Can't believe the amount of silly stuff thrown around here. For the good of all of the LFS community, please go to google and search fo Tazio Nuvolari and settle this anti drift madness for good. But seriously, this tryig to score points and impress who knows who is making a mockery of motorsports. Again showing it's better to be lucky than good.

Here's the website to enlighten you all about the great Flying Mantuan:

http://www.ddavid.com/formula1/nuvo_bio.htm

Better yet, read this:

http://www.forix.com/8w/nuvolari.html

Please read this little bit of history before anyone goes anti drifting again.

The true drifter isn't who wags his tail the most; it's he who's mastered complete control of his car and goes as fast as physics would allow him. It's a sad fact that this money worshipping and overcommercialized world of ours places winning at all cost above the good of any sport.

Last edited by Jamexing, Sun, 13 Aug 2006 05:47.

The only gases that naturally exist in the atomic state in nature are the "inert" gasses or the noble gases like Helium, krypton, Xenon, Noen, etc. This is due to their chemicla stability, since they have the full set of 8 valence electrons to achieve stability.

Yes, George, I'm glad that someone else besides me has discovered how silly it is to call anyone stupid. How can you define stupid when the ture nature of intellect remains so obscure?

Face it, no one is truely stupid(absoloutely never learns anything). We are all victims of our genetic heritage and most importantly , experiences(education, upbringing, social environment., etc). I'm sick of society and popular culture turning life into nothing more than a social engineering exercise for those in power.

Yep. Speed drifting is about maximizing use of the tire's grip, not going sideways just to impress your GF or judeges or whoever. Speed drifting is just a natural result of going as fast as your tires and chasis allows as dictated by physical laws. Try some WRC style driving on a gravel track and see what my true definition of drifting means.

BTW, Nuvolari was known to be extraordinarily fast at his time due to his mastery of 4-wheel drifting, whereby he'll turn in earlier than a purely grip-style driver would and exit much faster than everyone else. In his era of overpowered and undertired cars, it ws the fastest way to drive. If only I could find some video footage of his driving...

To go as fast as possible around a circuit requires maximum use of the tire's grip. Contrary to popular belief, static friction isn't the greatest. The greatest grip comes only when the tires are drifting slightly (a few degrees, tyre and surface dependant), just before they completely let go(sliding friction). That's why small angle drifts produce ultimate speed. If you stay completely within the non-drift envelop, you'll never squeeze every last bit out of the tires.

Showoff style-drifters, see the light and see what TRUE DRIFTING is all about! If Nuvolari was alive today, he would have puked at what a complete mockery drifiting has become today. Burning rear tires for the sake of entertaining todays increasingly ignorant and overpriviledged rich kids? What a waste.

Last edited by Jamexing, Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:30.

My point exactly. It's all about relatively small and controlled drift angles to improve turn in and exit.

What I'm trying to say is that atomic mass doesn't affect how much volume a certain number of gas molecules would occupy if all else was equal. I'm surprsied that you're studying science and couldn't compute this. But this is a LFS forum, not a flame war, so I'll forgive you, George.

Now, wheelhammer, let me explain why N2O is so dangerous aboard a car. As used by illegal racers without roolcages, race fuel cells or any race safety equipment, N2O is extremly dangerous. Split fuel is much more likely with those poorly (if any) race-prepped ricers.

I'll explain why. The fire triangle is composed of oxigen, fuel and heat. Since N2O is a potent oxidizer, it adds a strong O2(oxygen) component to the equation, making disaster much more likely.

Drifting as seen in those drift 'races' are just artificially induced excess yaw motion. However driting is applied for serious racing, AKA to go FAST.

Driting is a necessity to go fast on slippery surfaces such as geavel and especially snow. Now THAT'S REAL DRIFTING. Not wasting precious rubber and other resources to be burnt off on tarmac and destroying our environment for noting.

Once LFS applies true gravel and snow, no one could complain of lack of REAL drifting. To sway around like an out of control moose is just silly. But to exit corners with perfectly executed 4-wheel-drifts to maximize exit speed and use of tire grip... Now that's drifting in my book.

My statement about 33% O2 is perefectly valid. Are you familiar with the idea of moles of gas? Where 1 mole = 6.02*10^23 atoms or molecules? And the atomic mass of the molecule or atom is immaterial. For a given Temperature and pressure, all gases of equal molarity occupy the same volume.

So please brush up your physics and chemistry before saying I'm wrong.

And no, I didn't watch F&F TD because it's an insult to race car engineering types like me. I'm bringing those fantasy games and movies in only to illustrate how this silly and incessant preoccupation with puting N2O in LFS is just a product of a sick and lame popular culture that we are bombarded with. I certainly know that those things have no respect for Newtonian or any scientifically proven mechanics, otherwise I won't say what I say.

Last edited by Jamexing, Sat, 12 Aug 2006 16:55.

Hmm, my old Severe 4WD defeciency post was kinda fun with you aboard.

Anyway, it's always better to inform oneself technically them post blind opinions that all too often pop up.

Clearification accepted. Glad you choose reason over silly flaming antics. Wish more posters were like this.

Just flag up any inadvertant errors I made and I'm happy to rectufy them. I've nothing against CONSTRUCTIVE critism. Thank you Tristan.

Gee, why would I want to carry rocketfuel oxidizer on my car...

I win

[/quote]

BTW, I'm surpsrised and disappointed by our little statement up there. Win what? I wasn't argueing with you. And FYI, I do read posts and I can't believ how much crap gets ont o a thread. Trsitan, I thought you were one of the smarter, better informed and more reasonable ones.

That's one way to use it, as an intercooler like mechanism. Or you could add much more O2 into the air equation and add just enough fuel to compensate and the result, direct power gains! Great until it stuff your engine up.

Thanks for pointing out my error, tristan. N2O is what I meant. As N2O is 33% O2 by volume, this is much greater than the 20% or so normal air gives. The superior partial pressure alone should explain why nitrous use leads t omore power. Thus, bigger bang per cylinder volume. FYI, NO2 is used as an oxidizer for rockets. Since combustion or detonation requires the presence of O2, fuel and heat, N2O on board a car is definitely extra danger, since it completes one more component of the fire triangle...

Even if the A/F ratio was perfectly controlled by an excellent microprocessor control system, the bursty jolts of extra power won't do mechanical components many favours. Can't believe how many ricers would blow up their poorly setup NOS systems.

I understand that your stated application of NOS is valid in professional racing, tristan, but as it's suggested in this thread, N2O would be used to directly increase power to generate a push to pass mechanism. That's why my post is still valid.

Just try to compare the performance of your all-season OEMs with a soft compound gravel tyre of similiar size and you'll see why the hybrid is faster than the normals.

As explained by m374llic4, a Monte Carlo styled tight and twisty track is exactly what will satisfied both serious rally racers and drifters. As m374llic4 explianed, just make it a round the mountain track so that we still end up at the same point as ths start. Then we won't need this thread and everyone would be happy.

Last edited by Jamexing, Sat, 12 Aug 2006 16:02.

Wow, I've seen a remarkably large number of personal attacks, but this N2O thread takes the cake. That's one reason I've not joined this forum until I've played LFS for months.

Let me explain WHY N2O is so good for detonating engines. It's called LEAN OUT. Too much N2O for a given fuel intake rate is basically too much O2 for the given fuel, causing massive detonation. If it wasn't for sophisticated digital engine systems of today, a NOS boost system would be terribly unreliable, if not deadly. Since N2O is an oxidyzer, it allows more fuel to be burnt for a given cylinder volume, since higher O2 partial pressure of N2O allows this.

More power! Great , right? Not quite. If an engine wasn't adequately prepared for the gneration of much greater than normal power, it's no surprise that parts get overstressed and gudgeons pins start to break, etc. Try fitting a NOS booster to your Toyota Echo engine that's been turbocharged to make 50% greater than stock power with no internal strengthening. If any significant boost is to be obtained (such as over 50% as seen in F&F or NFS:U), be prepared for a petrol fueled grenade.

So before someone says I have no idea what I'm taling about, I dare you to contradict my above explainations valid scientific arguments. I thought we were simulation racers, not NFS:U style neanderthals. illepall

Last edited by Jamexing, Sat, 12 Aug 2006 16:43.

There's actually a simple way to make everyone happy. Just a a Monte Carlo WRC stage style circuit and problem solved for all people.

BTW, I refuse to vote because the choices aren't exactly neutral to all parties.

If LFS is a NFS:U race game, NOS is fine. But LFS is not about illegal racing. It's about professional style racing simulation. Why this NOS madness?

IRL, NOS can be EXTREMLY dangerous. It's a very potent oxidizer. Why would you want this in a race car and risk causing MASSIVE explosions(especially if the 2 somehow mix)? I thought we're racers, not SUICIDE BOMBERS. Yes, this is certainly against all safety concerns prevailing in current motorsports.

Problems with NOS far outweigh its benefits. Assuming all racers are equivilantly skilled and tactically competent, then the winner would be determined by the size of your NOS tank. Even so, NOS is still notorious for blowing engines up or severely shortening their lifespans due to reasons ranging for moverstressing internals (too much power) to poor adjustments (detonation). Why degenrate racing to this meaningless crap? I thought we're racers, not ricers with massive subwoofers and girlfriends to match.

Please, this NOS madness has gone on long enough. I'm amazed that this NOD thread has survived THIS long. And I get shot down for complainng about poor RB4 performance in my old 4WD related thread. AMAZING.

Just retain the setup tables or whatever they are called working in their current state. Only the SAVED setups need to be track specific. Now we have an ideal solution.

One way to organise setups optimally is to simply make the track specific. For instance, setups made for driving at Ashton GP should only be accsessible whilst the circuit is actually chosen. That will seriously reduce the clutter and improve organisation.

Oh, by the way, I'm also glad I'm not the only one to see how unrealistic and unfair intra-class imbalace severely affects racing and thus overall gamplay. Thanks Nick II for raising an obvious issue that has remained relatively neglacted.

Last edited by Jamexing, Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:51.

For everyone's information, please read the Severe 4WD defeciency in LFS thread I started some time ago. To be absolutely truthful, static gear ratios can only make things worse, sice it unfairly penalizes both the RB4 and XR GTT as they both lack the required powerbands to make them perform as well as they should, a close ratio set is used, which cannot be made with only 5 gears and without ridiculously low top speeds or poor start performance. No, a gearbox cannot magically even all cars out. Beside, road cars modified for track days do have their gear ratios changed(usually to close ratios) IRL, so fixing the gearbox is a moot point.

Good try, but this suggestion is a vast oversimplification of the TBO classs imbalance issue. For instance, the RB4 is undertired for the chassis's potential. Both RB4 and XR GTT could use a few extra bhp.

And to be absolutely honest, the TBO class is already a bit slow for the class(except of course the invincible FXO ). All too many games make the mistake of excessively nerfing things. As an example, real life Lancer Evolutions have significantly better acceleration than the RB4 even though its power to weight ratio is slightly lower. A classic powerband problem.

Last edited by Jamexing, Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:50.

Blackwood GT and Blackwood International are both absolutely brilliant designs. I REALLY wish the developers would actually make those 2 versions of Blackwood. Fast yet technical, exactly what a real dedicated racetrack should be. That switchback at the end of the 2nd major straight of Blacwood International would be an exhileraing echnical challenge.

Those 2 designs are:
(a) Long and fast enough for the REAL race cars (GTRs, FV8, BF1)
(b) Technical enough to eliminae boredom.

Good idea, but not applicable unless LFS allows detailed RL style engine tuning (ignition timing, cam profiles, etc). Last thing we need is a lottery blowup.

My advice:

Go test drive a real Lancer Evolution at a mountain pass. Then you'll know what you all (and LFS) are missing.

Last edited by Jamexing, Sun, 6 Aug 2006 08:47.

If you're going to ad a pickup truck to LFS, why not add a rally prepared Pajero, a car of real rally pedigree, and have some REAL rally fun? Selectable 4WD with center diff lock, rear LSD with potential for front fiment of an LSD, fully independant suspension..... Ideal marathon rallycar.