Judging by both IGTC and somewhat on the NDRC race - less than 2% and more than 20kgs should be the way forward in testing, and not only on ky2

I almost didn't wanna reply, but I guess if nothing changes things will just get screwd up by nubs.

IMO, the only way to balance the two cars is via lap time simulation software. I've been checking into that and unfortunatley there is nothing available for free. But there are at least 3 good versions out there which can take into consideration all the complications we face (xrr turbo lag, aerodynamics, tires, fuel usage, weight etc). If somone happens to be in possesion of VDMS module for MatLab or AeroLap standalone application I'd be happy to do the calcuations. This is the only way to take out the driver component, because I don't really see a point to your "test races" where u'll have some drivers in one car and some in the other, and none can provide a repeatable performance or be consistant enough. This is why in the last seasons you've just guessed 20 kg and left it like that - which is kinda stupid too.

Another thing to keep in mind.. It's LFS developers fault (this imbalance). They've built the GTR class to be uncompetitive within itself. This is not how race cars are engineered, making a GTR version out of a road car is all well and good, but it has to be done within the rules of the series those cars are going to run, and the rules are usually about engine size (or power), air restriction plates, curb weight, max tire size. Within that rule set the LFS cars are balanced.. they all have 1100 kg and 490 hp BUT the engineering aspect was forgotten.. some 1100 kg/490 hp cars will go faster than others, that's why BMW M3 GTR was banned from racing, because they did a better job than Porsche could within the same rules, so we waited for 5 years for a new M3 GTR.. do you want to do that in MoE? Obviously the FZR is faster, and easier to drive, but ruining one car for the sake of having a "balance" is not really a solution. On the other hand, drivers should be able to pick cars they like and be able to win in them - and here is where blame falls on the devs. So instead of fighting each other and having an all out flame war between the xrr drivers and fzr drivers, write petitions, do something, do ANYTHING to get a better balance by default. I've written what the XRR needs to be like in order to have the same opportunities as FZR (in one of my previous posts).

So, just demand it.. MoE is prolly one of the longest running leagues in LFS (other than Original LFS League) and has always and will feature the best drivers in LFS today, having the same problem for 5 years and trying to "take it into your own hands" isn't a solution. There is still a month and a half before MoE start, if Scawen was to release a tool that would allow significant changes to the XRR (CoG position, track widths, tire sizes, engine type/size, aerodynamic distribution, gearbox type) I (or anyone else) can have the XRR made competitive within a week. Ofcourse it'd be best kept within a few people to avoid fights about "44 % forward or 44.7 % forward weight distribution?" - one person to make changes based on sound math and real-world examples and a few people to test drive and develop sets.

That is the fix, not 2 % and 20 kg.

EDIT: I've just realised I never posted XRR specs cause the post was a bit long and was supposed to be a start of a petition to fix some things for endurance racing.. so here they are:

1. 2.8-3.2 L inline/V6 engine
2. MR layout (F430-ish)
3. weight distribution of that layout (45-47 % front, such that front and rear tire wear are about the same, on the current XRR fronts wear quicker)
4. wider track at the rear than the front (this would take care of the "it flips so easily" problem)
5. wider rear tires than the fronts (this would take care of the "stuck in the sand" problem)
6. lower turbo boost (and the turbo lag obviously)
7. higher rpm range (lower torque combined with higher rpm that would still give it 490 hp @ rpm > 6200)
8. fuel economy change with engine change (more fuel consumption beacuse currently XRR starts around 15 kg lighter for the same stint lenght as FZR) beacuse we can't have it run even a lap more per stint on a set of tires cause then FZR will need balancing.

Obviously someone is going to say "that's not a XRR any more, XRR is based on the XRT which is FR layout", to which I'll say "YOU ARE THE REASON IT'S UNBALANCED NOW, GO DIE IN A FIRE".

and I agree with Scipy. (Believe it or not :P)

+1

<3

Thanks for the constructive post, scipy.

It would be great if everyone involved in MoE contacted the devs to express their desire for a GTR class that's better balanced by default. Point them to scipy's post, if you feel like it. If they get 100+ emails all at once it might catch their attention.

In the meantime, just so everyone's aware, we have several known top drivers testing various restriction settings in the FZR, as well as doing baseline runs in the XRR. Hopefully we can have them try these settings at several tracks and get a general feel for what will work best if the patch doesn't come out in time, and if there's no response from the devs either way.

Quote from scipy :

I almost didn't wanna reply, but I guess if nothing changes things will just get screwd up by nubs.

IMO, the only way to balance the two cars is via lap time simulation software. I've been checking into that and unfortunatley there is nothing available for free. But there are at least 3 good versions out there which can take into consideration all the complications we face (xrr turbo lag, aerodynamics, tires, fuel usage, weight etc). If somone happens to be in possesion of VDMS module for MatLab or AeroLap standalone application I'd be happy to do the calcuations. This is the only way to take out the driver component, because I don't really see a point to your "test races" where u'll have some drivers in one car and some in the other, and none can provide a repeatable performance or be consistant enough. This is why in the last seasons you've just guessed 20 kg and left it like that - which is kinda stupid too.

Another thing to keep in mind.. It's LFS developers fault (this imbalance). They've built the GTR class to be uncompetitive within itself. This is not how race cars are engineered, making a GTR version out of a road car is all well and good, but it has to be done within the rules of the series those cars are going to run, and the rules are usually about engine size (or power), air restriction plates, curb weight, max tire size. Within that rule set the LFS cars are balanced.. they all have 1100 kg and 490 hp BUT the engineering aspect was forgotten.. some 1100 kg/490 hp cars will go faster than others, that's why BMW M3 GTR was banned from racing, because they did a better job than Porsche could within the same rules, so we waited for 5 years for a new M3 GTR.. do you want to do that in MoE? Obviously the FZR is faster, and easier to drive, but ruining one car for the sake of having a "balance" is not really a solution. On the other hand, drivers should be able to pick cars they like and be able to win in them - and here is where blame falls on the devs. So instead of fighting each other and having an all out flame war between the xrr drivers and fzr drivers, write petitions, do something, do ANYTHING to get a better balance by default. I've written what the XRR needs to be like in order to have the same opportunities as FZR (in one of my previous posts).

So, just demand it.. MoE is prolly one of the longest running leagues in LFS (other than Original LFS League) and has always and will feature the best drivers in LFS today, having the same problem for 5 years and trying to "take it into your own hands" isn't a solution. There is still a month and a half before MoE start, if Scawen was to release a tool that would allow significant changes to the XRR (CoG position, track widths, tire sizes, engine type/size, aerodynamic distribution, gearbox type) I (or anyone else) can have the XRR made competitive within a week. Ofcourse it'd be best kept within a few people to avoid fights about "44 % forward or 44.7 % forward weight distribution?" - one person to make changes based on sound math and real-world examples and a few people to test drive and develop sets.

That is the fix, not 2 % and 20 kg.

EDIT: I've just realised I never posted XRR specs cause the post was a bit long and was supposed to be a start of a petition to fix some things for endurance racing.. so here they are:

1. 2.8-3.2 L inline/V6 engine
2. MR layout (F430-ish)
3. weight distribution of that layout (45-47 % front, such that front and rear tire wear are about the same, on the current XRR fronts wear quicker)
4. wider track at the rear than the front (this would take care of the "it flips so easily" problem)
5. wider rear tires than the fronts (this would take care of the "stuck in the sand" problem)
6. lower turbo boost (and the turbo lag obviously)
7. higher rpm range (lower torque combined with higher rpm that would still give it 490 hp @ rpm > 6200)
8. fuel economy change with engine change (more fuel consumption beacuse currently XRR starts around 15 kg lighter for the same stint lenght as FZR) beacuse we can't have it run even a lap more per stint on a set of tires cause then FZR will need balancing.

Obviously someone is going to say "that's not a XRR any more, XRR is based on the XRT which is FR layout", to which I'll say "YOU ARE THE REASON IT'S UNBALANCED NOW, GO DIE IN A FIRE".

And you finally make this lovely post after writing it 3 months (or more) ago?

Bob's "tweak" could do this, try and get a hold of him. Everyone else should email the devs.

I know it would be a pain, but why not just try the tweak and if we find awesome settings with Scipys calculations then just get some smart guy to make a pack so it makes it easier for all us dumbasses who can't work out how to use tweak.

Or is there problems with running a tweak only server? But even still, if we modded the XRR and found the perfect balance between itself and the FZR then we only have to send the values to the devs to save them having to find them out for themselves.

LFS tweak (from lfs database) doesnt allow much tweaking of S2 cars, and wouldn't allow us to tweak the settings we wanted. Though, Bob Smith's NASCAR-like modded XRT/FXO changed a lot of things so it seems it can be done, just not with the widely available Tweak.

Kegetys.....

Well, AFAIK tweak can do a great deal if you find the values: change the engine type, rpm scale, even change tire widths on XFG, but the main thing we need is weight distribution..

It's the same as if we tried to make the FZR more front-heavy, yes, you can put some penalty weight at 100 % to the front and click more wing, but the width of the front tires will only support so much before u have to make the car really oversteery again..

If we want a really balanced XRR, all the changes need to happen at once. We simply can't have the current track widths with narrower front tires and less turbo lag, the car needs a complete overhaul, otherwise it's just putting a bandaid on a hemorage.

It could easily be made to go faster as it is now, and be easier to drive.. If the gearbox was a FBM type sequential (even with lifting and loss of boost it's still faster) and if on downshifts the clutch would be engaged. That's how JGTC 500 hp cars used to work, you have a dog-engagment sequential gearbox and you lift on upshifts (because there's no period of wheels-under-no-power) and on downshifts you use the clutch and blip so you don't wear out the dog rings. Currently downshifting in XRR can be a real problem, if you are on hard braking (even without blipping) the car sometimes doesn't respond to a downshift, and when it does the effect of immediate release of all the wheel torque through the gearbox makes the wheel go into a pretty sevear slip ratio and you lose the rear. Obviously it can be driven like this with a little patience and practice, but why should it? Gearbox modifications alone would buy it half a sec on longer/faster tracks like ky3 and as5, maybe even more if you take into consideration the smoothness that'd be gained on downshifts with a clutch.

We should chain ourselves to the lfs.net homepage as a protest

Quote from pearcy_2k7 :

we should chain ourselves to the lfs.net homepage as a protest

+1 :d

Quote from pearcy_2k7 :

We should chain ourselves to the lfs.net homepage as a protest

Will someone bring us food and drink? If not we will die from starvation.

Nah, i've got this new ProtestForLife (PFL) simulator so we can do it from the comfort of our computer chairs. Though the devs haven't updated it for a long time so were stuck in the 1960's with all the hippies.

Quote from pearcy_2k7 :

Nah, i've got this new ProtestForLife (PFL) simulator so we can do it from the comfort of our computer chairs. Though the devs haven't updated it for a long time so were stuck in the 1960's with all the hippies.

:ices_rofl

Please note with regard to the rules posted today that the balancing situation is not yet fixed.

At the moment we are leaning toward track-by-track balancing until the (imminent) release of the new patch--since we can more accurately control balance in this way, and since balancing for an entire season is irrelevant when the entire season will not be run on this patch--but this is subject to change pending further admin discussions, until a final statement is posted on the matter.

Your opinions are valuable to us, so if you have strong feelings one way or the other, please go ahead and state them, preferably via PM. If you choose to post regarding this subject here, please refrain from using inflammatory language or instigating a flame war.

Thanks.

I think that track by track balancing is wrong, if your gonna do that you might aswell let people chose their cars track by track. A better option if you wanna make it fair (depending how you look at it) so much would be to do success ballast.

I personally am completly against track by track ballast, it wouldn't work in terms of time used and i wouldnt be happy having a different car to the one i signed up to use for every race.

I don't see what differnce it will make, it's not as if you wont have time to practice for each event with the given ballast, regardless of whether you have 20 or 40 kgs of weight from 1 round to the next. What differnce does it make if the car is a little bit heavier, if you can't handle 5kg up or down then you shouldn't be driving in the series because in one stint, from 100% to 5% the FZR looses over 70kg.

My point regarding time was that establishing a ballast amount for each race will take at least a week by my reconing. You know as well as any other person too that it's not just 5 kg here and there, it has implications on how your tyres will wear throughout a stint which may require extra setup testing once a ballast amount is established for the round depending one where your team is in their setup development process. I just don't see it fair that you pick your car at the begining of the season based on performance that may change track by track. Your basically picking the car that looks and sounds nicest and has a basic handling style. The rest of it is just all variables that you can't know until the round actually comes up.

Well I think it would actually be more like +5 here or -5 there because we're never going to find the perfect ballast for each round, but we all know that like IGTC, the 20kg on the FZR is ok, but on some rounds it's just not even at all. So just by going by past experiences it should be easy to guess that 15-25kg (Or maybe 30 for South City) would be more than enough ballast needed to make it more even for each round.

Even if the weight could only be 15, 20 or 25, this is still going to help the XRR be more competitive and it really doesn't take any sort of brain power at all to work out what weight penalty will be used at what track. ie, Westhill 15kg, South City 25kg......

I seriously think this is the only solution to the balancing problem, especcially since a new patch is on the way I should think we're only going to be using this patch for 1 maybe 2 races. (I hope)

First of all, in the rules (if anyone bothered to read) it says that track by track balancing will be done for the first 2 races (cause the patch is expected about that time) OR until the patch comes out. And I agree with it, on KY3 FZR with 20 kg is as balanced as it gets vs. the XRR. On SO4 XRR wont stand a chance, so FZR should prolly get 30 kg. On WE1 probably 15 or even 10 for FZR. At least as far as GT1 is concerned.

For GT2 there should probably be a unified balance for the first 2 races so people can choose cars and since that class isn't as affected by things-that-go-bad-with-more-power SO4 vs KY3 wont matter as much. For now (with the current idea 20 % FZR and 24 % XRR), XRR will probably be a winner at the 12 h race (by a very small margin and due to the fact it's driven on R2 tires all around) and the FZR can probably win SO4 more easily (but this is yet to be tested).

New chicane for KY3 is great, thx.

GO GO GO MoE!

Round by round balancing sounds good, wouldn't mind giving the XRR a go in endurance races atleast in 1 class, can get a little tedious using the FZR all the time as soon as you mention endurance, although it shouldn't be made uncompetative like bb said an 5-10kg's either way will be enough. And i think this should be discussed between everyone 1 week before the round and get someone capable in both cars (bb:razz to test, so don't be going off by yourselves making silly balast rules

Also i think leaving the first 2 rounds open for car changes would be good. Just so we can get a real comparison and see which car might have the advantage.

I wouldn't mind track to track balancing at all as long as the ballast is reasonable.