I really really hope the somehow ridiculous "full throttle start = best start" thing will be fixed before a free start is given. If there are free starts with reaction times on the signal, nobody will notice anymore that there is still something wrong about tires in my oppinion.
I hope both features, a tire fix AND free starts, will make it in the final version of S2 ;-)
I hope both features, a tire fix AND free starts, will make it in the final version of S2 ;-)
The full throttle thing is something about partly unfinished/wrong tire physics and I really really really hope it will be fixed earlier than the start system.
When there are free starts in the future, nobody will notice this "bug" anymore, because there will be interessting starts with the different reaction times on the signal.
So this tire physics bug should be corrected and THEN also a free start should be possible ... this would be great for S2 beta/final ...
When there are free starts in the future, nobody will notice this "bug" anymore, because there will be interessting starts with the different reaction times on the signal.
So this tire physics bug should be corrected and THEN also a free start should be possible ... this would be great for S2 beta/final ...
Sorry.
My guess ... this release will be present for at least 1 year physicswise. (since april) Propably there will be a patch V next year with very very minor changes in this department like the new speedo. Most of the stuff will be tiny small details like perhaps a better replay control, an auto patcher, Vista compatiblity, translation for klingons ...
And if LFSTweak isn't compatible to Patch V then it wouldn't matter, because nothing is done physicswise at the moment as far as I know. It wouldn't be really bad if you can't rewind your replay, would it?
For me this is the most stable time at the important parts of the game itself. Perhabs there will be some redone Tracks or a new one, but I wouldn't bet.
S2 for Xmas '07 or '08?
Ok I have to be more precise. I don't talk about Rally or any 4WD car at all ... and I am not talking about a short oversteer with a RWD car.
I am talking about a very very very long controlled drift like you can do it around the skidpad. I can drift around the skidpad round after round without aborting the drift. I can even get it nearly to destroy the tires without leaving my drift ... so I am talking about 1 Minute of drifting around with a RWD car
In rFactor for example you can drift excellent with AWD cars. But its nearly impossible with RWD cars.
I didn't play GT Legends a lot yet. But I bet you couldn't drift several rounds on a skidpad if there was one. Its something about the ISI engine I guess. I really really hope they fix it some day, because some parts of the driving experience are in my oppionion better than in LFS. It has sometimes some strange grip ...
I am talking about a very very very long controlled drift like you can do it around the skidpad. I can drift around the skidpad round after round without aborting the drift. I can even get it nearly to destroy the tires without leaving my drift ... so I am talking about 1 Minute of drifting around with a RWD car
In rFactor for example you can drift excellent with AWD cars. But its nearly impossible with RWD cars.
I didn't play GT Legends a lot yet. But I bet you couldn't drift several rounds on a skidpad if there was one. Its something about the ISI engine I guess. I really really hope they fix it some day, because some parts of the driving experience are in my oppionion better than in LFS. It has sometimes some strange grip ...
@deggis : I heard of that mod and I will give it a try for sure ... sounds pretty good.
@eric : i think understeer or oversteer depend a lot on the setup. Most setups are friendly towards driver mistakes as it is better for long races.
FF :
Could be the fault of the steering wheels. This way or that way FF isn't what I expect FF to be all in all. And I am not sure if the G25 is that much better ... but for sure a little bit better with those 2 FF engines ...
@eric : i think understeer or oversteer depend a lot on the setup. Most setups are friendly towards driver mistakes as it is better for long races.
FF :
Could be the fault of the steering wheels. This way or that way FF isn't what I expect FF to be all in all. And I am not sure if the G25 is that much better ... but for sure a little bit better with those 2 FF engines ...
@xaotik : I tried several settings. If I tone down the FF the wheel is even slower ...
It's more a general thing. I know how a real car feels at the limit of its grip and what a real steering wheel tells me. And I can't find that in the FF on a wheel. I have 2 FF wheels: the Microsoft Sidewinder FF and the Logitech Driving Force Pro.
It depends on the angle of slide, if the wheel catches the slide itself. If it is a slide with high angle, you'll notice that the wheel is to slow. Toning down FF even makes it worse ...
If you turn on the 900° Mode of the DFP you'll notice it even more. The FF wheels can only catch slides, because they are in a much smaller mode than a real life steering wheel. Most cars have over 1000° ... and even street sport cars don't have less as 900° usually.
But in LFS most FF wheels are used with 270° oder 360° or something like that. Therefore the wheel doesn't have to go a long way to catch a very small slide but even then it can't catch a higher slide like a real wheel could do perhaps.
I get a much better feeling for the cars without using those FF effects. It is a difference between LFS and the ISI FF, but both aren't doing it for me If using the 900° Mode its even more difficult to catch slides than without any FF, because you have to spin the wheel faster than the engine can do it and therefore spin against the resistance of the engine somehow.
It's also much better to know how to control a slide without this FF. Because if you'll notice it through the FF of your wheel it is already to late. You are already sliding and losing time ... And the artificial FF in games is even slower than a real FF through your whole body (mostly bottom) would be. If you know how to push the car without sliding out before sliding, then you are faster. And you learn that a lot better than with FF in my oppinion.
It's more a general thing. I know how a real car feels at the limit of its grip and what a real steering wheel tells me. And I can't find that in the FF on a wheel. I have 2 FF wheels: the Microsoft Sidewinder FF and the Logitech Driving Force Pro.
It depends on the angle of slide, if the wheel catches the slide itself. If it is a slide with high angle, you'll notice that the wheel is to slow. Toning down FF even makes it worse ...
If you turn on the 900° Mode of the DFP you'll notice it even more. The FF wheels can only catch slides, because they are in a much smaller mode than a real life steering wheel. Most cars have over 1000° ... and even street sport cars don't have less as 900° usually.
But in LFS most FF wheels are used with 270° oder 360° or something like that. Therefore the wheel doesn't have to go a long way to catch a very small slide but even then it can't catch a higher slide like a real wheel could do perhaps.
I get a much better feeling for the cars without using those FF effects. It is a difference between LFS and the ISI FF, but both aren't doing it for me
If using the 900° Mode its even more difficult to catch slides than without any FF, because you have to spin the wheel faster than the engine can do it and therefore spin against the resistance of the engine somehow.It's also much better to know how to control a slide without this FF. Because if you'll notice it through the FF of your wheel it is already to late. You are already sliding and losing time ... And the artificial FF in games is even slower than a real FF through your whole body (mostly bottom) would be. If you know how to push the car without sliding out before sliding, then you are faster. And you learn that a lot better than with FF in my oppinion.
Last edited by RIP2004, .
Hi there.
Good review all in all for a LFS fanboy
1) As you said a matter of taste. But featurewise you can't deny that GTR2 looks better and I think that's for most people, because there are a lot details , you won't find in LFS.
But I know what you are talking about when saying a bit too saturated.
2) I really would like to understand what is bad about these sampled noises except, they won't simulate anything like a partly damaged engine, which LFS doesn't do too at the moment.
I like the sound in full throttle, in no throttle but also in between them. It just sounds awesome to accelerate all the way up and I don't think its really bad when going a bit off the throttle.
Perhaps these "in-between" sounds aren't perfect or as realistic as reality, but the engine sounds better all the way in comparison to LFS.
One thing about it is perhaps a bit more latency between your foot when modulating the throttle and the sound/engine reaction in comparison to LFS. But I personally think that is one very unrealistic point about LFS. The throttle pedal seems to be disconnected from any kind of engine and just connected to your revmeter. It just reacts instantly. There doesn't seem to be any mass in between. Big Engines like the one in GTR have some mass to get moving. They will react very soon but not instantly. Engine has to fire up and start reving and won't be like in LFS.
Perhaps some cart engines are as instantly as the biggest engines in LFS ...
I think the truth is perhaps in between those in terms of reaction. In terms of pure sound it is way more like GTR2
The system of LFS may be superior in the year 3000, but it will be very very hard to simulate the sound as good as those samples get at the moment and we are comparing at the moment.
3) Nice explanation. I think its more like GTR2 as full throttle starts with really really much wheelspin in LFS don't really differ much from trying to modulate your throttle. And I fear somehow that it won't be fixed, because this is hidden, if there will be free starts in LFS. Reaction time does have a big influence. Perhaps 70% ... but there is still a lot of difference between someone with throttle control and someone without. And this isn't really simulated in LFS yet somehow.
I hope LFS will be like GTR2 in this topic somewhere in the future.
BUT as you said there are no flat spots in GTR2. I didn't get any too. This is better in LFS ...
4) Well this is the biggest topic somehow. I hope you used the original physics and no mod, because the mods just try to make it more difficult but take a lot of realism away in my oppinion.
More difficult is NOT more realistic. You'll see a comparable development in LFS after the latest physics patch.
Those cars aren't very difficult to move fast but away from the limit. They should be this way because they do very long races and not only absolute professionals drive these.
But at the limit it is damn hard to drive those. It isn't really more easy to be fast than in LFS with GTR cars ...
I know this bug you are talking about. This bug is in every single ISI engined racing game. At certain drift angles physics seems to give up. This is very bad for street cars, as you can't drift them as LFS. In fact I know of no game where you can drift cars like you can do in LFS.
BUT if you are driving seriously you won't try to get to that angle. Those are racing cars with slicks and they aren't done for stable drifts ... if you want to be fast you avoid any kinds of drifts.
You will get somehow some small drifts but in this area physics still work. You can catch the car by counter-steering anytime. If you get past 45° or so it will be nearly impossible. There would be only a small chance without that bug as steering lock is at 20° and those slicks really aren't slow getting from grip to slide ...
In GTR2 there is no real chance of rescuing the car. But as I said it doesn't matter that much as you shouldn't get there if driving careful and most of the times you wouldn't rescue the car anyway in this situation... with LFS or without LFS physics.
So this bug doesn't really bug me and most of people enjoying serious races instead of trying to drift around the track *g*
I hate this bug in rFactor, but I don't notice it in GTR2 at all, also he is there for sure.
Perhaps it was exxagerated if you were using some kind of "reality mod", which just lowers the grip level of tyres. Because then you get faster to the angle of no return. With standard physics you will rescue the car exactly as in LFS by countersteering in most of the situations.
5) No addition here.
6) I can't say to much here as I hate force feedback. It is very very very very artificial in all of the games including LFS. In LFS it is somehow a bit better but way to bad to use it. I tried it once for fun. It is really fun but has nothing to do with the feedback you get from a real car at the limit. There was even some ridiculous bug of the steering wheel bouncing left-right-left-right just standing on a straight without touching it.
illepall
It just lowers precision of steering a lot. In real life the car will steer for you in a drift. You just have to get your hands away from it. In LFS it tries to do that, as FF is really calculated. But the FF wheels are WAY WAY to slow to do it as it is going on in real life.
So precise steering with some FF effects is more difficult in most cases than without and no way realistic.
In order to get it realistic there should be at least 6 FF engines which are able to move the wheel about 10 times as fast as now (braking your finger if you don't pay attention) and a lot more has to be calculated by LFS. No steering wheel in the world will go left-right-left-right ... just standing with the car
I don't know if it is something missing in the calculations or just the very low resolution of ground affecting the FF.
Both FF effects are fun, but I won't really take them in to simulation itself.
7) Damage is way better in GTR2. It doesn't look as good as in LFS in low speed crashs, but it does effect racing whereas in LFS its more like an graphical gimmick. Ok, there could be some sort of damaging to the suspension but it never will end your race. Drive back to the pits as you can do always and repair it in 10 seconds.
In GTR2 if you crash in the wall it can end your race. Crashing with over 100 kph may rip your wheels off or destroy the engine completly. Damage in the front will make your car understeer more, damage in the back may lead to more oversteer. Suspension can be destroyed to. But you won't continue driving as you do in LFS.
Engines can blow up and will if you are shifting wrong or have to much risk in your setup (rev limiter high, cooling down ...)
So here GTR2 is much more of a simulation. Ok, it doesn't simulate the look of crashs as good as LFS in low speed crashs, but it simulates the effects on your car much more.
LFS lacks too in optics if it gets to high speed crashs. Crash at over 200 kph in the wall and it will look like 30 kph and will have the effects on the car as 10 kph. You can see immediately, that damage is far away from getting finished in LFS. Try the BMW for example Crash with over 300 DOES look different. There both games are very similar ...
8) I will add something to multiplayer. I played a lot of races. There are some unpretty bugs sometimes. Cars can fall through the earth. But most of the races did work really good. Netcode is good enough to allow very close long racing and no CTD or 1FPS bug in masses anymore ...
But the netcode isn't as good as in rFactor or LFS. You won't notice the difference with good servers and racing against people with good connections. But you will notice it immediately with bad servers and low bandwidth ... there the result is much better in LFS or rFactor.
It seems that the bugs above are fixable. The netcode won't improve I think. So all people racing should have a good connection and the server should be a proper one. But then there can be very nice races with 25 people at the same time ... so netcode is good enough but could be better.
I hope Simbin will fix those irritating bugs, that occur sometimes with their first patch. We'll see ...
Good review all in all for a LFS fanboy
1) As you said a matter of taste. But featurewise you can't deny that GTR2 looks better and I think that's for most people, because there are a lot details , you won't find in LFS.
But I know what you are talking about when saying a bit too saturated.
2) I really would like to understand what is bad about these sampled noises except, they won't simulate anything like a partly damaged engine, which LFS doesn't do too at the moment.
I like the sound in full throttle, in no throttle but also in between them. It just sounds awesome to accelerate all the way up and I don't think its really bad when going a bit off the throttle.
Perhaps these "in-between" sounds aren't perfect or as realistic as reality, but the engine sounds better all the way in comparison to LFS.
One thing about it is perhaps a bit more latency between your foot when modulating the throttle and the sound/engine reaction in comparison to LFS. But I personally think that is one very unrealistic point about LFS. The throttle pedal seems to be disconnected from any kind of engine and just connected to your revmeter. It just reacts instantly. There doesn't seem to be any mass in between. Big Engines like the one in GTR have some mass to get moving. They will react very soon but not instantly. Engine has to fire up and start reving and won't be like in LFS.
Perhaps some cart engines are as instantly as the biggest engines in LFS ...
I think the truth is perhaps in between those in terms of reaction. In terms of pure sound it is way more like GTR2
The system of LFS may be superior in the year 3000, but it will be very very hard to simulate the sound as good as those samples get at the moment and we are comparing at the moment.
3) Nice explanation. I think its more like GTR2 as full throttle starts with really really much wheelspin in LFS don't really differ much from trying to modulate your throttle. And I fear somehow that it won't be fixed, because this is hidden, if there will be free starts in LFS. Reaction time does have a big influence. Perhaps 70% ... but there is still a lot of difference between someone with throttle control and someone without. And this isn't really simulated in LFS yet somehow.
I hope LFS will be like GTR2 in this topic somewhere in the future.
BUT as you said there are no flat spots in GTR2. I didn't get any too. This is better in LFS ...
4) Well this is the biggest topic somehow. I hope you used the original physics and no mod, because the mods just try to make it more difficult but take a lot of realism away in my oppinion.
More difficult is NOT more realistic. You'll see a comparable development in LFS after the latest physics patch.
Those cars aren't very difficult to move fast but away from the limit. They should be this way because they do very long races and not only absolute professionals drive these.
But at the limit it is damn hard to drive those. It isn't really more easy to be fast than in LFS with GTR cars ...
I know this bug you are talking about. This bug is in every single ISI engined racing game. At certain drift angles physics seems to give up. This is very bad for street cars, as you can't drift them as LFS. In fact I know of no game where you can drift cars like you can do in LFS.
BUT if you are driving seriously you won't try to get to that angle. Those are racing cars with slicks and they aren't done for stable drifts ... if you want to be fast you avoid any kinds of drifts.
You will get somehow some small drifts but in this area physics still work. You can catch the car by counter-steering anytime. If you get past 45° or so it will be nearly impossible. There would be only a small chance without that bug as steering lock is at 20° and those slicks really aren't slow getting from grip to slide ...
In GTR2 there is no real chance of rescuing the car. But as I said it doesn't matter that much as you shouldn't get there if driving careful and most of the times you wouldn't rescue the car anyway in this situation... with LFS or without LFS physics.
So this bug doesn't really bug me and most of people enjoying serious races instead of trying to drift around the track *g*
I hate this bug in rFactor, but I don't notice it in GTR2 at all, also he is there for sure.
Perhaps it was exxagerated if you were using some kind of "reality mod", which just lowers the grip level of tyres. Because then you get faster to the angle of no return. With standard physics you will rescue the car exactly as in LFS by countersteering in most of the situations.
5) No addition here.
6) I can't say to much here as I hate force feedback. It is very very very very artificial in all of the games including LFS. In LFS it is somehow a bit better but way to bad to use it. I tried it once for fun. It is really fun but has nothing to do with the feedback you get from a real car at the limit. There was even some ridiculous bug of the steering wheel bouncing left-right-left-right just standing on a straight without touching it.
illepallIt just lowers precision of steering a lot. In real life the car will steer for you in a drift. You just have to get your hands away from it. In LFS it tries to do that, as FF is really calculated. But the FF wheels are WAY WAY to slow to do it as it is going on in real life.
So precise steering with some FF effects is more difficult in most cases than without and no way realistic.
In order to get it realistic there should be at least 6 FF engines which are able to move the wheel about 10 times as fast as now (braking your finger if you don't pay attention) and a lot more has to be calculated by LFS. No steering wheel in the world will go left-right-left-right ... just standing with the car
I don't know if it is something missing in the calculations or just the very low resolution of ground affecting the FF.
Both FF effects are fun, but I won't really take them in to simulation itself.
7) Damage is way better in GTR2. It doesn't look as good as in LFS in low speed crashs, but it does effect racing whereas in LFS its more like an graphical gimmick. Ok, there could be some sort of damaging to the suspension but it never will end your race. Drive back to the pits as you can do always and repair it in 10 seconds.
In GTR2 if you crash in the wall it can end your race. Crashing with over 100 kph may rip your wheels off or destroy the engine completly. Damage in the front will make your car understeer more, damage in the back may lead to more oversteer. Suspension can be destroyed to. But you won't continue driving as you do in LFS.
Engines can blow up and will if you are shifting wrong or have to much risk in your setup (rev limiter high, cooling down ...)
So here GTR2 is much more of a simulation. Ok, it doesn't simulate the look of crashs as good as LFS in low speed crashs, but it simulates the effects on your car much more.
LFS lacks too in optics if it gets to high speed crashs. Crash at over 200 kph in the wall and it will look like 30 kph and will have the effects on the car as 10 kph. You can see immediately, that damage is far away from getting finished in LFS. Try the BMW for example
Crash with over 300 DOES look different. There both games are very similar ... 8) I will add something to multiplayer. I played a lot of races. There are some unpretty bugs sometimes. Cars can fall through the earth. But most of the races did work really good. Netcode is good enough to allow very close long racing and no CTD or 1FPS bug in masses anymore ...
But the netcode isn't as good as in rFactor or LFS. You won't notice the difference with good servers and racing against people with good connections. But you will notice it immediately with bad servers and low bandwidth ... there the result is much better in LFS or rFactor.
It seems that the bugs above are fixable. The netcode won't improve I think. So all people racing should have a good connection and the server should be a proper one. But then there can be very nice races with 25 people at the same time ... so netcode is good enough but could be better.
I hope Simbin will fix those irritating bugs, that occur sometimes with their first patch. We'll see ...
Last edited by RIP2004, .
@woz :
Yep. I know, because I drive a manual car IRL. A clutch is useful for a good start. But it can be done too with a strong automatic car with just one pedal.
Like an AMG Mercedes ... you can control the wheelspin with the throttle a bit and get a better start.
It doesn't change the fact, that it seems impossible to get a real advantage by throttle control. I did a few test runs on the drag racing track and all I got was 0,05s one out of ten times ... it should be a visible advantage. At least one car length or so and not just 0,05s on 400m ...
Try it yourself. Use automatic as help, because then you get the exact same gear changes and the only difference is the throttle control. You won't get really better times in all the cars, which you can start full throttle. The formula 1 car does make a difference, because it gets unstable full throttle and has a traction control.
But all the other slick or road cars are nearly best started with full throttle if you don't change the setup.
The one thing that stays in my mind is, that it has something to do with the tyre temperature perhabs. At the start they are always cold. Perhabs full throttle is as good in LFS because tyres get faster on temperature ... have to test that out with telemetry ...
Yep. I know, because I drive a manual car IRL. A clutch is useful for a good start. But it can be done too with a strong automatic car with just one pedal.
Like an AMG Mercedes ... you can control the wheelspin with the throttle a bit and get a better start.
It doesn't change the fact, that it seems impossible to get a real advantage by throttle control. I did a few test runs on the drag racing track and all I got was 0,05s one out of ten times ... it should be a visible advantage. At least one car length or so and not just 0,05s on 400m ...
Try it yourself. Use automatic as help, because then you get the exact same gear changes and the only difference is the throttle control. You won't get really better times in all the cars, which you can start full throttle. The formula 1 car does make a difference, because it gets unstable full throttle and has a traction control.
But all the other slick or road cars are nearly best started with full throttle if you don't change the setup.
The one thing that stays in my mind is, that it has something to do with the tyre temperature perhabs. At the start they are always cold. Perhabs full throttle is as good in LFS because tyres get faster on temperature ... have to test that out with telemetry ...
Last edited by RIP2004, .
I tried it with clutch too. You are free to try on the drag racing track. Its very hard to achieve even something like 0.02 seconds advantage on a 1/4 mile.
You can do it a little better, but the difference should be >1 second on the 1/4 mile and it isn't ...
It can't be that hard to get a little more traction. It's all about a little feel. And you can use the throttle very precisely in LFS. But it simply doesn't work like it does in real life.
People on a 1/4 mile event aren't robots. They aren't gods which have the perfect throttle amount on every second. But all of them get better results by trying not to spin the wheels. And in LFS it is damn hard even to achieve the smallest amount of time advantage against a full throttle all the time start ...
You can do it a little better, but the difference should be >1 second on the 1/4 mile and it isn't ...
It can't be that hard to get a little more traction. It's all about a little feel. And you can use the throttle very precisely in LFS. But it simply doesn't work like it does in real life.
People on a 1/4 mile event aren't robots. They aren't gods which have the perfect throttle amount on every second. But all of them get better results by trying not to spin the wheels. And in LFS it is damn hard even to achieve the smallest amount of time advantage against a full throttle all the time start ...
Last edited by RIP2004, .
Sorry for the late answer. Have been on holiday.
You're right. It's a better method to test it and there are differences. I think more interessting is the acceleration ( http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=7840 )
There is a difference but it doesn't make the same difference as in RL racing.
Sorry, have been on holiday for a while
Well you're right. They do. But it isn't as significant as in real life. You don't need a formula 1 car with TC ... some Touring car is enough.
The german DTM with similar cars like the FZ50 GTR :
The difference between a good start with little wheel spin and a start with a lot of wheelspin is over a second to 100 kph.
Good start : about 2,5 to 2.9s to 100 kph
bad start : 3,5 to 4s to 100 kph
And thats even just for a second of wheelspin by accident. If you would stay full throttle like everyone in LFS does the difference would be even worse.
Even with a short burnout and then less throttle you lose several positions in real life. In LFS its not even 1/4 of a car length between a full throttle starter and someone who tries to get a good start ...
So still something is wrong. It is not as wrong as I thought first, because the grip IS slightly better at some degree before total spinning, as you can see with the TC of the formula 1 car. But the difference is not significant enough ...
Yesterday I tested maximum g-forces values like with the braking and as Scawen said it is possible to achieve more acceleration with not full throttle.
But I still think it is to hard to achieve. The area of best acceleration is far to small ... IRL it makes measurable differences in 1/4 mile races between full throttle and good throttle control. Even a short burnout with lots of wheelspin makes a bad time ... In LFS you can just achieve a better g value for 1/10th of a second or so and all in all you are faster away with full throttle.
So I don't know what and how much is wrong about LFS, but I am pretty sure that this is still an issue and it will kind of get out of attention if there are free starts somewhere in the future of LFS. Because then reaction time will do the difference ...
But I still think it is to hard to achieve. The area of best acceleration is far to small ... IRL it makes measurable differences in 1/4 mile races between full throttle and good throttle control. Even a short burnout with lots of wheelspin makes a bad time ... In LFS you can just achieve a better g value for 1/10th of a second or so and all in all you are faster away with full throttle.
So I don't know what and how much is wrong about LFS, but I am pretty sure that this is still an issue and it will kind of get out of attention if there are free starts somewhere in the future of LFS. Because then reaction time will do the difference ...
Exactly that was mentioned before in the acceleration topic. I did some tests with acceleration and there is a higher g force again. But as with the braking it is very very hard to get there and impossible to hold it.
See http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=7840
See http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=7840
I think I am gonna go for the peak g values of acceleration today in the other Thread. We'll see what happens.
But if it is the same, the difference is to small.
IRL proper clutch/throttle work is visible on a 1/4 mile race ... often reaction time is measured too so you can see the difference. And everyone tries to avoid wild spinning wheels ...
but -> other thread later ...
But if it is the same, the difference is to small.
IRL proper clutch/throttle work is visible on a 1/4 mile race ... often reaction time is measured too so you can see the difference. And everyone tries to avoid wild spinning wheels ...
but -> other thread
later ...Well I am actually now as far to say the opposite of my origin post 
I just tested the "braking help" which is a very very slow and bad ABS system in some way.
And if you put the brakes on full power (19xx Nm @ RB4) you will achieve a much shorter brakeway with "braking help" than just flooring the brake without it.
I achieved -1.31g with careful braking (without braking help of course) on street tires. With locked wheels only -1.20.
It remains, that it is very difficult, but it seems to be correct.
Still strange is the acceleration topic. It would be fun to be able to start slightly better than someone else going full throttle at start. But most of it will come with a "free" start, where you can decide when to accelerate
I just tested the "braking help" which is a very very slow and bad ABS system in some way.
And if you put the brakes on full power (19xx Nm @ RB4) you will achieve a much shorter brakeway with "braking help" than just flooring the brake without it.
I achieved -1.31g with careful braking (without braking help of course) on street tires. With locked wheels only -1.20.
It remains, that it is very difficult, but it seems to be correct.
Still strange is the acceleration topic. It would be fun to be able to start slightly better than someone else going full throttle at start. But most of it will come with a "free" start, where you can decide when to accelerate
Well I think it is solved.
I did again a few test runs and it seems I was wrong!
I really reproduced much better braking ways by releasing the brakes. I did a 70m now
It just seems to be harder to get the right braking in LFS ... so more challenging.
So this seems to be right now. But I still think something is wrong about the acceleration thing A difference there should be easier to achieve ... 
So Thread solved somehow
I did again a few test runs and it seems I was wrong!
I really reproduced much better braking ways by releasing the brakes. I did a 70m now
It just seems to be harder to get the right braking in LFS ... so more challenging.
So this seems to be right now. But I still think something is wrong about the acceleration thing
A difference there should be easier to achieve ... So Thread solved somehow
Höh? You are right about that 1.29. Didn't see that ... have to examine that
Don't know if there were different conditions involved, but I also tested it with slicks and I got -2.35 with locked wheels and -2.32 with careful braking.Hmm, perhabs it is really really hard to get that degree. Have to continue testing
EDIT: Hmm really strange. I can reproduce better values now. It seems to be very very hard to hit the right setting. But then it is way way harder to hit the limit in LFS as in real life. Even one of the best german drivers (n1lyn) couldn't reproduce good values. At least in last version before last update. Perhabs this really was fixed this time, but I doubt it.
In real life nearly every racing driver should be able to produce better performance than locked wheels ...
Last edited by RIP2004, .
Well I did one test about that point.
I did a fully lock brake with RB4, full fuel, no passengers and default setup except full brake pressure (>1900 Nm)
The maximum of longitudinal acceleration was -1,2g at wheel speed 0. That's the peak and I didn't get anymore nowhere.
Then I did several brake tests, where I tried to be a good braker. I saw that data and there are very different g forces longitudinal at different wheel speeds. But I didn't get more than -1,2g.
That means :
Either I never hit the correct point in 10 braking tests. Nowhere in time just for a short period.
Or the physics aren't correct and you can't reach really more than -1,2g with that car, that tyres and exactly the same setup. Which is the peak value with locked wheels
Also note that I deactivated steering axis. This is why I took an AWD car to get a straight start with no steering. I also ran always into the limiter in 2 gear to have the same speed all the time when starting to brake.
A good driver should get about 10-20% better performance on dry. On wet or icy even a lot more. Which would be about 10m less in a 73m brake way.
Or at least -1,3g or more ...
I did a fully lock brake with RB4, full fuel, no passengers and default setup except full brake pressure (>1900 Nm)
The maximum of longitudinal acceleration was -1,2g at wheel speed 0. That's the peak and I didn't get anymore nowhere.
Then I did several brake tests, where I tried to be a good braker. I saw that data and there are very different g forces longitudinal at different wheel speeds. But I didn't get more than -1,2g.
That means :
Either I never hit the correct point in 10 braking tests. Nowhere in time just for a short period.
Or the physics aren't correct and you can't reach really more than -1,2g with that car, that tyres and exactly the same setup. Which is the peak value with locked wheels
Also note that I deactivated steering axis. This is why I took an AWD car to get a straight start with no steering. I also ran always into the limiter in 2 gear to have the same speed all the time when starting to brake.
A good driver should get about 10-20% better performance on dry. On wet or icy even a lot more. Which would be about 10m less in a 73m brake way.
Or at least -1,3g or more ...
Last edited by RIP2004, .
That's a good point. It is really hard. But try it yourself. Use the same setup one time with to strong brakes and one time careful.
If you are really good you get nearly exactly the same way. But you won't get a really visible shorter way ...
IRL race drivers get better ways. For sure some meters from 140 to 0. It isn't possible in LFS ... as far as I tried and some others too.
But feel free to prove me wrong. If noone gets a really better way on street tyres:
- Either there is no talented racing driver playing LFS
- or physics are still wrong in some way
Plz show data to see the reaction time and use the same! setup. No brake balance or weight change. And not only 1 or 2m from 140 to 0 plz
If you are really good you get nearly exactly the same way. But you won't get a really visible shorter way ...
IRL race drivers get better ways. For sure some meters from 140 to 0. It isn't possible in LFS ... as far as I tried and some others too.
But feel free to prove me wrong. If noone gets a really better way on street tyres:
- Either there is no talented racing driver playing LFS
- or physics are still wrong in some way
Plz show data to see the reaction time and use the same! setup. No brake balance or weight change. And not only 1 or 2m from 140 to 0 plz
Last edited by RIP2004, .
Oh sure. My mistake I meant longitudinal ... will fix it ...
I meant longitudinal ... will fix it ...Still something wrong about longitudinal acceleration (braking test)
(can a mod change the title in the forum itself? Longitudinal instead of Lateral)
Hi there.
My old thread about acceleration with spinning wheels and the examination of this problem: http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=7840
This was positive longitudinal acceleration. Some pointed out that it could be something about the missing feeling for tyre spin when accelerating.
I now tested again longitudinal acceleration. This time negative longitudinal acceleration ... braking. I claimed often since years, that something is wrong about the braking in LFS.
Here is my test to prove what I want to say. Longitudinal acceleration with locked wheels is way to high.
A car with locked wheels should use a significantly longer way to stop, than a car which brakes with spinning wheels. (at least on tarmac. In snow and in sand its a different matter ...)
In LFS both are nearly the same. In most cases locked wheels result even in a better braking performance in terms of the way ...
I will add 3 graphics with F1perfview.
I did the test with the RB4. First test (blue lines) with default setting. Second test with way to strong braking pressure and locked wheels ... (red line)
1. Both times cars start to brake at 141 km/h. Both need about 73.6 meters to get to 0 km/h. If there is an slight advantage, then with locked wheels.
2. The longitudinal acceleration. In some parts its better with good braking, in some parts its better with locked wheels. In average it is slightly better with locked wheels ...
3. The average wheel speed. You'll notice, that the red line doesn't go to 0 in the beginning. That is because the rear wheels didn't lock up immediately but soon after start of braking. Front wheels did lock at once.
________________________
It's not about, that in some cases your way from 140 to 0 could be 1m better if you would brake with feeling.
There should be a significant difference between fully locked wheels and a good ABS like braking ... locked wheels have a longer way to brake. You may try go get much better results But 73m from 140 is quite ok. But to good for locked wheels ...
I think that it could be really the same problem in physics as with acceleration. Longitudinal acceleration simply is wrong in LFS in some way. I don't know how much that influences the cornering behaviour, but it does for sure at least when accelerating out of a corner or braking with shortly locked wheels ...
Except this obvious problem I really like the LFS physics as they are now. RWD street cars really behave good now if an open diff is chosen. Perhabs preload should be modelled ... but that's another story ...
At least I didn't find any more severe problems
So I hope that the next incompatible patch solves the tyre problems, as I think tyres should be done right (well at least 95%, because it is damn hard to get them perfect) before moving on to other things.
Greetings
RIP
EDIT:
Exact values of way:
73,57m with "careful" braking from 141 kph to 0 kph
72,03m with locked wheels from 141 kph to 0 kph
But this 1,50m may be the reaction time or some other small differences ... basicly its the same.
Hi there.
My old thread about acceleration with spinning wheels and the examination of this problem: http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=7840
This was positive longitudinal acceleration. Some pointed out that it could be something about the missing feeling for tyre spin when accelerating.
I now tested again longitudinal acceleration. This time negative longitudinal acceleration ... braking. I claimed often since years, that something is wrong about the braking in LFS.
Here is my test to prove what I want to say. Longitudinal acceleration with locked wheels is way to high.
A car with locked wheels should use a significantly longer way to stop, than a car which brakes with spinning wheels. (at least on tarmac. In snow and in sand its a different matter ...)
In LFS both are nearly the same. In most cases locked wheels result even in a better braking performance in terms of the way ...
I will add 3 graphics with F1perfview.
I did the test with the RB4. First test (blue lines) with default setting. Second test with way to strong braking pressure and locked wheels ... (red line)
1. Both times cars start to brake at 141 km/h. Both need about 73.6 meters to get to 0 km/h. If there is an slight advantage, then with locked wheels.
2. The longitudinal acceleration. In some parts its better with good braking, in some parts its better with locked wheels. In average it is slightly better with locked wheels ...
3. The average wheel speed. You'll notice, that the red line doesn't go to 0 in the beginning. That is because the rear wheels didn't lock up immediately but soon after start of braking. Front wheels did lock at once.
________________________
It's not about, that in some cases your way from 140 to 0 could be 1m better if you would brake with feeling.
There should be a significant difference between fully locked wheels and a good ABS like braking ... locked wheels have a longer way to brake. You may try go get much better results
But 73m from 140 is quite ok. But to good for locked wheels ...I think that it could be really the same problem in physics as with acceleration. Longitudinal acceleration simply is wrong in LFS in some way. I don't know how much that influences the cornering behaviour, but it does for sure at least when accelerating out of a corner or braking with shortly locked wheels ...
Except this obvious problem I really like the LFS physics as they are now.
RWD street cars really behave good now if an open diff is chosen. Perhabs preload should be modelled ... but that's another story ...At least I didn't find any more severe problems
So I hope that the next incompatible patch solves the tyre problems, as I think tyres should be done right (well at least 95%, because it is damn hard to get them perfect) before moving on to other things.
Greetings
RIP
EDIT:
Exact values of way:
73,57m with "careful" braking from 141 kph to 0 kph
72,03m with locked wheels from 141 kph to 0 kph
But this 1,50m may be the reaction time or some other small differences ... basicly its the same.
Last edited by RIP2004, .
Yes really
As I said cars fly strange in both games. In LFS aswell as in GTR2. But I didn't see a car fly away crashing with 3 kph into a wall ...But this really isn't the point. The point that really really hurts for something called simulation is :
if you crash with over 100 kph or even over 200 kph hard into a wall in lfs, you just drive to your box and in a few seconds your car is again ready to race.
In some cases you need to push space to magically get your car back on the tyres.
And this is really bad for a simulation in my oppinion. Completly realistic kind of flying is more kind of a graphical gimmick and very very hard to achieve ...
And it would be sooo damn easy to implement it. Just do the same to the car as if no fuel left, if it crashes with a certain speed into something. Easy to do and would do the trick until the damage system is better ...
It would add a lot of realism just like free starts would ...
Hi Niels.
I am always interested in your comments, because you seem to try proving things like me
But this time I have to disagree. I noticed the big flaw in rFactor in your old sig too. It is impossible to countersteer out of a drift in some situations. But I really think they fixed it a lot in GTR2 ...
Watch these 2 videos. Same kind of car, tyres and same situation :
http://rapidshare.de/files/26572368/GTR2Demo.wmv.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/26572468/LFS.wmv.html
You'll notice, that LFS and GTR2 behave very similar. In both simulations the countersteering has an effect ... in both I didn't go off the throttle, but left the donut ...
I really think GTR2 is much more spot on than GTR1 and very similar to LFS. But the atmosphere is a lot closer to real life motorsports. Because of the tracks, because of the cars, because of the cockpits, because of the sounds, because of the weather change, because of the day-night transition, because of the whole events with training, qualifying, formation lap and so on and so on ...
I couldn't find a real flaw in the GTR2 physics. Perhabs cars are flying a bit strange, but not as strange as in LFS, where cars suddenly accelerate to 1000 kph, if contacting another car or wall because of the collision code and spinning a thousand times per second.
Much more important, than the graphics of crashing is the effect on racing. Crashing with 150 kph or more into a wall ... and you won't continue to race unlike in LFS. Graphics isn't as important as the simulation aspect in my oppinion.
Just my 5 cents ...
Greetings
RIP
Thx for clarifying that 
I didn't know it was under braking. As I said the first bit of a drop seems to be completly right, but I really think the drop should continue on high slip ratios and not stay there.
If someone in a race falls behind at the start, this doesn't seem to be just 0.5 SR but a lot more. Cars with just small amounts of spin still get away pretty good. They aren't all near their peak value, which is really small like in LFS.
I agree it is very very very VERY hard to find good data. I tried it a lot. I also looked at a lot of drag sites. I just found that spinning wheels are really significantly worse. Even if you correct them immediately after the start and don't stay full throttle it makes a difference of 0.5 to 1 seconds on the 1/4 mile. (with street cars ... not those drag monsters)
I didn't know it was under braking. As I said the first bit of a drop seems to be completly right, but I really think the drop should continue on high slip ratios and not stay there.
If someone in a race falls behind at the start, this doesn't seem to be just 0.5 SR but a lot more. Cars with just small amounts of spin still get away pretty good. They aren't all near their peak value, which is really small like in LFS.
I agree it is very very very VERY hard to find good data. I tried it a lot. I also looked at a lot of drag sites. I just found that spinning wheels are really significantly worse. Even if you correct them immediately after the start and don't stay full throttle it makes a difference of 0.5 to 1 seconds on the 1/4 mile. (with street cars ... not those drag monsters)
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG