Build your own Engine [Archive]

lalathegreat

22nd March 2006, 23:00

I know these sort of things, Engine mods tunning and tweaking, have been suggested to death. But I don't think its been fairly discussed before. Usually what happens is someone suggest it and 20 people give reasons why it should not be added.

Now my suggestion is to be able to make your engine. Am talking the whole sha bang.

Valve train
Head specifications
Block specifications
ECU parameters
Forced induction

Too me its seems very hypocritical to call for realism and want to race around with the same engine in everyones car. In reality no race team has the same engine.

Why add such a feature?
1. For one its more realistic
2.Dynamic Strategy. when a race teams builds a engine & suspension they have a set plan as to how there gonna grasp victory. To win a race you usually focus on a few specific areas whether it is avg cornering speed, entry speed, exit speed, straight away speed, consistency, Etc. these areas would be selected on what your strengths and weaknesses are and the track it self. With Lfs just having the ability to change suspension, you are constricted on strategies

Number 2 i think is the sole reason why it should be added. But as i have read in other post there are a lot of people with legitimate reasons as to why it should not be added. I plan on giving a rebuttal for some of the big reasons i found in previous post.

What is better... You win the race knowing all the cars have the same performance and its your skill as a driver that got the win or the fact you have more credits (Or have found a cheat/hack) so you have all the best bits and you only win because you have the faster car.
~WOZ

This is a good argument but i have to disagree. First off in real life this isnt the case all cars arent the same some are better than others in different areas. if as a simulator your highest priority is realism you should just have to deal with it because thats how it is in real life.

but modifying the engine is a no no to me personally. Partly because i would be clueless where to start, and secondly because it would give too much of an advantage to those knowledgeable in engines.
~Stellios (http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=70335)
(http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=70335)

I see a lot of people agree with this one. Don't understand why. Suspension setups arent exactly common knowledge. It seems rather selfish to deny a feature for the simple reason you don't understand it.

If this stuff ended up in LFS it'd turn into Gran Turismo/NFSU/Midnight Club, where the most modded car wins everything - in fact you need all the hot bits to win at all, the further you go - and then I think loads of people would quit playing. LFS is a driving sim and demands that your skill get you across the line first, not your after-market accessories.
~Hankstar (http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=20579)
(http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=20579)

isnt that how it is in real life though. With that said if u strap a turbo onto the GTi the skill level needed to drive it isnt going to get lower. If anything Its going to take more driving skills to keep it on the road and control wheel spin. Adding such features to Lfs would call for a class system for the cars. Class system like real life :)

Fair racing would go out the window and we'd have to endure all the silly questions and confusion about which tuning is best for which car on which track.
~Gunn

isnt this already the case with suspension setups

LFS is about racing, and racing is about skills, car control, using the brain, estimating the right speed in the corners etc, not about holding the N2O key down. That's how EA "racing" series shows it. Who wants moddded engine with N2O, airslamming turbo, precise set fuel mixture and timing, then he have to look for another game.
~MadCatX (http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=45581)
(http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=45581)
I feel racing is about the car just as much as it is about the driver. When a race team shows up for a race there two things they need to win, Car & a driver. When a team shows up for a race there arent coming for a good race and to have fun. Above all there coming to win

The trouble is that suspension tuning is necessary to allow each driver, and their respective styles, to get the most of the car. I can't drive some of Flotch's setups becuase they are too weird, but I can drive, say, Csimpoks.
tristancliffe (http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=18566)
(http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=18566)
I feel this is quite true for suspension and engine but not to the same extent you have for suspensions. One of the areas Lfs suffers and fails in comparison to a game like Gran Turismo 4, is its controls. To me were never really driving the same car. We all have different controls. Some use game pads, wheels, keyboard, mouse. With a game like GT4 everyone is either using the DFP or a controller. I think this is where the individuality in Suspension setups comes from in lfs.

However, with engine tuning, for a given track, there is one 'ultimate' configuration. Anyone running the wrong boost, ignition timing or whatever will be at a disadvantage to someone not running 'ultimate'. What does that mean? Well, eventually, everyone will run the same engine maps at each track, thus making the tuning bit useless. To start with it might be great while everyone finds the ultimate engine setup, but only for a few weeks. Therefore the programming work needed to make this happen would be wasted.
tristancliffe (http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=18566)
(http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=18566)

there can never be one ultimate setup. We all may have different views on how we would tackle a race plus an engine must really complement its suspension so there should be lots of variations.

In orginized racing it's not about who has the better car, it about putting drivers in very similar vehicles with a defigned performance range and letting them prove who is the better driver, not who has the better car. LFS is a Racing Simulator, as such it is designed to simulate the compitition between driver's skill.
Gimpster (http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=1553)
(http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=1553)

i do believe it is also about “who is the better driver” but in organized racing the better driver docent decide the win. many other factors do.
Nascar- it could be about pit times
Formula-pit strategy, car design
Rally-whose cars can survive the longest(they really abuse those things)

all in all it docent really matter who is right or wrong here. Adding such a feature as building your engine is a big upgrade. I don't expect scarwen to come here and be like this is what i got to work on. Before a system like this is implemented there are a several other things that really need to be added and fixed. Tire physics brake fade to name a few. I still do think such a feature needs to be added. though if it were to be added it would be far off i see no harm in discussing it.

I was not trying to insult anyone, am just trying to have a nice discussion on the topic with out someone calling someone else rice and what not.

Hankstar

22nd March 2006, 23:04

All I can say is: best of luck.

There are a few stats I'm going to have a go at estimating:

Percentage of LFS'ers who like racing: 100%
Percentage of LFS'ers who know anything about building/tuning RL engines (GT4 knowledge doesn't count): maybe 50%
Percentage of LFS'ers who don't know about building/tuning who could actually be arsed learning about tuning etc just for LFS: bugger all %

I reiterate what you've quoted me as saying: LFS is about skill behind the wheel, not skill in the garage. 60's F1 legend Jim Clark (may his soul rest) didn't know much about mechanics and didn't want to know. All he wanted was to hop in, drive fast and then tell Colin Chapman to make the car go faster :) I'm no Jim Clark on the track, but I am in the garage: just give me the keys, I don't care about anything else except the times on my pitboard.

Becky Rose

22nd March 2006, 23:18

Real racing is about money, and how you expend your money on technical progression. Even in the Go Karts I race the teams with the hottest engine tuning and most advantaced telemetry systems analysis and best organised "pit crews" are the winners.

I just turn up with a kart on a trailer, and I race against motorhomes and flat pack kitchens with carpetted garages.

If you want ultra realistic racing put money into the game, because money is all that really matters in real motor racing. Many a talented driver doesn't get very far because of the lack of it - for instance currently Britains best Grand Prix hope was an arrogant little kid I used to thrash in Formula TKM but he found a financer and went all the way. There's many a more talented driver out there.

If you want engine building on the other hand I think you need a hot rod or dragster sim.

Engine tuning yes as nearly every formula has engine tuning but engine building is the domain of Formula 1 and Le Mans. Outside of that and you get only the choice of sealed unit or tweekable.

I do agree on some of your arguments though - I got given a better setup than my own on South Long Rev today and went 4 seconds faster instantly. LFS is 30% skill, 30% T1 luck and 40% suspension & gearing setup.

Hankstar

22nd March 2006, 23:32

:nod: I agree about setups. They can make all the difference, not only to a race or laptime, but to the enjoyment of the game, full stop.

There's already a lot for the average bum (me) to get his head around in the setup area, with fully adjustable diffs, transmissions, suspensions, brake balances (even in the "street" cars like the UF and XF) and often I just download other peoples' sets and tweak them a tiny bit (and just as often not at all), rather than scratch-build my own. Start adding everything else and watch peoples' interest take a nosedive - or watch threads about "best engine settings for BL REV/SO1/FE Green pls" etc skyrocket.

There's nothing essentially wrong with wanting this extra stuff in LFS, but you must consider if it's actually worth having it at all.

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 00:29

can deff understand where you guys are coming from. it might of seem as though i over exsagerated Build your own engine. i don't think it would be more complicated than making a setup.

yea of course i understand some people want to race, and not bother with engine performance. But too me there seems to be only one road to victory in this game for a give track.

Suppose i said i was going to hold a competion with the winner getting 1000 dollars.

Competion
10 laps on blackwood in current LFS version, winner would be determined by points system

35 points for fastest 10 laps
50 points if u have the fastest lap
100 points if u break a world record for the track
and points based on split fastest split times and such
it would have to be done online and u get one shot Etc

as u can see there may be several different ways to win such a competion.
to me RL racing is sort of like this. Many different ways to win and its up to the driver execute the plan.

I think if some of us actually went and researched a little about engines we would see thats setting up one isnt as complicated as one would think.

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 00:43

Woz

23rd March 2006, 00:44

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 00:52

I saw a few in another thread suggesting that there should actually be less setup options in LFS to make it more realistic, and I think I'm in that camp too. Not to mention the fact that it'd make pick-up racing easier and IMHO that's what LFS does best.

Yea alot of the limitation in real life i realize were added for safety reasons. i don't watch nascar but was passing by speed and saw some guys tire blow up. u can imagine at 200mph thats a problem, what had happned was they lowered the tire preasure in the backright tire for grip but it backfired for them:(. turns out nascar has a minimum tire preasure limit for the front tires but not for the back. that just one example of why limitations are there. i think if limitations inf LFS were to be imposed it should be done by the person whos holding the Race. would be alot easier to implement i think

tristancliffe

23rd March 2006, 01:30

My opinion, for what it (isn't) worth is that engine tuning would be nice if it was done properly - and that just isn't feasible for, well, anyone here I don't imagine. The masses of information required to build a competative engine are staggering, so unless it was a crappy 'pick one of 5 camshafts and one of five cylinder heads' system it just wouldn't work.

Plus I don't think that it would, in the long run, add anything of any value to LFS at this stage. Maybe that will change as LFS develops...

Allow me to comment on a few of the parameters you have suggested. I will add my comments in, hmmm, blue I think.

Valve train
valve timming - What size valves? What flow coefficients? What seat angles and widths? What ramp angles? what duration? what overlap?
Cam timming - what cam profile? Multiple cam profiles - when does the change over occur. Pushrod, SOHC, DOHC etc?
maybe some sort or option for VCT VVT - done that above. Got ahead of myself.
Head Specification
Port size - done that too. But lots more parameters...
number of Valves - profile of valve stem and head? Angle of valves? Resulting cylinder head geometry? Spark plug (or multiple) position? Squish areas? Swirl? Turbulence?
Block SPecification
Bore - easy one that...
Stroke - what about conrod length?
Displacement - defined by (usually) just bore and stroke to give swept displacment, not a term in it's own right really.
Compression ratio - again, squish, combustion chamber design, piston crown profile, crown to top ring distance, valve pockets.
ECU Parameters
ignition timming - are people REALLY going to bother to work out the MBT for an engine at different loads, speeds and throttles? What about knocking and automatic advance. Cold start. Detonation? 3D, 4D, xD ECU maps?
Fuel maps - same again really... Stoichiometric? Rich? Lean? Knocking? Charge cooling due to latent heat of vapourisation?
Boost maps - this is complex enough without trying to model the pressure and flow rates and gradients of a compressor and turbine...
rev limits - now you want to model conrod strength, reciprcating mass balance, valve bounce etc?
Forced induction
Super chargers - lots of types, lots of complexity. You don't just pick one off a shelf. Lots of data is needed to correctly utilise forced induction.
turbos - same

What about charge cooling? What about inlet tract lengths? Airbox volumes? Primary and secondary exhaust primary lengths and diamters? Bend profiles and radii? Fuel wetting? Plug foulling? and lots and lots and lots more.

If you want to really simulate engines as much as you seem to do you will HAVE to include all of these simple (not to model) things to get anywhere close to it. Anything less will just be a GT4 style tuning exercise.

if u googled anyone of those u would be well educated to change values in anyone of those areas. (not in real life though) One of the good things about engines is there is ussually a trade off. so one upgrade will have a negative effect. might seem like alot for someone but if your on a team am sure there would be one person on there who was quite educated on the matter and could design a engine for the team. I myself am not a mechanic or a engine freak or anything (actually computer science major) and i do know quite a bit. it isnt hard stuff

Don't need to google them, and I can tell you if you have to rely on google then the chances of coming up with a working engine from scratch are slim to none. But some people play Russian Roulette, so what do I know... Yes there is usually a trade off - you could simplify the proposed GT4 system by having a RPG 'stats' system, so exhaust primaries 1 = +5hp +3lbft -2co -4nox etc etc.

I have and am involved in engine building, tuning and preparation and I can tell you it's not easy stuff. It's bloody complex once you get into it, although How Stuff Works does a fairly good job of making it seem simple, but that's its purpose.

Nice idea in a way, but to simulate it properly just wouldn't work, and to simulate it half-heartedly just isn't worth the hassle. Plus the 1337 crew would come along and bolt on phat air filters and big zausts just for the power gain, erm, I mean just to pull 12 year olds at run down cruuuuzes.

kevman_101

23rd March 2006, 01:56

The engine building is a decent idea.... but their should be limitations. You shouldn't be able to go and pump out like 400 hp in the GTI, but maybe tune it a bit to get like 40 extra hp, but makes the engine alot easier to break and makes your power band harder to use.

The gears I find pretty bad... Pretty sure it's impossible to change the ratios by such small increments. Maybe give a bunch of gears to chose from for different cars. Maybe give a selection of transmitions with different gear ratios and a final gear choice like 3.54, 3.72, 4.10 for street cars, then give individual gear changes to the GTR and S-S cars. The suspension is a bit of the same since if you right click you can change the stiffness by 0.1 KN/m.

Would also be pleasent to have in pounds for the spings since i played so much Nascar hehehe.

B2B@300

23rd March 2006, 01:58

Yea alot of the limitation in real life i realize were added for safety reasons.

I personally would love tinkering with engine setups :D but I have to agree with all those that say it is not good to overall racing. I would even infact like to see the ability to limit suspension/ gear ratios etc as a server side option for race serries or "race weekends"

As to limitations in race serries, it not just about saftey, infact I would say it less than 50% about safty and that limitations are imposed more to make the racing competitive. e.g. In the V8Supercars the whole serries is about creating an exciting but relatively equal field of cars creating some very close and hotly contested racing. Before this type of racing here in Australia they had Touring Cars but what happened with them is that one manufaturer would dominate for great lengths of time (years even decades) and that detracted from the racing (bit like F1 :razz: ) What they have created with the V8Supercar serries is great for the spectators and drivers alike, as it always gives great action on the track and gives each driver/team much more chance than they normally would have to do well, although at the end of the day the ones with the biggest budgets still tend to win most often, but not always :D .

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 02:14

tristancliffe
yea thats sorta what i had in mind although u did take it to the half way extreame. i do agree with u when u say if its not done right don't do it. one of the hardest parts in implementing such a system is when to stop in terms of factors to be considered. there would have to be point where you draw the line and say am not simulating that. to determine that line would take some carefull planning. it does look like a hit and miss sorta thing but i think it could work.

What i meant by its not hard is the actually comcept of it. example how combustion works isnt hard to understand but when u get into thermodynamics and all that is where it gets complex. i wasn't trying to give the impression you can google something and next day ready to design a a engine and then build it in real life.

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 02:21

As to limitations in race serries, it not just about saftey, infact I would say it less than 50% about safty and that limitations are imposed more to make the racing competitive. e.g. In the V8Supercars the whole serries is about creating an exciting but relatively equal field of cars creating some very close and hotly contested racing. Before this type of racing here in Australia they had Touring Cars but what happened with them is that one manufaturer would dominate for great lengths of time (years even decades) and that detracted from the racing (bit like F1 :razz: ) What they have created with the V8Supercar serries is great for the spectators and drivers alike, as it always gives great action on the track and gives each driver/team much more chance than they normally would have to do well, although at the end of the day the ones with the biggest budgets still tend to win most often, but not always :D

yea am on the same page with u. but sometimes when i see one manufacturer dominating i think its well deserved. if i went out raced and got my whooped i would anylyze my defeat, and hit the drawing board. deffinetly need limits though.

tristancliffe

23rd March 2006, 02:57

I like you. You took my exaggeration on the chin and in the humour intended. Whilst I know what you mean about it being a nice thing to do (ground up engine simulation and 'tuning') in terms of seeing your creation win races I still maintain that the added value to LFS would be negligable and perhaps even harmful to it, and we don't want that.

LFS is a computer game at the end of the day, so it's first priority is to allow us to have some close, fun racing without any more hassle than we want. BUT a close second to that is to keep the racing realistic at the same time. Whilst your idea might, technically, be more realistic (especially for F1 classes etc) I don't think it would add fun. If I want to design an engine there is nothing to actually stop me trying. If I want to race a racecar then there is something stopping me - I don't have a race licence, I can't afford the running costs etc. Whilst I could go and get a licence and I could save up, LFS allows me to do something I can't (regularly at least) in real life.

Anyone can, just be reading and thinking, with a pencil and some paper, being to design an engine. Hell, I used to sketch engines when I was a boy too. None of them would work (I could never work out why engines didn't just stop because they had no energy source without being plugged in), but I was able and willing.

I would, however, like to have a 3D engine building simulation program, where we have design everything, put it together, sort the electronics and fire her up. But I fear that's a long way off because combustion, CFD and FEA are imperfect arts. Maybe after LFS Scawen can 'treat' us to the worlds best engine simulator :p

Edit: Kev is about to reply...

newage

23rd March 2006, 05:20

imo, we have lfstweak, if lfstweak suport all cars and have mor options, that question is answered...

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 06:03

negligable and perhaps even harmful to it
could u elaborate on the negative side

to me the benefits of a more dynamic gameplay far outweight any negatives i know of.

for me this is sorta how i figure it would work
example there is a race

Track:Blackwood
Laps:30
Cars GTi, XRG,XRT, And AWD car RB something can't remember the name
Conditions:300 HP limit
my Strategy: try and get Faster Corner Exit Speed Plan overtakes after Corner Exits utilizing lightweight for acceleration.

given this situation Everyone is going to pick a different car to start with mostly based on Drivetrain and weight.

Continuing with the senario i would pick the GTi, beucase its lightweight. although its lightweight althought its light weight it still has it disadvantages such as its FWD understeer tracktion problems.

i tested it and i seem to use 2.5% of gas with the Stock GTi on every lap so that would be 75% the whole race in the stock form. that means anything i might have to make the engine thats is competitive but easy on the gas.(or drive in a more concervitive manner if possible)
summing it up so far

Engine:Need a competive motor that consumes < X of gas per lap
Suspension:needs to be able to alow me Exit corners fastthis is where it begins
going to have to be vague with this cause i
don't know the GTi Stock stuff so yea
Valve train
valve timming: [as in duration] need something thats going to be power in the middle to top end
Cam timming: [as in advance or retard when valves open] retarded for topend power
Head Specification
Port size: keep same
number of Valves: 4
Block SPecification
Bore :
Stroke: allowed me to rev to 9500 RPM
Displacement bump it up too 1.8 liters
Compression ratio something like 8:1
ECU Parameters
ignition timming
Fuel maps
Boost maps: would have very mild boost up to 75% throttle then someonething like 10-14 PSI full throttle
Forced induction
Super chargers
turbos: would use Smaller turbo with a AR ratio that alowed for a very quick spool

did this off the top of my head
as u can see i tried my best to set it up for my strategy i was vague in certain areas didn't want to over complicate this post more than neccesary.

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 06:05

imo, we have lfstweak, if lfstweak suport all cars and have mor options, that question is answered...
yea but we can't race it online and LFStweak allows any parameters. plus to keep the balance we would some sort of engine damage

DeadX

23rd March 2006, 07:13

This all seems crazy, i mean i agree with the adding of engine managment for the simple fact that it will be more like real life, and no car is the same....if everyone drove the same car in real life you know how boring that shit whould be see every single car like yours drivin the streets, racing on tracks, drifting on tracks, you whould know everything about it and what it can do...wheres the Challenge in that? wheres the realism in that? :schwitz:

I think this shouldnt even be a problem...i think they should add this because basicly for us dragers who like to drag on LFS DEMO and S2 that engine managment whould be GREAT for us i mean seriously GREAT not knowing what the other person brings adds more excitment to the game and knowning that when you have enough CREDITS you will be able to get yourself your own Engine upgrade or whatever how they wanna do it.

I say if its such a big deal, have it to were when someone creates a online room they can choose whether people can join with their modded cars or NOT that way the people who dissagree with this they can choose whether or not everyone is the same or NOT.

Becky Rose

23rd March 2006, 08:01

It would make more sense to allow this kind of thing in F1 and drag, and remove a lot of the setup options from the small formula's like the UF and XF.

The UF series should be totally standard, set your tyre pressures and fuel load (not that fuel load would effect them much because the tank is so small) and off you go.

F1 is about endless testing and telemetry.

In between is where you'll find me :)

danowat

23rd March 2006, 08:31

Why not have it?, because in many forms of motorsport the engine reg's are tight enough that the majority of teams have the same or very similar engines, there just isnt the scope there for changing much if anything.

I really hope that engine setup doesnt happen at least before the other setup pages are fixed and made more realistic, and if it does happen its not like the infintesimle setups we have now.

LFS has a LONG way to go before the existing setup system is made more realistic, without thinking about adding engine parameters.

You talk about modifying the engine of the XF Gti above, IRL many forms of racing that would include a car type like the XF Gti would have extremely limiting factors on the engine, you wouldnt be able to just change the displacement, or add a turbo, and if you could everyone would do it and there would be no advantage, back to square one.

ATM there is NO need for engine parameters.

edit : sounds like you have been used to playing GT4 TBH, the way GT4 works is the same way your train of thought is thinking, chuck as much horsepower as you can at a car to win a race, IRL it just aint like that.

Dan,

Becky Rose

23rd March 2006, 09:10

Actually it is, a bit, sadly. You said yourself, "if you could everyone would do it and there would be no advantage, back to square one." which pretty much sums the off track mentality of racers up.

If the rules dont outlaw something and/or the scrutineering isnt sophisticated enough to rule against something then somebody somewhere has a wallet large enough to do it ... which means 70% of the field have to do whatever it is to stay competetive...

danowat

23rd March 2006, 09:17

Which is exactly the reason why most/many of the modifictations the original poster mentioned just arent allowed in a lot of motorsport classes, they deliberatly restrict them to make for an even field, and so the race winner wins on driving ability rather than how much money/horsepower they can chuck at the car.

To keep LFS realistic, very little or no engine modification should be allowed, either that or they need to decide on fixed class sets, and also the rest of the setup parameters need severely limiting to, I have raced mini's in the past (like the UF1) and pretty much everybody in the field had the same engine and gearbox, and very, very little adjustment on suspension, in LFS I can change gear ratios and suspension settings out the ying-yang, that is about as non-realistic and arcade as you can get.

Dan,

Primoz

23rd March 2006, 12:20

If engine damage would be implemented better (for insatncew an engine could blow and there goes your race), it would be nice to be able to set max rpm. That way you could overrev the engine a bit but it would give you more speed. On the other hand, most racers shift at 7000-7500 rpm in the FXR and XRR so that would actually be quite useless... (rev limiting). Too much electronics style help :D

filur

23rd March 2006, 12:29

I'd like it, with more sensitive engines in terms of damage, and a server flag to allow tweaking, and hopefully 90% of servers still running without tweaking enabled.

danowat

23rd March 2006, 14:02

You know what CP, I would say its even less than that.

With the default set I can drive the FXO round BLGP rev 1:26, with a good set I can get low 1:24's to 1:23's, about 3 secs difference.

If my calcs are correct I reckon thats about a 4% difference.

Dan,

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 14:57

because in many forms of motorsport the engine reg's are tight enough that the majority of teams have the same or very similar engines, there just isnt the scope there for changing much if anything.
could u give some examples, not trying to call u out or anything just wanna know.
I really hope that engine setup doesnt happen at least before the other setup pages are fixed and made more realistic, and if it does happen its not like the infintesimle setups we have now.

LFS has a LONG way to go before the existing setup system is made more realistic, without thinking about adding engine parameters.
i said that earlier, adding such a featue is a huge update and i rather see other stuff implemented and fixed first

You talk about modifying the engine of the XF Gti above, IRL many forms of racing that would include a car type like the XF Gti would have extremely limiting factors on the engine, you wouldnt be able to just change the displacement, or add a turbo, and if you could everyone would do it and there would be no advantage, back to square one.

if u look at the SCCA honda-cup (i am comparing Civcs to GTI) u wil see that the rules do call for "The Honda Cup is designed to provide an exciting, highly competitive, Honda-specific racing venue. Technical innovation is strongly encouraged while close racing will be ensured by a minimum of easily met and enforced restrictions. " but if u read all the rules u will see alot of stuff is unretricted.

http://www.honda-cup.com/ Click on competitors and u will be proivided with the links

edit : sounds like you have been used to playing GT4 TBH, the way GT4 works is the same way your train of thought is thinking, chuck as much horsepower as you can at a car to win a race, IRL it just aint like that.
My whole point is not win by horsepower but win by strategy. I for one don't think most horsepower always wins. with an engine and suspension design there are alot of factors to prevent that from happening. when u add engine design u can bring different cars into the same class like XRT and GTi.

Hyperactive

23rd March 2006, 14:57

As for the engine tuning, of course I'd like to see it! Not that I could do much or understand it, I would love it.

But I think you are having a wrong image of the whole engine tuning affair. It is not that you increase some value, put some reinforcements there and there, tweak it little, notice that the engine heats up too much... It's about you change some value slightly, increase some values and notice the engine won't start at all.

But I'd say that some kind of simplified system could be doable. Like the current setup system. You can change all the suspension setting without being afraid that the shock mounts fall off or etc.

There would be still a whole lots of things to alter even if the valve number, bore size, cylinder blocks and heads, stroke and turbos would be left out. Building whole engines would be a pain to program/do properly. And what kind of racing cars have no limits for engine building?

Vain

23rd March 2006, 15:24

Engine mapping might be something interesting for the FOX and FO8. Regardless wether Formula Renault or F3000 have that, it would propably be a very good addition because it adds a lot of strategy to long races.
And we shouldn't even think about making the engines of streetcars editable.

Vain

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 16:55

Building whole engines would be a pain to program/do properly. And what kind of racing cars have no limits for engine building?
i use to think that too but look at LFS now look at the physics system. it probaly wasnt easy to do. any engine system should not be anyless more complicated that the current physics system.

Am down for racing with limits i just don't think it should be decided by the game it self but by whose holding the race.

And we shouldn't even think about making the engines of streetcars editable.
why? its common practice where i come from.

Greboth

23rd March 2006, 18:06

zeeaq

23rd March 2006, 19:37

IMO i study an automotive course at uni and although im only im my second year, if all enginre characteristics were implemented then i would expect 90% if not more players would be to confused by it all and possibly leave. Also if engine modification is to happen, i think its an all or nothing situation. As in - leave it out or have every possibility.

As tristan pointed out (not completely serious i no but has a point) that there is IRL 100's if not 1000's of different possibilities in one engine, and lfs has 18 cars (i think its 18 anyway)

im not sure about all of these as i dont follow them but im sure if its not no engine tweaking its very little. THink formula ford, formula renault, btcc to an extent, A1 GP, cupra cup etc. I no A1 GP was designed to be whos the better driver instead of whos got the most money. Cupra cup is done to find out whos the better driver in pretty much (if not) identical cars. And whoever won got a chance to race for seat in the btcc.

My point is reli - engine tweaking, tuning, modification in anyway is all or nothin IMO. And even though i know my way round an engine to a degree i wouldnt have a clue to full engine tuning.

Just my £0.02 worth.

I do not exactly agree with this statement.Dont think ppl will quit playing LFS if engine characterstics were introduced.In fact as i see it,it would enhance the learning experience of the game.I really think that LFS or any other racing sim.(havent tried other sims though) can help impart a lot of knowledge about the way automobiles work to many who arent really aware.Though i have always been a hardcore auto enthusiast all my life,i frankly accept that only when i started playing the game,i came to know in detail about the suspension settings (damping,ride height etc) and final drive settings,gear ratios,toe in toe out,parallel steer etc etc....though i have always had a rough idea about what each of these were,i never really knew what a difference they made to the overall handling and car control,based on individual driving styles too.So LFS actually gave me a feel and experience of howthings work in car racing....though its virtual...but then its a racing sim.:D

So all i am trying to say is we must include,if not all, atleast a few basic and vital engine char. to make it a complete racing sim. i.e. let it cover each and every aspect of racing.And moreover even in F-1,all cars appear similar.....as of what we can make out,watching a race or qulifying.....they differ only in speeds...but when each and every aspect is considered the cars differ by a lot of things....not only the engine but also the aerodynamics....they all appear smilar because every car has a set of norms and specifications to meet.....so they are all V8s agreed.....but they are all different....

one more thing.not trying start an argument or anything here.but why so much haterd to GT4:shrug: ???? i did find a similar something about NFS too....lol.....(think i sparked the fuel!!!!:D )....

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 20:10

im not sure about all of these as i dont follow them but im sure if its not no engine tweaking its very little. THink formula ford, formula renault, btcc to an extent, A1 GP, cupra cup etc. I no A1 GP was designed to be whos the better driver instead of whos got the most money. Cupra cup is done to find out whos the better driver in pretty much (if not) identical cars. And whoever won got a chance to race for seat in the btcc.

Those leagues where deff made with driver skill in mind. but the whole goal of the engine tweak tune build is not to destroy that aspect of LFS but to add to LFS. Just because Engine modifications where added don't mean u can't hold racees where the engines are the same. no?

As i stated before i rather see it user determined whether or not engines can be modified for a given race

LFS as a sim is very unique because its not a road car sim, Formula sim,kart sim. its a mixture of all, and this is mostly due to its dynamic physics. because of this u see stuff like drifting happenning. as sure when scarwen first started he prob didn't fore see people drifting. Engine modfication would create a different types of gameplay and LFS leagues not seen before.

Hankstar

23rd March 2006, 20:42

From a purely logistical point of view it's pretty hard to imagine any of this being implemented. For a start, Scawen would have to do all of it (unless he wants another guy in the team, which I think he doesn't, going by what he's said in the past), which would take ages. Because of that, he'd do it last of all, probably after S3 was released and everything was finalised. Then we'd all be waiting for him to finish the engine bits and when he did, everyone's hotlaps would be null and void and we'd have to start over. Further still, you'd have people complaining about "why wasn't this particular aspect of engine tuning included when this other one was, and why can I adjust this bit but not this other bit?" and so forth.

Then, unless you were participating in organised races (which would need to have rules as well as people who would monitor those rules), which many people don't, you'd roll up to a server for a quick pickup race and be blown off the track by some experienced tunester(s) who wouldn't share his setup/advice and you'd be dissillusioned quite quickly (that, or you'd see a list full of non-tune or tune-only servers and you may not see anything that suits you - and sometimes it's hard enough already to find a track/car combo you like, depending on the time of day). Well, I would, coming from the "I have no idea about engines and don't care enough to learn simply for a PC game" camp as I do. I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one.

It's not such a bad idea in itself, but I just don't think LFS needs it. LFS is focussed at drivers primarily and that's where I'd like it to stay. That may change in the future but I honestly can't see it happening.

@zeeaq: it's not that people hate GT4 and NFS around here, it's just that a lot of the locals have seen so many threads asking for arcadey stuff like bodykits, huge wings, neons, "stage 4 turbos", NOS and other assorted non-sim clip-on fashion/toy parts that simply aren't in the spirit of LFS (which is for racing, not ricing) they're just a bit over hearing about it :shrug: LFS is a simulator and bares only a passing resemblance to those console mega-hits :)

lalathegreat

23rd March 2006, 21:41

For a start, Scawen would have to do all of it (unless he wants another guy in the team, which I think he doesn't, going by what he's said in the past), which would take ages. Because of that, he'd do it last of all, probably after S3 was released and everything was finalised.

look at the physics now there alot of numbers in the mix to get the results we we play with. If you shown me this game and i didn't know who made it. last thing i would of guessed was one person did all the programming. Am still amazed at it. from a developement stand point i don't see it being much more difficult than the current Physics system.

everyone's hotlaps would be null and void and we'd have to start over.
its often said on this forum that LFS is a alpha and far from finished. if thats the case, as the physics are tweaked the hotlaps will all become "Null and Void" anyway. plus you could make hotlaps only done with standard engines.

"why wasn't this particular aspect of engine tuning included when this other one was, and why can I adjust this bit but not this other bit?" and so forth.
don't we already have this today.

(which would need to have rules as well as people who would monitor those rules)
this could be all done easily server side same way u retric certain types of cars

you'd roll up to a server for a quick pickup race and be blown off the track by some experienced tunester(s) who wouldn't share his setup/advice and you'd be dissillusioned quite quickly
This can already happen if someone has a superior setup

(that, or you'd see a list full of non-tune or tune-only servers and you may not see anything that suits you - and sometimes it's hard enough already to find a track/car combo you like, depending on the time of day
If done right it could eliminate this problem. why because we can have classes that are not based on cars themselves but specification of the cars
Stock Class A Class B ETC. although u have a point (i don't know whats its like finding a race in Full version)

Hankstar

23rd March 2006, 23:18

OK, I didn't notice you're a demo racer. In that case it's even more suprising that you want all this extra gear when you haven't even tried the other 15 cars and the rest of the tracks! Strange how people can form such strong opinions about something they haven't experienced to the full yet...

Well, all I can suggest is that you get the full version and mess around for a month or two, then see if you still think all this extra farnarkling is actually necessary :)

look at the physics now there alot of numbers in the mix to get the results we we play with. If you shown me this game and i didn't know who made it. last thing i would of guessed was one person did all the programming. Am still amazed at it. from a developement stand point i don't see it being much more difficult than the current Physics system.

What are you basing that on? Talk to a developer and see what they say.

don't we already have this today.

You are living proof of that :)

although u have a point (i don't know whats its like finding a race in Full version)

As I said, grab it, try it and then see. It's great value - better than anything else out there (imho).

lalathegreat

24th March 2006, 00:46

What are you basing that on? Talk to a developer and see what they say.
After reading LFS manual its quite obvious its not a simple physics engine. i mean u can just look at it tons of numbers all over the place.

I have my reaons for why i havnt bought the game, it has nothing to do with quality though. My opinion isnt going to change even if i buy the game.:shrug:

Hankstar

24th March 2006, 01:34

If that's the case I think this debate is close to being pointless. Without the full experience of S2 (and the subsequent improvements that have come since its release), I don't believe you can make an informed decision about it, or what should be done to it. It's like eating a handful of fries from McDeath's and then asking them to add fruit cake to their menu.

If you'd been racing S2 (and hanging around here) for long enough to get a feel for the game, and what the devs are trying to create, then maybe I'd consider your argument more carefully. Many have suggested these sorts of things before and the general feeling I got from those threads was that they weren't needed or wanted in LFS.

But hey, it's your opinion, so stick to it :thumbsup:

Peace
.h.

Shotglass

24th March 2006, 01:36

look at the physics now there alot of numbers in the mix to get the results we we play with. If you shown me this game and i didn't know who made it. last thing i would of guessed was one person did all the programming. Am still amazed at it. from a developement stand point i don't see it being much more difficult than the current Physics system.

no no no no no NO !
for the most part (or at least for a very large part) engine behaviour is affected by fluid dynamics the computation of which is a field thats still solely in the hands of engineering experts and very good coders
if you ever want to see any results you have to know a lot about the basics of fluid dynamics ... a lot about fe grid optimisation and also on writing fast code
and even then simulating a single valve takes an eternity on a home pc

there is just no way scawen would ever be able to find the time and knowledge to code that into lfs (id still like to have aero code based on cfd simulations of the actual car models lfs uses though)
especially since afaik there are no commercial products available at this point that offer a complete engine development environment ... so lfs would be a first of its kind

dont get me wrong it would be amazing if there were any way to design an engine have lfs calculate its torque curve and redline and feed these figures into the setup (long explanation for preprocessing) ... but i wouldnt want to pay thousands of euros for an lfs license

lalathegreat

24th March 2006, 03:27

for the most part (or at least for a very large part) engine behaviour is affected by fluid dynamics the computation of which is a field thats still solely in the hands of engineering experts and very good coders
if you ever want to see any results you have to know a lot about the basics of fluid dynamics ... a lot about fe grid optimisation and also on writing fast code
and even then simulating a single valve takes an eternity on a home pc

what do u mean by fluid Dynamics?

Thats way more complex than what i am suggesting. i get the feeling some of u guys think i am suggesting simmulatring everything in the engine down to thermal Dynamics and combustion physics. deff far from that

On a seperate note have u seen the program Engine Analyser Pro?

jtw62074

24th March 2006, 04:19

There are different levels of abstraction you can aim for when writing an engine model. It's not necessary to write a full 3D FEM system in order to make a very realistic engine simulation that produces torque/power curves that are close enough to reality. I've written three or four engine models over the past decade or so. They range from simple to very complex, but they don't need to be 3D mesh type things that take forever to run to produce very good results. (They do, however, take a very long time to write if you've never done it before and are not already rather knowledgable about engines. My latest engine model is arguably more complicated than my vehicle dynamics system from a programming perspective.)

The drag racing simulation I wrote, Straightline Acceleration Simulator, has an engine simulation in it that I wrote mostly while in high school (QuickEngine Builder). If you check out the demo, you'll find it runs a complete torque/power curve in a fraction of a second. Granted, it's a much simpler model than my latest stuff, but it works quite well regardless and is plenty fast enough for use in games. Since then I've done a lot more complicated stuff that does everything you guys are talking about and more, but they do take more execution time to run.

For a good portion of the past few months I've been writing a 2-stroke engine simulation based on what I've learned writing 4-stroke models for inclusion in Virtual RC Racing 4.0. So far the results are quite good and we fully intend to have this engine tuning in VRC as it's very much a part of real racing.

The setup options that can be changed in the model are very extensive (all the port timing events and passage sizes and so forth, it's a full blown wave action simulation), but we're not going to have more than a handful of them available for the public to play with. I.e., in reality (in RC anyway) people play with different exhaust pipes, glow plugs, and tune the fuel mixture, and that's about it. They might grind the exhaust port a bit to change the exhaust timing to shift the power curve around a bit, but usually only the pros or very experienced racers mess with that. However, one of the cool benefits you get from it is that when weather conditions change the curves are effected realistically. You need to change the mixture a bit or maybe the glow plug in order to maximize yourself for that weather condition.

Exhaust pipe selection moves your power curve around, trading off low end torque for top end power or vice versa. In the current VRC version we allow a limited form of engine tuning so people can already play with the exhaust or select different engines, but it's all based on multiplier tables running off a real engine torque curve and so on rather than an actual simulation like I'm working on now. Still though, nobody complains about it in our community and simply sees engine setup as another thing to play with to get the car running how they want. In fact, quite a lot of them have asked for more engine variables to play with.

Attached is a dyno run from the simulation in its current state. There's still a fairly long way to go yet, but you can see how it compares to a real engine. The green lines are the torque/power curves of a real engine, except for the low end part where the torque curve is flat (this was at a low rpm where we didn't have any dyno data.) The red and black lines are horsepower and torque, respectively, produced by the simulation. As you can see it matches up quite well, especially for a model that runs the entire curve somewhere between 0.5 and 1.5 seconds or so. So you really don't need to have a super complex model that takes hours or days to run like the manufacturers might use in order to get pretty close results.

As for the various arguments pro/against engine simulations in racing sims, I must admit I find the "it'll complicate things and I don't know anything about engines" argument a bit ironic. I agree with others that you're already setting up the chassis, which is a very complex thing indeed to do, and that can easily make the difference between winning and losing a race. Most of you guys know quite a lot about setting up a car and I'd bet it's mostly because of the sims you've been playing. You learned to do it. And you can learn to set up an engine as well. In fact, you might find it easier to set up an engine than the chassis ;) You really don't have to be sculpting your own combustion chamber and port designs in 3D or anything like that. Nobody does that but the engine manufacturers anyway.

Engine tuning isn't about getting stage 1 this, then stage 2 that, and so on, where whoever has stage 4 of everything blows away the competition. That's indeed very arcade and I suspect many of the folks that are against this idea are picturing that happening. I agree that if that was the case it would ruin LFS for a lot of people. However, if the setup options were realistic it might be quite fun and really not ruin things the way folks are thinking.

In my big car sim I regularily play with engine tuning by running curves off my QuickEngine Builder and find it to be really fun to do. What most people probably don't know is that making an engine produce absolutely as much horsepower as you can make it create is actually going to kill you. I.e., if your engine is going to blow up at 7000 rpm and you try to produce literally as much horsepower as possible, what you'll do is choose parts that get the torque to peak as close to 7000 rpm as possible. Then you can tell your friends about the 5.7L 600HP combination you came up with. Then you show up at the track and find you have absolutely no torque coming out of any of the corners and are getting blown away by guys with 400HP.

Yesterday I was running a 500HP car and swapped in a 750HP motor in my sim. My lap time on a minute and a half lap only improved by 2-3 seconds. Why? Because this particular track only had one straight long enough to take advantage of the power. You can't do a whole lot with the wheels spinning all the way down a short straight between two turns. Adding more top end power just makes it harder to control. So really, it's not necessarily a matter of "whoever makes the most power wins." You need to make power over a certain rpm range depending on your gearing and the track. Your numbers won't be as impressive as the next guy's, but he's left scratching his head as to why you've got 100HP less than he does and are smoking him ;)

Anyway, if done right, I think it'd be fun. Plus, it might be fun to try different "engine manufacturers'" engines by downloading them. It might be fun and open up a new area for bragging rights ;)

RMachucaA

24th March 2006, 05:00

after reading all of the thread (phew), all i have to say is... NO
:)

jtw62074

24th March 2006, 05:22

Why don't you tell us what you REALLY think? :razz:

lalathegreat

24th March 2006, 05:30

@jtw62074 he hit the nail on the head with what i was trying to convey
@RMachucaA ???? whats that suppose to mean

RMachucaA

24th March 2006, 06:29

jtw62074

24th March 2006, 07:23

One must decide whether one is going to do something or not at all before deciding where to fit it into her schedule. There's no harm in discussing things and dreaming up ideas in the mean time. :shy:

RMachucaA

24th March 2006, 07:28

well, this is the place to do it, just dont demand it.

jtw62074

24th March 2006, 09:16

I don't recall anyone doing any such thing :smileypul

NaBUru38

24th March 2006, 12:08

I am sure most of the LFSers won't like part upgrades (lighter parts, etc). But *** angles, turbo pressure... that would be better than nothng at all.

Shotglass

24th March 2006, 12:40

...

hmmm you almost have me convinced there ... but those curves deviate a bit too much to really get me excited
also could you estimate about how much time it would take to come up with an engine simulation thats at least as accurate as yours ?

jtw62074

24th March 2006, 14:46

hmmm you almost have me convinced there ... but those curves deviate a bit too much to really get me excited
also could you estimate about how much time it would take to come up with an engine simulation thats at least as accurate as yours ?

Interesting viewpoint. At peak power the error is only 4.5%, and that wider area past the peak is 10%. Below the peak torque the data was unknown and indeed should drop similarily to the sim curve. Average error is within 5%. That's with my wild guesses at flow rates at all the ports and so on. From an engineering standpoint that's considered excellent :)

Anyway, if I massage the flow rates and so forth it fits so closely you can barely see a difference, but that doesn't validate the model properly and to a science person it looks like obvious cheating to get the curves to fit ;)

The amount of time it takes to write something like that completely depends on the individual. It took me several months and I've done it before a couple of times, so it's not a small task, unfortunately. A full blown 4-stroke model takes quite a bit longer to develop.

lalathegreat

24th March 2006, 14:57

If i must elaborate.

This is something which should be brought up when S3 is in development.

Right now, its fine to suggest it as you have, but in reality its quite pointless to discuss it so early. There are many, many other features which are a lot more important to gameplay\physics that need to be addressed.
RMachucaA

if u look at my first post u will see i stated that already

all in all it docent really matter who is right or wrong here. Adding such a feature as building your engine is a big upgrade. I don't expect scarwen to come here and be like this is what i got to work on. Before a system like this is implemented there are a several other things that really need to be added and fixed. Tire physics brake fade to name a few. I still do think such a feature needs to be added. though if it were to be added it would be far off, i see no harm in discussing it.

Vain

24th March 2006, 15:03

A full blown 4-stroke model takes quite a bit longer to develop.How scalable is your model? Can you take your maths-sheet and get 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 cylinders in V and inline-configuration in a reasonable timeframe compared to the already done work?
I just ask this out of curiosity. Also the answer would determin wether it'd be a good idea to get your head with Scawen together. ;)
And by the way, did you think about a sound-engine? The maths that are involved in your motor model should be helpful there...
All in all :thumb: .

Vain

Shotglass

24th March 2006, 16:41

Interesting viewpoint. At peak power the error is only 4.5%, and that wider area past the peak is 10%. Below the peak torque the data was unknown and indeed should drop similarily to the sim curve. Average error is within 5%. That's with my wild guesses at flow rates at all the ports and so on. From an engineering standpoint that's considered excellent :)

a bit hard to tell the error without any scale ... but the thing the approximation is constantly significantly above the measurement so your simulated engine has a larger power band and higher peak power which should make the car quite a bit faster

The amount of time it takes to write something like that completely depends on the individual. It took me several months and I've done it before a couple of times, so it's not a small task, unfortunately. A full blown 4-stroke model takes quite a bit longer to develop.

well i guess that kills the idea until well into s3 at least

jtw62074

24th March 2006, 21:50

a bit hard to tell the error without any scale ...

It's easy. Open up that pic in a paint program and count pixels like I did :thumb:

but the thing the approximation is constantly significantly above the measurement so your simulated engine has a larger power band and higher peak power which should make the car quite a bit faster

Yes, but that's just one of the curves from when I was messing around with some new development stuff to make sure things shifted around correctly when things were changed. It wasn't meant to be spot on. I just plopped it together real quick to illustrate my point about it being unnecessary to do all the 3D mesh stuff and wait hours or days to produce a pretty good curve. As I said, there are several flow restriction values that are completely unknown through ports and passages. Garbage in, garbage out. In addition, I'm still working on it, so bear with me please ;)

As said before, if some of the unknowns are tweaked it fits almost exactly, but that's not any sort of validation of a model. What counts is that you're pretty close when making reasonable estimations of the unknown stuff that has dramatic effects. If we want to be picky about it, the motor from the dyno test is a '97 engine that's a little bit different from the one I took measurements of.

Anyway, try this next one instead if that's what's important ;)

http://www.performancesimulations.com/files/2stroke-C.JPG

If the tail at the high end throws you off, don't despair. We did not have data for the very top end of the curve or the bottom end before the clutch engaged. :p

Ill_eagle94

24th March 2006, 22:58

I think an engine creator would be wonderful and loads of fun.

I know it would be difficult for some people to figure it out, but if you have some default selections, they would have something to start with and would be able to make small adjustments to parameters and I bet they would eventually figure stuff out.

An other way to make people that are less knowledgeable able to remain competitive would be to simply have a check box when creating a server to allow or disallow modified engines.

If anyone has ever used Desktop Dyno (link) (http://www.proracingsim.com/desktopdyno.htm), you would most likely agree that everything that it allows you to do may be sufficient, although I would like to see a wider range of compressors or maybe custom compressors that you can design your own flow chart.

Shotglass

24th March 2006, 23:42

those graphs look much better ... if it wasnt for the long development time youd have convinced me by now :)

hideaki-san

25th March 2006, 00:11

Modded engines? How about engines which puke oil, coolant, and rods onto the track if you really screw up? :D

Ill_eagle94

25th March 2006, 02:28

Modded engines? How about engines which puke oil, coolant, and rods onto the track if you really screw up? :D

Yes. :thumbsup:

hideaki-san

25th March 2006, 07:37

And lots of black and white smoke out of the exhaust and hood when it tells you "I can't take this shit any longer". :D

Yes. :thumbsup:

Viper93

6th April 2006, 03:42

Those leagues where deff made with driver skill in mind. but the whole goal of the engine tweak tune build is not to destroy that aspect of LFS but to add to LFS. Just because Engine modifications where added don't mean u can't hold racees where the engines are the same. no?

As i stated before i rather see it user determined whether or not engines can be modified for a given race

LFS as a sim is very unique because its not a road car sim, Formula sim,kart sim. its a mixture of all, and this is mostly due to its dynamic physics. because of this u see stuff like drifting happenning. as sure when scarwen first started he prob didn't fore see people drifting. Engine modfication would create a different types of gameplay and LFS leagues not seen before.

Hehe I am a little slow on reading these....

You asking for something like what they made for NFSU2?

I think it would be a cool idea, but have locks on it so servers and leagues can prevent them from being used. I know I would not like to see them in use while in a race. I enjoy racing. I like the fact that everyone is driving exactly the same car. That way I know exactly where I suck at and need work as a driver. I don't want to not be able to compete just because I suck at getting a good engine setup too :schwitz:

But for the drag/drifting communities I think it would be good for them to have something to make their enjoyment better. Like someone said before this is not just a certian type of car race sim, this has everything. Who knows maybe if there is a big enough crowd they could make drift tracks =)

*edit* Read some more around the forum.... anyone feel like making a mod for this? =P Tweak had the idea for someone asking about a "points system" for drifting. I think this falls along the same line, IMO Maybe that would change if there was a significant number of racers wanting this. I have only seen one or two drift servers, there is always people on them though =P

BlakjeKaas

6th April 2006, 14:02

I would hate it. Cause you always have a kind of the best setup for the engine, so the 'new ones' will drive bad. And the rest, which will have all the same engine setup, (just like normals setups, cause there IS a fastest setup) so actually I think it wouldn't help LFS.(big dot :D)

DeadX

15th April 2006, 19:11

trackah123

15th April 2006, 19:23

hey deadx wazzup :D

anyway .. about this whole mod thingie.. i was thinking..
if mod features would be enabled online.. i think a new option should be created for lfs admins (that creates lfs servers)

option like : Allow Mod Parts (Yes/No)

so admin can decide wether they want to allow or disallow mod parts on their server :)

Hyperactive

15th April 2006, 19:26

Why do ya'll compair it NFS Underground? or NFS Most wanted? when there is 2 games on Xbox and Ps2 called... Grand Turismo 4 and Forza Motorsport...they BOTH are 2 very good Simulation games that have performance parts and stylish look additions in the game....so why even compair those games performance parts for LFS to NFS...when NFS aint even a SIM, and really its not a bad idea if Grand Turismo 4 can pass with performace parts and still be a very fun simulator then so can LFS

GT4 are forza plus others are more on the fun side of things, enjoyable and straightforward games. The main point is in playability.

LFS is a sim that aims to present the racing experience as real as possible. The main point is in realism.

But let's not start this :)

DeadX

15th April 2006, 19:32

trackah123

15th April 2006, 19:33

would take quite some time for devs to create mod parts from scratch and reprogram lfs and stuff i think... its not like crowded EA :D only few good devs that created LFS...

maybe in LFS S6 :shrug: who knows? hehe:smileypul

Hyperactive

15th April 2006, 19:37

yeh bro i know im on no ones side here, but what im saying is why are they compairing a NONE sim game with performace to a SIM game, and im saying lets say LFS does decide to add performace parts, well it whouldnt be any different and less realism in it then forza or GT4 is, and it wont make it less real then in real life...Track cars are modded right? there not stock? so why do we have to put up with stock cars :) and i know LFS focus's on Realism and ADDING performace parts WONT make it any less real then it is now.

Reasons for not to: Everyone would end using the same best equipment. And the reason we have road cars is that they are meant to be road cars. Not tuned road cars. Also the majority of LFSsers don't want anyt stuff like wings and bodykits because they are just for looks. And look pretty horrible imho :)

Btw. Adding parts in Gran turismo isn't realistic as you can't just bolt on stuff in real life.

trackah123

15th April 2006, 19:42

if we talk about parts.. it would be circuit racing parts (only wings tyres spoilers kits engine upgrades etc etc) like it is today on existing racing circuits..
not streetrace parts like NFSU etc..

it would work if the option i mentioned about the mod parts enabled/disabled exists for admins..

if people get smoked by high tuned racecircuit cars.. they can join a non-mod server..

DeadX

15th April 2006, 19:43

and i agree with trackah123, having the ability to have that option whoudl be great, and well why whould they make a game were you whould really spend 5 hours installing a turbo =/ of course there not gonna get that real, its the physics part that real or as real as it gets. Forza Motorsport is a SIM, performace parts, and i go online after about almost 1 year its been out and theres STILL tones of people playing online. And everyone whould end up using the same parts, but people do that now when they find the best setup they use it, it whouldnt be any different if it had performace parts, but the thing is with performace parts

Once everyone has the best performace setup, then it will go back to depending on ratios, susp, tires, and all that so why whould be adding perforace parts really make a differance

Hyperactive

15th April 2006, 19:52

well why whould they make a game were you whould really spend 5 hours installing a turbo =/ of course there not gonna get that real, its the physics part that real or as real as it gets.

It's not about installing the turbo. It's about modelling the physics and the whole system for it. There are things like wear, heating, etc..to be modelled to make it right. There is no game/sim where this has been accomplished.

[SIZE=3]Forza Motorsport is a SIM, performace parts, and i go online after about almost 1 year its been out and theres STILL tones of people playing online. And everyone whould end up using the same parts, but people do that now when they find the best setup they use it, it whouldnt be any different if it had performace parts, but the thing is with performace parts

Once everyone has the best performace setup, then it will go back to depending on ratios, susp, tires, and all that so why whould be adding perforace parts really make a differance

Forza is maybe a realistic console game in console terms. But I wouldn't call it a sim. Though I have never tried it. But adding performance parts aren't the thing in LFS. It's all about driving and physics.

I am trying to explain to you that people don't want performance parts in LFS as there is no purpose of having them.

EDIT: and if it was a system based on some kind of virtual money, it would just make the newbies slower, thus making the learning curve even more harder.

trackah123

15th April 2006, 20:00

i can understand people dont want parts in LFS.. but i dont really agree about the fact that parts dont have a purpose.. in contrary.. it all has to do with aerodynamics and downforce as well..

maybe people dont want engine tuning parts.. but same power.. different tuned aerodynamics and downforce in the same car..

DeadX

15th April 2006, 20:01

ok i dont care about adding performance also, but the thing is ya'll make it such a big deal when its not, and Forza Motorsport is a sim otherwise it whouldnt be under the category SIM. And yeh your right they havent made it as real as it gets in GT4 with wear and tear and heating but Forza Motorsport has...the engine will wear, so will the tires, and there is a gas feature but this isent about Forza, and if there making LFS so real then they whould add everything in life that you can do to a car why why not add performace. This isent about who wants what in any game or speaking of LFS. What if the creators do decide to add parts, what will you do then? you wont play because of performace parts...very stupid, either way LFS will be a great game, its the best i have played on PC so why stop playing because of 1 thing :shrug: if they add that feature that trackah123 is talking about with the admin choosing weither or not people can bring their modded cars into a room then there shouldnt be a problem.

trackah123

15th April 2006, 20:17

well racing realism :

1.racing parts
2.cheering crowds and race-commentator person (thru megaphones)
3.voicechat communication in car directly to your pitlane team

DeadX

15th April 2006, 20:31

Ok to sum all this up, basicly if you put it that way Hyperactive about all that wear and heat and crap, then apperarlty LFS aint as real as it gets then, there is no engine wear and heating when you crash glass dosent break, engine sounds dosent sound as good as it can be, the Flat 4 sounds more like a V8 then the v8 does a v8...i can go on and on. Maybe with this new patch some of that will be changed but for right now...no. Maybe there taking it slow and tryin to get every good real feature they can in, but right now its not as real and from what im hearing you say your talkin like LFS is as real as it gets and that adding performace parts will ruine it whitch is false...BAM IM DONE this was fun, peace out...i dont wanna talk about this anymore lol :)

trackah123

15th April 2006, 20:38

well in my words.. lfs is realistic when it comes to physics.. aero. forces etc.. but i think it misses the rest of the realism options.. there is so much more that can be added in the game to make it more realistic..

tristancliffe

15th April 2006, 21:25

Adding performance tuning parts won't make LFS any more fun - it just adds complexity, and drags in ricers who think they understand how cars work and behave. I don't see one single thing it would add to LFS. Setups are neccessary, as people have different driving styles, and the tracks require different setups. And whilst different tracks might need different tuning (but not much), it's not a driving style thing to anywhere near the same extent.

All you add is time, complexity and reduce the programming time for other things. Heat, engine damage, breaking glass and all these things WILL come eventually, but that doesn't mean tuning is required.

Besides, tuning is such a complicated process, much more so that car setup in many ways, that the vast vast majority of people wouldn't understand a thing.

P.S. Why can't you post in the same font size that everyone else uses? And why are paragraphs so alien to you?

Gunn

16th April 2006, 00:00

IBefore this type of racing here in Australia they had Touring Cars but what happened with them is that one manufaturer would dominate for great lengths of time (years even decades) and that detracted from the racing (bit like F1 :razz: ) .Not true at all. In fact the old touring car racing was more competitive, more exciting and much more dynamic. We saw great wins from Holden, Ford, Nissan, Alfa Romeo, Volvo and the list goes on. Nowadays you just get fully race-modded family sedans (and way too many of them on the pathetic little tracks in the series) of only two brands and the cars are practically identical anyway. Bring back real touring car racing in Oz I say.

DeadX

16th April 2006, 07:55

why do u care what type of font i type in...big deal...

but anyways, is it our fault that people dont know about cars? why play a car game if you dont know about cars. the point of a sim is for it to get as real as it gets and adding performace is gonna make it more complex? true but the more complex the more of a thrill it will be to try and make your car better then others, this isent even a big deal to me i dont care if they add it or not, but seriosuly ya'll guys take it like the world will come to a end if they add alittle perforace jesus and you cant doubt that adding performce wont make the game less unrealisitc, it will make it more realisitc. If they took away performace parts in real life, if you were a car tuner you whould be pissed so dont try to act like adding it, will be such a big deal

trackah123

16th April 2006, 10:13

why do i have this feeling this conversation about parts is going to be endless :D admins/moderators.. lock this thread now :D

tristancliffe

16th April 2006, 10:19

Is it our fault? No. Why play a game if you know nothing about cars? Well, I'd hazard a guess you don't really know much about cars (judging by your argument skills, general posting style, and the use of speeeling, punctuation# and grammar), but just think you do because you've read Max Power magazine (or the Aussie equivalent). If LFS was totally realistic I very much doubt you'd be able to choose an inlet manifold given the parameters for pressure/flow, heat transfer, pressure drop, length(s), etc, or how to work out the primary lengths of your exhaust manifold.

"Aha," they usually say at this point, "but I didn't mean that real, cos that's just silly." So now you don't want it realistic, despite you saying you wanted it as realistic as possible? You want a dumbed down NFS/GT4/Forza/PGR style tuning system where adding a stage 1 turbo = +40 horsepower and a medium camshaft = +15 horsepower.

You see, it just won't work. You either have it realistic and have only about 5 people understand it, or you have it dumbed down and lose the focus of LFS. At the end of the day we can have this:

Close racing
Equal cars, so it's just about driver skill (with a setup to match his style, but perhaps these should be fixed on some cars too)
More programming time on important things like tyre behaviour or aero modelling, or gravel trap design

OR:

Ricers
Silly cars with phat wingz
All cars turbo'd
less close racing
A sim dominated by 11 year olds who think they know about cars
less programming time for good things
dissolutioned, well, everyone
less fun
but arguably more realism if done absolutely 100% properly, in which case no one will bother anyway.

P.S. I meant this all in a nice way, but re-reading it has made me think it's come across as more agressive than I intended. Ignore that, and pretend I'm smiling whilst you read it (or doing that face <--)

Hankstar

16th April 2006, 11:10

I'm a garage idiot. I don't know much about cars except how to drive them. LFS allows me to choose a car, mess with relatively simple things like suspension and gearing and then go and race it against other people, having spent as little time in the garage as possible. I guarantee you that if anything as technical, fiddly and dull (game-wise) as some of the things that have been brought up in this thread made it into LFS I'd sod off and play something else, and I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one. I have this feeling that a lot of the pro-tune argument is coming from the GT/NFS end of gaming where you spend credits on upgrades and go instantly faster. Again, I know stuff all about RL tuning but I do know it's not as easy as just buying a part and bolting it on. But I think arguments against including this kind of stuff have already been made, and in a more educated way than I could. I simply think I'm one of many LFS fans who like that you can start the game and get racing in about 2 minutes, with minimal stuffing around. Adding realistic tuning options (which, to be realistic, would need to be very complex and difficult to figure out, especially for a layman like me) would alienate many LFS players.

I'm also amazed when seemingly dead threads get resurrected...but hey, it is Easter :)

tristancliffe

16th April 2006, 11:37

I'm also amazed when seemingly dead threads get resurrected...but hey, it is Easter :)

We do encourage searching, so it's only fair old threads come up. If they didn't search we'd flame them (nicely :p), so they'll never win really. But searching is good, as long as they then read the thread a bit.

trackah123

16th April 2006, 16:05

yeah this thread is ment to discuss the mod/part issue.. not a flaming war :) anyway.. i can clearly see the fear that lfs is going to be a ricergame when adding parts to it... but that would only happen if you would add streetrace tuning features in it.. i dont think it would be that bad if lfs had circuit racing parts (something DIFFERENT then streetrace parts).. also for example if we exclude engine parts.. but maintaining the other parts.. it cant go that bad. i remember an old game were you were actually constructing your own engine (bolting ur parts and stuff).. was really cool and you could adjust every single parts parameters.. if LFS had this.. it would be very nice.. im honest.. im not a car mechanic... but ido think its possible to add parts and keep lfs a nice game whatsoever..

plz forget about the ricer / nos NFSU issue.. (you know what i mean)its about circuit racing parts.. it shouldnt be compared anywhere near streetracing or other racing games like forza/gt4/pgr/nfs..

if lfs would be having parts.. it should be different then all other games (makes it special)
different tuning.. different parts system .. just a completely different system..

and yes it may not attract racers.. but mechanics would be interested i think if the race parts/tuning system would be incredibly realistic..

anyway .. ima keep on dreaming :) it wont happen anyway..

lalathegreat

17th April 2006, 03:52

lol didn't notice this came back

i would like to remind everyone that it was build your own engine lol

to all you people who where saying that suspension setups are simple i beg to differ. There not more complicated than engine tunning.
http://www.dewtronics.com/tutorials/phor/index.html
dosent look so simple too me

Engine tunnig can be about personaly preff as well. some of us here may preffer a turbo car while some of us preffer a Na car.(small example)

like i said it wasnt a matter of adding X part and getting X result it was about Specifing Numbers weather it was cam duration or lift Turbo A/r or runner lenght. and such
More horsepower dosent mean victory, thats some sort of ricer mentality.

If u where a shity driver in this car your gonna be a shitty driver in any other another car. And the way LFS is its gonna take more skill to drive a more powerfull car. you excellent drivers have nothing to worry about :)

hyphy_racer

5th January 2007, 01:04

this might seem real nooby and i honestly didnt read the whole topic but
if a "class" system was implemented couldnt this all be resolved. In forza on xbox they have classes. Your power, weight, and other upgrades all determine what class ur in. then every one in a class could have a chance \
just somethin i thought about looking at this thread with people saying that it would be all about parts. but not i f everyone had an equal chance at getting the same "ultimate" setup for a CERTAIN class.

Edit: sorry i didnt realize how old this was

EeekiE

5th January 2007, 08:13

The most engine tuning capability they should ever add should be spark, fuel and boost mapping*. The rest, I think, should remain sealed. If you can add new parts, you're making new cars, reather that tweaking existing components. Just as you can't change the suspension of an XF GTI for double wishbone. You have to learn to be the best, and get the best out of the cars available to you, not physically change them.

*but even this would need propper engine damage modelling, and maybe a selection of fuels to use with different properties and weights.

EDIT: But even then everyone would be a millionaire in the game because they'd choose to tune their engine to last only one race each time...

Dajmin

5th January 2007, 08:41

I did think about copying and pasting my standard response into this thread, but decided against it.

I still think any form of upgrade system would turn out to be a waste of time in the end. People would eventually work out the best setup for each track and everyone would use it, just like the vast majority of people all use the Inferno setups. This results in all cars being the same again, making any upgrades you added a waste of time.

KeiichiRX7

5th January 2007, 10:31

For a good portion of the past few months I've been writing a 2-stroke engine simulation based on what I've learned writing 4-stroke models for inclusion in Virtual RC Racing 4.0. So far the results are quite good and we fully intend to have this engine tuning in VRC as it's very much a part of real racing.

anyone care to give me the odds of running into another member fo the VRC community here, AND them offereing the same arguement i was going to?

as a suggestion, i would suggest that engines be restricted on parameters buil into the cars (bf1 would be restricted to 2.4L V-8's for instance), and that an "engine" be a separate setup file so that you dont have to transpose a crapload of numbers form one set to another jsut cause you want to use the same engine. a setup CALLING for a certain engine is another thing entirely

"Holy crap it seems there were a lot of posts while i was reading, it was only one page when i started (or ive finally got bonkers)*

One final note, this might also allow for other "Formulae". IE the Formula V-8 is what is is because of the supposed impositions on its design by the supposed sactioning body of the series it was designed for.

Some friends and i used to run a series with Mechanik, Formula V6-Lights. Lighter Weight, lower power, and a suprisingly competitive and exciting formula. I couldn't help but reminisce a little about that when i finished reading.

Concorde Rules

22nd July 2007, 09:54

All I can say is: best of luck.

There are a few stats I'm going to have a go at estimating:

Percentage of LFS'ers who like racing: 100%
Percentage of LFS'ers who know anything about adjusting suspention: maybe 50%
Percentage of LFS'ers who don't know about suspention setups who could actually be arsed learning about adjusting etc just for LFS: bugger all % I had to learn, so there is at least one

Well, that threw your arguement out of the window.

I'd learn for a kick off and I bet most of the population would aswell...

So +1 for me

You can have normal servers which don't allow tuning but then others which do.

Not difficult TBH, just a hell of a lot of coding for Scawen but if he wants to make the best Racing Sim there is, he has to get round to it after fixing everything else he ahs to do atm.

Hankstar

23rd July 2007, 06:07

Percentage of LFS'ers who don't know about suspention setups who could actually be arsed learning about adjusting etc just for LFS: bugger all % I had to learn etc ...

Do me a favour. Quote me directly so it makes sense:

Percentage of LFS'ers who don't know about building/tuning who could actually be arsed learning about tuning etc just for LFS: bugger all % is what I actually said. Your post makes it seem that was I against suspension adjustment. And nothing you said threw my argument out of the window because you seem to have either misrepresented or misunderstood my argument to begin with. I wouldn't dispute that many of us have indeed learned about adjusting suspension through playing LFS or some other race sim.

Not difficult TBH, just a hell of a lot of coding for Scawen
Piece of cake then. So why don't you go, with all your obvious coding knowledge, email Scawen and tell him how easy it would be for him to code in engine tuning/building options for 20-ish cars ranging from a 1000cc four-pot to a highly-strung Sauber F1 car and see what kind of response (if any) you get.

...he has to get round to it after fixing everything else he has to do atm.
Quite. If ever.

Concorde Rules

23rd July 2007, 22:27

Err no, I changed YOUR post into what I posted. I changed the engine setup into suspention setup.

People had to learn to setup suspention, I had to. So basically throws your argument of cba to learn out of the window.

Maybe I should have made it abit clearer, but then maybe you should read :)

Just to explain again.

You say no-one would learn to setup engines, well who came to LFS with all the required knowledge to setup suspention? I didn't have any, and I bet 75% of the population didn't. I learn't and so has everyone else apart from maybe 5%

If its added, people will learn. End of!

Hankstar

23rd July 2007, 23:10

Why even quote me at all if you're just going to change what I said to suit your argument? It's dishonest, lazy and it confuses the issue. I actually had to double-check my original post because I thought "there's no way I would have said something that stupid" and, hey presto, I didn't.

I already agreed that a lot of people would have come to this game without knowing much about suspension and would have learned about it through playing LFS. Your claim of throwing "my argument" out the window is halfwitted. It wasn't my fecking argument!

You might as well have changed my post to Noone's going to bother learning how to change the colour of their wheels and then said "but I learned, so nuts to you". Changing my post to suit your point of view was misleading and immature. I'm baffled as to how you think it's acceptable.

Dajmin

24th July 2007, 09:29

Mmm, necro posting FTL. 7 months? Seriously, are you just trying to cause trouble?

Anyway, I know nothing about setting up a car. I don't drive IRL and my knowledge of mechanics is "Yup, that's an engine". In fact, I couldn't even get to grips with Bob's Setup Guide and tool.

However, I've had to learn how to set up a car in LFS (suspension settings, gearing, the lot) because I never got on with the Inferno setups. I always found them way too twitchy and just basically couldn't drive the things.
So I started with the Race_S sets and worked from there. I learned how to create oversteer/understeer, I learned what I needed to change to increase turn-in/out response, I learned what was causing any spins or slides and eventually how to alter gear ratios to get the effect I wanted (although I'm still not great at getting a decent accel/speed balance for some tracks).

And I'm not even that much of a hardcore LFSer. So I think that anyone who is interested will learn if they have to. It's just that everyone gets a setup and assumes that's the best there is and adjusts their driving to suit. I prefer to adjust the setup to my driving style :)

But as far as engine upgrades go, I stand by my previous comment.

Concorde Rules

24th July 2007, 10:58

You might as well have changed my post to and then said "but I learned, so nuts to you". Changing my post to suit your point of view was misleading and immature. I'm baffled as to how you think it's acceptable.

Errr, its not immature, I changed your post to change it to a situation which HAS already happened and is happening at this moment! I've seen many many many other people changing peoples posts like that, and they don't get flamed :nod:

Your original post: All I can say is: best of luck.

There are a few stats I'm going to have a go at estimating:

Percentage of LFS'ers who like racing: 100%

We can agree there

Percentage of LFS'ers who know anything about building/tuning RL engines (GT4 knowledge doesn't count): maybe 50%
I changed that from "engines" to "suspention". Exactly the same scenario, people buy the game and start having to adjust suspention to become faster. Same thing will happen in the case of engines. And I doubt its even 50%, maybe 20 or 25%.

Percentage of LFS'ers who don't know about building/tuning who could actually be arsed learning about tuning etc just for LFS: bugger all %

*snip*

And this is where your totally off the mark! Most definatly more than 50% learned to tune suspention, Im willing to bet about 80% had to learn. So everyone will learn to do engines aswell, hell I would most certainly! I don't even do proper races, but I still would!

Ill be honest I stopped reading at that post, my first impression of your post was, "WTF is this guy on", and so without reading on I assumed that was your stance all the way through. I still don't know if it is or isn't because I haven't read it yet. :razz:

But we have to stop with all these "Oh it will make it more unbalanced". No, it won't. The guys who are fastest will have had spent the most time tuning and setting up for them. You want to win races? You have to do the same. :nod:

Then I hear you cry, "I want to win but don't have time", well you had time to tune suspension did you? :scratchch

But to become THE best Racing sim, the car has to become TOTALLY customisable, thats engines, gear, suspention, the lot!

The buying parts thing is really abit arcady really, I think sticking to tuning is the best bet :)

mrodgers

24th July 2007, 16:21

There is a feature in LFS that is fantastic, and that is called the community. The majority of the community want to have fun, not win races. Sure, they (we) want to win, but not at the expense of lapping a track by ourselves half a lap ahead of everyone else.

With that, there is another feature in LFS that is fantastic, and that is called "send setup". See, folks who don't understand setups can politely ask and the generous usually responds with a setup. There is even a website developed for the ease of sharing setups called the Inferno Setup Field as well as a section on the forum here for setup questions and sharing.

BUT, suspension and chassis setup is quite a personal thing. One setup may suit one particular driving style, while it drives like total crap by someone with another driving style. Thus, folks either learn to tweak setups themselves, or they wait until they finally recieve a setup from the generous community that does suit them and their driving style.

Engine tuning is not the same as suspension tuning. Engine tuning will produce 1 perfect setup that will be the fastest. If it would be implemented similar to car setup currently, then sharing will happen until everyone is running the same engine tuning, since there will only be one optimized for the fastest time. If it is not implemented with the ability to share like suspension setups, then there indeed will be those who can no longer race competitively because this is a racing sim, not a racing garage sim.

Comparing engine tuning to suspension tuning is comparing two completely different things as one would be optimized for a car/track and the other will be optimized for the individual.

Concorde Rules

24th July 2007, 16:51

tristancliffe

24th July 2007, 17:09

Ah, but all the F1 cars are different... It would be fair to assume that for any given track both F1 cars in a given team run the same engine settings.

As LFS is all about identical cars, those identical cars will have an optimum engine setup for any given track. Okay, so we might have different engine setups for each track, but once they are optimised (a couple of weeks I'd imagine) then it's just a case of loading the Aston Club engine settings or whatever. So we end up back at square one, but with one thing more to remember.

And besides, engine tuning (with sensible limits) won't magically make an engine be torquey or powerful, it's very much the construction of the engine that does that, and surely we don't want different engines flying about for each car? That would be silly. Unless people want to spend a few months designing a virtual engine, but it would take Scawen decades to catch up with Ricardo on that front.

Concorde Rules

25th July 2007, 18:48

Another thing occurred to me, fuel consumption.

I don't properly race, more CNR or City Driving, so in CNR I'd tune for all out power and use fuel up like no tomorrow and maybe blow an engine in 5 laps.

I love pushing things to their limits, and to mess around with an engine would be great :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

MIDWINTER

26th July 2007, 23:04

Real racing is about money, and how you expend your money on technical progression. Even in the Go Karts I race the teams with the hottest engine tuning and most advantaced telemetry systems analysis and best organised "pit crews" are the winners.

I just turn up with a kart on a trailer, and I race against motorhomes and flat pack kitchens with carpetted garages.

If you want ultra realistic racing put money into the game, because money is all that really matters in real motor racing. Many a talented driver doesn't get very far because of the lack of it - for instance currently Britains best Grand Prix hope was an arrogant little kid I used to thrash in Formula TKM but he found a financer and went all the way. There's many a more talented driver out there.

I do agree on some of your arguments though - I got given a better setup than my own on South Long Rev today and went 4 seconds faster instantly. LFS is 30% skill, 30% T1 luck and 40% suspension & gearing setup.

as much as money is a big part of this isnt racing more about the passion and joy of having battles trying to go the fastest and racing to be the best, most professional racers race because they enjoy it and it seems to me that money comes 2nd or 3rd in why they race:nod: thats my view on this, so why put in engine building:scratchch lfs isnt about modding if you want all that buy need for speed or some other game the majority of people i know who play this game is because they enjoy racing not messing about with engine blocks or being the richest racer they strive to be the best:thumb:

plus if u beat someone thats in a more expensive kart/ any other vehicle than you doesn't it feel so good :D rather than just mullering them through price and performance...

lalathegreat

27th July 2007, 00:54

Well to me the reason to have is not the obvious "so i can gain an advantage"
its adds strategy makes the race more dynamic and add to the realism.

First off I completly disagree with the logic that one setup can be the best. i said it before there can be some pref when it comes to engines as well. The only time that would happen(optimal setup) is if you had a race with no restrictions on the engine then i suppose it might be possible.

Having the option to build your own engine would imply a real time engine simulation. which means you could have very realistic engine damage IE Spinning a rod in cylinder four or something.

I could understand if u want to preserve close racing but having the same car dosen't do that. by keeping engine the same i suppose some people feel its down the the driver. but i don't agree with that suspension settings are just about performance oriented as the engine. give two racing teams same car and a team who does not know how to set up the car and i certain they will be lapping slower.

With that said i have been in servers where none of the races are close because of the difference in skill. ex one person lapping in 1:29 another 1:27 another 1:25. in those races in becomes clear after the first lap whos gonna win. Sometimes i am racing and i am clearly faster than someone and vice versa. i would not mind racing someone with more power but less skill so it can actually be close.

Piece of cake then. So why don't you go, with all your obvious coding knowledge, email Scawen and tell him how easy it would be for him to code in engine tuning/building options for 20-ish cars ranging from a 1000cc four-pot to a highly-strung Sauber F1 car and see what kind of response (if any) you get.

you are aware that you don't program the outcome for each car you program the model to see its own outcome. that said he would just have to code one generic concept of a "Engine" which would be the same code running the XRT engine and the F1 engine only difference would be the same variables that make a road going car engine different from and formula car.
So know programming 20 different things for 20 different cars.

ProDemoDrifter

23rd April 2009, 14:07

My thought on this is:
By tuning your car ,isnt UPGRADING it but customizing it
What i mean is that you have cams timing,A/F mixture and this stuff
Each will have a unique effect not only on the cars performance but damage,like engine is heating fastest when you run very high rpms or too much boost,you can have broken pistons and white smoke coming,broken transmission because of a bad downshift or bad start etc.
It's like the suspension,you can have a better suspension but you can customize it
Also,i read somewhere here that some will find the ultimate setup and then all the time devs spent on that is gone.As said,the customizing will have different effects on your car and not only that.Different tracks require different setup just like suspension.In a dragstrip you want all the power you can have just because its a straight,but on a 30 lap you will need efficiency,because if your car overheats,your out of the race.
But first,other things should be done in LFS like realistic damage.
I'm not saying this should be done now,all things will be made sooner or later!! :D

gruggy

2nd May 2009, 12:48

i think i should elaborate on what i mean by building engines
Valve train
Head specifications
Block specifications
ECU parameters
Forced induction

Valve train
valve timming
Cam timming
maybe some sort or option for VCT VVT
Head Specification
Port size
number of Valves
Block SPecification
Bore
Stroke
Displacement
Compression ratio
ECU Parameters
ignition timming
Fuel maps
Boost maps
rev limits
Forced induction
Super chargers
turbos

if u googled anyone of those u would be well educated to change values in anyone of those areas. (not in real life though) One of the good things about engines is there is ussually a trade off. so one upgrade will have a negative effect. might seem like alot for someone but if your on a team am sure there would be one person on there who was quite educated on the matter and could design a engine for the team. I myself am not a mechanic or a engine freak or anything (actually computer science major) and i do know quite a bit. it isnt hard stuff

now thats what im talking about.
if live for speed had that i dont think i would ever stop playing. and for people that dont understand all these options then they would end up learning think about it. imagine one day you start up lfs and you have all these new options to work with you would end up learning about all these things anyway.
good luck mate it prob wont happen but if it did wow if it did:scratchch:D:thumb:
i reackon if this is a driving simulator why not add to the realism and have a tuning simulator aswell.