TBO class balancing issues

[Vegetal]

Just a little introduction: Today the brazilian league is starting it's first championship, based on the TBO class (XRT/RB4/FXO), with the first track being WE intl. The A class race is going to be held day 6 of this month. And i'm in the A class.

So, everyone is training for the championship those days, and me and a buddy of mine decided to make a test. That test was going to have 30 laps (same as in the race), i was going to race the XRT and he was going FXO.

We are precisely the same level in this track, we both have best lap times in the 1.57.1x range using the XRT, which is the car we are going to use for the championship. Before the test i thought the FXO would have to stop to change it's tires, but seems as i was wrong. We both finished the race without going into the pits, and our tires could still manage some 5 or 6 laps beyond the estipulated 30. Who finished in front?

FXO of course, with a 21 second advantage over my XRT. After the race we commented on the driving style we used. I had all my laps into the 1.57/1.58 range, without going into the grass once, and i remember only one braking mistake, with no major consequences. But he told me he was going totally relax, he went into the grass sometimes, missed some braking points, did some laps in the 2.00 range too.......and managed to win with a 21 second advantage over my XRT.

After that we reported our findings to the person in charge of the league, and the FXO's advantage was so proven that he decided to issue a passenger to all FXO drivers in the championship. But even then it is still faster, just with a slimmer margin.

Now let's get a technical view of the reasons for this advantage: Lighter weight - this one is the most obvious, the FXO weights almost 100 kg less than the XRT, and pretty much that compared to the RB4.
The second one, the FXO has a wider contact patch than the other 2, with 240 tires on all wheels, comparing to 245/225 on the XRT, and 215 on the RB4.
The third one, the FXO's transmission is the most efficient, with an 82% rating against 78% of the XRT, and 75% on the RB4.
The fourth one, is the boxer engine which gives it a better center of gravity.
And finally the fifth, as it's the car which uses the least fuel of those 3.

All of these would make sense if the car was hard to drive, but it's the easiest together with the RB4, and wears it's tires more or less the same as the other 2.

No need to say it had an advantage since S1 times isn't it? Just posting this so you guys know how it is, and hoping it will change in the next patches.

[Tweaker]

Yeah the FXO is still the fastest.... I thought the XR GT Turbo would have finally made a match for the FXO, but I don't think it has still.

You are right, the balancing does seem the same as S1. I wish we had a miracle and the RB4 was equal with these cars, it still is sluggin' behind :( Matter of fact, I guess any AWD car does in LFS :(

Good analysis on the cars though too, makes a lot more sense why the FXO is faster.

[Gabkicks]

yeah, i would like to see more balanced classes. too. :) the pb's/wr's dont even tell the whole story.
that was a good read vegetal.

[axus]

Yes, there is a deffinate issue here - I was just looking at the WR's in the TBO class on all tracks and the FXO is slower than the XR GT TURBO only on Westhill International Reversed. What changes do you think will be appropriate though? Maybe give the others 6 gears and slightly wider tires than they currently have?

[Hoellsen]

Hm, I'd like to see that test on a couple of more tracks, especially some with tight corners. Westhill only has wide sweeping corners (well, except one) and therefore traction isnt an issue which means increased tirewear at the front doesnt come into play.

Maybe try it at Aston Grand Prix or one of the city tracks?

[Vegetal]

Good to know you guys liked. I think we will make other tests when the other championship races are closer, but there are so many advantages that a somewhat increased tire wear on the FXO wouldn't make much difference.

And tweak, AWD cars should really suffer with one problem - low transmission efficiency, after all they have 3 differentials, a lot of energy is dispersed there. The fact is that the differences in vehicles of the same class in LFS is just too big, the FXO GTR makes laps years slower than the other 2 GTRs, the FXO is 1 to 1.5 secs faster than XRT or RB4, and the list goes on.....

I think the time gap between the fastest and the slowest car on a class shouldn't go above half a second, because there are some cars which are easier to drive, like FXO or FXO GTR, and thus should be a LITTLE slower than their harder-to-drive counterparts.

But let's keep focused on the TBO class, i think that if this issue is solved on the TBO, they will probably get more attention to balancing the other classes.

Suggestions as to make it more balanced? Well, we tried both 1 and 2 passengers on the FXO, with one, it's still a little faster, but more balanced obviously, and with 2 it gets somewhat slower. So, i would say that making it a little heavier, reducing tire width and transmission efficiency could make it.

My view is that easier cars should be just a tiny bit slower, so that the lap time enhancement on harder cars could balance for a higher probability of making a mistake.

[Sunday Driver]

I don't think it's necessary to change it. If I want a challenge, then I drive with the XRT just for fun. If I want to have better chance to win a race I choose the FXO. But I'm quite slow anyway, so I'm always driving just for fun, regardless what car I take.

The unbalance of cars can also care for close races between racers of different driving abilities, e.g. the good driver with racing wheel takes the XRT the lesser good driver with keyboard takes the FXO. :wave:

[Bob Smith]

Getting cars exactly balanced is never going to happen on all tracks, they're different after all and some cars will be better at some tracks. Of course if one car is faster on the majority of the tracks, then maybe it should be slowed slightly. I don't think the reduced weight is too much of a problem, but maybe it should only be as efficicent as the XRT, or have less power (it has a better power-to-weight than either of the other two).

[Vain]

Yes, lowering the car's (effective or nominal) power is propably the best way to balance the car. That way it will keep it's great handling and low weight, so it is still unique among the TBO-cars, but it won't be better than the others.

Vain

[XCNuse]

let me just point out one more thing, yes i know it has to do with weight and how RB4 is extremely heavy and whatnot, but lets look at the power to weight distribution here:

FXO: 210bhp/ton ; 2495 lbs ; 234 bhp
GTT: 205bhp/ton ; 2697 lbs ; 247 bhp
RB4: 200bhp/ton ; 2723 lbs ; 243 bhp

so .. really, the stats of these 3 cars are kinda all over the place
.. but that 228 lbs difference and 9 bhp difference between the FXO and the RB4 apparently is making a huuuuuuuuuge difference..
i think the FXO needs to gain a few lbs, i wonder if it would be more equal if it gained 100 lbs

[96 GTS]

Just a sidenote, but the cars in LFS are unnaturally light. There is no way that the AWD RB4 should be lighter than the very light Honda S2000 roadster. The FXO is lighter than the original Mazda RX-7 which was a tiny, tiny car. Just my oppinion, but I think all of the road cars in LFS need to be heavier by 500lbs.

[Renku]

I'd like to see a balanced TBO4 class. Actually there are some tracks, where LX4 is quicker than any of the TBO and vice versa. But the problem is that there are more tracks, where LX4 is faster, methinks.

[Hallen]

Just a sidenote, but the cars in LFS are unnaturally light. There is no way that the AWD RB4 should be lighter than the very light Honda S2000 roadster. The FXO is lighter than the original Mazda RX-7 which was a tiny, tiny car. Just my oppinion, but I think all of the road cars in LFS need to be heavier by 500lbs.

Yes, but you are comparing a race prepped car to a stock car. Take out all the soundproofing, the spare tire, the AC, the radio, the headliner, pull the stuffing out of the back seats and add lightweight racing seats, put on lightweight carbon fiber hood(bonnet), and trunk lid, pull off anything else that you can do without. You will shave a lot of weight off of the car.
The Speed World Challenge E46 BMW 325 base weight is 2750lbs (the weight they are not allowed to go below). The stock car weight is something like 3252lbs. Hmmm, that is about 500lbs.

Setup makes such a huge difference on these cars. It will be very, very difficult to make an assessment without a whole lot of data with different setups and different tracks and different driver styles. But keep cracking at it, we will figure it out eventually.

[ORION]

When you are actually racing, the difference is smaller than when hotlapping. Only the RB4 is slow all over the place :)

I would keep the weights and add some bhp to the XRT/RB4, so that the XRT gets 207bhp/ton, and the RB4 204 or 205 :)

[Bob Smith]

Just a sidenote, but the cars in LFS are unnaturally light. There is no way that the AWD RB4 should be lighter than the very light Honda S2000 roadster. The FXO is lighter than the original Mazda RX-7 which was a tiny, tiny car. Just my oppinion, but I think all of the road cars in LFS need to be heavier by 500lbs.

Well comparing those three cars to the nearest real life counterparts:
GTT: 1223kg, Starion Turbo: 1125kg, difference: +98kg
RB4: 1235kg, Celica GT4: 1390kg, difference: -155kg
FXO: 1132kg, Astra Coupe: 1345kg, difference: -213kg

That of course only gives an idea, since they're only inspired by real cars, not based on them. Were they though, 500lb would only be quite close for the FXO. It's more important we end up with closely matched cars (but with distinct handling characteristics) rather than making them look exactly like a real life car (which wasn't the intention anyway)

[Michel 4AGE]

Bob.. RB4/Supra ? I thought it was more like the Celica GT4 ? 4wd,2000cc Turbo?

[Mogar]

FWD usually have a higher power transmission efficiency to the wheels. FXO have higher power/weight ratio and also is more efficient than the other cars, that makes the actual power/weight ratio even bigger than the other cars, and makes it even smaller for the rb4.


A bit more power on rb4 and a little less power on fxo and I think we are all set. Than this will force you to master all the cars in order to be competitive on a championship with a large selection of tracks.

[Tweaker]

Bob.. RB4/Supra ? I thought it was more like the Celica GT4 ? 4wd,2000cc Turbo?

Yeah, a lot more like the Celica, only visually the front resembles somewhat of a Supra.

[96 GTS]

Yes, but you are comparing a race prepped car to a stock car. Take out all the soundproofing, the spare tire, the AC, the radio, the headliner, pull the stuffing out of the back seats and add lightweight racing seats, put on lightweight carbon fiber hood(bonnet), and trunk lid, pull off anything else that you can do without. You will shave a lot of weight off of the car.
The Speed World Challenge E46 BMW 325 base weight is 2750lbs (the weight they are not allowed to go below). The stock car weight is something like 3252lbs. Hmmm, that is about 500lbs.

Setup makes such a huge difference on these cars. It will be very, very difficult to make an assessment without a whole lot of data with different setups and different tracks and different driver styles. But keep cracking at it, we will figure it out eventually.
Yes, that's true, but I don't think the TBO class is race prepped, if you look around the cockpit, they still have radios and A/C units, the seats look normal to me, they still have rear seats. I don't know about carbon fiber hoods. I actually had never even thought of the cars as being race prepped, but if they are, the weight makes perfect sense.

OT, but the GTR cars need to have different interiors than their roadgoing counterparts. The FZ50 GTR even has wood trim lol, it's not a big deal, but I think it would add to the immersion factor if the race cars all had stripped out interiors. Maybe a Pi Reasearch display instead of dials ;) Although the clock does come in very handy, it's way too easy to lose track of time while playing LFS :D

[Bob Smith]

Bob.. RB4/Supra ? I thought it was more like the Celica GT4 ? 4wd,2000cc Turbo?
OK I was struggling to think. Happy now? :)

(I found three weights for the Celica GT4, I went with the middle one...)

[Vegetal]

There are a lot of ways to make it balanced, you could just reduce hp in the FXO, make XRT and RB4 gain some hp, also making FXO heavier or XRT/RB4 lighter etc etc etc.

The biggest point i think, is that the FXO - besides being very easy to drive - is quite faster on most corners, ranging from 3 to 7 kmh faster than XRT or RB4 on cornering average speed, also rocketing out in corner exits. I already said the boxer engine, tire width and reduced weight contributes to this, but i think the easiest way to balance it - without changing it's handling drastically - would be to reduce the contact patch, maybe to the same level as the RB4 (215mm tires).

[Vain]

I think it should stay the way that the FXO can go faster around corners than the other cars. That way it keeps it's characteristic style.
Lowering the hp of the engine would keep the great handling and high cornering speeds but balance the car.
Of course the FXO would still be superior on narrow and twisty tracks, but it'd be inferior on tracks with more straights.

Vain

[sinbad]

Well comparing those three cars to the nearest real life counterparts:
GTT: 1223kg, Starion Turbo: 1125kg, difference: +98kg
RB4: 1235kg, Celica GT4: 1390kg, difference: -155kg
FXO: 1132kg, Astra Coupe: 1345kg, difference: -213kg

That of course only gives an idea, since they're only inspired by real cars, not based on them. Were they though, 500lb would only be quite close for the FXO. It's more important we end up with closely matched cars (but with distinct handling characteristics) rather than making them look exactly like a real life car (which wasn't the intention anyway)

Agreed. Of course the Astra coupe can't have been the complete inspiration for the FXO, or else it would have an inline 4 and not the boxer engine. So if we can assume that the cars aren't really intended to be "like" anything totally, then there's no reason the FXO shouldn't weigh as little as, say, an Integra Type R.

[Hallen]

Yes, that's true, but I don't think the TBO class is race prepped, if you look around the cockpit, they still have radios and A/C units, the seats look normal to me, they still have rear seats. I don't know about carbon fiber hoods. I actually had never even thought of the cars as being race prepped, but if they are, the weight makes perfect sense.


Good point.:nerd:

hehehehe, I never thought I would see racers arguing for LESS hp.

[5th Earth]

OK I was struggling to think. Happy now? :)

(I found three weights for the Celica GT4, I went with the middle one...)

I always thought the RB4 was a Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX... but whatever. The Eclipse weighs significantly more than the RB4, some we can compromise :)

Back on topic... I think initially it was thought that FWD was in itself enough of a disadvantage to make the XRT and the FXO equal, but in practice since the power levels are relatively low, and suspension tuning options fairly extreme, it's really not a problem. If the power and weight were equal, then logically one would think the XRT would be faster.

Anyway, I think the drivetrain effeciency is the main problem--IMHO it shouldn't be different between the XRT and the FXO. IFAIK driveline effeciency is not one of the main advantages of the FWD configuration. I'll grant the FXO lighter weight, since FF does weigh less than FR. Power would be the remaining tweak, but since the FXO is already less powerful, I'd leave it for now and see if the drivetrain alone will make things better.

RB4... just gets the short end of the stick. It has marginally less power than the XRT, but the main killer is the decreased torque--without torque, it can't make full advantage of improved acceleration due to AWD. Extra driveline drag and weight is realistic, but... it's just not powerful enough to need the AWD, just like the FXO isn't powerful enough to really suffer from being FWD. From a "gamer logic" standpoint, I would say the RB4 should be the most powerful, since it's the biggest and heaviest, but it isn't. If all I cared about was game balance, I'd make the RB4 inordinately torque-y at the low end, and give it a slightly more overall power (but not too much). But that'd be with no justification from physics.

[qwejibo]

XR GT Turbo looks like a Mitsubishi Starion, but the technical specs are Porsche 944 Turbo S. 250hp @ 6000rpm, 350Nm @ 4000rpm, 1350kg(XR GTT matches this with driver + 100% fuel) and tyres F: 225/50/16, R: 245/45/16.

[Chaos]

the inbalance of TBO class is there since S1... I love RWD and I think I'm pretty fast with it, but what I can't stand is that someone who is less skilled than me, takes a car that is easier to drive (FXO) and is even faster GTT and beats the hell out of me... I cried for equality in this class long ago and still cry :(

I would make it the other way around: Harder car to drive > better times
Why should the easy car be also the fastest? I just can't understand this...

[Bob Smith]

I'd say the RB4 is easiest, and it's the slowest, so that bit is right. A bit too slow mind.
FXO should at best be as fast as the GTT though, not faster (on the whole). We should be encouraging people to drive real cars.

[sinbad]

We should be encouraging people to drive real cars.

Hmm good one. Gotta love the RWD fanaticism around here some of the time.

[Ziploc]

Balancing??

Check out our leagues qualify list!

Race 8 - LRF @ Aston, National - Qualifying

Modoff (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Modoff) FZ50 1:59.250
RMachucaA (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=RMachucaA) FZ50 1:59.740
banshee56 (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=banshee56) FZ50 2:00.640
Hallen (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Hallen) FZ50 2:00.830
WalkDMC (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=WalkDMC) FZ50 2:00.860
Nick_ll (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Nick_ll) FZ50 2:00.920
Boosterfire (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Boosterfire) FZ50 2:01.150
starry (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=starry) FZ50 2:02.300
sweetreid (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=sweetreid) FZ50 2:03.000
Lino (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Lino) FZ50 2:03.110
Agent248 (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Agent248) RA 2:03.220
CombatWombat (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=CombatWombat) LX6 2:03.310
Ziploc (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Ziploc) LX6 2:03.370:54.470
ZeroR (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=ZeroR) LX6 32:03.530:54.490
Chuby (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Chuby) RA 2:03.570:54.350
edcwhite (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=edcwhite) RA 202:03.850
Supagoat (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Supagoat) LX6 2:03.920
FunkedUp (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=FunkedUp) FZ50 2:03.980
Revzalot (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Revzalot) RA 2:04.050
Cargo (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Cargo) FZ50 2:04.210
Dr3vil (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Dr3vil) RA 2:04.310
zman003 (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=zman003) FZ50 2:04.890
Stuff (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Stuff) RA 2:05.900
Silkswift (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Silkswift) FZ50 2:06.020
Sword of Luck (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Sword of Luck) RA 2:06.390
mrodgers (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=mrodgers) FZ50 2:07.230
bdshan (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=bdshan) RA 2:07.330
The Orange Mage (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=The Orange Mage) RA 2:07.350
ml_paladin888 (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=ml_paladin888) LX6 2:07.770
Kutt (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Kutt) RA 2:08.230
Dygear (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=Dygear) LX6 2:08.710
ricin (http://lfsworld.net/?win=stats&racer=ricin) LX6 2:13.470

[Hoellsen]

Aston Nation is really the absolute worst track to compare anything. Two very long full throttle parts, 3 tight corners + a chicane + one midspeed. Simply not a balanced track in the first place. Most balanced tracks (and preferably the ones to do comparisons on) are Ky3 and As5.

[Carlos H Wrobel]

the brazilian league is using one passenger on FXO to make it fair..

i can do almost the same number of laps w/o changing tires with FXO and XRT

at ky nat i can do 32 laps with XRT, and 31 with FXO... i can drive FXO as fast as XRT... maybe a bit faster(ye, carrin 1 passenger)...

i really dont understand why FXO need to be that faster in comparison with XRT or RB4...

[maczo]

i am yet another one who thinks this is ridiculous that the easier car to drive is the faster one. i was doing something like 60 laps on westhill the other day with XRT. let's say i needed 10, even 20 laps to get to know the track. then the other 40 was improving the times. i got under 2.00 (now dont remember exact times) so it's not that im a complete n00b. then i sat in the FXO and ... voila! beat my XRT time in 3 or 5 laps (took me so long because i was braking way to early for fxo's weight and traction!) and improved by more than a second in another 10 laps. makes me cry.
well, almost ;(

maczo

[Tweaker]

The FXO is pretty easy to drive... has a few tricky parts to it when braking... but other than that, I prefer it over the other two cars now by far.... :(

[Carlos H Wrobel]

if FXO get + weight, maybe 1200kg(actually weights 1130kg)...