apears that more of the tyre features are not finnished on the NTM compared to OTM and that it was brought out in too much of a hurry.

So some will say it's a step forward but a long way from being finnished and were at square 1.2-1.5 while others will see it as a step backwards so they feel it is at square 0.5-0.8 and everybody was expecting to be at square 2.0 and we aren't so yeah it is a real shitfest which will take some time settle down.

I just did first few laps with Ford GT at Suzuka and I gotta say wow! I love that feeling

I'm still terribly slow in it 5sec or more off pace but could drive it all day and be slow I wouldn't care

Quote from MadCat360 :

The real one is an understeering pig when on the throttle.

First few laps last night I liked some things but found it frustrating also, after a night sleep and reading up a bit more I have found the following good:

- Set all sound sliders to 0db (before I had tyre high and rest low)
- Haven't changed g25 Logitech profiler settings at all
- in-game FFB set to 13 for Skip (above that you get clipping and its different for each car)

Started with Skip at Okayama short and played with setup found when compared to OTM that a good feeling setup requires quite different setup strategy.

Found it necessary to bring the brake bias forward, raise the front ride hieght substantially and have the tyre pressures more how you would expect IRL (i.e. rear lower than front) Also found that a stiff rear ARB works well as it seems to support the rear end better and gives better drive out of the corners, so it's a mistake to go too soft with the ARB.

Initial impressions with the NTM on the Skip are:

- It feels a lot more like a real car
- you have to think about the traction circle a lot more than before!
- You can catch slides, even hold drifts and push hard etc but in different ways to the OTM and it feels pretty realisitic to me.
- It punishes you a lot more for overdriving on corner entry than before but conversely it is more forgiving on corner exit.

Conclusion: - I think it will prove to be a much better tyre model than the OTM on the other road cars once it is rolled out but will require a rethink on how to go about setting them up and a little relearning with driving techniques. I find myself thinking more often than not that this feels right with the NTM it feels a lot less like a toy now. Obviously there will still be issues that need sorting out but it is a good step in the right direction imo

Quote from tinvek :

don;t forget the ford has been in development for a long time, quite possibly it's actually been "running" for a while and has been developed alongside the NTM as that progressed

If anything though you would assume that the develpoment of the Ford GT would have given them some insights into the complexities of applying the NTM to each tyre type and car.

With their ambitious initial timelines that doesn't seem to be the case and leaves one with the suspicion that things will not go as smoothly as initially thought.

I suspect there will be 'improvements' made over an extended period of time even on those cars that do receive the NTM early.

Well we don't have long to wait now

Quote from PMD9409 :

Well they say that setup changes will not need to be done on the skippy which is quite shocking. The NW was totally different setups.

I have a strong premonition that there will need to be a lot of tweaking of the tyre model for each car that it is applied to over the next few months and that this is just the beginning

What I'm interested in mostly between the skip and NW is any differences in slip angle as the skip has treaded tyres I'd expect the slip angle characteristics to be quite different to the NW.

Quote from flymike91 :

Again, the way people decide to live in their own countries is none of my business (I am not my government), but when they immigrate to the West they must be expected to rise. If the West wasn't considered a better place, they wouldn't immigrate here.

I'm having some trouble understanding were you are coming from, can you clarify what you mean by expected to rise? As it is written it can be taken many ways.

At least we get to try the NTM on the skippy which when combined with the testing we have done on the NW on road courses should give us some insight into how the NTM will behave on the other road cars.

Quote from anttt69 :

/end rant

There, there... -do you want mummy to get David to share his toys with you?

Quote from aoun :

Is this all with the fixed setup for the current MX5 series? If so i am 9 tenths off from you and thats shocking!!!!

I must be doing something really wrong.

It would be with fixed setup, I've done 1:01:446 and some guys have got below 1:01

There's a lot of time that can be gained or lost on corners 2 & 3 as it can be taken numerous ways, also corner 6

Quote from boothy :

My pb is a 1:01.714. u mad?

Nope doesn't make me mad Actually this got me thinking a bit I think once the new tyre model hits the MX5 the times will more likely compress between fast and mid field than in something like the V8SC. Could make this an even more fun serries...

@ MiguelMargarido your making a lot of assumptions there mate

Yeah the email link is broken but, just log into the members page as you normally do then follow the emails instructions. Works without a problem

And yes the v8 is awsome, one of my favourite cars

Interesting that in both iRacing and LFS the area where the physics seemed most out are with low speed grip and around the areas of the tyre taking the 'initial set of slip angle'.

I also don't think that LFS or iRacing have too littile grip it is just that the feel to the driver is that there is two little grip and that could well be related to the above.

The odd thing is that with both sims when you are really in tune with the sim physics and car they both feel like they have great grip, but to the casual user there doesn't feel like there is any grip at all.

For example (and yes I know it is probably because I suck lol) I can get to a pretty reasonable level but then not drive for a week or two and jump back in and find for the first few laps I struggle to stay on the track let alone set a time, I often wonder if that is how it would be irl or is it because we are missing so much in the way of feedback in sims that we have to compensate a lot more.

First Post

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=5772#post5772

First thread

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=3927

My most controversial thread contribution goes too

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=867438#post867438 and following posts

Seems i was always an opinionated @#$@ well not a scratch on Tristian though

Last edited by Glenn67, Sun 8 May 2011, 16:40.

Haven't constructed a model kit in some 25 to 30 years but this thread makes me want too

Quote from Hallen :

Yes, but the point is that they have to update cars independently which means they don't have universal tyre physics -- they fudge their calculations to work better with each individual car. When Scawen finishes the physics for the tyres, all cars will be impacted.

Sorry for the off-topic. I'm a bit pedantic about that kind of thing.

That's a pretty big assumption there Hallen

Just because they choose to release the tyre physics in stages doesn't mean that every car has different underlying maths equations for tyre physics or look up tables etc.

As an example taking the classic pacejka magic formula for modelling tyre performance and then setting it up to match real tyre data for different tyres would require different parameters and tweaking of those parameters to match the tyre you are trying to simulate.

In the real world even from the same manufacturer and same tyre type/model the tyres can vary in their real world performance significantly, so if you try replicating the performance of many different types of tyres in construction and rubber compounds the tuning and tweaking of parameters that need to be plugged into the equations to simulate tyre performance is not going to be a 5 min task and I'd suggest it is a task that can be improved upon over time as they get more test data knowledge so isn't even a onetime task.

The reality is that any tyre model no matter what its base is or how good/bad the critics claim it will be, is going to be an approximation (read fudge) of real world tyre performance.

Also just because one developer chooses to apply physics changes across the board and another applies it to cars individually has in my opinion zero implication that one is fudging tyre physics and the other is not.

Perhaps the different decisions in how they release updates has more to do with recourses at their disposal or their differing goals such as trying to replicate specific tyre performance on specific surfaces compared to trying to replicate general tyre behaviour as accurately as possible.

I'm a bit pedantic about that kind of thing too

Quote from tinvek :

anyone else see this thread? i won't spoil it if you haven't but keep reading it for the surprise fact that explains things

http://members.iracing.com/jforum/posts/list/1455524.page

lolololololololol rofl Good one funiest thing I've read in some time

Stating the obvious here but the aussie v8 is very different to drive than most other professional race cars in real life and is known to be a handful. You hear comment from visiting drivers to the V8Supercar serries all the time in this regard and is no different in iracing. You get the impression though that it is a much liked car by drivers in real life and it seems you either love it or hate it in iRacing. I personally love the car and feel it responds very well to brake throttle balance which is why I love it so much.

Recent upgrades have helped make it feel more planted and enabled slightly earlier and more aggressive throttle application than previous. I don't personally think that the v8's handling is any more off than any of the other cars in iRacing though and would only expect new changes to be in increments not leaps and bounds. It will always be a car that requires fine throttle control at the limits just look at how many videos of footwork out there require very careful and considered throttle application.

It's easier to drive than the SRF (I also love that car )

Quote from lap traffic nz :

Its lagggggtastic, my options are very limited due to rubbish internet network here (fibre optic not due for about 3-7 years) copper wires FTL.

Fibre in itself will not dramatically reduce ping times. If you compare the speed of light over 13,500km to the speed of electrons over copper there is only 19ms difference, with the over all time over copper being roughly 64ms.

Knowing that the average ping time from Aus to london is 300+ then you can see that the vast majority of time to be gained is not from a change from copper to fibre but rather from higher quality faster switching gear. Unfortunately I don't ever believe that ISP's primary focus will be on the speed of the switching gear in of itself but will remain on ever increasing bandwidth requirements which is why they look to fibre.

I was with LFS since 2004 first with 56k modem then 128k ISDN to finally several different versions of ADSL. The ISDN line gave the lowest and most consistent ping times and that was from a farm in the outback

So I wouldn't be holding my breath about fibre when it comes to ping times...