Cars Jaguar XJ13 [Deleted]

Status
Not open for further replies.
my AI are faster than Aphigod's :D they were doing 32's. it wasnt a complaint by the way. if the AI are very fast at 100% then thats good. the same cant be said for some vanilla cars like the GTA.
it might just be that my pace is inconsistent relative to the limit and im just getting closer to it in the GT40.
 
I did put quite a lot of work into tweaking the AI file some weeks ago. They're pretty fast. Mine were solidly in the mid 33s, 18C and optimum grip with cloudy weather. I ran a few races with them last night, working while they did their AI thing in the background. Never saw a 32. (Not that I don't believe you! I'm sure it's not hard to shave half a second with better weather conditions.)

Also, and just to be clear on this: I didn't expect 32s because of Mantas' 36s or my 38s or the AI times... that number was based purely on the real lap (35.7) factoring in the differences between the condition of the real car from that session and ours as modeled in AC. Ours doesn't have intermittent failure of the front brake hydraulic assist. Ours doesn't have random camber change in the rear wheels under lateral load. Ours definitely has better tires. And our Beckett's isn't damp. ;)

FYI the GT40s in my races were in the low-mid 35s. Right where they should be, considering how similar the AC car is to the Group 4 Mk1 that put up a 1:35. (I'm still unsure on the tire situation there. I don't know if what we have in AC is what they'd have run in G4. I think you'd need Aris for that one.)
 
Last edited:
How long do you let the AI run for? I test with 60min Q in race weekend, let them do 2 or 3 laps then skip session. Fastest was well into the 32's. Probably had RSR settings still as well (26c) the fastest Ford was 1:35.0 for me.

I've always tested AI by skipping a 60min Q and then checking the times. They often gain a second or so from when I skip at lap 2/3/4 to the end of the qualifying session.
 
Last edited:
I do 40 min qualy, then a 5-lap race that I usually end up skipping for another qualy session. :D

My 5 Fords were spread from ~1:35.3 - 1:35.7. (I ran 5 of each car + my car with the ctrl-c AI driving, so 11 on track.)

Edit: I also let them run out the full time, no skipping the session. For one, I work @ home so it's easy to just set them up to race and then go across the room to work at my other desk. For two, I've never trusted the times when you skip a session. That used to be bugged, supposedly it was fixed, but...
 
20161028213201_1.jpg


It must be the track/ambient temp or extra 20mins... or my AI really are faster. I do keep them free range and only feed them the finest corn ;)
 
I have done some minor tweaks to a couple of the physics files since the last update, but I would be surprised if that accounted for any measurable time. :)

My money's on the weather.
 
Greetings @mantasisg,

Honestly, still not driven this one, but hear/read a lot... sure it's a truth. As well, aphidgod my kind mate, so... Wish or think to make little contribution into this project by making sound update relative Corsa 1.9
It will take not more than 3 days around (if all okay there). Need previous sound project (better) or wave records used in.
Think, lot of guys will mind this good. How you about?
 
Yeah, maybe a little too long, but I have planned to release it just a tiny bit later, because I wanted to do some model changes. And I did. I take responsibility for this :D

I still have just a little few things to improve, and hopefully then sound will be ready too, it is almost there now.
 
mantasisg updated Jaguar XJ13 with a new update entry:

0.95

Hello, main concern of this update is obviously the sound fix. Please understand that this is only real source of this mod.
If you have already downloaded "sound fix" for this car from somewhere else, then you should know that it is more placeholder than a fix
and it was made without mt approval, as it is usual in the comunity of reposters.


SOUND
- Updated sound. This is real update/fix.

Physics
- updated brake heating behavior;
- updated tire longitudinal grip;
- minor...

Read the rest of this update entry...
 
It's unfortunate I can't reply to the reviews, but I'll try it here... I can be long winded this way so maybe it's for the best. :D

On the Hobbs lap @ Silverstone: as Mantas said, it was 19C on a drying track with a damp patch in one corner. I'd call that "green" for sure, after factoring in the lower general grip of the v10 tires I'd try it at maybe 95-96%.

And when you achieve it, remember that the real car was doing development testing that day and still had some bugs. The front brake hydraulic assist was lunched and so the brakes were only being about half used... full braking force required something like 200kg pedal pressure which obviously didn't happen with human beings driving. That impacted stopping power and generated a lot of heat, which impacted stopping power. That has not been modeled in AC.

Also the rear suspension, in typical Jaguar fashion at the time, used the driveshafts as load-bearing links, essentially as part of the upper "wishbone." This had not yet been perfected for the loads and speeds of the XJ13 and the shaft ends were floating in the gearbox, causing uncontrolled camber changes on the rear wheels under cornering loads. Obviously we have not modeled that in AC either. (It was eventually sorted after a few rounds of testing, so even if I could, I wouldn't.)

And we're definitely using better, wider tires than were on the car that day in 1967. They're more or less a detuned version of the KS GT40 tires, as the Dunlops Jaguar was using were not quite on par with the Firestones and Goodyears for road racing. But they are the larger, later size as used on the XJ13 after its rebuild in the early '70s, part of which included flared fenders necessary to fit wider rubber. (And to add to the suck salad of the tires, the ones used in that test were found to have been the incorrect compound, with less grip than the ones specified - and only on the rear axle IIRC. David Hobbs is truly an alien, and his career would go on to bear that out I think.)

Anyway, the testing recap from Silverstone suggests that low 1:30s were possible once all the bugs were ironed out, and while I think that may have been a bit optimistic I certainly think 1:32-1:33 was in play given the same testing conditions. (For context, the small block GT40 was 1:35 flat and the fastest car in the world at the time, the Lola T70, did it in 1:28.8. Test conditions unknown on both times.)
 
I just drove the new, updated version of your awesome XJ13, but I have to say that the full-throttle sound of the car seems to be relatively quiet compared to the volume of the car idling and the overrun off-throttle.
 
Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation @aphidgod, it was my comment in the review.

Well, quite amazing he managed such a lap time under the conditions you mention and the issues on the car. I'll give it a shot at lower grip levels. Just read the posts above. If 100% AI can do a lap in the 1:32's then that seems pretty spot on with the David Hobbs story !

Congrats on the car handling ! I find it very rewarding to go on the power early while turning in and keeping the car.
 
I did tone down the AI for this update by nearly a second/lap @ Silverstone '67. They were maybe a little too awesome... although 1:32s @ 26C and 100% is hardly unreasonable, IMO, all things considered. I'm pretty happy with the pace right now, both with humans and with the AI driving.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest News

How long have you been simracing

  • < 1 year

    Votes: 209 14.1%
  • < 2 years

    Votes: 153 10.3%
  • < 3 years

    Votes: 149 10.1%
  • < 4 years

    Votes: 113 7.6%
  • < 5 years

    Votes: 213 14.4%
  • < 10 years

    Votes: 177 12.0%
  • < 15 years

    Votes: 117 7.9%
  • < 20 years

    Votes: 80 5.4%
  • < 25 years

    Votes: 64 4.3%
  • Ok, I am a dinosaur

    Votes: 205 13.9%
Back
Top