Making live for speed a way to tune your real racecar?

[mikespeed95]

Hey,
This is an idea I had talking to a freind on aim.

Is there a way LFS could have a car, that is only able to use offline, that say is just four wheels and an engine. you input how much the engine wieghs, its power output at xxx-xxx rpm, the engine position, tire size, wheel size, wieght, and all the measurements for the suspension.

reason i ask, the physics are decent. but how many of you have wondered how some different rate springs/whatever would feel but dont feel like taking the time to swap everything go to the track and do it when you have LFS already on the computer.

basically an advanced mode, where you are required to spend a couple hours typing in measurements for your car's moving and non-moving parts, so that then you can have it on and go to a lfs track and play with shocks/springs/etc.

just an idea, i know nothing about programming or what it would take, but just curious if this is even a possiblility. probably wouldnt get used a lot but it'd definately be veerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry cool to some people, and it'd be a cool tool to learn more about car setup for people like myself who dont have a lot of experience with fine tuning and nitpicking little things.

[Woz]

Hey,
This is an idea I had talking to a freind on aim.

Is there a way LFS could have a car, that is only able to use offline, that say is just four wheels and an engine. you input how much the engine wieghs, its power output at xxx-xxx rpm, the engine position, tire size, wheel size, wieght, and all the measurements for the suspension.

reason i ask, the physics are decent. but how many of you have wondered how some different rate springs/whatever would feel but dont feel like taking the time to swap everything go to the track and do it when you have LFS already on the computer.

basically an advanced mode, where you are required to spend a couple hours typing in measurements for your car's moving and non-moving parts, so that then you can have it on and go to a lfs track and play with shocks/springs/etc.

just an idea, i know nothing about programming or what it would take, but just curious if this is even a possiblility. probably wouldnt get used a lot but it'd definately be veerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry cool to some people, and it'd be a cool tool to learn more about car setup for people like myself who dont have a lot of experience with fine tuning and nitpicking little things.

You mean LFSTweak built in then?

As long as offline only or opened up through InSim so server could control it would be good, otherwise no.

[mikespeed95]

i tried to undersand lfstweak but my sheer computer ignorance i didnt really get it.

just like a sled car with a boxes you could add to represent car parts and assign wieght and measurement values to them so if you had time and a tape measure you could build your car on it to tune.

maybe even a server option to allow custom rails. that would be some interesting fun.

100000hp 5 lb car versues 10000000lb 1000000hp car. haha. wouldnt be the purpose but would be a little fun.

[dougie-lampkin]

basically an advanced mode, where you are required to spend a couple hours typing in measurements for your car's moving and non-moving parts

:jawdrop: sounds too much like a job! We need enjoyment, not employment! (somone PLZ PLZ sig that :D)

[blackbird04217]

:jawdrop: sounds too much like a job! We need enjoyment, not employment! (somone PLZ PLZ sig that :D)


If you want it sig'd so bad why don't you do it yourself?

[mikespeed95]

lol, it blows my mind if any of you have jobs with how much i time yall spend on here.

[evilpimp]

Well with LFStweak or tune you can change all of that on the cars there is in LFS. Find a car that look s a bit like ur style of car and you can change the engin position, tires, power, everything.

And with the weight restrictions ingame maybe you can get it perfectly like ur car.

Btw just a lil question... Does LFS help you in ur real drifting?

[mikespeed95]

i use lfs as a way to waste time. im just curious if i could learn anything from the physics engine.

[tristancliffe]

You want to know how real spring changes would feel in a real life car by inputting your car in LFS? It won't work - sims are far to simplistic to get specific answers like that.

You'd be better off doing some maths to work out wheel rates and roll rates, comparing them to 'now', rather than finding 3000 variables, from chassis stiffness of YOUR car [not manufacturer spec], exact rising rate equations, bush stiffness, perfect CoG position [which will require you to suspend the car].

You just can't do it accurately enough to get a real idea - certainly no more than you'll get from the maths/Excel approach.

And this perfectly demonstrates your complete lack of understand of vehicle dynamics and mechanics. You can get a friend to send me a rude email comparing me to some unknown racer if you like, without knowing half the facts, but you have yet to demonstrate any understanding of anything at all.

-1

[March Hare]

bush stiffness
Is this even modeled in LfS?

[tristancliffe]

Exactly - it isn't, but will have a major effect on a real car! Replace your bushes with steel examples (or even rod ends, if you have the money to convert!) and see how different the car behaves, even though everything else is the same!...

[mikespeed95]

thanks tristian for reading way too far into my post to make a lame personal attack.

all anyone has to do is look at my posts to see how i fully understand and preach that this is a video game and nothing like real life, althought for a video game its pretty damn good. but nice try.

for physics/exaggeration sake this would be nice to see the effects of radical changes since it shows data.

[tristancliffe]

The effects of radical changes are well documented in books, websites and paddock folklore. There is no need to use LFS (or any other simulator) to tell you that doubling the stiffness of your front springs will increase understeer.

But you weren't talking about radical changes, if you read this part of your post, QFT.
but how many of you have wondered how some different rate springs/whatever would feel but dont feel like taking the time to swap everything go to the track and do it when you have LFS already on the computer.

[southamptonfc]

F1 teams test components and setups in simulators. I don't see why consumer sims can't or wont eventually be used in the same way.

[tristancliffe]

But they design the cars (so they have very accurate 3D models of all the components and their attachments), so can end up with accurate vehicle models and suspension data. They only use new stuff, so can measure their stiffnesses etc, and be confident it won't degrade over 30,000 miles (because they don't do 30,000 miles). They can also do a lot more testing to correlate their results, have thousands of man hours a week devoted to CFD, FEA, Simulation, testing and analysing.

No, I don't think we'll see sensible real race car analysis in grass roots motorsports in our lifetime, for the simple reason we don't know our own cars well enough, and never will (unless we make every bit we can, and thoroughly test every aspect of bought in parts).

[mikespeed95]

The effects of radical changes are well documented in books, websites and paddock folklore. There is no need to use LFS (or any other simulator) to tell you that doubling the stiffness of your front springs will increase understeer.

But you weren't talking about radical changes, if you read this part of your post, QFT.

theres this thing called "selling an idea". you should read about it since thats your forte.

i mean...then again....why use a decent physics engine to play around when bored when you can be glued to a book 24-7 and have nothing to play around with?

[mikespeed95]

F1 teams test components and setups in simulators. I don't see why consumer sims can't or wont eventually be used in the same way.

simple thought pattern for an intendedly somewhat simple idea, i like it!

seriously, this thread is about "hey i want to play with settings, but maybe get an idea on changing things on my real car, it'd be kinda nifty if i could plug something similar to my real car onto lfs to play with in e-racing land, maybe i could even learn something from playing with it on here since fundemental rules will be consant with real life more than likely."

this thread is about....ok i just doubled my spring rate.

this thread is not about OMG SAVE .0001 SECOND PER LAP IRL BY PLAYING VIDEO GAMES

its about playing with things for ideas. ever wonder "what if i did this radical setup" or "what if i wanted to make my car jump"

well, know you miiiiight have a basic fundemental idea. THAT is what this thread/idea is about.

[tristancliffe]

theres this thing called "selling an idea". you should read about it since thats your forte.And I'm shooting it down as rubbish. Maybe you should read about it; when you learn to read ;)
i mean...then again....why use a decent physics engine to play around when bored when you can be glued to a book 24-7 and have nothing to play around with?Because a decent book will teach you more than messing about in a PC sim in less time, and make you go quicker in real life. If you aren't capable or willing to read and learn, then motorsport isn't for you, and therefore this thread becomes redundant.

simple thought pattern for an intendedly somewhat simple idea, i like it!From a simple person too, to maintain the theme.

seriously, this thread is about "hey i want to play with settings, but maybe get an idea on changing things on my real car, it'd be kinda nifty if i could plug something similar to my real car onto lfs to play with in e-racing land, maybe i could even learn something from playing with it on here since fundemental rules will be consant with real life more than likely."And my reply is basically "well you could, but it wouldn't tell you anything you won't already know if you even know what a spring is, and it would be accurate to any appreciable extend as cars are complex and sims are relatively simple [from the end users point of view]. You've made your point. I've made mine. You are crying about it. I'm not.
this thread is about....ok i just doubled my spring rate.Just for shits and giggles, or did you seriously think such a daft increase, in a sim or reality, could ever be a good thing?

this thread is not about OMG SAVE .0001 SECOND PER LAP IRL BY PLAYING VIDEO GAMESI never said it was. But even trying to find whole seconds in real life won't be helped by putting inaccurate 3D models and data into a simplistic simulation.

its about playing with things for ideas. ever wonder "what if i did this radical setup" or "what if i wanted to make my car jump"No, I can't say I have. The basic set up of a car is easily deduced in about a nano-second. There may be three or four basic car set ups, so call it 4 nanoseconds. From there you have to try things, and see what the driver likes. Then take into account how is driving, and perhaps compensating for a faster setup being, technically, worse... A computer sim WILL NOT HELP YOU!!! It might help your children, or their children. But it won't help you.
well, know you miiiiight have a basic fundemental idea. THAT is what this thread/idea is about.Know you might? What? Speak English please. It would help sort your argument(s) out. This thread is about some monkey suggesting something that isn't feasible, and wouldn't help real life people on iota. So I've made that clear.

If you don't like my opinion of the truth of the matter, then simply don't post your ideas on public forums. If you don't agree with me, then either keep quiet or argue the points carefully with thought. Do the latter, and chances are you'll agree with me on this matter. Unless you happen to know nearly everything about your car, from sectional stiffnesses of the chassis, to perfect tyre friction versus slip angle curves, and much much more.

If you want to know what doubling your spring rate is, it's this:
Terrible ride.
Understeer or Oversteer depending on the wheel rates, which you probably have ignored, and also roll rates, which I doubt you've thought about.
Dampers MILES from optimum, even with 'adjustment'.
Stupid ride heights
Poor suspension alignment, if not statically, then in roll and pitch.

Need I go on? I didn't need to even look at LFS's icon to work that out...

[Bob Smith]

While I agree with Tristan, that sims are only as accurate as the data they are fed, and getting some of the required data is very difficult, it does not rule them out completely.

LFS is good in the sense that you can get in and drive and attempt to feel the difference, but a lot depends on the tyre model. Since all tyres differ, unless yours truly match with LFS, then the results will be suitably skewed.

Approaching things from a different angle, but ultimately constrained by exactly the same limitations, is my analyser (see sig if you're not familiar), which I keep trying to push in more of a real world direction with every release. It does what you are asking of but you cannot "get in and drive", as it were.

[southamptonfc]

From a simple person too, to maintain the theme.
GO **** YOURSELF TRISTAN - and I'm sure I speak for most people on this board, probably everyone you have ever met and worked with and your mother too.

[tristancliffe]

Perhaps most people on this forum.
Not likely most people I have ever met.
Possibly people I have worked with recently.
Certainly my mother (bit of a falling out when she said she'd rather I died instead of my brother).

Just because you can't keep up in an argument, in so much that your technical abilities fail before the end of a discussion, doesn't mean you need to resort to swearing...

Incidentally, are you mikespeeds mother, or do you like defending his ignorance? Should I await another amusing email comparing me to a professional race person, or will it be done here (in public or via PM)?

[MillerM]

...

You have got issues, get some help. Seriously.

[tristancliffe]

I have issues with lots of things. One of them is people posting ridiculous stuff about "making LFS a tuning aid for real cars", but being totally unable to back it up with reasonable thoughts and explanations, and falling back on 'Feck you Tristan' when they can't cope with the technical side of things their posts encourage, deserve and require.

I have other issues too, like what wallpaper to put in my hallway, or what damper settings to use as baseline on an Exige. But they aren't important right now.

[spanks]

GO **** YOURSELF TRISTAN - and I'm sure I speak for most people on this board, probably everyone you have ever met and worked with and your mother too.

Tristan is one of the more intelligent living breathing people (not a chapter out of an encyclopedia) on the internet that I have seen on the topic of cars, as well as tearing people to shreds.

His posts are hilarious, and the people usually have it coming :shrug:

Whats the point of starting an argument if you don't expect there to be someone to say you're wrong??? Thats just no fun.

Maybe if you look past the insults and show some interest you might just learn something, or worse yet...even agree with him.

[ajp71]

F1 teams test components and setups in simulators. I don't see why consumer sims can't or wont eventually be used in the same way.


i mean...then again....why use a decent physics engine to play around when bored when you can be glued to a book 24-7 and have nothing to play around with?

The systems real teams use will not be real time, the real time motion simulators they use for driver training will be fairly similar to commercial simulators, still bound by current hardware restrictions but with massive budgets and access to information. The non-real time simulations, which is what you're suggesting generate multiple full time jobs to simulate and develop one car. It isn't realistic to try and do this on your own and would not be a few hours work, the basic principles and results of radical setup changes can be easily read in books or seen in any vaguely similar car in a current real time simulation. Tristan has far more knowledge in this area than either of you and even I can see you haven't got a clue so I'd read his posts if I were you ;)

[southamptonfc]

The systems real teams use will not be real time, the real time motion simulators they use for driver training will be fairly similar to commercial simulators, still bound by current hardware restrictions but with massive budgets and access to information. The non-real time simulations, which is what you're suggesting generate multiple full time jobs to simulate and develop one car. It isn't realistic to try and do this on your own and would not be a few hours work, the basic principles and results of radical setup changes can be easily read in books or seen in any vaguely similar car in a current real time simulation. Tristan has far more knowledge in this area than either of you and even I can see you haven't got a clue so I'd read his posts if I were you ;)

Well I went for a job interview at Toyota F1 to write their realtime F1 simulation system - described as being 'like a playstation game'. Drivers use it to learn circuits. Engineers use it to test new components, systems and setups etc etc. Data is constantly fed into the sim from the car telemetry which is used to improve the sim, it's a cyclic process. I don't know or care if Tristan has more knowledge in this area but we both clearly have more than you.

F1 technology filters through to the consumer market and happens quicker than 1 lifetime. That was simply the point I was making, don't know why everyone on these boards feels the need to have petty arguments about every tiny comment. The words 'get a life' spring to mind....

[tristancliffe]

Technology does indeed seep down within one lifetime. But the fact is they are using one car (each year, although not huge changes between cars anyway), and spend millions of man hours on that one vehicle.

How can Joe-Bloggs, with his nine year old car of questionable quality (bush wear and tear, tyre degradation, chassis fatigue etc) get anything CLOSE to accurate data out of it in a couple of hours (when he doesn't even know 99% of the required data to input, despite 'lots of research') when the F1 teams sometimes struggle too.

If you did go for a job interview at Toyota, then you must be either cleverer or more intelligent than any of your posts, technical or otherwise, have shown. In which case I'm sorry for assuming you are what you type like (a moron). Having said that, clearly you didn't get the job...

Alex has quite a bit of first hand race engineering experience too - he knows quite a bit of stuff too (and has put me right on more than one occasion). I'd go so far as to suggest he knows more than you and mikespeed combined, judging from his technical posts, his ability to discuss technical stuff, and his ability to remain light-hearted during a discussion (and his spamming ability - but he learnt that from yours truly!).

[southamptonfc]

apology accepted :) I take back what I said.

I didn't get the job but that was because they didn't think I'd stick it out in Cologne for more than a couple of years before going to get a job with a team in the UK. I blitzed the technical interview :)

I'm not interested in an argument, all I said was, quote:

"F1 teams test components and setups in simulators. I don't see why consumer sims can't or wont eventually be used in the same way."

Sometimes it's not what people write but they way others interpret them that is the problem. I will say this, when a ford fiesta has as much telemetry gathering capability as a modern f1 car, consumer sims will allow simulations. It will happen, that's my opinion and that's the last post from me.

[tristancliffe]

My advice - if you DO have the technical ability (and therefore language) to discuss this sort of stuff (and bear in mind I know several people from uni that worked at F1 teams from machinists to designers, so I know that a machinist doesn't necessarily understand all the technical stuff), can I advise you to stick to it, and use the language. Bamboozle me with 'tech-speak' every time something like this comes up - who knows, we might both learn something.

Contributing to a 'technical' thread with "GO **** YOURSELF TRISTAN - and I'm sure I speak for most people on this board, probably everyone you have ever met and worked with and your mother too." hardly lets us see you have much technical abilities, and [from memory] other posts on technical matters have left me equally unimpressed.


Technical stuff FTW

[xaotik]

Is there a way LFS could have a car, that is only able to use offline, that say is just four wheels and an engine. you input how much the engine wieghs, its power output at xxx-xxx rpm, the engine position, tire size, wheel size, wieght, and all the measurements for the suspension.

Have you ever played around with X-Plane? It's an interesting flight simulator that it allows you to do just that for flying machines. Prototypes have been made of planes and copters using it's simulating capabilities and for airfoil simulation it's truly impressive what it can achieve.

However, as soon as you do start playing around with it you'll see that it was made from the ground-up to be like this - and it has taken several years to do this. And it's not all that simple to use either.

To change the aim of a piece of software at any given point is pretty hard. I imagine it's even harder for a simulator.

Currently as it stands LFS isn't that much of a thorough simulator, in the strict sense of a datacrunching and information outputting piece of software - like you'd find in the labs of some automotive production company, to actually give you usable data - I believe it's model could also mislead you if taken to extremes or just give you simplistic answers which could be deduced by reasoning to start with.

In a far-fetched way it would be like saying you could use Crayon Physics (http://www.kloonigames.com/blog/games/crayon/) to solve architectural problems. It just might give you a sort-of close idea for a generic concept but you could do that just as well and faster in your mind's eye. And the more you study the more your mind's eye is able to reproduce.

[ajp71]

Well I went for a job interview at Toyota F1 to write their realtime F1 simulation system

Wasn't the majority of the real design work done in CAE programs similar to the commercially available ones that I've seen at uni open days and am looking forward to getting my hands on? Maybe the real time simulation is fed largely from spreadsheet type data outputted by said packages (although at a much greater level of fidelity and not bodged nearly as much as all commercial sims have to at some point, I include LFS in that)? Do they actually use the data analysis from the real car to drive the simulation, surely the computer models offer a more detailed view of what's going on and the real life outputs simply show the accuracy of the model? IIRC there are about 200 different data outputs on an F1 car, which is a lot for looking at what's happening to it but, given only a handful will ever be relevant, not a lot for finding out exactly what's causing the result and to scientifically diagnose a solution.

Regardless of what F1 teams do, and I'm sure useful real time simulation is a future possibility (and I'm prepared to listen to someone who knows better than me whether it's already happening), I very much doubt there will ever be useful real time simulation available in a commercially available product. An F1 car is a pretty simple thing to model compared to an old banger with a big V8 stuck in it, the F1 car has a lot less tat stuck to it than a production based car and the finished thing should be exactly what's built on the computer. If you tried to put an existing car into a sim you'd have to start scanning and precision measuring every single component and it would still then be a rough guesstimate as to what's best and the finer adjustments would be achieved through fairly rough adjustment of adjustable racing suspension and testing, which would be many times less expensive.

Have you ever played around with X-Plane? It's an interesting flight simulator that it allows you to do just that for flying machines. Prototypes have been made of planes and copters using it's simulating capabilities and for airfoil simulation it's truly impressive what it can achieve.


A plane is a much simpler system to simulate though, the only hard things it requires are CFD and stress analysis. The rest of it is pretty simple stuff really and with testing it's entirely possible to build a light aircraft with pencil and paper, in the same way you could go and build a car that drives perfectly safely down the road or pretty well round a race track using existing knowledge and a limited grasp of physics. You couldn't get away with pushing the envelope in the way an F1 car or jet fighter does though with this type of technology ;)

[southamptonfc]

Do they actually use the data analysis from the real car to drive the simulation, surely the computer models offer a more detailed view of what's going on and the real life outputs simply show the accuracy of the model?

Yes they do. It's an iterative process. Real life data is fed into the computer program. By comparing results of the model to measured real life data, the model is improved. It's similar to an AI neural net.

In this way don't need to know every detail about the materials and structures down to atomic level to produce a highly accurate model. The model continuously improves by simply running the simulation and driving the real car and processing the data. Sure, there has to be a starting point for the software which involves in depth modelling but if you have enough modelling points (telemetry sensors), the computer models can create themselves with relatively simple starting points.

Aircraft autopilots use this method to learn how to fly aircraft. They are able to cope with changes in their environment, not simply because of a set of human designed rules. They have brains of their own - quite scary really! :)

[Primoz]

AM i the only one that just hopes to see a post like this from Tristan? I don't know are you all to prod of yourselves to actually read but this guy knows stuff. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOADS of stuff. So i cherish every post that is filled with information. I found out a lot of new stuff from this thread. Didn't read the whole thread (only 3/$ of the first page, then the piss stuff started). I have actually learned a few things from the rare posts from Tristan i've read (don't read him that much, sadly, where can i catch you Tristan? :D), which will hopefully come to use in the future (aiming for a Facutly of mechanical Engineering...).

[ajp71]

Yes they do. It's an iterative process. Real life data is fed into the computer program. By comparing results of the model to measured real life data, the model is improved. It's similar to an AI neural net.


Interesting stuff but it sounds like the real time simulation is simply being based off non-realtime computing that's refined with the real telemetry, much like I suspected. So the product in discussion producing useful outputs wouldn't just be a real time simulation, but a full array of commercial (and privately developed) highly specialised CAE programs requiring a good understanding of physics and with a huge learning curve, definitely not a couple of hours of work or within reach of the home enthusiast.

(don't read him that much, sadly, where can i catch you Tristan? :D)

He's plastered across the forum, although constructive Tristan posts are like a needle in a haystack :D

[southamptonfc]

Interesting stuff but it sounds like the real time simulation is simply being based off non-realtime computing that's refined with the real telemetry, much like I suspected. So the product in discussion producing useful outputs wouldn't just be a real time simulation, but a full array of commercial (and privately developed) highly specialised CAE programs requiring a good understanding of physics and with a huge learning curve, definitely not a couple of hours of work or within reach of the home enthusiast.



Agreed, but it's hard to say when a computer program become a 'real time' simulation, not just rule based - when it's modelling atoms etc? It's something that can be debated forever.

Don't forget that you're reading this on what would probably be considered a super computer 10-15 years ago. There's a bit of freeware software called Space Simulator which NASA would've killed for in the 60's and they had a budget 10's of thousands time larger than any F1 team. If you look at AGI's Satellite toolkit you'll see what kind of thing is available now commercially.

[ajp71]

Agreed that you'll only ever be able to model down to a certain level and modeling any mechanical component at an atomic level isn't realistic and even if you did you'd never be able to get the advantage because of limited tolerances available in even the most precise manufacturing techniques of today.

The thing is though you'd have to be modeling on a level that is completely different to any commercially available sim and you'd be looking at a comparable level of detail to programs that are always going to be serious engineers tools rather than general entertainment.

[mikespeed95]

as someone who
1) doesnt take forums too cerally
2) PREACHES that lfs is just a video game

this thread is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too serious for my blood. some of you people need to lighten up and realize not everyone plays lfs with hopes of being michael schumacher, and some people genuinely dont care, they just wanna play video games.

im not the best car builder tuner on earth, never claimed to be, but after having my tonsils removed and being told to sit inside ways of resolving my immense boredom get thought of, and i posted one.

but seriously, it blows my mind if any of you actually do any real racing because of how much you seem to care about your e-persona. i knew this guy once, he told the same story about how he won a spec race at road atlanta in 1987 and he was the rain man. its 2008 and he tells that story every day. he posts on the internet like some of you do. hes smart and all, but he just takes shit wayy too seriously.

this thread srsly blows me away how cereal it is.

ibsomeonepostsaboutowmuchawesomertheyarewheninreal ityireallyjustdontcare.

[xaotik]

1) doesnt take forums too cerally

I'm with you on that account - they're not that much of a ceral matter really. They're not even candadints for things to be taken cerally.

[tristancliffe]

as someone who
1) doesnt take forums too cerally
2) PREACHES that lfs is just a video game
As someone who
1) Also doesn't take forums to seriously
2) Knows absolutely that LFS is a 'videogame'

I still hope that LFS, in it's attempts to emulate reality to some extent are done so in a technical manner from the ground up, rather than quick bodges to keep the punters happy. There are hundreds of games designed for your intellect, which should keep you happy and away from here. There are not many games that attempt the same thing as LFS in the same way. Most sims, for example, don't care HOW something is achieved, just that the end result isn't far off. Hence rFactor is quite convincing 80% of the time. But it's that last 20%, when you are nearing the limit or slightly past it, that rFactors 'bodge it' approach falls over and reveals a completely dead simulation underneath. You like it? Great! I hate it!!!

this thread is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too serious for my blood. some of you people need to lighten up and realize not everyone plays lfs with hopes of being michael schumacher, and some people genuinely dont care, they just wanna play video games.I'm no Schumacher, and some people don't care. But YOU also have to appreciate that some DO care. And you'll find more of the latter in sim forums like LFS, nK (okay, maybe not nK), X-Plane etc. Niche simulation markets. More people care and aren't just into playing 'videogames' (which is a term I last heard in 1987 - what decade are you living it?!).

im not the best car builder tuner on earth, never claimed to beThat's because you just made up the term 'car builder tuner'. No one in the history of mankind before or since has described themselves as a 'car builder tuner'.

but after having my tonsils removed and being told to sit inside ways of resolving my immense boredom get thought of, and i posted one.Couldn't you have chosen something more constructive, like catching MRSA or SARS?

but seriously, it blows my mind if any of you actually do any real racing because of how much you seem to care about your e-persona.Have you not noticed - I don't give a monkeys about any 'e-persona'. I like technical stuff. I like driving vehicles (rather than being driven by them), and I like simulations.
i knew this guy once, he told the same story about how he won a spec race at road atlanta in 1987 and he was the rain man. its 2008 and he tells that story every day. he posts on the internet like some of you do. hes smart and all, but he just takes shit wayy too seriously.What's that got to do with this? Have you tried taking stuff seriously - you'll find EVERYTHING in life is more absorbing and complex than you ever imagined. Day to day stuff, like... timezones!.. are vastly more complicated than you think about them. Get a life and learn stuff - contribute to the human race in some way, rather than bumming around wasting peoples' time.
this thread srsly blows me away how cereal it is.Ah, a cooked breakfast man.
ibsomeonepostsaboutowmuchawesomertheyarewheninreal ityireallyjustdontcare.

How much awesome? I can cope with no spaces in sentences for effect, but at least make an effort to punch the keyboard accurately. You'll look less dense as a result - see how southamptonfc pulled himself back from the brink of idiocy? It's not too late for you to do the same...

[lalathegreat]

@mikespeed
i get where you were coming from with the idea.

The problem with Tristan is, it seems he can't think on the fundamental level. I have that problem sometimes, when someone asks me a programming related question its hard to just give a answer and convey importance of certain aspects without giving a 20 hour lecture. same with him he can't discuss spring rates without talking about a 100 other variables that you might not even know about much less care about.
so while your idea sounds good, to him he just sees all the unaccounted variables and dismisses it.

[Huru-aito]

so while your idea sounds good, to him he just sees all the unaccounted variables and dismisses it.

Unaccounted variables that would need to be taken into account to end up with a simulation that would actually do what the OP was after..

[tristancliffe]

Try one of the old LFSTweaks or Mechaniks - you CAN change engine, CoG and a host of other variables. And in the setup you can put whatever springs you like on a car. And it won't handle like the real car - partially because LFS remains incomplete (and no one will deny this), and partially because those variables are only the tip of the iceberg.

Do I go on a 20 hour rant about other variables you don't care about? Be that as it may, you HAVE to care about them to get the desired function. Why do you, when discussing programming, go on the same rants about other aspects of the programming that the other person hadn't considered? It's because they NEED to consider it.

I don't give a monkeys if you didn't know or don't care about the vast complexity of the original suggestion. But the fact is it IS a complex scenario, and without proper attention paid you won't learn anything.

Besides, you can double the spring rate of one of the cars in LFS (that closely matches your real life car) and see what it does with the limited variables we have now.

[lalathegreat]

Do I go on a 20 hour rant about other variables you don't care about? Be that as it may, you HAVE to care about them to get the desired function. Why do you, when discussing programming, go on the same rants about other aspects of the programming that the other person hadn't considered? It's because they NEED to consider it. i would not go so far as to say they "NEED" more like "really should" all depends on the situation you can satisfy

I don't give a monkeys if you didn't know or don't care about the vast complexity of the original suggestion. But the fact is it IS a complex scenario, and without proper attention paid you won't learn anything.
i think its really subjective wether or not you'll learn something. i doubt LFS will ever teach you something you didn't already know.
for someone who knows substantially less, they might learn a great deal. Now am not saying his scenario of plugging in variables from his car will net him results that are actually useful. His suggestion at heart was to be able to edit variables that give the cars their characteristics IE Cog and all that lalalalala

[tristancliffe]

His suggestion at heart was to be able to edit variables that give the cars their characteristics IE Cog and all that lalalalalaWrong. His suggestion at heart was stated thus:

"but how many of you have wondered how some different rate springs/whatever would feel but dont feel like taking the time to swap everything go to the track and do it when you have LFS already on the computer"

To paraphrase "I would like to input my own car into LFS to see what drastic changes to setup data, such as doubling the spring rates [taken from later in his replies], will have on my car".

I have discredited this of being any use whatsoever because his car, no matter how carefully he measures the data, will not be accurately simulated to the degree required to get any useful data out - Stupid Inputs = Stupid Outputs. He would be no better off using, say, the UF1 and doubling the spring rates than he would putting 'his car' into LFS. And that sort of stuff is well documented, easily visualised, and pretty simple to calculate.

[henrico-20-]

Lfs has a pretty good feeling of the cars when you practise a lot and you know what to change on yr setups and so lets say 30% realism?? but it would be impossible to add all movements, forces and so into the sim. and if it was possible, it would take ages to recreate your 13 slivia with an LS1 engine! and there are other facts that change yr cars handeling like weather, Human Gforces, dust/oil on track. if you wan't a realistic car, then the enviorment must be even as realistic otherwise it just won't work. best thing to do is go out in the weekend, get some spare springs with diffrent stiffnes, other tires, brake pads/discs, coilovers, strutbars, enginemounts, gear ratio's and more.. test the diffrent parts and write the diffrences in a notebook. this is maybe expensive but it is the ONLY way to learn. an yes i know what i'm talking about.. :rally_dri