By settled do you mean there is the same normal load on front left and front right wheel for example?
i think he means the load is being relitively constant between the right and left 
I'm having a hard time explaining this.
by settled I mean the load isn't changing across all four wheels. it's, for all intensive purposes, constant.
But that only means that the level of weight transfer or load transfer isn't changing. Not that there is no weigh transfer or load transfer, which are not beneficial during turning due to load sensitivity of tyres.
well technically hes correct since transfer implies transienst behaviour
being constant state has nothing to with why cars will generally have less cornering acceleration on skidpads than on tracks which by and large have positive corner camber
being constant state has nothing to with why cars will generally have less cornering acceleration on skidpads than on tracks which by and large have positive corner camber
I can only attribute this to body roll, so this effect would actually be from the fact that the inside tyres haven't unloaded yet, rather than the other side of the transient (assuming sub-critical roll damping) where the overloading of the outside tyres happens. More weight on any one tyre indeed gives more outright grip to that tyre, but the unloaded tyres will lose more than your ovreloaded tyres gain, so on average you have less grip.
I'd prefer to think of that as constant weight transfer, rather than no weight transfer, but as Shotglas points out that's technically correct although perhaps less likely to be interpreted correctly. Maybe that's our problem though.
Transient peaks on a meter are fairly meaningless, IMO.
If the corner in question was also flat, made of the same surface material as the skidpan, and of the same radius, then you should get comparable results. Race tracks are likely to have a surface that gives better traction than a skidpan and corners can be cambered, both improving results, and driving different radii also has an effect due to the differing speed you can take the corner at, and the speed related effects this introduces.
constant weight or load transfer could be beneficial when more grip on outer wheels and lower on inner wheels in turn will cause the inner to slip which can ease narrowing the turn >> therefore having more lateral g, right? I dont know then why short weight transfer is to be more beneficial?
Maybe the cause was too understeery ride on skidpad? Here's a video of what I'm talking about. A constant pull is about .90 max, where throwing the car into the corner means .97+ repeatedly.
http://www.drivetoescape.com/grip.wmv
http://www.drivetoescape.com/grip.wmv
You probably won't see that much of a delta once the load sensitivity (likely by the sounds of it) is tweaked in the upcoming patch. A main issue in LFS right now is that the outside tires can gain to much grip through excessive load. Combine that with the excessive (as in to easy to initiate) understeer Scawen mentioned, and you have what you see there.
werd
This isn't a weight transfer effect. With a car that's understeer in a trimmed condition (constant speed skidpad test such as the first part of the video above) the lateral g is limited by the lateral force the front tires can produce. If they have enough to pull 0.9g while the rears can pull 1.05g (or 2 or 3 or 20g for that matter), the car will do 0.9g on a skidpad. The rear tire slip angles will only climb high enough to maintain that 0.9g. They have 'leftover force' yet to be tapped. If you kick the car sideways a bit to a larger slip angle, the rear tires will make more than that original '0.9g worth' of force.
Translation: Chuck the car into the turn a bit and you'll get more than 0.9g or whatever the skidpad rating is. It's something that can be (and frequently is) analyzed with a yaw moment versus slip angle diagram. This is not a weight transfer effect at all. You will see more weight transfer, yes, but that's because you're pulling more g rather than the other way around.
This is where suspension tuning for the track comes in. By increasing rear roll stiffness, the front '0.9g limit' increases because there is less weight transfer at the front. The rear 1.05g limit decreases. As long as the rear can still pull a bit more than the front, the car is still understeer. Voila, your skidpad numbers increase in a trimmed condition.
I keep checking lfs.net for any news if they released the tire physic patch yet 
I'm a big vw fan, but I can care less about the sirocco! Need the extra realism feel!
I'm a big vw fan, but I can care less about the sirocco! Need the extra realism feel!
great explanation. Thanks.
I rather have new physics than multiple screens....
Maybe that is a requisite from VW or Rockingham owners. Multiple screen feature allows building better play seats in expository sites for promotion. I'm just guessing
i am affriad you are guessing wrong, scawen is working in his own way, he doesnt like when people are telling him what too do. like most of the things this is something what he wrote down on his list, on "the List".
(in general
Too be ecextly i am not using multie screen (or maybe i need to say, not yet). but i can see the Big / great benefit from this new system. too be honest i think its selfish if you say that its stupid that he made this system. because its some thing that special, no other sim / shouter has got it. and it you ask me that where lfs is all about.
The multi monitor system was an awesome addition.
It was but,
10,2% of lfs drivers has more than 1 screen,
6,7% has more than 3.
1,1% has more than 4
0,2% has more than 5
Can you post a link to reference of this?
no
his point is that u have to be really dedicated to buy more then one monitor for gaming and personally i dont even gonna buy a wheel
Multiple monitors are not only useful for gaming :P, they are great for typical work... like watching two movies at once 
.
.Also they are useful when you use programs like Adobe Photoshop CS4. Having image on separate monitor is really good feature for a designer. 
+ monitors are pretty cheap nowadays, for gaming you don't even need IPS panel, $200 22" TN TFT would be enough.
+ monitors are pretty cheap nowadays, for gaming you don't even need IPS panel, $200 22" TN TFT would be enough.
I have 2 screens and am not so dedicated, i was lucky to get the second screen (21 inch CRT
) for free. You don't have to have more than one monitor to use multi-monitor functionality.
It does nice job with one monitor too, just add monitors in LFS and experiment with monitor angle. It can offer you fish-eye projection.
You can have the same FOV, but gain better visibility of the dials, or you can extend your FOV without long arms effect. It creates some barrel distortion, but this is better than long arms.
And of course stronger videocard is required, because it eats a lot of FPS. 
See and compare attached pictures. Parameters of the view are in file names.
It does nice job with one monitor too, just add monitors in LFS and experiment with monitor angle. It can offer you fish-eye projection.
You can have the same FOV, but gain better visibility of the dials, or you can extend your FOV without long arms effect. It creates some barrel distortion, but this is better than long arms.
And of course stronger videocard is required, because it eats a lot of FPS. See and compare attached pictures. Parameters of the view are in file names.
This thread is closed
New Tyre Physics (work in progress)
(1082 posts, closed, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG