|
This looks fun. Is it cheaper than $29.99 anywhere?
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:23 |
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I'm still fiddling with this, and fighting the urge to put out a full-size Estate Wagon. I, uh... May have started fiddling...  
Tremek fucked around with this message at 07:09 on Jun 10, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
Can you guys share some thresholds of what might be "good" versus "bad" in terms of reliability, power, fuel consumption, etc? I'm kind of in a vague place here trying to gauge what's competitive or not.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
MrChips posted:On the first page, there is a link in the rules (as well as in one of my posts) to the track files we will be using for this simulation; a competitive car should be able to do a lap of Le Mans in something like 4:10-4:20 or so. Anything under 4:10, I would classify as very good indeed. THE WAGONATOR COMETH  This is my best shot at a motor thus far: 
Tremek fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
I think I have created a monster: Now to see if it passes scrutineering.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
Riso posted:
I thought it was a minimum weight spec, not a maximum weight spec? As in your car must weigh at least 1100kg? This car is a FR setup, longitudinally mounted v8, RWD. My car is over the 1100kg minimum, and if so it's just a (self-imposed) penalty that it weighs more? Remember this is a huge estate chassis - I don't care that it's huge and less competitive than a sports car chassis, I want my Touring Car Championship damnit. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Riso posted:I just meant the lighter your car is the faster it goes! Hahaha brutal. If the game would support LMS-styled craziness or open wheel stuff, that's where I would have started.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
I need to stop messing with things - every time I touch it now, I make it slower. My peak progress:  From this:  In this:  < 4:10 in the full body wagon seems pretty good. Hopefully it can hold up! Now I need MrChips' review (resending modified files now) for feedback.  Edit: and because I'm getting good at making analogs of the dumb things we have:  
Tremek fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Jun 12, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
Kilonum posted:yeah, my normal workflow goes Looks fun, what does she do on LeMans?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
I believe this to be rules-legal:  
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:Just ignore warnings period, unless poo poo is breaking or you're suddenly losing power because you've made changes that cause it to be overly constrictive. Hell, any really powerful turbo motor will inevitably have both the compressor and turbine showing as red; I have a big turbo V8 I was messing around with that has around 1600 bhp and both halves of the turbo are massive restrictions on the airflow as well as the intercooler. One of the ways to make your powerband flatter and wider with less lag on a turbo engine is also to deliberately undersize the turbine so it becomes a significant obstruction to airflow. Yes, in the designer there's a break/doesn't break threshold but there's also the reliability and annual maintenance scoring in the game, indicating how fragile your motor is, and then to take that a step further MrChips is going to do a more complicated calculation. It would be good to know general guidelines from MrChip on how he intends to model reliability; right now I don't have any frame of reference in terms of what describes a 200,000 mile motor versus one that breaks in 5 laps.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
FYI, I just reopened the files I had exported to MrChips for my estate wagon and, uh, holy crap, something has gotten very weird with the grilles etc. on the front of the car. Moreover I think the tire sizes changed as well. Weird... Going to strip all the accouterments off of it and try again. My early theory is since I designed it in an earlier version of the game, it then updated (and broke) things and then shrunk my fender dimensions etc. which shrunk my tire widths. Bottom line, check your stuff! Tremek fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Jun 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Had to rebuild the war wagon. I give you the Calais MkII VNA:   Can't possibly fathom the styling inspiration, can you I'm not dicking with it ever again. Sending over to MrChips for validation. Tremek fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Jun 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
I now have quite the dilemma. First, my true favorite as it's near and dear to my heart, the Calais MkII VNA:  Nothing quite like that cam-in-block pushrod V8 sound. And it performs well:  However, my engineers have been left to their own devices and have submitted a few powertrain variants of the VNA on the same chassis. Behold, the VA I6:  Sassy in orange, and ... surprisingly fast with its huge inline 6 powerplant...  As well as the future-tech team, submitting their own wild small-displacement twin-turbo V8 design, the VT-R:  ... which also runs a mean Sarthe time:  And potentially edges out the flagship VNA. Scandalous. All competitive. Now to evaluate other concerns, like reliability and fuel consumption... HARD DECISIONS. edit: For comedy: a late entrant emerges from the nutjobs in the farm implements and heavy equipment division:  Sporting a naturally aspirated 5.4L inline 4 that revs to a maddening 8300 rpm, these coots eked out a respectable time:  Tremek fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Jun 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Riso posted:A severely underweight car, yes. Now push it to 1250 kg and watch your 4:09.27 disappear. Even my wagon does 4:08:73... MR weight penalty is admittedly stiff, but against the sports-car MR chassis moreso than the LMP, which due to aero gives no fucks and still turns in good times given the constraints. I'm guessing MrChips is watching how things go this first round and then makes rules adjustments where/if necessary for the next bout. edit: Playing around with more HP on the LMP chassis - very much NOT rules-legal..  Now consider that the Audi R18 e-tron yesterday ran what, 3:17? The LMP above has 1600hp right now. Just insane.  Right now I'm very much dimensionally limited width-wise by the chassis due to the dumb placement of the turbos. If I could put the turbos on top then I could double the HP. Tremek fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Jun 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
Riso posted:My main concern with your car is that you see all of our designs and are able to respond in a way we cannot. Didn't he say he had already put his design on a USB drive in a sealed envelope? I say let the man race. It's pretty clear we're all sharing info anyway at this point, unless there's some evil genius dark horse that's not posting in the thread, I think we all have a decent idea of what cars can do as-is. He came up with the idea, and should have some fun too. Tremek fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Jun 15, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
Your efficiency looks good... With half as many fuel stops as something like my v8, I wonder how much time you gain back...
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
MrChips, since we're still a couple weeks out from a deadline but you have a lot of enthusiasm in the thread, what do you think about doing an exhibition run this week of a track as a sort of shake-down for folks to get a feel for how things will go? Not a full multi-track simulation, but something like a pre-tour event. Maybe even use a track we won't be racing on if you don't want people to optimize based on the specific track data. I like to think most everyone in here would be interested?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
Wow, those results are really interesting, thanks for running the test day results! Looking forward to seeing more detailed feedback, I'm already churning over how to improve this.  Edit: on the subject of horsepower conquering all...  That's a rules-legal car. Horsepower is indeed king. Although how it's delivered is dramatically different in the turbo motors. I'm too dumb to figure out if gas consumption over time is worth the pit stops. 
Tremek fucked around with this message at 05:22 on Jun 17, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
A little restomod ain't never hurt nobody.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2015 13:33
|
|
|
Very interested to see the details on our cars' performance in the tests... Curious if it's fuel consumption or something else that caused the wagon to make 3 stops!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
FatCow posted:Everyone who had a surviving car needs to fire your driver, use that poo poo up in the time allotted. What are you saying?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2015 02:19
|
|
|
MrChips: I don't intend to enter my LMP chassis as I intend to submit a road car for road racing, not a non-production racing prototype - but if it were to go into the test day, where would it fall? Edit: also thank you for the detailed race report! Are the races going to be based on time, distance covered, laps? Also good to know my car didn't have any failures and is just a thirsty pig. Thanks! Tremek fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Jun 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2015 12:39
|
|
|
Kafouille posted:The LMP isn't really any faster than the modern sport car bodies, a separate class would be pretty useless. It has a pretty middling drag coefficient and the advantage on tire widths is irelevant here. The only advantage is the center of gravity seems to be a tiny bit lower but it's not terribly significant. If my LMP build turns out faster than your MR build, would you be sad?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
It pained me to do it, but against all my inner instincts, I tuned the VNA to be a little bit less of a gas guzzler. It still runs a respectable time, considering: ... but gets 25% better fuel consumption. Fewer pit stops seems like a good thing. I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
8ender posted:Say it ain't so, I was rooting for the gas guzzling massive trap speed ludicrous wagon It's only lost 1 second off LeMans, so it's not THAT much slower. I think I'm battling a lot of wheel slippage.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I'm having trouble getting that to work out in-game, though. Rear wing + lip, with downforce balanced so it's sitting almost exactly neutral, is getting me ~4:28 on La Sarthe. My wagon has 58% wheel spin but is under 4:10. Might be other modeling constraints, like an unsophisticated suspension setup?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
  I think I should start subcontracting my designs out to other manufacturers. Call me Steyr-Pininfarina-Ghia. Edit: same car with a 344.6 g/kWh engine:  Edit 2: 345.2 g/kWh: 
Tremek fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Jun 19, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
The cars run the same in the last version. There's nothing new about the engines/bodies/etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Really? I haven't had a chance to try the open beta yet. If that is indeed the case, I might open up to entries from the open beta. You should probably hold off for now unless you install the open beta in a different folder as it seems like once you open a car in the beta, you won't be able to go back and open it in the current/last version. Engines seem to translate OK, but not cars; I think they changed some of the structure in the .lua files, which would just be a mess for you to manage.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
wargames posted:My 100% not legal car, I can shave off 3 seconds on that car by adding in a front wing. Looks fun, if you crank the displacement back to 3143cc or less on the V8, you might be closer to actually being able to run that thing... Oh, and RWD, and 6 speeds, etc..
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
Riso posted:Anyone wanna share last tests fuel consumption for comparison? My wagon, with an engine rated at ~452 g/kWh, consumed 335.616 liters over 269.781 km, or on average 1.244 liters per KM. Thirsty! This is why in the next test I'm interested in reeling my car back on fuel consumption and seeing what the results end up like, even if for the sake of the test it ends up being overall slower... Back of the napkin math: If, with the more fuel-efficient engine, it runs 1.5 seconds slower per lap at Barcelona, and I win back 90 seconds of a fuel stop, then up to and including 60 laps (but before the next fuel stop) it makes the overall elapsed time on the track greater and theoretically makes the car doing more time on the track - but less than a full lap with a lap time of 2:05. Assuming my elapsed time of 2hr 01min 48.99s (7308.99 seconds) is factored in, + 90 seconds of additional track time might have put me one lap closer to the leader? Let's approximate that I averaged 132 kph. If I stay on the track 90 seconds longer with 1 fewer fuel stop, do I get another 3.3 km added to my elapsed distance? Not sure here. Tremek fucked around with this message at 15:57 on Jun 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
Disappointing results for the wagon! You guys make me want to enter something more competitive.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
All my lap times have changed (for the worse it appears) in my client with the latest release. I should probably go back in and check stuff. What's the final deadline?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
MrChips, I'm out of town with the family and don't have automation here, can you either use my previous legal revision of add a resonator to bring the loudness into legality? Sorry and thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2015 14:15
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Done. Thanks for doing this, been out of the loop for a few days. Excited to see how the results turn out, thanks again for running this!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Neat, excited to see how round 2 turns out. Not surprised my Wagonator ended up mid-pack in Round 1, but hey, at least it wasn't a DNF. Edit: have you posted a list of the tracks/races/duration and days you're planning to run the sims? Tremek fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Jul 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
I'd like to remind you all that the team running two full size station wagons is currently in 11th place. That is all.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Even though it's not in the rules, I'm kind of thinking of performance balancing right now. What would that entail?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:23 |
|
|
Chiwie posted:As TMR is the real soul of SA-GTE racing, we demand that Full Frontal, MustardFacial and Modus racing have their car's weighed down with 200kg of extra ballast for stealing our idea of being part of the SA-GTE. This is fantastic, well played.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2015 04:08
|
|
