Plus the tyre physics allow too much force combining, so FWD cars can generate a lot of grip and put down power much better than in real life. Combine that with 210kg less weight and it's no wonder the XFG is quick!
If you race on CTRA 1 you notice most of the drivers use the XFG, but then you will see a good driver in the XRG winning the race. RWD is better, clearly. In all FWD cars the engine is over the front wheels, so again, it's asking too much but not only that, but when the engine is mounted over the front wheels, the rear wheels have nothing to do literally, theres almost no weight, infact, you could add rear weight to balance the car 50/50 and you'd probobly be faster, the only disadvantage would be under braking. Still, it's been clear since the beginning of front wheel drive that the maximum ammount of horsepower is around 200bhp anymore than that is just insane, rear wheel drive cars clearly can handle more power better anyway.
Imagine the Carrera GT take the engine from the middle and put it to the front, then swap the drive chain to power only the front wheels, and it's going to be probobly, the worst handling car in the world, ever made.
Imagine the Carrera GT take the engine from the middle and put it to the front, then swap the drive chain to power only the front wheels, and it's going to be probobly, the worst handling car in the world, ever made.
Yeah, I'm a bit amazed about how well some people think they can brake. Against a modern abs system you will probably have problems matching just the stopping distance even when fully focused only on the braking. And then try to do with when focusing on other things on the road/track..
I saw an interesting "test" on some tv-show. Westfield xtr4 (no abs) vs mercedes s-class; braking from 160km/t and avoiding an obstacle. Since the Westfield is around 1,5 tonns lighter you would think this wasnt going to be much of a fight. Of course, lots of elements into this, driver, tires etc, but it was still quite interesting to see that the big mercedes stopped around 20 meters before the westfield. I've seen much of the same on track days; even with much more weight, newer cars can brake later and far into the corner due to superior braking systems. I can fully understand that some people don't want it because it takes some of the skill/fun out of driving however.
A Norwegian race driver said that one of the reasons his Z4 race car is so quick is that they have good electronic stability systems. Of course, in road cars, ESP and the likes isnt tuned for performance and tend to kill the power, so you're better off without.
Swap the drive chain to power only the front wheels! lol - typo I hope.
200-250bhp might be too much for fwd, but the argument was never: "which drive configuration is capable of dealing with the most power?". Ask that question and the answer wouldn't be rwd either would it.
With typical low power road cages, fwd is fine, and it doesn't render every car equipped with it complete crap as some would have you believe.
Yea it was a typo :P or maybe I was thinking of the Blitzen Benz??
I have owned an old 1.1ltr Mini and BMW Mini Cooper. I also borrowed a BWM Mini Works S (220bhp) for a weekend test drive where I thrashed it for 500 miles around Scotland before I left the UK for NZ.
The BMW Mini is nothing like the original Mini but it is a great fun car as long as you keep in the power band. Go and borrow one from a BMW showroom for a weekend, act right and make the right noises and you are sorted
. Try and get a S or Works S on 16inch rims, the 17inch rims tramline too much and add to the unsprung weight too much.It really is a well balanced car that sits on and holds the road well. It is just great fun to chuck about. Not sure if its changed since I had mine but just having a rev counter in front of you adds to the fun, the rest of the pointless crap dials are in the centre of the dash.
That said, in the end it is NOTHING like a real Mini which is a far more raw experience. Given the choice now I would pick the original as I prefer cars without nanny electronis to get in the way
If I could just take you up on that point..
The outright lap record for the tracks on CTRA Race 1 are pretty evenly matched between the XRG and the XFG. There are a few tracks that are better for the XRG, such as some of those with long straights and fewer tight corners (BL1, SO1/1r, etc), then the XRG with it's vastly superior top speed will out-perform a driver of equivalent skill in the XFG, however on many of the tighter tracks, or those without straights were you exceed 90mph or so for long periods, the XFG is a much faster tool, such as on tracks like SO Town or FE Gold (yes, I know the XRG has a faster record than the XFG, by 0.02 of a second, but that's because I suck lol, I could get a 1.43.9x if I were any good on the final corner)., and FE Club.
The XRG is more fun however, and will put people in contention to move onto the FZR, a car which requires alot of finesse. The XFG is easy to drive up to about 90%, but getting that final 10% is very hard. The XRG, on the other hand, is pretty easy to drive up to around 80%, however the final 20% is just as hard to achieve as it is in the XFG. It all comes down to choice really.
I do not believe for a minute that this is possible if the Westfield didn't either have malfunctioning brakes or an absolute idiot driving. Even if it simply locked up and the driver made no attempt to brake properly a car with big tyres and downforce should be able to stop far quicker than a saloon weighing 3 times as much. Fully locked wheels will still stop a car pretty quickly, typically about 70% efficency of the absolute optimum, through in an obstacle and the weight/downforce/suspension/manual transmission of the sports racing car should will be no match for the saloon. Of course if the one car is driven appalingly (almost deliberately) badly then a car that doesn't require a driver will obviously be better.
http://img178.imageshack.us/im ... 692/242942010000ze0os.jpg - Found that for you AJP.
For the sake of the argument, let's take a Audi RS4. Most likely packed to the teeth with the latest in braking technology. This completed the 100mph - 0 in 4.47 seconds.
Lets take a Caterham CSR260. This completed the 100mph - 0 in 3.86, and last time I checked, that didn't have ABS. Even if that did, the Atom most definatly does not and that stopped in 3.93 seconds.
Normally, there's no subsitute for sticky tyres and light weight!
What I find most interesting is the Veyron and the A1GP car, both had exactly the same 100mph - 0 time of 3.40 seconds, and considering the Veyron weighs like 1.8tons, that's an amazing achievement! Then again, it does have an amazing price tag
For the sake of the argument, let's take a Audi RS4. Most likely packed to the teeth with the latest in braking technology. This completed the 100mph - 0 in 4.47 seconds.
Lets take a Caterham CSR260. This completed the 100mph - 0 in 3.86, and last time I checked, that didn't have ABS. Even if that did, the Atom most definatly does not and that stopped in 3.93 seconds.
Normally, there's no subsitute for sticky tyres and light weight!
What I find most interesting is the Veyron and the A1GP car, both had exactly the same 100mph - 0 time of 3.40 seconds, and considering the Veyron weighs like 1.8tons, that's an amazing achievement! Then again, it does have an amazing price tag
What is your point the light weight cars, probably on smaller tyres and probably on brakes that aren't intended to be used cold stopped half a second faster than the overweight saloon. The only thing seriously impressive about that list is the Veyron, but it did have the assistance of enormous tyres and brakes and its air brake. Even the WRC car stops considerably quicker than the overweight gadget filled road cars, despite the fact that its brakes and tyres would have been absolutley hopeless cold.
im am glad that LFS have started to make real life aftermarket cars.. i dont care what cars thay make.. only its aftermarket cars.. for a more realistic feeling..
i dont know where i heard this or read this.. but is it true that thay will release a model program to model cars to LFS after full game ??
i dont know where i heard this or read this.. but is it true that thay will release a model program to model cars to LFS after full game ??
Don't get me wrong, I am looking forward to the new VW. But I just can't help thinking why they could not have developed and EVO or Subaru or somethink in the 300BHB 4WD category. Would be so much fun in LFS.
Mabey a Mitsubishi Evo VIII MR FQ-400. Now that would be somethink worth waiting for.
In the mean time I will continue to dream about S3
Mabey a Mitsubishi Evo VIII MR FQ-400. Now that would be somethink worth waiting for.
In the mean time I will continue to dream about S3
LFS is just getting back to it's S1 roots back when LFS stood for Live For Slow.
Except for ones made out of the same material as clutches in LFS since patch Y.
NFS manages to get quite a few brands, including Audi in their games, and what kind of reputation do the NFS games have?
Isn't the BMW Sauber F1 a real race car?
Modern ABS systems reduce braking on individual tires that are rotating significantly slower than the average speed of the other tires. No driver can match this kind of computerized braking system. I'm not aware of any racing team that chooses to not to use use ABS and ESC (electronic stability control) when it's allowed in that event, so it must provide some advantage.
Depends on the cause of the oversteer. If it's lift throttle (engine braking on a RWD) induced oversteer, the driver has the option to steer more and induce understeer at the front to balance out the car. If the driver has to brake, then countersteering isn't an option. Apparently Jackie Stewart mention using this method back in the 1960's in the Formula 1 cars before downforce. It's not natural, but it does work for some cars.
Agree with you here.
The stability control usually allows quite a bit of oversteer, at least so on sports cars like the Corvette Z06, to the point that drivers prefer the stability control on when racing it when it's allowed. It can be shut off in the Z06, and I thought it could be shut off on most sports cars.
Since the front tires steer, they generally have a higher working slip angle than the rears, so that leaves the rear tires with some extra traction for propelling the car. Even all wheel drive has it's limits once power to weight ratio reaches a certain point in race cars.
Not even those. I've tried, and it's a real struggle to melt an LFS clutch.
It's a good point you make really, the XRG and XFG are closely matched whatever track and whatever circumstance.
First of all, I never said I didn't know what to do. I just wanted to confirm and see if it's the right thing. Second of all, it's not that obvious. At least it's not obvious that is is the absolutely RIGHT thing to do in a certain situation. You'd have to be pretty damn sure to make that claim.
Next, I'm curious about a certain effect that happens when you counter-steer in the opposite direction when your car starts to oversteer, for example.
So, it oversteers, and you start to turn your wheels in the opposite direction to straighten it out. At some point, your front wheels regain the grip with the road again and produce a massive side force that starts straightening your car at first, but it's so strong, that it overshoots and sends your car spinning in the opposite direction.
That is, unless you can 'counter-steer' again in the other direction now, to eliminate the rotational force on your car.
That's exactly why I'm not so sure if counter-steering is the right thing to do. Especially if it happens during a bend on the road at a decent speed. If you continue to counter steer, you most likely will end up spinning out but staying on the road. If you attempt to counter-steer and can't straighten the wheel fast enough afterwards, you will spin out in the opposite direction and DEFINITELY go flying outside the turn.
But anyways, you guys are such pros, I'm sure you knew all that already. Sorry for boring you.
So wait, it's the front wheels that lose grip when a car oversteers?
The car will always want to straighten itself up, don't fight it and you should easily be able to get the car under control and then take further evasive action if needed. Cars with power steering so no real feedback from the wheels are generally at a disadvantage because it can be more difficult to feel what the car wants to do and it is far easier for an inexperienced driver to cause issues by fighting the cars natural tendency to save itself.
Why are you assuming the brakes/tyres are cold?
Well even cars with power steering will steer just as eagerly into a slide/skid, it's the reason why they straighten up when you let go of the steering after turning a corner. "Feedback" is of no use at all really in such an extreme situation, your hands will hardly be on the wheel anyway.
What happens really all depends on how much space you have and how quick you are. If you're correcting a slide you're following the car with the steering rather than the other way around, you're not in control of where it's going until you're no longer correcting, if you're really good and not in too much trouble you can continue to slow it.
The real trick though, kids, is to not get in to one of the situations. Never having to correct a slide in an emergency is more a sign of skill than being able to correct one.
I've had to correct a slide at 80mph in my FWD car on the highway. You're definitely right, as I should have not even gotten into the situation that I got myself into. But that was when I hadn't been licensed for very long. Basically, I was driving like a chav, and was going to swerve around someone who had been tailgating me, until they passed me and cut me off. I turned the wheel hard, but had no experience at driving that fast, and was suprised by how responsively my car pulled to the left. So I all of a sudden snapped the wheel to the right, at which point my rear tires decided they didn't want to accelerate as quickly as my front tires. So then I countersteered a little, but it was too much and I over corrected, but finally got it straight. It was a stupid thing to do, and part of being skilled at driving is actually knowing the limits of your skills. You shouldn't be testing your limits in an uncontrolled environment like the public roads. I agree that new drivers should be required to take some sort of high-speed/high-performance driving class on a large skidpad. People should physically be taught what to do in a oversteer/understeer/emergency braking situation. That way it will be easier to teach people to follow the speed limits, not drive like a chav, etc.
Sometimes things are entirely out of your control, though. Someone running out from behind a van at the side of the road, a dog/cat running across the road etc. It doesn't matter how aware or perceptive you are, if you drive for long enough something WILL happen that you could not have been prepared for. Not long ago I came round a blind corner at ~40mph (60mph limit) and found a queue of stationary cars. To make matters the road was damp and greasy. If it hadn't been for the ABS and good brakes I would have been in the back of something hard. The only way I could have been prepared for that would have been to drive round every blind corner at 10mph, but it would take me hours to get anywhere and I would probably get drilled by someone coming along behind at 60mph.
We've all had those moments, and some collisions are virtually unavoidable, but there's a difference between that and what I was referring to: correcting the mistake. Whatever evasive action is required you should never have to spend time and distance correcting a slide, correcting a mistake.
Idk if this had come up already, but to get back to the "disconnection" of the driver from the road because of the aids.
Or that the ABS is safer than no ABS.
There is a paradox called moral hazard. The safer cars gets, the more accident there will be, because the people get less careful while driving. This is true for every situation in every field of the human life.
When the cars had no aids, people HAD to be careful or they were dead.
Or that the ABS is safer than no ABS.
There is a paradox called moral hazard. The safer cars gets, the more accident there will be, because the people get less careful while driving. This is true for every situation in every field of the human life.
When the cars had no aids, people HAD to be careful or they were dead.
Indeed - put a big spike on the steering wheels and nobody would crash. Ever.
Scirocco - Yawn
(251 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG