Cars (DATA REPLACEMENT) Mazda RX-7 FD3S Improved Physics by Arch

[Kyuubeey]

.

Uhh, alright. Did you have some kind of issue and managed to fix it? In that case please post it here so others can see as well.

 

[Kyuubeey]

Kyuubeey updated (DATA REPLACEMENT) Mazda RX-7 FD3S Improved Physics by Arch with a new update entry:

Geo, AWS, tires, inertia, misc

27.09.2019 Version 1.8

- Changed geometries
- "Rubber bushing" ARB coeff from 0.4 to 0.5
- Changed AWS
- Removed AWS from S1 and S2
- Default SM tire pressure to 24, closer to ideal
- Tire changes
- Adjusted inertia
- Adjusted tuned cars LSD settings
- Removed tray adjustability from S3 and S4

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[Kyuubeey]

Kyuubeey updated (DATA REPLACEMENT) Mazda RX-7 FD3S Improved Physics by Arch with a new update entry:

Dampers, rollbars

13.10.2019 Version 1.9

- Adjustment for damper oversight
- Calculated rollbars; didn't quite trust the old ones

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[Kyuubeey]

Kyuubeey updated (DATA REPLACEMENT) Mazda RX-7 FD3S Improved Physics by Arch with a new update entry:

Load curves, aero, misc

09.01.2020 Version 2.0

- Added Street 2000's tire
- Added load curves to tires
- Tire changes
- Found spring angles, droplink angles etc; not much change
- Minor suspension and setup tweaks
- Adjusted inertia
- Recalculated aero
- Added aero yaw drag fin
- Changed EBD
- Changed AWS in tuned cars
- Changed UIs for tuned cars

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[SpaceCadet]

You forgot delete height adjusment at setup

 

[Kyuubeey]

You forgot delete height adjusment at setup

Wow, I didn't even notice that ingame. I can't remember what I exactly I had it in for, but I don't think it was in the last version. It's been there for months in this build, probably. Thanks, I'll correct it.

 

[Kyuubeey]

Oops, I had been aligning the steering earlier and forgot. The tuned cars still have incorrect front geom on them. Lol. I didn't even complete the procedure fully; but it only took me a minute to do now because it was so close.

Also, the steering geometry alignment for the Spirit R isn't even correct in 2.0, it's to spec for the first generation FD, because that's where I was aligning the baseline. Lol ^2.

I should probably write down what's currently WIP, in case I forget later lol.

 

[Kyuubeey]

Kyuubeey updated (DATA REPLACEMENT) Mazda RX-7 FD3S Improved Physics by Arch with a new update entry:

Arch did an oopsie

10.01.2020 Version 2.1

- Aligned steering to original spec
- Aligned Spirit R geometries to Spirit R spec
- Removed (accidentally left in) height adjustment from Spirit R
- Changed EBD
- Tire changes

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[TL98_RD]

when i want to start a practice session, the game cannot load the car and reverts back to the launcher; i followed the procedure step by step

 

[Kyuubeey]

when i want to start a practice session, the game cannot load the car and reverts back to the launcher; i followed the procedure step by step

Replace sound in CM as well.

 

[TL98_RD]

Replace sound in CM as well.

it did the trick, thx.
Suggestion: try to find some single turbo sounds given that S2 to S4 are single turbos

 

[Kyuubeey]

it did the trick, thx.
Suggestion: try to find some single turbo sounds given that S2 to S4 are single turbos

As usual.

I don't think it's exactly that simple. Even if I found a sample clip to use, it still needs processing even if it was professionally recorded, which is beyond almost anyone. I've tried to make sounds before.

 

[Kyuubeey]

Kyuubeey updated (DATA REPLACEMENT) Mazda RX-7 FD3S Improved Physics by Arch with a new update entry:

Drift, rear geometry, tires, inertia

04.02.2020 Version 2.2

- Added Drift version
- Improved rear suspension geometry accuracy
- Added Street tires to higher tuned versions
- Small inertia change
- Made ebrake a bit weaker based on anecdote
- Maybe minor tweaks I forgot

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[RobPhoboS]

Awesome work !
I love it.
I need to have a look around to see how you edit and start adjusting these things, as I'd like to re-create my car (for fun).

 

[Kyuubeey]

Awesome work !
I love it.
I need to have a look around to see how you edit and start adjusting these things, as I'd like to re-create my car (for fun).

Thanks. You can go ahead and open the data files and look around. I've documented a lot of stuff in the files for reverse engineering purposes and for my own convenience.

It's less editing and more wiping almost everything to 0,0,0 or generics and starting over.

 

[Megolito]

Hey arch i had a question. i do physics modding for cars to improve them. and i'm curious how you are able to measure the suspension geometry when you adjust it. I have had to eyeball all my wishbone/strut adjustments. i can read online that the upper wishbone is say 24 inches. but how are you able to get it to 24 inches in the physics file, the adjustment looks like example Wb_tyre_top_ front 1.00, 1.00, 1.00 and those 3 values to change it im not sure what they are. is it meters? so ide convert inches to meters?

ive had to use pictures of the real suspensions and then use landmarks in order to get the suspensions to look right in game, like ill notice the top wishbones starts at where the rim meets the rubber of the tire, so ill go from there. instead of using an exact measurement like you do. how are you able to do that? how are you sure you have a 45 degree angle and not a 43 degree one? or that it's 25 inches long and not 26? what are your methods for making the in game suspensions exact

 

[Kyuubeey]

Hey arch i had a question. i do physics modding for cars to improve them. and i'm curious how you are able to measure the suspension geometry when you adjust it. I have had to eyeball all my wishbone/strut adjustments. i can read online that the upper wishbone is say 24 inches. but how are you able to get it to 24 inches in the physics file, the adjustment looks like example Wb_tyre_top_ front 1.00, 1.00, 1.00 and those 3 values to change it im not sure what they are. is it meters? so ide convert inches to meters?

ive had to use pictures of the real suspensions and then use landmarks in order to get the suspensions to look right in game, like ill notice the top wishbones starts at where the rim meets the rubber of the tire, so ill go from there. instead of using an exact measurement like you do. how are you able to do that? how are you sure you have a 45 degree angle and not a 43 degree one? or that it's 25 inches long and not 26? what are your methods for making the in game suspensions exact

If I'm lucky, I'll just receive the coordinates directly. Otherwise it's 2D geometry analysis tools and sometimes some eyeballing with a physical ruler, like when starting out with almost no data.

A decent free software to receive lenghts of arms and angles is GeoGebra. Go into the graphing tool, input in for example:

A = (500, -1200) for a joint at 0.0500, -0.1200, ZZZZ. Fill in all your points that way, then draw segments between them. Search online how to find the segment lengths and angles and whatever.

Very often I won't have angles or lengths though, often either flat out just coordinate measurements or nothing at all but pictures. It'd take me very long to share all my methods for 'eyeballing' and I'd rather not.

Remember that when making roadcars, often especially rear suspensions might look simple to produce but actually have extremely different characteristics than what it would be if you just put the points on the joints. Like the FD3S rear, the real camber and toe curve is *very* different from what you get if you just put the LCA joint on the wheel where it is IRL. I think without camber measurements, it'd have been challenging for me to make it accurately. So it needs some deeper understanding and not just copying points.

 

[Megolito]

If I'm lucky, I'll just receive the coordinates directly. Otherwise it's 2D geometry analysis tools and sometimes some eyeballing with a physical ruler, like when starting out with almost no data.

A decent free software to receive lenghts of arms and angles is GeoGebra. Go into the graphing tool, input in for example:

A = (500, -1200) for a joint at 0.0500, -0.1200, ZZZZ. Fill in all your points that way, then draw segments between them. Search online how to find the segment lengths and angles and whatever.

Very often I won't have angles or lengths though, often either flat out just coordinate measurements or nothing at all but pictures. It'd take me very long to share all my methods for 'eyeballing' and I'd rather not.

Remember that when making roadcars, often especially rear suspensions might look simple to produce but actually have extremely different characteristics than what it would be if you just put the points on the joints. Like the FD3S rear, the real camber and toe curve is *very* different from what you get if you just put the LCA joint on the wheel where it is IRL. I think without camber measurements, it'd have been challenging for me to make it accurately. So it needs some deeper understanding and not just copying points.

i really REALLY appreciate you letting me know all this. i knew you had complex methods because i read all your Readme files i guess you could call them that go over like some of things you corrected. and some of the changes are so exact that i was really blown away. you are actually the reason i got into doing physics. ive seen many many mods and many authors and you are in your own category/tier. no other modder does those extra steps to get exact real life replicas. to be fair not even kunos so i cant hold it against them. i will try to improve using some of those methods you listed. i cant really strive to be at your level since you just have a vast understanding of what you are doing.

i just try to get those mod cars that feel simply broken into a decent working shape with correct figures on anything i can find data on. simple things like gear ratios, downforce, drivetrain loss and power curves...ect i was tossing 80% of the free mods i downloaded into the garbage bin due to poor and copied physics that felt terrible. and i got sick of it because some of the models looked great. anyhow thanks alot man! the detail you do does not go unnoticed. to me its legendary. i like to look under the hood even in the DATA to compare with kunos and see all the stuff they got wrong that you had to change haha.

 

[Kyuubeey]

Hah, thanks. You're sounding a lot like me when I started. I saw Niels working on a bunch of stuff and decided to download some mods of cars I liked and started trying to improve them, back in the days of rFactor.

I think that's a pretty good start. Learn how to do research first and how to read data and put in all the simple things correctly first. Then over time you'll read more and try more and figure out suspension, aero, tires etc.
It took really long for me to start producing anything of value, even when I was reading books and looking at cars made by the pro studios and good modders. I think nowadays it's easier to get started; find a car to make, run into a big problem then come on CSP Discord mod-talk channel and post about it. Someone will help. I didn't have anyone to help early on; so my stuff also was trash.

Right now just start figuring out basic mechanics like how springs work, how dampers work, how levers work. You'll make a lot of cars without knowing how basic things really work in the sim and IRL. That's ok, but the sooner you do, the sooner you will have the tools and confidence to approach problems in a purposeful way.

I don't think my methods are so complex or my work so good. I don't even have my own spreadsheet for most things, I just use available tools and document most my stuff in notepad. But I'm alright at the process of *making* the car. Nowadays when I have people who just do the research for me on most of the car, I can put out a new one fast. It just takes long for it to become more solid, because you can't always find or understand all of the data on the first pass.

I've only ever heard that I don't know what I'm doing, or my stuff has more mistakes than other people's and that's why I have to update so often, so I'm pretty surprised a newbie sees it the other way round. It's not *entirely* untrue for some cases, but honestly it just means that when my car has problems, I fix them. They don't remain like on 90%+ of mods which start out bad and never improve.
Of course the best way is to just do it right on the first pass, and for some cars I had so much data that there's not much to improve over time.

About professionals' cars, like Kunos and other studios. I will say it right here that most my cars are more accurate and better made than any roadcars made by studios.
Part of it is because sometimes I know better (What were they thinking when making the E30 and Yellowbird rear? Why does the MX5 NA not hit the bumpstops when everyone knows it does? Why does the FD have artificially strong springs?) but honestly often it's because they have anywhere from a day to maybe a week to work on a car. They don't really get any special data like everyone is saying, so it's mostly the same process. Some of my cars are alright after such a short time if I have good data, but what about the ones which don't? You get version 2.0+ after 6 months. Pros don't have that privilege and they must simply move on. It's one of the benefits of being a modder; you don't get paid, but you can do what you want, as good as you want.

 

[Kyuubeey]

Kyuubeey updated (DATA REPLACEMENT) Mazda RX-7 FD3S Improved Physics by Arch with a new update entry:

Inertia, CoG, wings, suspension, tires

07.05.2020 Version 2.3

- Changed Spirit R sta-bar wall thicknesses, thanks to @baker7498
- Changed sta-bar bushing stiffnesses
- Changed Drift handbrake to stronger variation
- Modified inertia based on new data
- Modified CoG height based on new data
- Modified rear wing drag(s) on tuned cars
- Changed FFB to be a little stronger
- Minor suspension corrections
- Tire changes

Read the rest of this update entry...