• Welcome to the largest (sim) racing website in the world!
    Blurring the line between real and virtual motorsports.

Cars (DATA REPLACEMENT) RUF CTR-1 Yellowbird Improved Physics by Arch 1.1b

Ruf faszination.

  1. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    Kyuubeey submitted a new resource:

    (DATA REPLACEMENT) RUF CTR-1 Yellowbird Improved Physics by Arch - Ruf faszination.

    Read more about this resource...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. CobraCat

    CobraCat

    Messages:
    702
    Ratings:
    +331
    Almost like you read my mind. I'd been hoping someone would redo the physics on this monstrosity. It always felt exaggerated and too extreme. Thanx!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Jeremy Chaim

    Jeremy Chaim

    Messages:
    68
    Ratings:
    +6
    Loving it. This upload is missing the car sub folder, though.
     
  4. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    Oops, you're right. I'll fix it in the next one.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Fat-Alfie

    Fat-Alfie
    David Pemberton Premium

    Messages:
    1,918
    Ratings:
    +2,700
    Would I be right to think that setups for the stock version will not be transferrable to this version?
     
  6. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    Entire suspension's different. What do you think?
     
  7. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
  8. Fat-Alfie

    Fat-Alfie
    David Pemberton Premium

    Messages:
    1,918
    Ratings:
    +2,700
    Well, if you had mentioned that in your release, would I have needed to ask? What do you think? :rolleyes: There's no need for sarcastic comments like that :thumbsdown:
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    Generally when I've redone a car, it's because the underlying suspension and whatnot are so off as to warrant a change. The Yellowbird isn't even remotely close especially in the rear camber curve, so I can't imagine it being transferable. I thought it was a given. :O_o:

    There's a bunch of cars I'd like to just apply a few simple fixes to, but they're not enough to warrant releasing a whole new mod and claiming I made it.
     
  10. Grazilian

    Grazilian

    Messages:
    13
    Ratings:
    +0
    Dude! First of all, thx a million for this mod! I've been wanting to drive this icon ever since the initial release, but just never could get myself to enjoy it due to the lack of realistic physics. Now finally it's possible to emulate that legendary drive around the Nordschleife (with white socks & lofers, lol!), well almost...
    As you've mentioned, the tires are a bit too sticky, but that's not an issue for me. I also don't care about physics based on "real" data too much, but I love the illusion of a somewhat authentic drive, so if I may make a suggestion for a small adjustment: Could you transfer more weight to the front of the car, so it becomes a little more tail-happy? Thanks so much again!
     
  11. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    Hey,

    The only adjustments I ever make is to produce a more realistic end result. Right now I'm working on making the geometry closer, because I was given some Porsche camber and toe curves for the 930, both axles, so I can fill in the blanks. :thumbsup:

    I won't be changing the weight distribution, as it's correct based on data from Best Motoring, when they tested the Yellowbird. Moreover I won't be changing anything else that important unless I have reason to suspect I should.
     
  12. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    Kyuubeey updated (DATA REPLACEMENT) RUF CTR-1 Yellowbird Improved Physics by Arch with a new update entry:

    New geometries, setup

    Read the rest of this update entry...
     
  13. Sanch0z

    Sanch0z

    Messages:
    7
    Ratings:
    +0
    I really like this mod, cause kunos CTR is beyond broken, but there's something that bothers me. Was braking perfomance all that bad? Front wheels are always sliding no matter how gentle I push the pedal even on min brake balance and semislicks. Is this how it supposed to be?
    P.S. Are you planing on making others specs of this car? Like optional 6th gear, stiffer springs or anything?
     
  14. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    I think the braking performance is a consequence of *too much* mass in the rear. I think it could actually be improved if brake fade was implemented, which I'm on the fence about.

    The pressure and split is reasonable for a Porsche braking system with a fairly high pressure proportioner valve. I have some data for 964s and 993s so I just made some assumptions.
     
  15. Grazilian

    Grazilian

    Messages:
    13
    Ratings:
    +0
    Fair enough... If you got data from someone who've actually tested the Bird, that's awesome. I totally appreciate your passion to stay as true to the data as possible, just when you've mentioned you've modeled it after the 930, I remembered it being very understeery from the VirtuaLM rFactor mod... Cheers, brother!
     
  16. Sanch0z

    Sanch0z

    Messages:
    7
    Ratings:
    +0
    Finally managed to get a decent lap (7:36:47). Chassis feels good (although you need to get used to understeery nature of it) but I still believe there's something wrong with front tires when braking, they just won't grip.
     
  17. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    The tires are within reasonable bounds. I think the issue is more-so that there's no brake fade to weaken the front brakes = allow more proportional rear braking and that our braking systems in sims apply pressure completely unlike IRL. Maybe I will add fade, maybe I won't.
     
  18. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    Also, to add, the CTR really has exceptional braking performance considering you're going into most corners 100km/h faster than you'd expect in a more toned down 911.
     
  19. Kyuubeey

    Kyuubeey

    Messages:
    489
    Ratings:
    +421
    • Like Like x 1
  20. CobraCat

    CobraCat

    Messages:
    702
    Ratings:
    +331
    Did you intend to list torque as kilopondmetre (kpm) instead of newton meters ?
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.