IMO the best cars to start with would be the UF1 XFG or XRG, preferably the XRG. They are slow, not just with acceleration but the car in general is just slow with reacting or acting on things and would give you a good start into really learning to play LFS.

If you have to drive single seaters I would start off in the FOX or MRT-5, probably the MRT, learn a couple tracks within a second or so of WR then start thinking about moving into the F08 and more tracks.

When I started LFS I put in over 1500 laps in the MRT at FE club to get the basics down and by then I was running within a second of WR. I didn't spend all my time at that track, but learning one track/car very well will give you an idea on how to drive the next config and how hard the car can be pushed.

I had a good 7-8k miles in the game by the time I had put 1500 laps into FE club too. Take your time, have patience and most of all practice! I think I am at a good 4-5k laps now at FE club in all the cars=/ Goodluck =)

Well I have heard of cars having too large of exhausts. Mainly in NA'd cars due to not enough back pressure at the exhaust valves. I think this can cause stuttering at lower RPM. Which would cause all sorts of wierd noises.

Dual 3 inch sounds way too much for that little engine! Jeez my brothers Hemi only has 2.5inch. My fathers 6.0 or 6.1 in his Chevy only has 2.5 also. 3 inch would be great at RPM but would give you problems low RPM I would think.

N2003 was decent but I definatly wouldn't say the physics were amazing. Online play for me was very jumpy at best too.

"Offically Quoted" by BBT "sssssssssss" and "ffffffffff"

I can see what he is saying though they could use a bit more "ssssss" in the turbo noise. What's there sounds good but it's missing this IMO.

They should align with boost PSI and not engine RPM like Jeff said.

Quote from Hyperactive :

Imho, LFS has sounded pretty good on lower revs but the problem is the higher revs, especially the point just before upshift. This was the biggest problem with the FO8 (before U32). Just by listening to the sound I couldn't tell when to upshift, I had to completely rely on the shift light. What I was expecting the sound patch to concentrate on was mainly the high-revs stuff. I have always thought that what makes LFS sound "bad" is the higher revs stuff and I was a bit disappointed that most effort was put to change the sounds to something else and leaving the core of the problem untouched.

If we go into technical stuff, I guess LFS already does pretty well the basic engine sound related stuff which have big effects on the sound. Like the firing order, engine size and engine type. What it doesn't do is all the mechanic noises coming from engine and the combustion sound created inside the engine when the fuel burns and as a result the shockwaves travel in the air through the manifolds finally exiting the exhaust pipes. There is not enough variation. In real life, every piston stroke sounds a bit different, the fuel burns slightly differently every time and the result is more variable and "wandering" instead of being static sound played at exactly certain frequency. Different types of engines have special characteristics as well. And not leaving out the obvious, valves, valves per cylinder, fuel injection or carburetor, manifolds materials and the level of the engine tuning. These all need to be chosen before you can start creating the sounds. Just making it sounds like inline-4 without turbo won't make it achievable if you are using any kind of dynamic synthetised system, like in LFS. It just won't work and you can hear this in the BF1 in U32.

As I listened Todd's engine sound sample, my first thoughts were quite similar to what tweaker said. Too metallic and "I only hear distortion and and too much static treble". Couldn't agree more. It sounds nice and all but it doesn't sound much like sitting inside a real car. I'm not sure whether Scawen was joking about adding the window opening as a setup option but imho there's much more to it. (I'd like to see the chance of opening the windows on the quieter cars.) The car structure and padding (the FZ50 is obviously more quiet at 60mph than the XFG for example) play major part with these. Are you seeing where I'm going with this? Car classes. Car types, more specifically speaking, the level of race prepping done to the car. Is it stock, only competition equipment being driver's helmets and overalls? Is it slightly tuned road legal car with possibly steel manifolds (not cast iron), race seats (originals replaced), engine tweaked (more high power instead of low rev torque). Does it have rollcage. Stripped interiors? These have quite noticable effect on how the car sounds, how and what you hear sitting inside it. Is the car new or old? What kind of brakes it has?

And it should not be all about engine and drivetrain. The addition of drivetrain whines was a good thing but as said it doesn't sound too good. Take the UF1 for example. An old car with no sound proofing. The engine and gearbox are not very well "separated" from the cockpit meaning that a lot vibrations and resonance gets through. At 40mph the dash starts shaking. At 50mph the wind noise is unbearable and at 60mph the steering wheel shakes, the seat vibrates, the suspensions rattles and squeeks as you go over bumps. It feels like the car is ready to take off. Even the slightest bump makes a sound and you can hear it. Driving a real car at high speeds feels so totally different because you have millions of different sounds giving you information and distracting you at the same time. Every time you go over a kerb or lift one tire opff the ground you hear a sound. And it is a scary sound. I know adding these additional sounds is hard and impossible even in compatible patch, but not impossible with time and commiment.

Also the sound that you hear when you collide with another car is wrong. The best crash sound is imho in Nascar 2003. I have been in real accident and the sound you hear in N2003 is spot on. Head-on collision with another car. It is not a "shriek". Also the car-tirewall collision sounds are way off. It is not a "klonk".

One thing about the transmission whines. There is always play on the transmission. This is easily heard when traveling at slow speeds and you lift your foot off the throttle and the car kind of slows down with hesitation. Also the frequency of the transmission whine is way too high. The UFR sounds at 120kph like the XRR should sound at 200kph. At low revs and 2nd gear speeds the transmission whine should have a lot lower frequency and they should be more louder than they are. Also there is no transmission whine in the UF1. This car should defenately have transmission whine.

What about brake squeel, suspension sounds and backfiring? Please take your time and work with the sounds more. They are not good.

I second this quote by hyperactive. I enjoy the new sounds now that I have had enough time to listen to every car around the track but there is still plenty missing. A good step in the right direction though

I think the sounds themselves are nothing to write home about. But from reading the posts on them I think the way they are brought to us is better and leaves alot of room for improvement and this could be a great way to have sound!

In GTR they use samples, while at full throttle they sound nice they lack their luster at anything but. I think the way LFS is doing the sound could overcome that and should be great for LFS, once it's completed fully with sounds that are not so flat.

I already died :bananadea:banghead::something


The way drifting is made out to the public it's not racing. It could be possibly so that drifting would be the fastest way around the track, but then your heading into WRC realm anyways and I wouldn't consider that drifting.

Drifting does require control of a vehicle and it's ok to watch, fun sometimes but to me it's not racing it's an art form like figure skating or ice dancing. You never hear the Figure skaters say they are trying to go as fast as possible around the rink do you?

Hehe I wasn't going to say anything Becky but for all the City Life people out there it should be great fun =)

http://www.googlefight.com/ind ... ord1=Hannu&word2=Jakg

Hannu PWNS! =)

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

Especially with your nifty pseudo-locking differential
If you die can I have your car? Your wife has her own right?

LOL Sure if you plan on shipping it back fron England

Hehe yeah this diff they have in the car is very nice, the 250 pounds of toque helps a bit too =) Powerslide here I come =) and people say FWD's understeer *pffft* =) "Look Ma I can see where I am going while looking out the drivers side window" =)

Live for Speed Votes 409 or 57.850070721358%
Edit: 437 or 58.974358974359 Go :lfs: =)

Last edited by Viper93, Wed, 13 Dec 2006 19:23.

Hehe nice info becky looks like your Christmas vacation was short lived =P

You could also say that you can make a FWD oversteer intentionally, which I have done on many occasions.


ehh whats the argument about again?

ohh I know, it's about GT4 "simulating" racecars.

I definatly agree that in GT4 the cars are glued to the track for the most part and the lower powered vehicles don't spin easy. But if they did behave like real cars why would people play? Especally with joysticks... I mean jeez I know many peopel that play gt4 with the arrow pad and the buttons! crazy thing is they are almost as fast as me =P

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

AHH, that's what he was talking about.

Well, he missed the context. How many people out there would instinctively mash the throttle to induce oversteer & save a car plowing through (away from) a bend?

Most people I see are still on the brakes hard until they stop =P

Heya, now that I am perminently in the UK I was wondering if anyone wanted to get together for a Karting event?

Here is a little track near Oxford

http://www.kartingoxford.co.uk/

Prices are reasonable IMO I am also willing to head to Milton Keynes and race at Daytona there but they are more expensive

Any ideas, thoughts? I realize this time of year isn't perfect but I am itching to get into a seat of some kind, at least until my car gets here =)

Last edited by Viper93, Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:54.

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

Any RWD production car will understeer unless you (pretty much intentionally) induce oversteer anyway. The average dolt comming into a corner too hot will understeer in any normal RWD regardless. Manufacturers intentionally build understeer into production vehicles for - (dramatic pause) Safety Reasons(TM).

"nod" =)

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

Gee guys, not sure about this. Todd posted some pretty conclusive reasons and knowledge on tire behaviour indicating that a tire really should not lose much (read: almost none) grip past their peaks - at least not without the ratio being extreme, which (laterally) would be pretty hard to acheive. I'll see if I can find it shortly.

JTBo, if you like spinning play GTR2

I thought that in the end it was that LFS left a bit too much grip, not much, but a little. I don't think there is anything wrong with spinning in LFS, maybe a bit more for the racecars but the roadcars feel good =)

Hmm, I don't know. I think one big difference from LFS to RL, besides there some things missing in LFS, is that you can alter the setup alot making a much more stable car. If you took a setup you would find on a car coming off the showroom I think you would find it much easier to spin.

I think what you could be referring to is the ablity of the tires in LFS to maintain grip well past their maximum slip angle, that would cause cars in LFS to spin slow, IMO. There I would agree that the tires in LFS grip too much past maximum slip angle. But it's not that slow in LFS as it is...

Quote from Gunn :

It's about time that some developers realise that it takes much more to make a race sim than just putting the word "simulator" on the retail packaging. Customers could benefit from that realisation too.

Didn't Pole Position call itself a simulator back in it's day? =P *joke har har har*


honestly if you think GT4 is a simulator your on crack...

There is one important thing missing in LFS that will never be in the game for almost every driver... G'Forces. The road cars spin closely to RL cars, not perfect but close... the reason it seems slower in the game is because you do not have any forces acting on your body throwing it around making things appear faster.

Watch this video... http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=16167 and tell me how that is faster than in the game...

Crazy.... and STUPID!

Quote from Michel 4AGE :

That's a nice curve there. It actually has power under the curve, instead of just a peak number.

Yup I LOVE it! sooo smooth even with the turbo, there is minimal turbo lag partly because of the torque generated on top of having a tiny turbo that boosts 14PSI. It's an awesome engine in general too having all internals suitable to run up to the stage 3 turbo kit via the factory for 355 HP. People say that turbo engines don't last... this engine for people have been ticking perfrectly at over 100k miles! I also have a 7 year factory warrenty with my 05 SRT-4 ACR. Not to mention it's the fastest production FWD you can buy in the world =)

Most cars you get a kick in the butt at 3k when you ramp up the cam but this engine is perfectly smooth and pulls just like a V8, you can't beat it. And I still get 30MPG cruising. I have yet to downshift for hills, not once. Even when I went from Wisconsin to Florida through the mountains. You cannot beat this engine.

Big reason they are popular is because they are so cheap. Not because they have HP, thats not a very incorrect statement saying that Honda's have horsepower.... well many FWD's for that matter.

I think it would be wise to listen to Mike Nostra. I have seen Honda dyno's they are nothing spectacular and deffinatly don't belong in a race engine...

Here is a dyno of what a race engine should look like, granted it's not perfect and depends on how you drive but this would be very drivable

http://www.dragtimes.com/2004- ... -Results-Graphs-8832.html

Quote from tristancliffe :

Whilst the S2000 engine in undoubtedly 'clever', it's appaling for a road engine. All revs and not much go. I'd much rather have a few less revs and a few more lb.ft. Unfortunately Honda love seeling horsepower, and seem to be using higher and higher revs to acheive this (at the expense of midrange torque).

In the real world Nissan and Toyota (for Japanese manufacturers) are far superior to Honda in terms of useability and A-B performance. All in my opinion, of course.

I agree =)

As for 4 cylinders here is the new SRT-4 engine specs

2.4 litre i4

Horsepower 300 HP at 6,000 rpm
torque 260 lb.-ft between 2,000 and 6,000 rpm

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/0 ... the-300-hp-caliber-srt-4/

Ok, thanks, that's what I wanted to hear =) I understand why you have increase cold pressure for a cold day. But I didn't know that pressures are not used to effect tire temps. I do realize that compounds aswell as driving style and track conditions effect temps but I was always under the impression that you could adjust pressures to adjust temps. Maybe I had been watching too much NASCAR while I grew up =P

Well I should rephrase that =P if the tire is in overheating over the whole tire I would increase pressure, not decrease it. I would also look at how I was driving but still =P

I understand what you said tristian and I practice that. I am not getting why though you would increase pressure to make the tires heat quicker, physics is telling me the oposite. I can understand that it's because you want to counteract the absense of pressure buildup that you would get during a race that would prevent the sidewall form flexing too much, but increasing pressure, in itself wouldn't increase tire temperature. I could see it though if it meant that you could run a corner a bit harder, hmm maybe thats where I am missing the boat? =P

I am crap at saying what I want to say =(