Setups needs to go..

[Boris Lozac]

One of the things that putted me off from LFS is the whole setups nonsense. I am sick of being forced to use unrealistic and rubish setups if i want to be fast.. Some of them totally ruin the car till it's no longer recognizable.
I haven't followed LFS progress recently, but my teammate said something about road cars getting very limited setup options. That's great and a good step, but we need that with all the cars..
Limit ALL unrealistic options that you wouldn't find in your normal RL pit stop. Limit all settings that are related to uncomplete or wrong physics. Like aerodinamics and stuff. If it's still not coded, then let's not have the option to mess with that and make redicolous setups just so we can be fast.
It all came to the point where people who find more glitches and bugs in physics make sets, and you are literally forced to use similiar sets just so you can keep up.
I know this is the good way of finding bugs in physics, etc, but how long do we have to be guiney pigs and is it more important then good racing? :)
There are beta testers there for a reason...

[ColeusRattus]

I do agree that realistic setup restrictions are a step in the right direction.

But I also think that the role of setups is overrated in a race. While a "good" setup might gain you a second or two over a lap, it usually makes the car so unstable and tyre eating that it's almost undrivable for anything longer than five laps.
Basically, it's still the skill that's the main deciding factor.

[geeman1]

I haven't followed LFS progress recently, but my teammate said something about road cars getting very limited setup options. That's great and a good step, but we need that with all the cars.. AFAIK Scirocco is the only car that will have limited setup options.

[Bawbag]

Erm, what kindov bugs are you on about? The last bug I can remember was the high nose bug, which was in patch P or something.... :schwitz:

I agree with the road cars though, but the scirocco is like the guiney pigs you were on about, i'm fairly certain that when it's released the devs will think about limiting the setups for other road cars too, if it's a success ofcourse. :)

[geeman1]

There are beta testers there for a reason...The thing is that even the best beta teams can only find a fraction of the bugs and glitches that the game has.

[Boris Lozac]

But I also think that the role of setups is overrated in a race. While a "good" setup might gain you a second or two over a lap, it usually makes the car so unstable and tyre eating that it's almost undrivable for anything longer than five laps.
Basically, it's still the skill that's the main deciding factor.

Not quite, as most of my (and majority probably) races are 5 or so lap stints, and there those 1 or 2 seconds means first place or last :)
I hate the fact that cars loose all the soul and "personality" with those horrid sets. I haven't drove a proper LX set for years, all of the fast ones feels like i'm driving the most understeery car in the world. :schwitz:

I even came to the point that i see GT5 as my simming rescue. :tilt: I don't want to have to pay for iRacing, and i don't want to drive LX that understeers more then XFG..
What's the deal with that anyway, is it still the justification that we are helping in nailing the physics, so we have these million setup options?

[Not Sure]

I agree with OP, the setups have become a burden.

I'm not a fast driver by no means, but it still frustrates me to know that the drivers that beat me by seconds are probably using unrealistic setups. Not to mention things like wheel / chase view, clutch cheat.. but i digress.

I don't see why we don't have server determined setups OPTION. People who enjoy fiddling with setups would not lose anything, and those of us that enjoy an even field could have a place to race.

I understand unlimited setup tweaking may be benefical to testing the physics engine. Why not keep single player as it is, but limit setup options in multiplayer. Win - win?

Limiting setups is the easiest way to enhance the racing experience, ironing out all the bugs from physics will take time.

When I was introduced to LFS i was impressed by the flexibility of setup options. This however should not stand in the way of enjoying LFS. I have a feeling more and more "serious" sim-racers are switching to iRacing.. :shrug:

[[DUcK]]

Which of the "more serious sim-racers" do you mean? Most are just getting bored of the same content in LFS, switching to other sims, it's nothing to do with lack of forced setups.
I also disagree, I don't believe there is such a thing as an un-realistic setup. Some of the assymetrical setups are probably not ones you'd see in real life, but how do you know that they wouldn't work in real life?

[zeugnimod]

Not to mention things like wheel / chase view, clutch cheat.. but i digress.

You are putting using chase view and using that clutch macro on the same level? :pillepall

[Not Sure]

You are putting using chase view and using that clutch macro on the same level? :pillepall

Yes I am, both offer unfair advantage and are not available in real life.

[zeugnimod]

Yes I am, both offer unfair advantage and are not available in real life.

Wow. :thumbsdow

Do you realize that one is an option in the game and the other one is achieved by external programs?

[Not Sure]

;1062497']Which of the "more serious sim-racers" do you mean? Most are just getting bored of the same content in LFS, switching to other sims, it's nothing to do with lack of forced setups.
I also disagree, I don't believe there is such a thing as an un-realistic setup. Some of the assymetrical setups are probably not ones you'd see in real life, but how do you know that they wouldn't work in real life?

Maybe you are right, it's not the setups per se that are making LFS less interesting. But this issue would be really easy to fix, so why are you against it? I don't mean to flame, I just can't understand why would anyone be opposed to closer / more realistic racing..

[[DUcK]]

It doesn't make racing any less realistic. Don't get me wrong I'm all for limited setup options, but it does take some fun out of it. Then again it also saves me a few minutes not having to play with so many options in the set for league races :p
I think the FBM should be the most limited in the setup, though, along with the road going cars.
Don't get me started on clutches :p

[CSF]

You are putting using chase view and using that clutch macro on the same level? :pillepall

Bwahahaha that's you told Zeug. :D

[zeugnimod]

:sadbanana

[Byku]

A simple option on server site: "Realistic setups - on"... that's all I want. I like to play with todays setup options(thx to them i've learned a lot about car suspension etc), but also I would like to be able to race in realistic matter on servers :).

[Timdpr]

I hate setups, I really do...for instance, I've been along to 2 Kyoto 250 practices. In the first race, I qualified last iirc, and finished pretty low down. I was then given a set, and in the last race, I qualified 6th and finished 6th! As soon as I recieved that set, my laptimes were faster by two thirds of a second. There are some slow people out there who are doing well because of a good set, and fast people who are doing badly because of a slow one. I know setting up your car is a major part of motorsport, but you have so many options on road cars, ones that you can take to real extremes...

IMO, setups in LFS need to be a lot more limited than they are now. It would produce closer racing, I'm sure!

[Bawbag]

Unrealistic setups are only as unrealistic as you make them. These so called un ealistic setups your on about may seem unrealistic to you, but to the person that made the setup, it will feel great, because they like it.

What i'm saying is when I make a setup, I don't think about all the people who would like more understeer than the setup provides, but I make it so that I like it, so that I can drive the car on the limit and be able to keep the car on the road. If you don't like using faster guys setups, dont use them, just because these guys drive faster than you, doesn't mean that their setup is faster.

'Not sure', what's the point in fixing something that isn't actually the problem? :S

Also, what's going to make it more realistic and closer? I'm not opposing the idea of the restricted setups btw, i'm just questioning the reasons.

[[DUcK]]

I couldn't agree more Ray. A setup is setting the car up to be able to be pushed to the limit whilst you're in your comfort zone. More often than not, the fast guys like driving oversteery sets, so they can handle the car, rather than guessing what it's about to do next. Admitedly I couldn't drive most of the fast sets when I started, but once I started getting more confidence and driving faster, the set became easier to drive.

[Glenn67]

;1062514']Don't get me started on clutches :p

:Kick_Can_

[Not Sure]

I did not start this thread, and I have already expressed my view on this matter. Let's keep this on topic

[[DUcK]]

I don't believe it has gone off topic? :p

[Boris Lozac]

Unrealistic setups are only as unrealistic as you make them. These so called un ealistic setups your on about may seem unrealistic to you, but to the person that made the setup, it will feel great, because they like it.

And that person for example never sat in the real car in his life or been to a RL garage/pit. People are just finding ways to make them faster, and that would be ok, but in the process they mess the car up so badly that all the charactheristics of the car are gone! Fast LX sets are AWEFULL. Period.

I don't know how to make a set, so if i want to be fast i have to use some random set.
Are there any real mechanics/race drivers here, do you have all those options when you're setting the car up? :tilt:

[[DUcK]]

Well no, you don't have the amount of options that LFS provides, but if I did, I'd sure as hell be using them.

[Not Sure]

I meant to reply to Bawbag:s message.

My reasoning was based on the fact that the "fast setups" more often than not exploit physics "features" that really should not be there. Locked diffs is one example.

Yeah, nobody has to use these sets if they don't want to, that is true.

So one could say there is nothing unfair here, we all have access to WR-sets.
My point is that I would like to race with realistic setups WITHOUT it being a disadvantage. If you don't see this as an issue, that is fine too.

LFS is supposed to be a simulator, remember?

[Glenn67]

;1062563']Well no, you don't have the amount of options that LFS provides, but if I did, I'd sure as hell be using them.

Well even if you had more options in real life could you use them? I'm sure you haven't used all the options you have currently got due to that thing called a hole in your wallet :p

As always my stance is give us more options but allow server side restrictions :melting:

[Boris Lozac]

So one could say there is nothing unfair here, we all have access to WR-sets.
My point is that I would like to race with realistic setups WITHOUT it being a disadvantage. If you don't see this as an issue, that is fine too.

LFS is supposed to be a simulator, remember?

Exactly

[[DUcK]]

Well it doesn't cost money to change ARB stiffness, ride height or tyre pressures Glenn :p
And besides, LFS doesn't involve money, so why should you pretend you've got a budget?
As for the locked diff conspiracy, we use a mini spool (locked diff basically), and it turns in fine.
I can't understand why everyone thinks locked diffs in LFS are so unrealistic. The setups they are used on, are so oversteery that of course it will turn in, besides, the fast guys usually slide the rear end of the car around.
The only thing different I find is that it's much easier to get out of the pits in LFS with locked diff than it is in the cup car :D

[Glenn67]

Locked diffs is one example.

In something like an XFG and entry level racing you are actually likely to see locked diffs in real life if rules allow it, as it is nasty but very cheap alternative to LSD. There is not too much in the setup perameters in LFS that couldn't be replicated in real life my dad for instant cut and rewelded suspenion parts to get the camber he wanted :shrug:.

Don't get me wrong though I don't particularly like the fact that just by changing to someone elses set when I've jumped on for a quick race can at times see an improvement in lap times by up to 2 sec a lap :schwitz:Hence why I'd really like to see some cars restricted or better imo would be server side restrictions, which I'm sure some would support (perfect for CTRA1).

[sinbad]

;1062573']Well it doesn't cost money to change ARB stiffness, ride height or tyre pressures Glenn :p
And besides, LFS doesn't involve money, so why should you pretend you've got a budget?
As for the locked diff conspiracy, we use a mini spool (locked diff basically), and it turns in fine.
I can't understand why everyone thinks locked diffs in LFS are so unrealistic. The setups they are used on, are so oversteery that of course it will turn in, besides, the fast guys usually slide the rear end of the car around.
The only thing different I find is that it's much easier to get out of the pits in LFS with locked diff than it is in the cup car :D

Because LFS should simulate competition regulations. Limitations to setup should be as well considered as limitations to engine performance, weight reduction, tyres, and wheel size are. It shouldn't just be a case of "allow everything because I coded it and want people to notice".

If a series which allows myriad adjustments to everything is being simulated then fine. If not, then restrict things accordingly.

[Glenn67]

;1062573']As for the locked diff conspiracy, we use a mini spool (locked diff basically), and it turns in fine.

Cough don't those mini spool diff act as an open dif in coast (power off) mode :razz: that would make them turn in easy :x

']Well it doesn't cost money to change ARB stiffness, ride height or tyre pressures Glenn :p

Got those new headers yet? :p

[[DUcK]]

I wouldn't have thoght so as it holds both axle's together therefore making it locked, I may be wrong, but that's my understanding of it.
Yeah we got sponsored them ;)

You make a good point, sinbad. ;)

[Bawbag]

My point is that I would like to race with realistic setups WITHOUT it being a disadvantage. If you don't see this as an issue, that is fine too.

LFS is supposed to be a simulator, remember?


Since when was using locked diff an advantage? If it was such a big advantage then everyone would use it, but they don't. Even in MoE race, quite alot of teams used clutch pack (I know we did) :shrug:

Boris, how do you know all of these fast people who make setups don't have any experience? Why don't you go drive one of Norbis setups? :thumb:

On the note of realism, I used to drive a corsa, which is somewhat similar to the XFG, if the XFG handled like my "realistic" corsa, I'm pretty sure the only people left driving it would be on the Cruise servers.

[S14 DRIFT]

I kind of agree... but then again, you can alter anything you want on LFS.. and rightly so, I think.

Besides, with all of these setup sharing websites, there's no excuse. It wouldn't overly bother some people if they were restricted though (such as me), because it would mean there'd be more chance of a closer race, but still, I'm undecided abou the whole thing.

:shrug:

[Glenn67]

;1062601']I wouldn't have thoght so as it holds both axle's together therefore making it locked, I may be wrong, but that's my understanding of it.
Yeah we got sponsored them ;)

Your spot on Ducky :p don't know what i was thinking (me brain is too rusty at the moment :razz:) Great to hear you got the gear you were after. Looking forward to the up coming season :)

Interesting with a quick google search and some reading of different forums just how many people do use spool diffs (locked diff) in both racing and their street cars. The most common comment that stood out was that a locker is much more predictable than a LSD, which interestingly enough was the same reason it was so widely used in LFS...

[Not Sure]

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=35229

I'll just leave this here. :hide:

[pearcy_2k7]

I like it the way it is personally, you can gain a whole new perspective on a car just by changing minor things, it can make you love it instead of hate it. It actually keeps more interest for me, even though i don't make setups, its almost like driving a different car intirely, so why would you want to limit that experience. Like has been said the VW will be a mule, so maybe this thread is a little early :thumb:

[S14 DRIFT]

I like it the way it is personally, you can gain a whole new perspective on a car just by changing minor things, it can make you love it instead of hate it. It actually keeps more interest for me, even though i don't make setups, its almost like driving a different car intirely, so why would you want to limit that experience. Like has been said the VW will be a mule, so maybe this thread is a little early :thumb:


Mmhm... +1 indeed :D

[sinbad]

On the note of realism, I used to drive a corsa, which is somewhat similar to the XFG, if the XFG handled like my "realistic" corsa, I'm pretty sure the only people left driving it would be on the Cruise servers.

There are plenty of small fwd hatchbacks in existence with little power that are a joy to drive. I'd question the "realism" of LFS if they could not give a similar spec car the same stock suspension settings without it becoming terrible or terribly boring to drive.

[Hallen]

One of the things that putted me off from LFS is the whole setups nonsense. I am sick of being forced to use unrealistic and rubish setups if i want to be fast.. Some of them totally ruin the car till it's no longer recognizable.

That may be...
But every set that I have ever used that was competitive AND setup for longer races has always been quite reasonable. Sure, some used locked diffs, and tire pressures are a bit goofy in LFS, but other than that, they had perfectly reasonable spring, damper, and ARB settings.

Find some of the sets used by the good teams in MoE or IGTC or other top series. I think you will find that most of them are quite reasonable. They are well within the bounds you would find on a real car.

I think extreme sets are put together for one of two reasons.

The person building the set doesn't really know what they are doing and because something in the set is totally goofy (but within normal ranges) they have to compensate with something totally unrealistic somewhere else.

Or

People are compensating or exploiting some quirks in the LFS physics.

Most of the time, however, this type of set is only good for hot lapping or short sprint races. They are either to unpredictable to drive in a longer race, or they will eat tires.

I do want to see some limits placed on setup options for some of the cars. A more limited range of spring and damper settings would be OK for example. But I don't want to see things to the level of only allowing changes to tire pressure and maybe camber. If you are going to race a car, unless it is a showroom stock class, you are going to make changes to make the car faster.

[sinbad]

If you are going to race a car, unless it is a showroom stock class, you are going to make changes to make the car faster.

That's the clincher. You'll do whatever the regulations allow and no more, and not just to the chassis, but to the engine, body and interior too but LFS draws a line there arbitrarily.

If they'd just take the time to make a decision about what level of racing the "classes" and cars in LFS represent and then mimic real world series regulations and restrictions (and vehicle appearances) nobody could argue with it whatever their decisions. It's the vague randomness, the not really knowing if a car's supposed to be a road and track car or a rather highly prepped race car, which confuses people.

[Kid222]

+1 for fixed setups on road cars, if it's for the good of realism.

On the other hand i am afraid that after it's (ever) done, cars will be not so much fun to drive anymore... but since they're fictional (majority), devs can make them drivable, i hope.

[Huru-aito]

Maybe after VWS has been released, some thought could be given to restrict the vehicle setups. And definitely NO SERVER OPTIONS for the setup limitations, we have enough options already..

If the car doesn't have a rollcage, it's a roadcar - only allow toe and maybe camber changes (depending on suspension type). Tyre compound & pressures should be free, but knobbly and hybrid tyres should be left for rallycross tracks only. No changes to gearbox or differential. Ackermann should be locked. Maybe a few choices of fixed value springs and dampers for TBO class, as well as FZ5 and the LX cars. RAC should run whatever it runs in real life (with a special version for Tege to do tests :nod:).

Single seaters should have setup options like in real life, with correct accuracy.

Tin top racecars could very well be as is, but some limitation to the accuracy of adjustments. Springs at 10N/mm steps, dampers with one math value and then steps (clicks) to fine tune etc.. Gearboxes with realistic & fixed shaft distance -> limited amount of possible gear sets.

Locked diffs could be allowed, but if the physics are fine tuned then they should be pretty much unusable.


On the other hand, LFS is so much a work in progress that locking the setups could result in changes in class balancing if there's ever a physics overhaul..

[S14 DRIFT]

There's no rule that you can only use knobbly tyres off road, look at all of these 4x4s (none of which actually go offroad I may add!)

[UncleBenny]

Yes, what Huru-aito suggests is exactly how I envision it some day. I don't really mind the open setups as they are now, but it would definitely be an improvement if more restricted setups moved from the VWS to the other cars at some point in the future.

[NickC]

IMO

Somethings in setup are not realistic at all. The car doesnt react to changes like it should. I can't use my real life experience for this, because somethings are just not right ;) ( one car more then the other btw )

I like the idea of making the cars in forms of cupracing. Limited setup options, but still enough to make a change in laptimes etc. ( good setuppers should be rewarded ) For example make the fox regulations Like the FRenault2.0. XFG like clio cup etc etc. Change the gearing to SHORT MEDIUM LONG also.

gr Nick

[Hallen]

LFS has its limitations.

You can change things in the engine... you have the intake restrictor. That's enough for now. Many club classes only allow minor changes to engines like a performance "chip". That's about it. Plus "buying" headers and other stuff to put on the car just makes things messy and complicated for racing online. You want to talk about class balancing issues then?

You can change the weight. Again, that is enough for now.

Just because a car is faster (eg, it is the R version), doesn't necessarily mean that only the faster car should have adjustments. I have seen plenty of street machines that have been modified for track/street use. Camber plates are relatively cheap and easy to install, many also have caster adjustments. Adjustable coil-over suspensions are easily attainable for just about any car. Fender rolling, wider tires, aero devices, diff changes, brake upgrades, etc. I have seen it all and I have seen it on cars that might surprise you.

All race cars, and I do mean all, have a roll cage. Period. You don't race without one. You can't really use that in LFS as a delimiter though. I view the XRG as a "prepared" class car in club racing. You should be able to make a pretty wide range of adjustments to it.

What I don't want to see is setup capabilities so limited that everybody just pushes the sliders up and to the right and there ya go... that's the fastest set. There must be enough variability to allow people to make both good and bad sets and to accommodate different driving styles. It's all in the fun.

[Forbin]

Fast LX sets are AWEFULL. Period.

You feel that way because you can't drive them. Period.

I don't know how to make a set, so if i want to be fast i have to use some random set.
So learn. I did. No one taught me. I found out what made the car handle as I wanted and went from there.

A more complete understanding of how damping works was acquired later in college while studying Laplace and step response as they relate to waves, specifically electrical waves. Bob Smith's setup analyzer helped further.

I started way back in 2003 (and apparently so did you). Since then, I made sets that lead me to win many races in LOTA, GFC, and OWRL. I also helped fine-tune the set that lead to CoRe Racing winning the 2008 MoE 24HR race in the GT2 class. Two of our top drivers were able to go 23 laps per stint with that set, longer than any other team in the GT2 class, and it probably could have gone at least another lap or 2.

[Hallen]

You feel that way because you can't drive them. Period.

... Bob Smiths setup analyzer helped further.

Well, he did say "Awefull" which probably means the same as "Full of Awe". I take that to mean he is humbled by the LX.

Bob's setup analyzer is way cool. It will help in understanding what setup changes do.

[Forbin]

Well, he did say "Awefull" which probably means the same as "Full of Awe". I take that to mean he is humbled by the LX.

Bob's setup analyzer is way cool. It will help in understanding what setup changes do.

The LX, especially the LX6, suffers no fools.

The OP clearly lacks the skills necessary to drive an LX fast and therefore thinks all setups should meet his idea of an acceptable level of driveability and a lack of adjustability to suit his lack of learning ability.

[Boris Lozac]

The OP clearly lacks the skills necessary to drive an LX fast and therefore thinks all setups should meet his idea of an acceptable level of driveability and a lack of adjustability to suit his lack of learning ability.

O rly... thank you for your wisdom...

[Forbin]

Seriously, Boris, this is the kind of thread I'd expect from someone who has been with LFS for less than a year, not 5. Can you honestly say you haven't the slightest familiarity with what any of the setup options do?

Are there any real mechanics/race drivers here, do you have all those options when you're setting the car up?
I do trackdays and races on my motorcycle. I do all my own work in the garage besides mounting tires on the wheels. I still remove and install the wheels myself.

What options are you referring to, exactly?

Spring rate? Stock rate on the front of my SV650 is something like .65 kgf/mm. Middleweight race bikes typically use about 0.9-1.0 kgf/mm, depending on rider weight, and the max is something like 1.2 to 1.5.

Damping? At the moment, I can only change the fork damping on my SV via fork oil weight. Thicker oil = more damping. However, Traxxion Dynamics makes a cartridge fork insert that provides fully adjustable compression and rebound damping. Likewise, the rear shock on my SV has no damping adjustment, but I can buy a new one (Penske, for example) for a reasonable price that provides full adjustability. Rear shock changes are also dead simple. I can't speak for the exact range of adjustment but I would imagine it is substantial.

Ride height? This is very simple to change on the front on any bike. Just slide the fork tubes up or down in the triple clamp. As with damping, this adjustment requires an aftermarket rear shock on my SV. The range of adjustment on both ends is very wide.

Steering lock? Not so critical on a bike since riders tend to use so little on the track, but some reduce it slightly to prevent the bars from hitting bodywork or the fuel tank at full lock.

Caster/rake? Most riders use ride height changes to change rake angle. On some bikes it's possible to change the angle of the steering head. Again, there's a very wide range of adjustment here.

Toe? Yes, all bikes have this adjustment, at least in the rear, except it's simply called "alignment". If it's not at least fairly straight, the bike acts very strange. Perfectly straight (0 degrees) is ideal.

Gear ratios? Yeah, LFS does get a bit crazy in this respect. Basically all I can do on the bike is change front and rear sprockets, which changes the final drive ratio.

Tires? This is one area where there is significantly more adjustability in real life than LFS, unless you race in a spec-tire series.

Tire pressures? Hmm... no explanation needed here.

[kaynd]

Flexibility in setup options is one of the main things that got me into LFS. Removing them entirely from the sim is like taking half of the fun out for me. :shrug:

Unrealistic setups are made due to current tire model flaws. I have already referred to this (http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=960535#post960535) many times. FWD cars in LFS reeealy suck (http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1004170#post1004170) for this reason.

I also think that server side setup restriction is the way to go for all cars and classes.
As I have already said in another similar thread (http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1010657#post1010657). Event organizers are the ones who restrict the amount of changes you can do to the car you are racing.

[aceracer]

rFactor has fixed setup servers. Everyone has a certain setup determined by the server. At first I thought this was great - even field and all, everybody with the same car. After facing for a while I thought the exact opposite.

1) faster drivers were still faster drivers - and there were still seconds in it
2) it's very frustrating to drive around a track doing 1.23s when you know you can easily do 1.20s - but the default set is arse :)
3) You have to drive a car you don't like, unless you are the server admin and specified your set!
4) the set is likely to be n00b safe which makes it boring and slow to drive for experienced racers

So the end results of the race is the same except that half the field didn't have any fun cos they have to drive a crap car.

I have around 10 sets for as3 (of course, I'm a CD:D) which caln all do 1:40.50s and they all do them in different ways. Comparing and tweaking these I have learned so much about:

- car behaviour
- effect of one setting against another
- other ppls driving styles
- setting up cars

I find I enjoy LFS more now that I understand more about cars. It allows me to take an "alien" set and adapt it tomy needs - or learn how to drive it myself - or understand why I can't drive it :)

I find it makes me a much more complete racer and it has helped me become noticeably faster on many other combos.

Once you've cracked the basics you can take any set, make it fit your style in no time and be competitive. There really is no need to be 2 secs a lap off the pace because of the set. Any half decent set can be made to run competitively. It's the last half second to the alien times which is the real crunch point. But you don't need to go that fast to win 99% of the races you participate in.

So honetly, I coulnd't disagree more with the argument of the title post of this thread...

aceracer

[[DUcK]]

Great post aceracer! I can't fault any of your arguments, noice! :D

[ajp71]

Since when was using locked diff an advantage? If it was such a big advantage then everyone would use it, but they don't. Even in MoE race, quite alot of teams used clutch pack (I know we did) :shrug:

Whether it is still an advantage following better clutch pack modeling is not the point, it is still widely used in LFS and totally unrealistic for modern single seaters and GT cars. There are very few examples of modern GT cars comparable to LFSs GTRs where locked differentials are used as an alternative to a clutch pack system (other than for cost saving in grass roots racing). There have been a few examples where locked diffs have been used in circuit racing, but nearly always either in very high power endurance racing prototypes or unsophisticated older GT cars where the track surfaces were a lot worse than today, these were still the exception rather than the rule and always came with lots of understeer as a price to pay. Usually justified because it was both made a wildly powerful car (we don't have any in LFS) controlable and easier to drive at the expense of outright speed and because of issues with clutches not be strong enough to take the torque (never been an issue for LFS type GT cars).

Aside from the RWD cars, where there is at least an arguement that it is possible and has been done before is the issue of FWD cars with locked diffs. In all the time it has been up for debate nobody has ever found me a believable example of a front wheel drive circuit racing car using a fully locked diffential. In most front wheel drive cars it would make the steering extremely heavy (which we get round) and would put huge forces over the driveshafts, causing all sorts of issues, especially if they haven't been equalised correctly. I don't think we have any driveshaft twisting simulated, which would also adversely effect a car with a locked differential.


Just because a car is faster (eg, it is the R version), doesn't necessarily mean that only the faster car should have adjustments. I have seen plenty of street machines that have been modified for track/street use. Camber plates are relatively cheap and easy to install, many also have caster adjustments. Adjustable coil-over suspensions are easily attainable for just about any car. Fender rolling, wider tires, aero devices, diff changes, brake upgrades, etc. I have seen it all and I have seen it on cars that might surprise you.


Adjustments in real cars are not as precise and cannot be performed trackside so easily. They are mainly for basic setup to account for manufacturing tolerance, accident damage and general bodging. The perfect car wouldn't have much suspension adjustment, producing fastenings and adjustment mechanisms adds drag and weight where you want it least. In reality testing time and data feedback is limited and the car, track and weather are never exactly the same between sessions as they are in the sterile world of LFS atm, personally I think the sterilness is a bigger issue than the freedom of setups, if the cars allowed pointlessly precise setup adjustments that wouldn't be an issue if LFS somehow randomly made slight changes to the shape and structure of the car and all suspension components to accomodate for real life wear and tear on a car, which is really far from a rigid body.

[ajp71]

Are there any real mechanics/race drivers here, do you have all those options when you're setting the car up? :tilt:

I suppose I've got 4 different angles of experience.

Riley 1.5 stage rally car - tyre pressures, 3 choices of tyre (gravel, fast road, road legal semi-slick), choices of different designs of steel and aluminum brake drums (in development, not really a setup choice), brake shoe material, all geometry is modified but fixed (other than standard tracking).

Morgan Roadster (road legal race car) - tyre pressures, single control tyre for all conditions (although other wet tyres are allowed few bother with the hassle/cost on road tyres), camber shims (everybody has them set to maximum allowed by series), 40 notch single way adjustable dampers (rather cheap units, better ones would have fewer adjustments over a smaller more useful range), brake regulator (under car, not worth cockpit mounting).

F4 (single seaters, wings and slicks) - tyre pressures, control slicks/free wets (but we only use one type), fully adjustable suspension arms (mostly in order to get the geometry how it was designed to be, not adjusting it from standard), adjustable camber, caster (car dependent), ride height/corner weights, wings (total guesswork, just move them up and down in a slot done by feel and not really replicable), adjustable coil over dampers (changing springs is difficult and time consuming without specialist equipment). Gear ratios are adjustable, but it takes at least half an hour to do so is rarely done trackside unless absolutely essential.

Endurance racing BMW E36/E46 2 litre 4, 6 cyl M3, V8 (races between 2-24 hours) - cars are literally ready to go out again without work after a 24 hour race, well built and reliable usually finish far higher than over stressed machines that are quicker in terms of raw pace. There are very few adjustments made really, the cars are setup for the drivers that drive them and stay the same pretty much all season (bar dampers/wings/gearing if really necessary). The cars are setup more towards what the drivers want than what might be theoretically faster, there's no point in setting a car up to be quick if it just ends up in the wall. The cars always run the same hard compound slicks (probably like R4s in LFS!), the tyres can last upto 4 hours, meaning two pitstops, keeping pit time and cost down. During the build process pretty much anything can be changed, and the suspension is redesigned, better cars will have 4 way adjustable dampers, typically with about 8 notches on each setting. Rear wings are adjustable (but aren't terribly precise), the aero package has to be decided during shell preparation. There is little that can be done about changing front downforce, high downforce cars have adjustable winglets that help a little but really it simply has to be balanced with the rear wing and if you build a car without a suitable front splitter to put on it then there is nothing you can do trackside. Gearing can be changed, but rarely is. Changing the final drive is easier, a quick diff change with military precision takes 14 minutes.

[Boris Lozac]

Seriously, Boris, this is the kind of thread I'd expect from someone who has been with LFS for less than a year, not 5. Can you honestly say you haven't the slightest familiarity with what any of the setup options do?

Offcourse i know what some of them do, but it never interest me to investigate and make some setups. But that's not the point, what bothers me is that most of the fast sets take advantage of unfinished physics, wrong physics, whatever you want to call it, and that makes some cars feel totally dead and unrecognizable... but they're FAAAAST

[[DUcK]]

How do you know what each and everyone one of the cars "should" handle like though? Just wondering, because I don't think a car can lose its characteristics, but you can make them more subtle with setup changes. Most of the cars handle bad with default or race_s setups in LFS, so people make different setups that theoretically will make the car go faster. It's not much different in real life, for eg, I've got a '94 Ford Laser road car, was fully stock. We put new shocks, lowered and stiffer springs in it - it's a different car now.

[aceracer]

Offcourse i know what some of them do, but it never interest me to investigate and make some setups. But that's not the point, what bothers me is that most of the fast sets take advantage of unfinished physics, wrong physics, whatever you want to call it, and that makes some cars feel totally dead and unrecognizable... but they're FAAAAST

Honestly I think what you're saying is way over the top. There may be some extreme sets which are quick but I would say that's the exception rather than the rule. And there's never any need to drive them to be competitive.

Name me a track/car combo and a target time (humanly possible, not WR please :)) and I will drive it with a set that doesn't need exploits or freak settings. (of course then we'll start arguing how the car should feel... but it could be a fun challenge :)). In fact I'll drive it with 2 completely different sets that don't need them.

Secondly, what's wrong with making the car feel like you want it it. Honestly, my XFG will never feel like my FZR, no matter what I do to it. But if I think it's an understeering beeeetch and I make the rear harder to combat it, I think it's the most natural thing in the world. And doesn't alienate from what the car is.

In the vast majority of cases and sets I have I really don't think there's that much to it. Most of them are just solid sets optimised for track - nothing extreme or crazy about them, no exploits - and I always get my sets from fast drivers and then adapt them to my needs.

Cheers

aceracer

[S14 DRIFT]

A good driver will win irrespective of settings... I can normally win using Race_S in the XFG on CTRA 1. Whether that's me or the fact everyone else sucks there is for another day, but it's the driver making the car, very rarely the other way round.

I agree with Aceracers ^ post.

What exactly is wrong with making a car oversteer or understeer based on personal preference. :shrug:

[scipy]

When I saw this topic I did expect some stupidity, but this is just too much, you are even leaping over Bawbag's tard bar with such ease that it makes him look like a headless chicken. My first instinct was to tell u to go die in a fire because ur an incompetent whiney bitch, and I did that, but I deleted the post right away because I knew one of the mods would just do it for me, so here comes the sensible response.

Your basic argument is this: "I can't do it, so take the option away for everybody so they can be just as slow as me." Why don't u just go live with the amish? I bet there's no camber adjustments on wooden wheels, so there will be nothing to confuse you.

There is even a Cyber Setup Guide translated into _YOUR_ language, and if you would've just bothered to read it ONCE, you would know 95 % of the things you need to know to set up any car (in LFS). But no, maybe you glanced at it once, tried a few clicks here and there, and the result wasn't an earth-shattering change in speed and feel - so you gave up. GG there.

As far as real life cars go, because of the fact that a very high percentage of the population consists of people like you (i.e. incompetent retards) - all the production cars are set up to respond to ANY circumstance with massive understeer, they are also as soft as a clubbed baby seal. That just won't cut it in racing. LFS has a precise enough physics model to simulate a real car better than almost any sim out there, and the setup options all do what they're supposed to.

Another thing, you suck. That's not an insult, it's just a fact, because most people suck and they will take it upon themselves to judge setups. News flash, 80 % of the time the problem isn't the setup, it's the driver. There's a sickening amount of people out there who will blame a perfectly good setup for their lack of driving technique. They don't know how to turn, how to brake, how to combine the two etc.

Yet another thing, since your last race information is from May '08 we can conclude you are nowhere near active enough to judge anything related to driving nowhere near the limit. So just save us all a lot of time and effort, stick to a RACE_S setup and bind the following text to one of your F keys: "I am better than all of you cheaters who have setups, take RACE_S and I'll beat you." Then you can continue to live happily ever after in the wonderful land where you're right and everyone else is wrong.

[Fuse5]

I've actually been wondering, where is that Cyber Setup guide. Looked, but couldn't find it :/

[Not Sure]

I suppose I've got 4 different angles of experience.

(good stuff)

Thanks for the info! This puts LFS's setup options into perspective.

Oh I forgot, real life has nothing to do with this game.. I can not setup the car better than IRL racers and I am slower than those that can -> I suck.

/thread :(

[nesrulz]

I've actually been wondering, where is that Cyber Setup guide. Looked, but couldn't find it :/

http://en.lfsmanual.net/wiki/Basic_Setup_Guide

[nesrulz]

Why don't u just go live with the amish? I bet there's no camber adjustments on wooden wheels, so there will be nothing to confuse you.

:hihi::hihi::hihi:

[tristancliffe]

I think both sides of the fence have good points in their argument.

1. The setups in LFS are too 'open'. There is too much range and resolution of adjustment on most of the settings, and too many settings on a lot of the cars.

2. Any racer worth his salt will use any and all means necessary to find each tenth of a second. If that means using an 'unrealistic' setup in a sim (or simply an extreme one in real life) then so be it.

3. Drivers have different styles. Some gel quickly with the uber-fast 'alien' sets, others go nearly as fast with more 'sensible' sets. Some prefer corner entry oversteer, others prefer a bit more understeer.


If the range, resolution and number of variables in the garage was reduced to more normal values for that type of car then the most extreme sets would become more 'normal'. Combine that with refinements to the physics so that the really silly stuff doesn't work anymore and everyone would gradually convere in their requirements. The aliens wouldn't be able to (and maybe wouldn't want if it wasn't an advantage) setups that differ so greatly from similar cars in real life, and the non-aliens would be content that their 'realistic' setups aren't so far off the pace.

To blindly state that Boris must be rubbish because he doesn't like the silly-sets isn't really fair (this coming from me!). And to blindly say that the silly-sets aren't silly when they patently are is also daft. As much as it pains me to say it, try and see it from each others' point of view.

[scipy]

Well, I did try. I agree that spring/arb adjustments of 0.x are quite silly, and I agree that road cars should have a bit less options available on them. But you see, Boris has a reputation/past - he's is as stuborn as a mule and has been banned (or about to be) from numerous serbian forums because he will start an argument and only keep going on and on about his point of view, and after a while, people who have tried to be sensible and show him the error of some of his ways just realise it's a waste of time and energy, but he still doesn't let it go. Ofcourse, he really has no pull over LFS devs and I doubt they will remove setup options just because someone makes an invalid argument like his was, but still - we are on the verge of something kinda new, and for the people who've gone through the trouble of learning more about sets and how to utilise them as an advantage it would be kind of silly to take it all away just so it's easier for the "rest". But hey, I really couldn't care less about XFG/LX/whaeva shitbox car, just dont touch the race cars (we could do with a bit finer steps in toe adjustments even :P).

[hyntty]

but you see, boris has a reputation/past

... :really::D

[OmniMoAK]

First off I admit I am not real good at LFS, but I do have some AutoX and went to Skip Barbers performance racing school and I think I did fairly well.
Probably not a delicate as I am in real life, that and no fear of death.....

here are my 5 ideas (for road cars, maybe for all cars):
1: Limiting it to some degree;
Gear ratio for an example seems to be the consensus here that the level of customization is too much for people on both sides of this argument. Gears should be tuned to X.0 or even X.00 but not to X.000.

Suspension should be tuned to the whole number or the tenths but to the hundredth. And so on for the other settings.

2: Make it easier with predefined levels (Novice setting menu);
Creating another menu for novices so that there are 3-5 levels for each setting:
Example Gears could be set to Close Medium or Far, but each setting equals a setting like the way it is now. So if us novices could see that we may like a Close gear ratio then we can tune accordingly and if we mess it up we can just set it back to Close gear ratio and begin again.

3: Same as 2 but remove fine tuning all together
(fine tuning meaning how setting are currently on LFS)

4: Limit what can be tuned even more (realistically);
dramatically decrease the setting level
Brake Pressure: Now UF1 Torque could be 100Nm to 10,000Nm. How about just putting it to a level maybe 1,000Nm and the max you can change it to is + or - 2,000?

5: Create ONLY 10 (or less) set banks for each car;
For each car there will only be 10 sets you can choose from not unlimited as it is now. Having a limited number eliminates the 1 set for every track instead that people do now, there will be people who keep a long track set, short track set, Drag, drift, ect...

I believe a one of these or a combination of these would greatly help the experience of LFS for all at all levels

Maybe I should Post this in the Improvements Suggestion forum... maybe I will.

What do you people think?

[Boris Lozac]

Woah woah woah Scipy, what's wrong with you (ili ti, koji ti qrac?) :really:

First of all, i've been banned from ONE forum, and that's because admins couldn't stand the fact that their beloved ISI sims suck, and i liked to argue with them about that..

Second, i don't think one driver is better then the other if he spends 70 hours a week fidling with setup, finding glitches and practice 500 HL's in a day... that's just robotics.

I may named this thread wrong, i didn't mean we should all drive with Race_S and that's it, i meant exactly what someone said here (sinbad i think), that devs need to decide already what these cars in LFS are, and what they represent. I want them to be limited to the real life setup options, and if some hole in the physics is connected to some part of the setup, then just disable that setup option, and keep it only for beta testers and alike...

[Forbin]

5: Create ONLY 10 (or less) set banks for each car;
For each car there will only be 10 sets you can choose from not unlimited as it is now. Having a limited number eliminates to some degree of 1 set for every track instead there will be people who keep a long track set short track set ect...
Any racer worth his salt has a different setup for each of the tracks he goes to, in LFS or real life.

I know that in my case, my setups in LFS did not vary much from track to track, especially if there were no extreme features of the track (e.g. AS4's Eau Rouge, FE's curbs). I started with the same base for each track and tweaked the compression dampers, ARB's, ride height, tires, tire pressure, camber, gearing, and downforce (where applicable). Springs and rebound dampers generally stayed the same.

[geeman1]

Second, i don't think one driver is better then the other if he spends 70 hours a week fidling with setup, finding glitches and practice 500 HL's in a day... that's just robotics.It does. It's, you know, practice. The thing that they say makes you perfect. Maybe you should try it sometimes.

[Boris Lozac]

It does. It's, you know, practice. The thing that they say makes you perfect. Maybe you should try it sometimes.

So if i don't have 70 hours a week for LFS, that makes me a bad driver?

[Not Sure]

What's with the attitude!

In LFS tracks are static (Becky made a good post about this issue), so in theory they can be driven with machine-like precision. This is hardly realistic, RL drivers can not do this.

Limiting setups per track / car would not work, one could always just copy the files before race.. And if the setups were not separate files, we could not use setup analyzers. I like the idea though.

Physics changes will eventually make unrealistic setups obsolete.

[aceracer]

So if i don't have 70 hours a week for LFS, that makes me a bad driver?

You're not as good as someone who practices.

Or what's your theory? We all are equal, those who practise cheat!

Hey, actually I'm better then Steve Vai at guitar - only I can just practise 20 mins/day. It's just not fair that he practises 5 hours a day and then plays better then me - now he's a millionaire guitar god and still can't play a pentatonic scale right - life is just so unfair!

Sorry, this may sound a bit cynic, but jeez man, you need to practise to develop your talent. Otherwise we'd all be born the same and die the same... and yes, someone who practices more than me is a better guitar player than me.

But hey, we could all just not practise guitar. Then there would not be one single good guitar player in the world, and then I wouldn't be as bad! Because even Steve Vai, with all the god given talent he has would be nothing if he didn't practise - but he'd still be leagues better than everyone else who doesn't practise ...

So what is it: no setup options and limited practise time? Fast drivers will still be faster...

aceracer

[nesrulz]

You're not as good as someone who practices.

Or what's your theory? We all are equal, those who practise cheat!

Hey, actually I'm better then Steve Vai at guitar - only I can just practise 20 mins/day. It's just not fair that he practises 5 hours a day and then plays better then me - now he's a millionaire guitar god and still can't play a pentatonic scale right - life is just so unfair!

Sorry, this may sound a bit cynic, but jeez man, you need to practise to develop your talent. Otherwise we'd all be born the same and die the same... and yes, someone who practices more than me is a better guitar player than me.

But hey, we could all just not practise guitar. Then there would not be one single good guitar player in the world, and then I wouldn't be as bad! Because even Steve Vai, with all the god given talent he has would be nothing if he didn't practise - but he'd still be leagues better than everyone else who doesn't practise ...

So what is it: no setup options and limited practise time? Fast drivers will still be faster...

aceracer

Sad but true. :)
Good example...

[Boris Lozac]

I agree aceracer, but that's a whole different subject, i don't know how we got to that in the first place :)
I just want realistic setup options, and VERY limited ones for the road cars, XFG is a pure road car too, so that means only the suspension, tire presurre, etc..

[OmniMoAK]

Any racer worth his salt has a different setup for each of the tracks he goes to, in LFS or real life.

I know that in my case, my setups in LFS did not vary much from track to track, especially if there were no extreme features of the track (e.g. AS4's Eau Rouge, FE's curbs). I started with the same base for each track and tweaked the compression dampers, ARB's, ride height, tires, tire pressure, camber, gearing, and downforce (where applicable). Springs and rebound dampers generally stayed the same.

I see your point but if that is true then would you really need 10 different sets? I am not against your POV just looking to please both sides of the argument. But even you agree LFS level of customization is a little overboard in some areas, most sim games are.
Maybe RBR has it a little easier (or too easy).

[Bandit77]

hate, insults etc...

Go and get yourself some tranquilizers, really.



about practicing: sure, it's everyone's right to practice and hopefully it shows some effect, BUT there's a major anti-realistic point with practicing in LFS: IRL you don't have the same car and the very same track in the very same conditions, open and available and free of traffic 24/7. A significant change to the tracks and maybe even the cars every year or so would definitely freshen up things a bit.

@aceracer: vai isn't able to play a pentatonic scale right? I don't believe this for a second.

@boris: I'm more or less with you here... I don't like this far-from-RL sets and stuff either, but try not to bother too much. you don't really gain that much by finishing a race first. drive with a setup you like on a track you hardly know and be happy about losing only 5 seconds to the fastest guy each lap. ;)

[Bawbag]

Second, i don't think one driver is better then the other if he spends 70 hours a week fidling with setup, finding glitches and practice 500 HL's in a day... that's just robotics.




Easy way to sort this would be for Boris to choose a combo, tell someone to join his server and then set the combo he chose, then he can proove his theory. :thumb:

[sinbad]

How has this argument turned into something about difficulty levels associated with setup options?

It's irrelevant, and just makes the "pro limited-setup" argument look petty, or like sour grapes or something.

Everything in the setup options for each car should be there for a reason, because a real world version of that car in that category would be that way. End of story in my opinion. I couldn't care less if that makes it easier for noob to win or even harder.

I don't care about adjustments being there just to let me see the complexity of the physics engine or marvel at it in action either, I don't care about the complexity of the physics engine.

I just want things to be the way (I feel) they would be "in real life". (Which is totally dependant on how the devs or whoever categorise the cars- something I don't care that much about either, I just wish they'd do it, make the decisions and make the changes to the way they can be adjusted and/or the way they look.)

[Hallen]

Adjustments in real cars are not as precise and cannot be performed trackside so easily. They are mainly for basic setup to account for manufacturing tolerance, accident damage and general bodging. The perfect car wouldn't have much suspension adjustment, producing fastenings and adjustment mechanisms adds drag and weight where you want it least. In reality testing time and data feedback is limited and the car, track and weather are never exactly the same between sessions as they are in the sterile world of LFS atm, personally I think the sterilness is a bigger issue than the freedom of setups, if the cars allowed pointlessly precise setup adjustments that wouldn't be an issue if LFS somehow randomly made slight changes to the shape and structure of the car and all suspension components to accomodate for real life wear and tear on a car, which is really far from a rigid body.

I wasn't debating the point that it is obviously trivial to make setup changes in LFS compared to real cars and the fact that testing can be virtually infinite in LFS. It is a sim, and that is one of the fun things about a sim.

I agree that variability in the track conditions would be a big deal and would greatly add to the challenge. Cars that actually flex and twist around like they do in real life would be good too. That is where the road going XRG would be very squishy and the XRR would be very stiff. Right now, they are probably identical in stiffness, which of course is simply not right.

Yes, I am looking forward to the day when the track warms and cools as the day goes on, where the humidity changes, were even the track condition changes as rubber gets laid down... even having to deal with "klag" as David Hobbs calls it. I am sure the we will get there in time. Throw some rain into the mix with realistic drying patterns, and I think we all will have found nirvana. But, for these things we have to wait and work with what we have.

[aceracer]

@Bandit77: Sorry, there was an "I" missing in my post:

"I" cannot play a pentatonic scale right! Vai doesn't even know the concept of "not" playing something right - lol :D

as to infinite testing: agreed, it may not be real, but it does help me understand a lot about what I'm doing to my car, so I like it to have identical conditions. Cos I don't have to wonder whether it's the change I made which gains me a 10th or whether the track just got faster while I was in pits :)

I know I know, not realistic, but I for one like tweaking and re-tweaking once I have a nice base set. Fir me that's fun - and it doesn't take away the fun from racing either. Small change every race, see what it does, switch back, try sth else - always makes it interesting to be on track ... but yes, I agree, dynamically changing track conditions would be hugely entertaining!

aceracer

[Forbin]

I see your point but if that is true then would you really need 10 different sets?
If you race on 10 different tracks, you need 10 different sets. They might be fairly similar but each track has its own quirks and setup challenges that require a dedicated setup to be as fast as possible.

[TagForce]

Easy way to sort this would be for Boris to choose a combo, tell someone to join his server and then set the combo he chose, then he can proove his theory. :thumb:

Oh yeah, I've met plenty of fast drivers in LFS, and some of those are actually good, too... But being fast doesn't automatically mean being the other. And practicing 500 hotlaps doesn't make you a better driver, just a faster driver. Which of course makes it easier to win.

[aceracer]

Absolutely, couldn't agree more - I always get by arse kicked by faster drivers but actually I think they're no good at all. I'm the best - I'm just not as fast - but I'm better - honest! :thumb:

Hehe, only kidding, but maybe you could elaborate a little on what you mean? I see it this way: In racing when a guy is faster than me and beats me 5 out of 5 races I am happy to agree that he is the better driver. After all in a race what matters is who finishes first! :shrug:

So what do yo mean? Are you referring to hotlappers who can't do more than 2 laps without crashing? Then I agree, I consider myself a better driver than some guys who have faster hotlaps than me but never make it to the finish.

Or do you base it on safe and courteous driving - there are guys who never crash and always make it to the finish - but never better than 15 secs down - then I would disagree...

Feel like explaining?

aceracer

[Bawbag]

Oh yeah, I've met plenty of fast drivers in LFS, and some of those are actually good, too... But being fast doesn't automatically mean being the other. And practicing 500 hotlaps doesn't make you a better driver, just a faster driver. Which of course makes it easier to win.


Exactly why I specificly said for Boris to choose a combo at complete random, so this eliminates the whole "500 laps of practice" bullshit.

[Forbin]

The "hotlappers can't race" theory has been disproven time and time again. See Rudy van Buren, Bawbag, MarcG, vincper, and Biohazard. And those are just the ones I've actually raced against.

FWIW, when participating in a league such as OWRL, I typically practiced for 2 nights before a race, plus another 2 hours the day of the race, totalling around 8-12 hours. This includes practice, setup tweaking, and race simulation to determine tire wear and fuel consumption.

[UncleBenny]

The "hotlappers can't race" theory has been disproven time and time again. See Rudy van Buren, Bawbag, MarcG, vincper, and Biohazard. And those are just the ones I've actually raced against.

I don't think its "hotlappers can't race" I think its just SOME hotlappers can't race. I wouldn't consider myself fast at all, but I wouldn't say I'm slow either and I know how to hold my line and its just amazing how some fast guys will just run you over with no proper overtaking attempt made at all. I realize you can't throw everyone into that category though.

[aceracer]

wasn't that why you got banned on our servers? Damn, just get out of the way man!

lmao :D:D just joking...

Agreed, although I'm not sure that lack of competence - I think it's a head issue. Some hotlappers think they must lap 1/10th away of WR times on all laps, including when they have 5 opponents around them ... I also find that quite annoying...

aceracer

[Ziploc]

We can put this to bed really easily.

Three server side options.

-Forced setup "SETUPNAME" or "DEFAULT"
-Limit set options.
-Normal

:shy:

[Zen321]

Here's my two cents concerning the debate.

Limiting setup options can be or can not be a good idea. It all depends on the reasons invoked :
- Reason 1) In real life you don't have such precision adjustability for aftermarket parts on road cars. Valid point, makes sense <-- [GOOD REASON].
- Reason 2) People make setups that doesn't make any sense for me, and any attempt of making my own setup result in a fail, so let's limit those options because I want to be as competitive as them. Jealousy, lack of dedication. <-- [BAD REASON]

Apart from racing, one of the thing I really enjoy with LFS is messing with setups and increasing my knowledge about car dynamics. When I work on a setup, it can take me up to monthes to find the perfect settings for me. When I look at some SetupGrid or Inferno setups, I sometimes don't see the point of some of their specific settings. For instance, in a RWD car, Toe In at the front is something I find quite stupid, and when I switched to toe out at the front, my laps improved by around 0.7% of the WR time. (so a range from 0.4 to 1.2 seconds depending on the length of the track). But I'm sure it makes sense for their view of setuping, and that they are more comfortable with it, and that is what matters.

Let's take the example of FWD cars. People say "God, I can't understand why a XFG doesn't suffer from massive understeer at the exits, as it should do...". This is the trick of setuping, because people want to make the cars more balanced overally. Let's take a look at the toe at rear wheels on a FWD race cars IRL. You'll notice they have slight toe out at the rear, in order to prevent that understeer to happen, especially in exits. But is it unrealistic ? Is it unrealistic to dedicate your time when making setups to prevent a FWD car from understeering really bad at the exit? No, it's the job of what a proper setup can do.

What would be unrealistic is if your XFG could spin the real wheels like the XRT, with a tuned setups, which is not the case...

Chopping seconds and positions off your records is something very gratifying in LFS, but there is also a "quest" about making your own setup as fast as it could be, which is also very gratifying as well ;)

A final thing about setups ? The best way to make a setup isn't to follow advices of LFS Manual. LFS Manual is a very good beginner's guide to understanding how a car can behave, but you can only fully grasp the importance of each increment you change while testing them, in respect with what you have learnt about setuping, should it be on LFS manual, race books, etc.

[S14 DRIFT]

I don't think its "hotlappers can't race" I think its just SOME hotlappers can't race. I wouldn't consider myself fast at all, but I wouldn't say I'm slow either and I know how to hold my line and its just amazing how some fast guys will just run you over with no proper overtaking attempt made at all. I realize you can't throw everyone into that category though.

The problem is they tend to think that "Well person X is slower than me, they should move out of my way because they know I'm quicker than them"..

Then they stop thinking "fairly", and decide to "get past" with little concern to thier fellow racers. Some hotlappers can't 'race', by race I mean pass cleanly, drive in traffic etc. Not all, some. :x

[Bawbag]

Count how many fast hotlappers there are, then count how many of them you've had bad experiences with, then have a read of your post.

That's like saying all school teachers are bad because one of them called me fat.

[UncleBenny]

Count how many fast hotlappers there are, then count how many of them you've had bad experiences with, then have a read of your post.

That's like saying all school teachers are bad because one of them called me fat.

I think aceracer made a good point actually. Its not hotlappers that are a problem, its people who take the "hotlap" mentality racing with them. They may or may not actually be hotlappers, but they seem to give hotlappers a bad name. Not sure how this even came up, this has nothing to do with setups.

[sinbad]

The problem is they tend to think that "Well person X is slower than me, they should move out of my way because they know I'm quicker than them"..


I saw you bark that at someone last night so don't start passing judgment on anybody else.

This has gone wildly off topic and everything has been said before, but then I guess everything on topic has been said before too so.......

[S14 DRIFT]

Difference is, I said that in a "jokey" manner, hence the unusual selection of emoticons which followed, if you noticed that. :shrug:

[sinbad]

Difference is, I said that in a "jokey" manner, hence the unusual selection of emoticons which followed, if you noticed that. :shrug:

Well with simultaneous horn blasts you came across like a tit. @ &

;)

[S14 DRIFT]

I get that quite alot! ;)

Sorry your sarcasm detector is brokened :(


Hope yu still luv mi. :cry:

[010010011010]

We can put this to bed really easily.

Three server side options.

-Forced setup "SETUPNAME" or "DEFAULT"
-Limit set options.
-Normal

:shy:

I agree with this sort of soloution.

Some racers pratice ALOT and have good setups and thats all fine and dandy but i dont. I have exams to do and school to go to, stuff to do etc... so im not as good as some others with or without their setups. But i would like to eliminate setup ups as an excuse for not being able to keep up with people. So i agree you can keep all the options and stuff but there should be a few servers in which you HAVE to use the RACE_S set or some other more specific one, either way there should be a server for 'Recreational racers' like myself where set ups are not a factor. and then if you want to change setups go join another server

[UncleBenny]

I agree with this sort of soloution.

Some racers pratice ALOT and have good setups and thats all fine and dandy but i dont. I have exams to do and school to go to, stuff to do etc... so im not as good as some others with or without their setups. But i would like to eliminate setup ups as an excuse for not being able to keep up with people. So i agree you can keep all the options and stuff but there should be a few servers in which you HAVE to use the RACE_S set or some other more specific one, either way there should be a server for 'Recreational racers' like myself where set ups are not a factor. and then if you want to change setups go join another server

So basically we should break up an already small community even more? Bad idea in my opinion.

It is not that hard to go find a set on Inferno or Setupfield to race with. Or do a race or two on a server and then ask someone if you can use their set, most people have no problem sharing.

[aceracer]

Absolutely! The "set issue" resolves itself in a matter of minutes:

Either go to setup field or:

1) wait for race to end
2) ask winner or fastest lap driver for set

Sorted. 99% of drivers will share their set - I always share all of mine. If someone doesn't, just ask the next best, it'll be just as good.

Drive next race - if it's an "alien" set or a "drifty set" or whatever you can't drive comfortably with do this:

1) 1 nudge up on both wings, or just rear wing if rear steps out too much
2) 1 nudge down on brake power
3) if you can't control under accel use clutch pack - use low locking power, around 30 to 35

These tweaks take 30 secs to do and are a very basic instant result procedure. They will only cost you a couple of tenths in laptime on most tracks.

This is way better than having a pre-defined setup locked to a server because everyone can race a competitve set and within seconds ahe it adjusted to any skill level.

As opposed to having "recreational driver set" which doesn't really do anything for anyone.

my $.02

aceracer

[Bandit77]

It is not that hard to go find a set on Inferno or Setupfield to race with. Or do a race or two on a server and then ask someone if you can use their set, most people have no problem sharing.

that doesn't really change anything, if you reconsider it.


IMO, there MUST be racing without setting up, really - not only because there quite a few drivers who would appreciate it.

If you're against it, you're neglecting these drivers... if you say they're only a few anyway, the argument of breaking up a small community is none.


sidenote: I could be wrong, but the ones wanting fixed / very limited setups might not be talking about formula or GT cars. I think it's more about the road cars, which IRL can't be greatly adjusted either.

[UncleBenny]

that doesn't really change anything, if you reconsider it.

What doesn't it change? If you are saying that you might not like how the set you get handles...well what if you don't like the default set the is being enforced on a server? You're still stuck in the same boat. At least now you have the option to fix the problem if you should choose to.

Also for those who say enforcing sets will fix the problem of people complaining that they aren't fast because the don't have a good set, I don't think that will be the case. Instead people will just complain that the default set is too loose, too tight, too whatever. There is no way to make everyone happy with a server enforced set.

[JohnPenn]

For me setups are not just about speed I still use 2 year old setups on many server because I like how the car feels using them ,restricting setups Is not the problem we have in LFS, go to a busy server, watch a few races, the problem will rear its ugly head pretty quickly.


Bad driving breeds even worse driving

[DeadWolfBones]

I don't think its "hotlappers can't race" I think its just SOME hotlappers can't race. I wouldn't consider myself fast at all, but I wouldn't say I'm slow either and I know how to hold my line and its just amazing how some fast guys will just run you over with no proper overtaking attempt made at all. I realize you can't throw everyone into that category though.

It's also that some hotlappers lack seasoning in racecraft--aka driving respectfully around other drivers, and understanding that you won't be able to get near WR pace on every lap. Again, some hotlappers. :)

[S14 DRIFT]

For me setups are not just about speed I still use 2 year old setups on many server because I like how the car feels using them ,restricting setups Is not the problem we have in LFS, go to a busy server, watch a few races, the problem will rear its ugly head pretty quickly.


Bad driving breeds even worse driving


Mm, you're right there.

I mean, I hope the devs don't restrict setups that we already have (i.e old cars won't suddenly become underdeveloped and lacking in setups).

If this must happen, how about only doing it on new cars, as to not cause undue tension within the community? Some may say that by doing this it's creating a "double standard". The fact is that some cars we have had since the beginning of LFS... others we've had for a couple of years since S2.. either way, it's better to restrict new cars, because that way, no-one has to relearn anything, since it's a new car, after all.

:)

[scipy]

That's like saying all school teachers are bad because one of them called me fat.

Tell daddy who it was, we'll take care of it.

[Jonesy_]

That's like saying all school teachers are bad because one of them called me fat.

Tell daddy who it was, we'll take care of it.


Actually, all of but one of them was a liar.

[jbirdaspec]

I'm not involved in any kind of motorsport besides LFS and some other Sims in the past. I drive a oversized 4x4 tahoe and work in a cube. If anyone would like to discredit me for that please go right ahead. I've left myself wide open with that statement. You can take whatever I have to say however you want to.

Here are my thoughts. I think limted setups can serve a purpose. I want to find out what that is like with the Scirocco. This should be a good measure of what it will bring to LFS.

At the same time though racing and competitive motorsports is about taking what you have and making the best of it to win. At this point in LFS we have a lot of setup options. Any driver that doesn't look at what they have and use it to win doesn't really want to win. I for one don't like Locked Diffs, but in some cases I'll use it if the purpose serves me. If tomorrow the setup options change entireley in LFS then we are still in the same situation we are in now. What I mean is we have to take what we have and use it to win like we have always had to do.

Thanks for reading.

Jay Odom

[Zen321]

Finally we have some wise Americans! Uncle Benny and jbirdaspect, you both have some good points here.

Close racing comes from skills and setup. I'd say around 80-85% skills and 15-20% setup.
A setup is a tool, it isn't a finality. A good driver uses the best setup for him to maximize his skills, not the other way around.

Just to get an example, take Tweak, take the LX4 and double the engine size (2800 inline 8), you should be around 300-320 hp, which would surely be enough to ensure a good time, with the appropriate gear ratios...
Unless you are already good, you won't be able to come anywhere far from the WR.

Now give that tweak to the WR holder, and he'll beat his time easily... It is such a bullshit to tell that people are fast just because of their car, and it is as well very mean, and a clear sign of a frustrated mind. A sprinter won't remove a whole second out of his time just because he has the best shoes ever... It's the same for racing. It is a sport, some people are more talented than the others and unless you dedicate time to reach their pace, you'll go nowhere.

That said, close racing doesn't mean all the time fast racing. If you go to CTRA 1, you will have some close racing with people that aren't THAT fast (except the podium holder that usually have a gold or platinum license).
If winning is all what matters, or being relatively faster than the others, go to a drift server and start racing. If the two conditions above are what satisfy you the most, then you'll enjoy yourself a lot :)

[Bandit77]

What doesn't it change?

The point is, you will still not have the "same" car as the rest of the field. I agree with you on the problem with the default set not pleasing everyone though. So VERY limited setups might be the better option. For the road cars maybe 2 or 3 damper/spring combinations but still relatively greatly adjustable ARBs... or something - and definitely a set diff. the higher you go in classes, the more options you get. no two drivers in F1 have the same set, right? :)
Racing the smaller cars should become a bit less scientific, IMO.


...
I mean, I hope the devs don't restrict setups that we already have (i.e old cars won't suddenly become underdeveloped and lacking in setups).
[...] because that way, no-one has to relearn anything, since it's a new car, after all.


... and some people were blamed because they said they don't want to spend their time on setups.
I think it would freshen up the challenge a lot.


Finally we have some wise Americans!
it already started fishy.


Just to get an example, take Tweak, take the LX4 and double the engine size (2800 inline 8), you should be around 300-320 hp, which would surely be enough to ensure a good time, with the appropriate gear ratios...
Unless you are already good, you won't be able to come anywhere far from the WR.

Now give that tweak to the WR holder, and he'll beat his time easily...

says who? you? based on what?


A sprinter won't remove a whole second out of his time just because he has the best shoes ever... It's the same for racing.
you're not good at decent analogies, so don't.


If winning is all what matters, or being relatively faster than the others,


that started off ok...


go to a drift server and start racing. If the two conditions above are what satisfy you the most, then you'll enjoy yourself a lot :)
... and turns into an unneeded bash, really.

[gezmoor]

Any racer worth his salt has a different setup for each of the tracks he goes to, in LFS or real life.

I know that in my case, my setups in LFS did not vary much from track to track, especially if there were no extreme features of the track (e.g. AS4's Eau Rouge, FE's curbs). I started with the same base for each track and tweaked the compression dampers, ARB's, ride height, tires, tire pressure, camber, gearing, and downforce (where applicable). Springs and rebound dampers generally stayed the same.


Which at the end of the day is how it would be in real life. Take any vehicle and it has basic dynamic characteristics. Once you've got the basic things like damping/spring rates set so that the car handles correctly/optimally, (call it what you will), for your driving style then track to track changes should really be relatively minor. I look at some of the LFS sets for the same car and there can be huge variations in things like spring rates and arb settings for different circuits. This just isn't realistic IMO. For example there is no real reason to be increasing the springing of the front of a particular car by say 60% for one circuit over another. There aren't any major steep gradient down hill braking zones on any of the LFS tracks that spring to mind??. Why would a car need to be massively oversteery on one circuit and massively understeery on another?? (for the same driver)

[aceracer]

You can even have a massively oversteery on one corner and massively understeery for another - on the same track!

Ok, maybe a bit exaggerated, but I played around with it a bit and it' not that stupid.

For the FZRs you can change brakes and rollbars on the fly. So I developed a set and a routine where on AS3 I would put brake pressure a couple of clicks back and softer rollbars for the 2 hairpin section to get a grippier oversterry car through there, then change it back to previous for the chicane where I preferred cleaner and more direct handling. And stiffen it a little more for the long and fast 4th gear turn 1.

Of course this is over the top, and in the end all the button pushing was more stressful than anything else, but I did get fast latpimes with it and it was easy on tires.

So if you can set up a car for one corner, or one part pf the track to be quite different than another, just think of how different setups can be for different tracks!

aceracer

[[DUcK]]

Another thing, is that you don't have all day, and brand new tyres every session, and a new engine that you can shift + p etc in real life, so you don't do extensive testing like you can on LFS. That is why you see some different sets, and sets you wouldn't 'expect' to work.

[Straightsix]

Here's something else to ponder, what effect to control systems have on an individual's setup?

I'm making the leap in logic that nearly all the responders to this thread are playing on a wheel. There are people that are WR holders that drive with a mouse. The overwhelming point is that different control schema necessitate the ability to change the way the car drives.

As an example, my experience playing LFS changed pretty drastically about a month and half ago when I bought a new wheel. I started playing LFS on a wheel that was orphaned at my apartment; it was an old Logitech Driving Force without the power adapter for the FFB. I bought a Logitech DFP the day after Christmas and pretty much had to relearn how to drive.

I think the option to tweak setups needs to stay in the game. I think the experience of playing LFS would impacted pretty greatly if setups were limited or servers forced a spec set.

[Bandit77]

other topic have touched the "wheel vs. no wheel" issue too.

IMHO, you have to cope with what you have. you can't expect a "simulator" to completely make up for suboptimal input devices.
Is it a sim when a wheel user and a gamepad user have the same chances?
It's great that it's actually possible to drive with something else than a wheel and it should stay this way, but you have to face the consequences.

[S14 DRIFT]

... and some people were blamed because they said they don't want to spend their time on setups.
I think it would freshen up the challenge a lot.


Well tbh, I only really race XFG and XRT on CTRA (that's pretty much all the racing I do).

I made a set for both, which took a bit of time but I use the same setup on every track. Both cars have 'winnable' setups, I'm banging on the doors of lap records on most S1 combos, and this isn't because of 'the setup' - I know exactly what the car will do if I do <something>, and can drive accordingly. Give my setup to someone who doesn't know (and I've tested it, don't worry) and they'll find themselves slower than before.

If I'm racing a car that I'm not familiar with (i.e I don't have a setup which I know will do X if I do Y) then a simple check to Team Inferno or Setupgrid will normally supply me with a setup. Failing that I'll ask the people on the server...

Although that's my view, you can see where I'm going - The average Joe doesn't have to spend time on setups - There are people that make perfectly acceptable public setups and share them... that way everyone wins. People that like making setups can still enjoy the challenge to tuning a car to shave 0.01 second from a WR, and those who don't have the skills/time to setup a car can still be competitive if they have the driving skills.

Too many people blame setup when, in actual fact, they can't drive!

[010010011010]

So basically we should break up an already small community even more? Bad idea in my opinion.

theres hundreds of servers online, hows having a few (or even just the opition to have a few) for not-so-serious racers going to break up the community?

oh and dont get me wrong, i dont blame set-ups for my lack of pace, but it would be nice to have a server with a for ones who arent into sets and stuff. kinda like the equivlient of really low-cost racing in real life.

[Straightsix]

other topic have touched the "wheel vs. no wheel" issue too.


I was not aware of that; thank you.

I can still very much see the situation where someone using a mouse would need the car to react within the limitations of the input device. This, of course, would necessitate setup options.

[Forbin]

theres hundreds of servers online, hows having a few (or even just the opition to have a few) for not-so-serious racers going to break up the community?

oh and dont get me wrong, i dont blame set-ups for my lack of pace, but it would be nice to have a server with a for ones who arent into sets and stuff. kinda like the equivlient of really low-cost racing in real life.
Low-cost racing is for the financially challenged. Since sim-racing is essentially free by comparison, restricted-setup sim-racing serves only one purpose: catering to the mentally challenged.

The idea of "low-cost" racing is rather silly, too. Take WERA here in the United States, for example. They're a national motorcycle racing league and most classes are split into Superstock and Superbike. Superstock has lots of restrictions on modifications and requires the use of DOT-approved tires. Superbike has practically no restrictions at all and allows the use of slick tires.

Now you would think slicks would be at least a bit more expensive than the "street" tires and thus make Superstock less expensive. However, the DOT-approved tires are little more than slicks with some grooves in them. And the price difference? Zero. They both cost $400 USD per set.

[Bandit77]

Low-cost racing is for the financially challenged. Since sim-racing is essentially free by comparison, restricted-setup sim-racing serves only one purpose: catering to the mentally challenged.

ahaha... calling people who like racing under other conditions "mentally challenged" is a bit over the top, to say the least.

... and is there any other details about your bike racing that you haven't told us so far?

[scipy]

ahaha... calling people who like racing under other conditions "mentally challenged" is a bit over the top, to say the least.

... and is there any other details about your bike racing that you haven't told us so far?

Actually, it's not over the top, not even a bit. IMO the only restriction in any racing class should be power to weight ratio and tire width - so you can fit 5 different types of cars in a class, and anyone can choose their weapon of choice. Also if your running a "cup" or anything similar setups should not be restricted in any way, why would someone who has the knowledge to give themselves a completley legal advantage be put in the same failboat as the whiner who just came there with no prep work at all and thinks he should have the same chance at winning.

In simracing it's even worse, many of the aspects that a good driver and/or race engineer would consider in real life racing are completley absent in simracing, there is no taking care of a car, keeping track of how many miles each component has and when they have to be changed, or a gazillion other things that help smart people get the car across the finish line. So, with all those "advantages" already gone, can you seriously argue some kind of locked setups and "equality"? It is for the mentally challanged.

[Boris Lozac]

Ok, stfu Scipy already... I had respect for you, laughed to your random jokes on Mirc, etc... if i only knew your such a two-face fa* on time..

[pearcy_2k7]

Saying stuff like that only makes you look like more of a retard, instead of debating to scipy's (pretty accurate) points, you decide to go totally off-topic and insult him personally. :thumb:

[Boris Lozac]

Saying stuff like that only makes you look like more of a retard, instead of debating to scipy's (pretty accurate) points, you decide to go totally off-topic and insult him personally. :thumb:

I have better things to do then argue with an i*iot who insults me for no fuc*ing reason.. i said what i have to say about this subject, thread title was kinda misleading, but i explained that i didn't mean "disable setups", but try to make them more limited and realistic...

[ajp71]

Low-cost racing is for the financially challenged. Since sim-racing is essentially free by comparison, restricted-setup sim-racing serves only one purpose: catering to the mentally challenged.


I think you've missed the point, in the case of where I work the budgets are huge for what is being raced and the cars are competitive. We won both the major championships we run cars for, one car ran in a different championship which it was leading until it got badly damaged in a crash (and was repaired and upgraded to be raced in a different series). The cars have everything adjustable (which is effectively free) and lots of components and the entire suspension geometry redesigned in house (which definitely isn't free) the adjustments are largely doable in relatively short periods of time, even in pitstops. Only a few basic adjustments are made though because despite having three day meetings there just isn't any real point in doing it, if the driver(s) are comfortable with the car then that is what you need. In reality data analysis can never be so precise and clinical because the conditions are simply never the same. The fact that LFS has unrealistic setup ranges and fidelity is simply because they are unrealistic, the over dependence on sets is because we always have exactly the same track surface, ambient temperature and humidity, exactly the same unwarped car, the same brand new tyres and engine. In reality it simply isn't possible to do this regardless of how big your budget is or how much you love yourself.

[Not Sure]

This thread is going nowhere, so let's just agree to disagree.. :(

For the record, my point of view was not to "eliminate all setups", but to restrict some car's setups to some degree. A lot less settings for road cars and realistic, physically possible gearbox settings accuracy for all cars.

And I know how to make setups, claiming that those wanting to see restrictions are retarded noobs is not very mature.

So let's move on!

Is there some place one can download setups for endurance racing? My goal is to find one set which I can get used to. Constant fiddling with setups prevents learning the car's behavior in all situations. This can be dangerous for other drivers as well, losing control and causing pileups is not a very good thing..

Now that I think of it, isn't it kind of weird that unstable WR setups are available and apparently widely used, but "general" setups are not.

So could you please post your safe (easy to drive), semi-competetive all-around setups?

[Zen321]

Blah blah

Thank you for your post, it made my day :D

Apart from consisting in a very bad ad hominem attack all the post, it just proved that you typed in bad faith. You had nothing to contribute, so please keep your mouth shut.
Unless you can argument what you said (I'm referring the post in which you quoted extensively mine), basically just saying I was an idiot, your post is not relevant to the discussion here.

About the tweaking, says me, based on observations on private on which tweak was extensively used, and it did not show good results.
How I am not good at analogies? I did a simple analogy, to be simple to understand. I am sorry if you are not even able to understand it.

Are you american? I have no idea, since your avatar does not display such flag. And if you are, obviously, you can not understand sarcasm of second degree humor, which is very bad you know... you should think about training to get some ;) I am not sorry if I offended you, because I didn't write it to offend anyone, so it's your issue if you behave like a startled virgin.

And I am not sorry if you thought my last words were a bash. It was an objective advice. I don't know why


If winning is all what matters, or being relatively faster than the others,


is associated to bad in your mind... feeling guilty of something, dear?

It's an analogy (that you didn't understand, basically once again, you start to be good at that ! =p <-- I put that smiley so that you can SEE that there is a sarcasm in there :) ), and for me, winning is important and being relatively faster than others is important as well. But instead of suggesting downgrading others abilities (locking setups or going to a drift server), I prefer to dedicate myself to training (racing technique AND makign my own setup) to upgrade my own abilities.

Sorry to support the idea that tending to the better is more enjoyable that putting everybody on a low average...

Back on topic, I wanted to direct you to a suggestion some guy made months ago (and I give total credit to him for that, I just don't remember the name). He basically said that instead of limiting all setups, it would be better to create 3 subcategories of setups with different limitations
- Pure stock (only tires and wheel adjustable)
- Spec-up (with more things adjustable to a limited level)
- Complete custom (with basically what I have today).
Race cars and low formulas, would have the choice of the two latter obviously, and F1 would only have the latter.

But I think I won't say what I just said because I will be bashed by Bandit77 for killing baby seals :schwitz: (<-- this was again a sarcasm, but harder to see, because I didn't put the =p smiley, sorry... :shrug:)

[Byku]

it would be better to create 3 subcategories of setups with different limitations
- Pure stock (only tires and wheel adjustable)
- Spec-up (with more things adjustable to a limited level)
- Complete custom (with basically what I have today).
Race cars and low formulas, would have the choice of the two latter obviously, and F1 would only have the latter.

The best possible solution. Both "camps" will be pleased :). Totally agree.

[Bandit77]

...

:thumbsup: from the first to the last sentence. and yeah, I'm waiting for these setups too.

...

I first didn't want to respond to this, as to me there's no benefit and i'm a bit selfish in this respect.

What I have to say, though: I find it amazing (in a negative way) that YOU accuse me of reading too much between the lines. You know the saying about the glass-house, don't you?

And I still believe your analogy was very lame.

But hey, from now on I will just pretend that all of what you say is the truth and I just don't understand it - when in reality I just don't care anymore.

[zeugnimod]

Is there some place one can download setups for endurance racing? My goal is to find one set which I can get used to. Constant fiddling with setups prevents learning the car's behavior in all situations. This can be dangerous for other drivers as well, losing control and causing pileups is not a very good thing..

Now that I think of it, isn't it kind of weird that unstable WR setups are available and apparently widely used, but "general" setups are not.

So could you please post your safe (easy to drive), semi-competetive all-around setups?

There are a lot of endurance sets on Setupgrid (www.setupgrid.net). I'm sure you will find one that suits you.

[Zen321]

I am sad that you over reacted to my statements... Sad, not sorry.

What I found really disrespectful is that I was expressing some ideas, and instead of showing me they were wrong/argumenting yours were better, you just took my post for what it wasn't with the purpose to make me appear as a total idiot. You tried to play smart, I showed you I could do as good as you on that specific matter. End of the discussion

I never said the idea was shit, I said the reasons invoked and the means offered are not good in my opnion (for various reasons I stated before). I like when people agree with me, but when I like a lot more is when they actually prove my point to be wrong, with new arguments, because by doing so, we tend to find a better solution (like the one I quoted in my precedent post, which was the best answer to a similar deliberation topic about setups I have found so far).

The forums are not a debate, they tend to be more of a deliberation, because a broad range of alternatives is at grasp. This is good, and should stay that way.

But hey man, if you want to not talk anymore, it's up to you, I would be really pleased if you seconded each and every of my posts. And when I'm pleased, I give a lot of Jaffa Cakes away !

[Not Sure]

There are a lot of endurance sets on Setupgrid (http://www.setupgrid.net). I'm sure you will find one that suits you.

Ok thanks for the info, I'll check them out. :thumbsup:

[Fastwalker]

i wouldnt mind having limited setups,
simply because it would save me lots of time

im fine with the way it is now too tho

[scipy]

Ok, stfu Scipy already... I had respect for you, laughed to your random jokes on Mirc, etc... if i only knew your such a two-face fa* on time..

:D:D:D:D::D hahhahhahha GG. I'm two-faced just because I don't agree with your ridiculous point of view and fullfil my responsibility to point it out with sarcasam? You should go into politics, maybe u can be pres0dente!

BTW I make it a point to never flatout insult anyone, unlike u just did. I always list specific points and reasons which kinda always lead to a uniform conclusion that the person in question has diminished mental abilities. Tnx for falling in line with the theory.

[zeugnimod]

BTW I make it a point to never flatout insult anyone, unlike u just did. I always list specific points and reasons which kinda always lead to a uniform conclusion that the person in question has diminished mental abilities.

This "argument" makes me think you have kinda diminished mental abilities yourself. :scratchch

A "flatout insult" is a "flatout insult", specific points and reasons or not..

[MAD3.0LT]

Your spot on Ducky :p don't know what i was thinking (me brain is too rusty at the moment :razz:) Great to hear you got the gear you were after. Looking forward to the up coming season :)

Interesting with a quick google search and some reading of different forums just how many people do use spool diffs (locked diff) in both racing and their street cars. The most common comment that stood out was that a locker is much more predictable than a LSD, which interestingly enough was the same reason it was so widely used in LFS...


u were orignaly thinking of a detriot locker thats only locked under load ie full throttle these are extreamly bad no matter what way you look at it not good for drag use or any other use then having a locker in the car thats street legal cause cops wont know its their unless they open the diff.

the mini spool/full spools are the fully locked diff and i have one in my track car live rear axel it was a cheap 90$ alternitve to the 1700$+ for the 2 way lsd option the main problem with it is the car setup can become unstable and the suspension and mainly the rear sway bar has to be altered to suit the locked diff.

I would never drive with a bottem of the range 700$ LSD ever again they are dangerious and inconsistant and caused me to allmost hit the wall on the last corner of queensland race way due to it changing its mind from 2 wheels to 1 wheel and back and forth.

allso can IRS have spools? i havent heard of a car that has IRS with a spool.

PS duck ur in the v8 clubman racing hey?

[Boris Lozac]

:D:D:D:D::D hahhahhahha GG. I'm two-faced just because I don't agree with your ridiculous point of view

You can disagree of course, but what part of my first post made you go all rampage? I'm mentally challenged because i don't want a billion setup options in a freakin XFG that doesn't even have a rollcage? Those billion options wouldn't be such a problem, but combining them you can make an redicolously unrealistic result. Are you a fu*kin mechanic, you work for Mclaren F1 team or something, so my post totally insulted you like you make a living out of making setups? :really:
You're just a geek who has plenty of time to explore all possibilities with a setup and make the one that takes advantage of all the holes and inconsistencies of the physics engine.. (i don't mean this generally, there are offcourse people who know what their doing actually)

[Jonesy_]

I'm just wondering what is actually that wrong with the setups, that makes them so unrealistic as some ppl here say.

I'd like to see one of these unrealistic with physics flaws taken advantage from setups everyone seems to be on.

I mean, I'm not mechanic, and barely understand the basics of making a setup, so I'm just asking what is so wrong with the 'fast sets'?

[S14 DRIFT]

It's the infinitly adjustable things, such as gear ratios to 0.01 of a ratio on all individual gears and then final drive, ability to adjust suspension in 0.1 intervals and the like - That's what some people have the problem with.

As I've said before, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, but people are most likely going to whinge till they get thier way. :shrug:

[kaynd]

I'm just wondering what is actually that wrong with the setups, that makes them so unrealistic as some ppl here say.

I'd like to see one of these unrealistic with physics flaws taken advantage from setups everyone seems to be on.

I mean, I'm not mechanic, and barely understand the basics of making a setup, so I'm just asking what is so wrong with the 'fast sets'?

Actually the whole setup philosophy in LFS is almost opposite to what is needed in real life.

In LFS it’s perfectly ok for a fast setup to load as match as possible the outside tire of the end you want more traction, not giving a damn about the inside tire.
IRL you want to keep the tires at the end you want more traction, as equally loaded as possible…

That’s why fast FZR setups are set up mostly with basic overseer from the suspension stiffness. I am not talking about obvious spring and ARB stiffness values but for relative stiffness/mass values.
And that’s why All FWD car setups are set always with a lot higher overall suspension stiffness at the front comparing to the back. Again talking about stiffness/mass relations and not actual numbers.
The only think that makes some times RWD cars more stable by softening the rear suspension, is the way power gets delivered... because that way some of the engine's power is transferred to the ground thought the inside tire by the diff and in that way you get some initial safe-understeer while increasing the throttle. Without that meaning that the back end has more traction than the front cause of the softer suspention, as it sould be.

But guess what… no setup resstriction is going to solve that problem... this is caused by inaccurate tire physics.
No matter the restrictions on available settings… the same “unrealistic” setups will continue to exist unless something is done to the tire physics.

[Forbin]

I haven't seen this "stiffer = more grip" thing in LFS since the early demo tests in late 2002.

Yes, some of the FWD cars in LFS typically use sets that are rather stiff at the front, at least for hotlapping and short races. This is allows them to lift the inside front wheel and, with a bit of throttle, use the outside front to pull the front of the car around, helping the car turn. A kart uses much the same principle in the rear. Note that this is very, VERY hard on the front tires.

In the FZR, the mass is carried very far to the rear and the tires are much wider in the rear than in the front. Thus, a fairly heavy oversteer bias is required in the suspension to counter the very heavy understeer bias in the mass distribution and tires.

In my years of making LX4, LX6, MRT, XRR, FZR, FOX, FO8, and BF1 sets, I've never found stiffening the front to result in increased oversteer, nor has stiffening the rear resulted in reduced oversteer.

[kaynd]

It's not the same in all cars. But it is still there. Also it's not that easy as stiffening the end you want for more grip. It needs the apropriate damping settings.

For the FZR I allready said that I am talking about stifness/mass relations and not absolute values... Of cource because its so rear heavy it needs so mutch harder suspention at the back than in the front.
As for other RWD's I allready said the main reason in most Rwd cars that suspention stifness seams to do the right thing is because of the differential.

In LX6 for example it's this is not so noticeable... but still after hours of testing I have found that appart from making it not so responsife... hardening the front/softening the rear gives almost no extra traction at the rear.
Also this depends on the camber settings. For some short tracks that have usualy left or right turs, where there is beneficial to have one side of the car with positive camber. The softer end indeed has more traction because the inside tire's camber angle is almost parallel with the outside tire's angle.

Yes, some of the FWD cars in LFS typically use sets that are rather stiff at the front, at least for hotlapping and short races. This is allows them to lift the inside front wheel and, with a bit of throttle, use the outside front to pull the front of the car around, helping the car turn. A kart uses much the same principle in the rear. Note that this is very, VERY hard on the front tires.


Yes yes I allso know that. Thats exactly what I am talking about. In a car (not a cart) only the outside tire sould not be able to produce as mutch grip as two more equaly loaded tires.
(On carts the tires have to cope with much less load comparing with cars, talking about contact patch/mass and there is nothing else than a locked diff at the rear so you really can’t do anything else to make it turn other than lift the inside rear wheel.)

have you ever tried to make an FWD setup In LFS using some oversteer in the springs for a change? eg stiffness distribution 40% front 60% rear... using the appropriate diff of course ...
I have tried realy hard to make a setup like that... I actualy made an FXO setup that had great turn in and mid corner speed... but it was rubish on conren exits. Yes according to LFS's tire physics its way better to use only one heavyly loaded wheel.

Of course it increases tire wear... and thank God at least this works normally..


Anyway I am not making that out of my head. :shrug: I face it every time I have to make a new setup for my team.

[Forbin]

For the FZR I allready said that I am talking about stifness/mass relations and not absolute values... Of cource because its so rear heavy it needs so mutch harder suspention at the back than in the front.
I saw and understood your argument and that is why I mentioned the difference in tire width between the front and rear. The suspension must also be adjusted to compensate for this inherent understeer bias.

As for other RWD's I allready said the main reason in most Rwd cars that suspention stifness seams to do the right thing is because of the differential.
I haven't seen this behavior change as a result of using a locked differential on the RWD cars, although I suppose it may be possible to set up a RWD car to act like a kart, lifting the inside rear. I haven't seen it in practice, though.

Likewise, it's not like the cars with other drivetrain types don't have differentials.

[Bandit77]

There are a lot of endurance sets on Setupgrid (http://www.setupgrid.net). I'm sure you will find one that suits you.

XFG: locked diff, hybrid tyres on the rear.
XRG: locked diff.

:shrug:

Maybe there are some others, but I downloaded 6, and 6 were this way. It actually doesn't feel too ugly in the XRG, but the XFGs sure do not feel too realistic.

Of course it has a lot to do with the game-physics not being perfect (tyres seem to be really horrible), but these setups clearly exploit the faulty physics.

So, to be competitive and to fight with the same weapons you really need to have an exploit-set that is not realistic.

You might say you CAN also be competitive with a realistic setup because setups only matter so much, BUT:

Whereas I'm still not very quick with an exploit-set (only did a couple of laps), I'm already a tiny bit faster than with my rather realistic "feel good" set... despite of two or three obvious mistakes in the lap.

Ok, this is maybe related to myself... however, there must be a reason why the fast sets are exploit-sets.

I hope you didn't lose me here. The points I want to make are:
1 - high adjustability make exploiting faulty physics more possible / easier.
2 - exploit-sets are faster but unrealistic
3 - in order to have equal opportunities you need to have the same set (i.e. an exploit-set)
4 - thus you can choose between being competitive or a realistic experience.

Limited setups could be limited in a way to minimize exploiting. Just as an example no locked diffs (at least until the tyre issue is solved), no knobblies except when on rallyX-tracks.

So this was about limited setups for more realism.

As for the "only driving skills count" aspect: I'm looking forward to the veedub. It'll show if the concept is valuable. (f'ing twist... I don't like the car itself at all :razz:)
IF it is valuable (which I believe), I hope that the levels of adjustability for all cars will be reworked, i.e. the lower the class the less options and coarser the steps.
Of course, therefore the classes have to be defined.

[kaynd]

I saw and understood your argument and that is why I mentioned the difference in tire width between the front and rear. The suspension must also be adjusted to compensate for this inherent understeer bias.
On the other hand I didn't pay mutch attention to what you stated there :shy: so yeah you are right for that. :thumb: But this still is not an excuse for the tire physics in general :razz:


I haven't seen this behavior change as a result of using a locked differential on the RWD cars, although I suppose it may be possible to set up a RWD car to act like a kart, lifting the inside rear. I haven't seen it in practice, though.

This will give some nasty initial oversteer when aplying throttle because the outside tire wants to propel the hole car. Not because it has less traction. In FWD it's ok but in RWD it's going to be tough to handle.
The oposite thought (softening) works realy whell cause of the resistance caused by the locked (or high locking) diff. And that's what masks the problem so In most Rwd cars the stifness changes, produce usualy the disirable result. (softer rear = more understeer)


Likewise, it's not like the cars with other drivetrain types don't have differentials. they have but in 4wd you can do whatever you whant with torque distribution so the problem there is allso not so noticeable. (only if you experiment with a great variation on suspention stifness distribution between front and rear you will notice that something is going wrong)

And on the FWD it's... well ahh whatever... exactly the oposite.
I laugh my ass off every time I get that :really: look when I say that someone needs a bit harder ARB at the back for less oversteer while appling the throttle. :x

This is not going to be solved by setup restrictions.
Server side setup “rules” appropriate for cup racing would be interesting… Just that.

[bbman]

I'm just wondering what is actually that wrong with the setups, that makes them so unrealistic as some ppl here say.

I'd like to see one of these unrealistic with physics flaws taken advantage from setups everyone seems to be on.

I mean, I'm not mechanic, and barely understand the basics of making a setup, so I'm just asking what is so wrong with the 'fast sets'?

The majority of setups is locked diff... With the wheelbase of every car except maybe the MRT, you shouldn't be able to do a turn in the car - yet not only does it turn the car faster, it also propels it out of the corner faster as there is no torque loss due to diff action...

I too think the physics are the root cause of the unrealistic setups, not the other way round... Adjusting the heat/traction curve, as well as the longitudinal slip/traction curve and/or force combining I think would make many of those unrealistic setups disappear...

[Zen321]

The majority of setups is locked diff... With the wheelbase of every car except maybe the MRT, you shouldn't be able to do a turn in the car - yet not only does it turn the car faster, it also propels it out of the corner faster as there is no torque loss due to diff action...

I too think the physics are the root cause of the unrealistic setups, not the other way round... Adjusting the heat/traction curve, as well as the longitudinal slip/traction curve and/or force combining I think would make many of those unrealistic setups disappear...

Very true, I can't do anything but agree.

@kaynd, Keeping traction on all tires is not what every racing engineer is looking for.
As far as I remember, former rally/asphalt rally driver Jean Ragnotti driving for Renault at that time was extensively using a turn-in technique in which the inside rear was sometimes 10cms off the ground. This is what made him famous, and yet he was really fast (not only chav driving ;) )

@Forbin, in some cases a stiffer rear suspension can actually create understeer, or a stiff one can create understeer. For example, when exiting, if you have all of the weight on your rear wheels, with your front skidding lightly (super-understeer), if one of your rear wheel starts skidding, you'll not be able to counter the motion with the steering.

From what I have been told when tuning the suspension, I tend to use the optimum spring frequencies, with respect to the relative mass of both ends. Because a lighter sprung mass requires harder suspensions, in the XRG for example, I will choose relatively stiff suspension (I have found that the WR values for the springs were very adequate), and a rear suspension relatively stiffer at the rear than at the front. I didn't yet work on a setup for an FWD, but it would be on the same concept, with stiffer springs at the rear and softer at the front, with a damping that can maximise the load of the front wheels all the time (and one or two clicks of toe out at the rear, which is very common IRL and improves the cornering of that FWD beast :p).
For midships, it is usually the opposite, I tend to have springs according to the relative weight of each end of the car, and then fine tune the damping/ARBs, in order to get the proper behavior.

Actually since a couple of weeks I have found out something with the ARBs that they don't tell you about in the LFS setup guide or Bob's Smith VHPA (that is a very good tool by the way). But I won't tell it to you, setuper's secret :smileypul

[S14 DRIFT]

-snip


Not a full response, but why shouldn't you be allowed to choose hybrids on a road track? After all, that's why they're called hybrids, surely?

It allows one to choose the balance of the car, putting hybrids on the back of an XFG makes it less understeery so it's not an exploit... it's just tuning?

But I don't understand what you mean by "exploit setups"... it's just taking advantage of a faster setting, which is open to be chosen by EVERYONE. :shrug:

[kaynd]

Very true, I can't do anything but agree.

@kaynd, Keeping traction on all tires is not what every racing engineer is looking for.
As far as I remember, former rally/asphalt rally driver Jean Ragnotti driving for Renault at that time was extensively using a turn-in technique in which the inside rear was sometimes 10cms off the ground. This is what made him famous, and yet he was really fast (not only chav driving ;) )


You have said that by yourself but I will help you understand what you are saying...

The rear inside tire was lifting because of the realy realy hard rear suspention comparing to the front. In this way he was redeusing the rear end traction / increasing the front traction. Thus having better turn in.
In LFS FWD setups you will see exactly the oposite...


Actually since a couple of weeks I have found out something with the ARBs that they don't tell you about in the LFS setup guide or Bob's Smith VHPA (that is a very good tool by the way). But I won't tell it to you, setuper's secret

O yeah you think that you are the only one who have found this “secret” ;)
The only reason no one refers to this officially is because this effect is not even remotely accurate comparing to real world physics… /me-> exaggerating here
(ok this is not so bad, it is just way to profound in LFS)

[Not Sure]

How about you share this secret ARB thing with the rest of us?

[Byku]

Have to agree... wth do You mean? :really: Who's no one? Guys what are You talking about? :scared:

"not even remotely accurate comparing to real world physics…" WHAT DO YOU MEAN? :scared:

[Bawbag]

Go take all the WR's with your secret ARBS then.

[DHRammstein]

I disagree with the OP to the extent that I don't think he has a clue what a driving simulator is, what nonsense.

[S14 DRIFT]

Go take all the WR's with your secret ARBS then.

Permission to laugh. :D

[Zen321]

Good point kaynd about the FWD setups
I didn't take a look at them on the different setup download files, since I am more interested in RWD's, but I'll be sure to take a look see if my point is valid or not :)

About the ARB settings, did I mention anywhere I was the only one to know it, nor was it an uber-setting? I just mentionned that it was something about dynamics that is not explained neither in LFS manual or VHPA. And I'm not even sure it is the secret that you are speaking of (and which I would like to know :p ). So stop the aggro guys, let the steam off a bit !
@Bawbag, I will be honest with you, and I always said that. Skills are more important than the setup, and right now I don't have the skills to match a WR with my actual controller (a mere laptop touchpad... damn I should've taken my G25 with me before moving!). I don't remember anything I said that would refer to : I would kick every WR holders' ass, did I?
So stop taking the piss each time someone on this thread say something, it gets really annoying :)

[kaynd]

There is no thing like secret adjustment that gives you “free” speed ffs… :razz:
It’s all about handling and mainly feel. And it is not a secret… It’s all about fiddling with the relation in stiffness between springs and anti roll bars (combined with the appropriate damping) in order to have the desirable responses from the car.
But anyway this is widely known… many racers even change the arb stiffness as the fuel load decreases and the weight distribution of the car changes… so go figure…


The hole effect is almost indescribable so I won't even bother to try and explain it because most likely I am going to mess it up.. :P It's just the reason you may feel that by adjusting some (single digit) NM in ARBS , even if this doesn't change the overall stifness distribution that much, it effects greatly the feel of the car or the willingness to turn-in or correct a line.

[Byku]

Ok guys, sry:D. I just want to clarify, this "effect" is ... well.. realistic in LFS or not?

[kaynd]

It might be so noticeable because everything in the car from the suspension components to the car itself is rock solid, so if you reach a sweet spot on the total balance, even the slightest ARB stiffness change makes has a significant effect.

Great way to test it. High speed slaloms.
Try to keep a steady rhythm between direction changes and observe how fast the car reacts when it starts to steer and how fast it recovers before you steer to the other direction.

I hope this makes sense.:schwitz:

[Zen321]

Oh I see, nah don't worry I wasn't referring to this ;) Yeah I've heard about the 70% or 45% relation stuff, but what I found was in the topic of the effcet on the car's behavior. I found it to be a lot more complex than "stiffer rear/softer front --> more overteer" or its understeer counterpart, and this complexity is not even mentionned.

Maybe I am wrong, but so far, my testing goes in the direction that it is far more complex :) Though I need further empirical data to finish my setups ;)

[kaynd]

I am allso not referring to soft more traction and hard less traction stuff when talking about fine tuning the arbs

[DHRammstein]

I have two cars that I race regularly, and like it or not, the setup means a lot, driver skill too obviously, but to say setups need to go is nonsense, it's a part of racing. Limiting the setups, maybe, but I can adjust just about every aspect of my cars, so if this sim is to be realistic, the setups should stay as they are, at least to an extent. IMO, my only issue is that, for example, the FXO, is it a stock car, or a heavily modified car that can be modified, if it's not, then you shouldn't be able to make so many adjustments to the car, it should be limited. Where a GTR, you should be able to adjust absolutely everything. Or am I missing something..

[Hallen]

I haven't seen this "stiffer = more grip" thing in LFS since the early demo tests in late 2002.

Yes, some of the FWD cars in LFS typically use sets that are rather stiff at the front, at least for hotlapping and short races. This is allows them to lift the inside front wheel and, with a bit of throttle, use the outside front to pull the front of the car around, helping the car turn. A kart uses much the same principle in the rear. Note that this is very, VERY hard on the front tires.

In the FZR, the mass is carried very far to the rear and the tires are much wider in the rear than in the front. Thus, a fairly heavy oversteer bias is required in the suspension to counter the very heavy understeer bias in the mass distribution and tires.

In my years of making LX4, LX6, MRT, XRR, FZR, FOX, FO8, and BF1 sets, I've never found stiffening the front to result in increased oversteer, nor has stiffening the rear resulted in reduced oversteer.

I would agree with all of that.

However, I have heard from several "real world" club racers that on certain cars, and only up to a point, stiffer ARB's in front will decrease understeer or stiffer ARB's in the rear will decrease oversteer. They claim this is because the ARB's help to limit the camber change at the wheel due to suspension geometry. Therefore, stiffer bars increase overall grip up to a point. I don't know if this is true, but it holds a certain amount of sense because ARB's should help limit suspension deflection and therefore the inherent camber change couldn't get as high. But I don't know for sure if this is how things really work.

I also don't know if LFS models this or not, but I suspect that it does.

Now if you are already using uber stiff springs and ARB settings, then the suspension deflection is already limited and the camber change isn't much of an issue.

[kaynd]

What you have heard from real world club racers is true and also yes LFS models camber changes according to the suspension travel combined with the total roll of the car so what you said should be apparent in LFS.
But no I am not talking about those specific situations. I am talking about general behavior in changes of stiffness relation between front and rear. I am quite surprised that not many seem to be aware of that. :expressio

Has anyone ever tried in LFS to induct oversteer at an FWD car just by increasing the rear suspension stiffness to see what is going on. ? It may make the car unstable in side to side weight transfers if the damping is not tuned appropriately to slow down the suspension with the higher frequency but apart from that, there is no grip gain at the front at all.

Anyway I got tired. I think I am going to leave it rest. It seems that I can’t even express what I want to say.

[Forbin]

I would agree with all of that.

However, I have heard from several "real world" club racers that on certain cars, and only up to a point, stiffer ARB's in front will decrease understeer or stiffer ARB's in the rear will decrease oversteer. They claim this is because the ARB's help to limit the camber change at the wheel due to suspension geometry. Therefore, stiffer bars increase overall grip up to a point. I don't know if this is true, but it holds a certain amount of sense because ARB's should help limit suspension deflection and therefore the inherent camber change couldn't get as high. But I don't know for sure if this is how things really work.

I also don't know if LFS models this or not, but I suspect that it does.

Now if you are already using uber stiff springs and ARB settings, then the suspension deflection is already limited and the camber change isn't much of an issue.
Actually I have experienced this in LFS, particularly with the LX6. If the ARB's and springs were too soft in the rear, the rear rolled too much, reducing rear grip. I often found that trying to reduce the tendency of the inside front wheel to lift off the ground was a good thing. So yes, there are some special, extreme cases where the "stiffer front = more understeer" rule is not quite so hard and fast. It still holds true for the most part, though.

[Byku]

To soft rear arb will make rear behave like more pendulum I suppose. It will create bigger forces acting on the wheels for a moment. There is propably a "border" between too soft and soft arbs. Hell... I don't know anything about setups... but I think it MIGHT be true :D.

[010010011010]

Low-cost racing is for the financially challenged. Since sim-racing is essentially free by comparison, restricted-setup sim-racing serves only one purpose: catering to the mentally challenged.



Well you've just shown you closed mind attitude to anything that dosent suit you. If you really think that then you could simply no go on to these 'mentally challanged' servers and stay on you more 'professional' servers. I just wanted a server for people who dont spend all their time playing this COMPUTER GAME, for people who just play for fun, and have a life in the real world.

[[DUcK]]

That's the argument I hate. People thinking that people have no lives because they are fast on a computer game :-/
Either way, the fast guys will still be the fast guys, and the strugglers will still be strugglers.
Some people can make setups quite quickly, and they then only need fine tuning, which can sometimes take time, yes, but it's only really needed in GTR cars for enduro type races.

[sinbad]

;1066659']That's the argument I hate. People thinking that people have no lives because they are fast on a computer game :-/
Either way, the fast guys will still be the fast guys, and the strugglers will still be strugglers.
Some people can make setups quite quickly, and they then only need fine tuning, which can sometimes take time, yes, but it's only really needed in GTR cars for enduro type races.

I agree, anyone who for even a moment thinks this suggestion (or argument) is about attempting to make the gap between fast and slow smaller is gravely mistaken or misguided.

To my mind we shouldn't even be having this discussion. If the cars were not a physics code display mechanism, and if they had been based on real world equivalents from the outset, then adjustability would be set and nobody could argue that they should be able to adjust the spring rate by 0.000001, and the individual gear ratios by 0.000001 in an XFG which is actually based on a generic "one-make cup" car with lots of mechanical restrictions (for example).

[Glenn67]

;1066659']Either way, the fast guys will still be the fast guys, and the strugglers will still be strugglers.

When I played alot (mainly S1 to early S2) I could consistently run within 1% of WR pace on many combos and much closer on some. Since I don't have a life anymore and can't play LFS as much I struggle to get better than 104% of WR pace :schwitz:so the amount of drive time you can get does effect you lap times, well at least for us mere mortals :p

I personally don't want to see too much restriction of setup ranges but perhaps on some of the lower classes (i.e. STD cars) the increments could be abit more course.

I have personally had cases were I've driven with a set thats not specific to a track but a fast set for another similar combo and been struggling with lap times, then get a set thrown my way and within 5 laps have knocked 2 sec off my lap time. So I can understand were some are coming from with wanting restrictions.

Having said that I'd really hate to see much in the way of forced across the board restrictions on any of the cars in LFS. I'd much perfer that servers could set a spec for the cars to run on that server, so that the setup restrictions could be varied between servers and only in force on that server with that server also having the ability to distribute a base set for the spec. Not every one would use this feature I know but server operators like CTRA could use it to great effect.

This would add to LFS were across the board restricition of setup adjustment on certain classes of cars would imo detract from LFS as the ability to tinker with setups is a good and important feature of a racing sim.

In my mind alot of these issues will not be so pronouced down the road when track surfaces and conditions become variable and the tyre physics have recieved there next installment of improvements.

[[DUcK]]

I have personally had cases were I've driven with a set thats not specific to a track but a fast set for another similar combo and been struggling with lap times, then get a set thrown my way and within 5 laps have knocked 2 sec off my lap time. So I can understand were some are coming from with wanting restrictions.
That's fair enough, but I'm usually the opposite. I've got two or three sets for the one car, based off exactly the same set (susp rarely changes except for the rear roll bar by 10 clicks), only different cambers and gears. I believe if you have a set that's fast somewhere, there's no reason why it can't be fast elsewhere. I've done a whole Aussie League Championship with the one set (not even different gears) and still managed to win it.. So that's one of many arguments that setups don't make a massive difference.
Having said that, If your top 1 & 2 are very close, having that setup advantage is a small but clear advantage and it's a legal advantage. It's a mental advantage; knowing your setup is going to be better than your opponents on the last few laps or whatever.. Which is why I want to get rid of the 'ss' option online. I occasionally put a lot of time and effort into setups for the Aussie races I do, and sometimes they are just small changes which make all the difference, then I feel rude not giving the set out, so I do. Also it makes your opponent think "he only wins because of his setup" (if you don't send it over).

[Glenn67]

;1067365']That's fair enough, but I'm usually the opposite. I've got two or three sets for the one car, based off exactly the same set (susp rarely changes except for the rear roll bar by 10 clicks), only different cambers and gears. I believe if you have a set that's fast somewhere, there's no reason why it can't be fast elsewhere.

I agree with your entire post and have similar experiences (on a lesser level obviously :D) What you describe is one of the keys to the whole discussion imo. You have had enough track time, experience and support (from fellow races, teams etc) to derive base sets in which you are comfortable with on most any track car combo. I on the other hand aren't active enough to even remember which set is good and which is not let alone have several base sets I am comfortable with. So when I have a few spare hours in the once or twice a month I get the chance to fire up LFS I end up spending most of the time getting back in tune with LFS and finding a set I'm comfortable with - which usually requires taking an inferno set and making changes till it suites me.

The other primary argument is about realism which imo will not be able to be done properly until certain physics and environment improvements take place.

Hopefully in about a month I can have more time to get back into LFS again, at that point I might even attempt to create a base set setup pack for my self and post it for interested parties.

[jasonmatthews]

I have setup a server for only Race_s races. Please see this thread - http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=53803

[gezmoor]

Actually, it's not over the top, not even a bit. IMO the only restriction in any racing class should be power to weight ratio and tire width - so you can fit 5 different types of cars in a class, and anyone can choose their weapon of choice.

And the resulting carnage from the differing lines/relative speeds on different sections of the circuit caused by placing dramatically different machines on the track at same time would be really conducive to good racing right?? No I didn't think so. :shrug:

Also if your running a "cup" or anything similar setups should not be restricted in any way, why would someone who has the knowledge to give themselves a completley legal advantage

Errr... how can it be a "legal advantage" when it's not compliant with the series rules ?? Think you're missing the point of the whole ethos of spec racing. If the spec doesn't suit your tastes/talent just go find one that does and leave other people to race in series that suit their tastes/talents. There are plenty of different motorsport options to choose from.


be put in the same failboat as the whiner who just came there with no prep work at all and thinks he should have the same chance at winning.

Sounds more like you're the one whining about not being able to beat these guys that "just turn up with no prep work" to me.

In simracing it's even worse, many of the aspects that a good driver and/or race engineer would consider in real life racing are completley absent in simracing, there is no taking care of a car, keeping track of how many miles each component has and when they have to be changed, or a gazillion other things that help smart people get the car across the finish line. So, with all those "advantages" already gone, can you seriously argue some kind of locked setups and "equality"? It is for the mentally challanged.

Why care? if you're good, you'll be able to beat them anyway. Your whole post, (and others too), just sound like you're worried about a bit more competition maybe??:shrug: IF the changes result in more competition down the ranks what difference does it make to you if you're out in front? or do you worry that restricted set options will mean you can't win as easily anymore??

Your posts make no sense to me in all honesty. All I see in most of them is vitriol towards others with a different opinion to you. :shrug: