Ahh I see, this is not a bug and it is not a ditch that causes it. It’s just that you happened to cross a sudden surface camber angle variation with the wrong line because of the sudden oversteer that the rear tire caused, touching the grass.

In that situation all the weight and downforce of the rear end of the car, loads just one rear tire and here this happens to be the outside already heavily loaded one, hence the extreme deformation. Also the hole car's momentum helped in order to generate this extreme vertical force when the rear left suspension hit it's bump stop.
http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... mp;stc=1&d=1245094521

I took some screenshots from ky oval to give you an easier example of the same case
http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... id=86552&d=1245094464
http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... id=86553&d=1245094464



The extreme lateral force that this tire generates falls in another category of tire load sensitivity inaccuracies. In LFS no mater how heavily you load a tire it will produce more and more grip. It might not be linear more_load -> more_traction which would be completely wrong but it is not as far from that as it should.

Last edited by kaynd, Mon 15 Jun 2009, 19:42.

You have attached the wrong replay.
Can’t really say from the photo shat could cause it. It pretty much seems like a flat tire to me which makes it even more strange if the tire is not blown, because I have never sheen a normally inflated tire deform that much just by cornering force even if it is 5G.

But then it's impossible to blow a tire after just one lap racing, so :eye-poppi

Do you ever start with less than 3000rpm in a race? Anyway this depends on the engine's powercurve, if you are talking about a diesel, 3K is considered high rpm but we are talking about most LFS cars here.

Quote from kaynd :

Of course the turbo will not spool to it's 100%

And I don't disagree with that. I just justified why you get even less than that low pressure the turbo is supposed to produce in low rpm when accelerating - without a constant load.
(All the dyno methods I have seen mentioned here do not introduce the use of brakes, hence the inaccuracy that Bob is referring to, in low rpm)

Anyway this is meaningless because no one cares about what the engine does in those lazy rpm in a race sim.

Quote from jaxx751 :

Isn't that the point of how turbos work? As they spool they create torque. I would just powerbrake to be honest, if you're not at the minimum RPM for the turbo to be spooled 100% that's not really that close to shift points.

I think Bob is talking about turbo lag. Of course the turbo will not spool to it's 100% at low rpms but with the lag LFS turbos have, it will not be able to spool fast enough to produce the power it was supposed to in e.g. 2500rpm, when accelerating even with a single tall gear at the dragstrip.
You need a constant load in constant rpm to do this, which can't be achieved by just accelerating the car.

Anyway even if low rpm power is not that accurate at the graph, I think this doesn't matter that much because no one is using below 4000rpm when racing. So why bother?

Quote from jaxx751 :

Though I have started to think that in the FZR power falls off at upper RPMs and a lower shift point might be better.

I have found out long time ago and it is still the same way. That FZR's powercurve is quite flat up there... there is not much power variation between 7500 and 8500rpm. And this is logical considering the enormous powerband for a NA motor... (peac torque @ 5250rpm - peak power @ 8100)
Exactly the opposite from what you expect also happens to the turbocharged GTR cars where the powerband is much narrower. (peak torque @ 4800rpm - peak power @ 6300rpm)
It's not realy that unexpected for the power to drop off sustansialy after peak power for a turbocharged car, but this happens to be so profound at LFS turbocharged GTRs that makes them have a great disadvantage compared to FZR especially on fast tracks.
(I am speaking from experience being a member of the only team that didn't use the FZR in MoE GT2 class οf the last season. We where struggling to keep up in straights using the barely minimum downforce settings while FZRs drove with plenty of it despite having 9HP less due to the GT2 class restrictions. (!) )

Last edited by kaynd, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 13:32.

Didn’t notice that comment on the first post earlier. (talking about careful reading eh? )

Do you care posting the setup you are using? Even with default, which suffers from instability during lateral weight transfers as most LFS default setups do, I can’t see what you are referring to.
Can you separate faint oversteer from power oversteer? The XRG shows hardly any power overtseer even in second gear. Only when exceeding it’s lateral acceleration limits it will loose the back end under full throttle and will continue sliding mainly because of it’s momentum and not because of it’s power.

If the AC Cobra in GTL shows that little power oversteer and is affected much less by weight transfers, then the GTL’s model is unrealistically easy to drive…

You can find many of those WR or similar setups in these two sites.

http://www.setupgrid.net/
http://setupfield.teaminferno.hu/

I didn’t mean to be rude. You didn’t seem give any attention to many opinions stating the really obvious.
The feedback forces you get are relevant with the force you, as a driver, apply to the wheel.
If you are not a machine that copies the exact hand movements of the driver on the replay, then the forces you will get would be completely inaccurate and irrelevant to what you could get if you drove in the same conditions.
I am not going to continue arguing on this. If you can’t get it, I will not make you get it.

read and try to understand

Quote from GabbO :

What would it help if the wheel is turning from itself? The wheels react like this cause you force them to be in that certain place they are, not letting them naturally straighten out in a corner for example. If you don't apply the same forces yourself, the forces you get are pretty much meaningless.

As logitekg25 already said, brake force is usually limited setupwise so the tires won't lock in almost any condition.
As for the corner exit oversteer while increasing the throttle, (Byku allready said this) it's just the violent transition from push understeer to "pull" oversteer that the locked diff produces while going from braking to accelerating not in a smooth or optimal way according to the car's full traction capabilities. (e.g. If you drive the XFG utilizing the full front tire's limit, it most likely won't oversteer when you start accelerating)

Quote from tristancliffe :

Yup. I think the quick setups are countering FWD understeer with a lot of rear stiffness to increase load transfer at the rear and cause oversteer. It works in real life too - see how many FWD cars pick up the inside rear wheel.

Actualy if you take a look at LFS FWD setups you will see exactly the oposite.
For the reasons I have allready mentioned here , here , here and in other posts that I don't bother posting here because they are all referring to the same problem described in more words.

Last edited by kaynd, Wed 10 Jun 2009, 19:27.

Nice save but I think you are pushing it a bit too hard if this is your first track experience with this car.
Try to stay in limits for a couple of laps before you start drifting.

Quote from Hallen :

But again, that's just a guess given the pictures and data that we have.

btw this test is in the BMI vol 18 Enduro challenge.
http://www.bestmotoringvideo.com/package/vol18.html

It is old enough to be really cheep at various online stores… or just not be a big sin to find it by other means (e.g borowing it )
and that if you care about seeing how the cars where driven, helping your judgment.

Congratulations for the 5 years of top notch racing to all Mercury guys. The closure of model teams like Mercury is indeed sad but it didn’t come as a surprise for me and for many others, simply because more or less anyone can feel this lack of motivation from time to time. As the time passes this happens more often till a point when it becomes terminal. Real word changing conditions and priorities is one part and the almost stationary state of LFS the past 3 years is the other part of this problem’s source.
Anyway this is normal. We shall only hope for better things to come and spend as much energy as we can in activities that are most satisfactory.

If you can spend close to 300euros then I think that Dell 2209WA is a secure choice. (be careful 2209WA has a eIPS panel, 2209W has a TN panel)

Have a look at digital versus. Its a really nice site for reviews in general. Their monitor tests are short on words but produce some clear- "easy to understand and judge by your own" results.
eg http://www.digitalversus.com/article-358-4862-88.html

on the other hand I am going for the Iiyama prolite B2206WS.
http://www.digitalversus.com/article-358-5093-50.html
It is as good as a TN panel can get and close to my ~200 euros budget.

Spend some time in the "Products Face-Offs" -> screens section. You will find even more detailed info there about many tft's

And trust me... monitors have almost nothing to do with brands... any brand produces from time to time some bad and some good monitors. You have to look for specific models and types.

Last edited by kaynd, Sun 17 May 2009, 22:22.

Quote from Matrixi :

It depends.

There are people (not mentioning any names) who play LFS only and just for the sake of racing. People in this group aren't really that interested in the hardcore realism of LFS, as they might just use some old arcadey steering wheels (or mice/joysticks and what not) and even custom/chase cameras to gain that little bit of advantage in their races. This group of people can accept the LFS development pace just fine as is, as they don't really care about anything else but the racing aspect. They recycle the available content over and over, without getting tired of it. They find the racing part most exciting, the realism is just a fun side effect.

The other group of people, I think are in it for the car simulation enthusiasm. This group isn't all that dedicated for just that pure racing sensation, but more of trying to feel the car and the physics around it while trying to drive as close as possible as in real life. Racing is still important for this group, but they aren't interested in maximizing their racing efficiency with unrealistic cameras and clutch macros. I think this group will also get bored of LFS much sooner than the "racing is all that matters" -group as they depend more on the content and less on how high standings they get in their races. Variety of cars and tracks is the key for this group. They find the realism most fun, good racing is just the side effect.

It all boils down to which option each group finds more fun personally.

There are not only 2 groups of people. Everyone has his own preferances.

Don’t fall in the same mistake categorizing peoples in the same way others do for drifters.
You seem to “screen” anyone who plays LFS only and just for the sake of racing as the type of person who could do anything in order to gain an unrealistic advantage.

One can be satisfied, in a way, by the current physics as far as racing is concerned, (actualy nearly all real world driving-racing-general car controll principles still apply in LFS regardless the flaws) never get bored as long as there is healthy racing competition out there, still be aware of the physics flaws and looking forward for improvements, (tyres in LFS need improovements in many other aspects than just heating) and after all respect that this is a project of 3 peoples who have chosen to work that way.
Yeah class balancing issues and the inaccurate tire load sensitivity model bothers me a lot. But that’s all. It just bothers me and puts me off. If I am tired I just go and play something else. It’s a better thing to do than just trying to categorize people and basically insult anyone who believes something different than me.

This depends on the suspension design of each car.
I used to aim for perfectly horizontal sitting cars, judging by the damping graphs but I found out this is meaningless if the suspension kinematics are not exactly the same in both front and rear axle.
Now I alter it mainly by feel or trying to approximately bring both front and rear roll centres to close levels.

Yes this makes sense

Quote from NightShift :

BTW is it correct to use the 'Remaining travel' figure when tuning the rake angle?

I don't realy understand what you mean by "rake angle".
But anyway I have seen that usualy the graphs showing the remaining suspention travel, reach the bottom a bit earlyer than what happens in LFS, espesialy if we talk about the remaining travel afected by roll angles. This might have to do with some suspention kinematics that as Bob has said, he hasn't modeld yet.

I don’t quite get how exactly stiffen and soften buttons work ether, except from the obvious.

As for the level ride optimized frequency differences between fron and rear, usually they are far from being ideal for handling especially if they are tuned for low speeds. (Try increasing the 108km/h or 30m/s vehicle speed from the “live settings” and recalculate the level ride frequencies.) But this level ride optimization might help you if you have to tune your setup in order to be as stable as possible hitting a bump in a certain-narrow speed range. (Also damping affects spring frequencies so you have to keep this in mind while tuning)
You always have to compromise things anyway.

Have a look here.
http://www.optimumg.com/OptimumGWebSite/Others/TechTips.html
It is mentioned in Springs & Dampers I

Quote from Bob Smith :

The original damping graph was a mismash of the drop and live graphs, but when I fixed it to be just a drop, someone said the live part was actually useful, which is why I added it back in as a separate option. I'm glad others are finding it useful too.

Thanks for bringing back this feature keep up the great work.

Also optimized frequencies for level ride, depending on vehicle speed is really useful (it was for me anyway, now I deal with that mainly by damping espesialy if I don't want to alter greatly the spring frequencies). For a long time I did this calculations by hand. thank you thank you thank you . . . (the known flash)

Last edited by kaynd, Thu 30 Apr 2009, 16:50.

Check your fps. I had the same problem when fps did drop below 30.
If that’s the case, try a 16bit resolution before the dropping of any other setting.