Cars Porsche 911 GT3 cup circuit + hillclimb [Deleted]

[rpmmod]

Kyuubeey : ??? You talk to me? you think I don't know how wings system work ?

 

[Kade]

Show me the difference in tyre loads your method causes versus "original" way to do it and explain why your tyre loads are more realistic (I'd like comparison to the real life data you have). You wouldn't make such claims without being able to show the evidence supporting it, right?

 

[rpmmod]

What claims exactly?

 

[Kyuubeey]

kyuubeey : I never said my method is perfect but look at the total cl of kunos Z4 GT3 or 911 GT3 R, 2.5 it's absolutely unrealist, mine have a little more than 1.1 and the grip is roughly equivalent, so it's clear that the "traditional" method is far to be good.
The longitudinal movement component is important on tight turns with some cars like Z4.

I don't understand everything you and Ghoults said but I will take time and use google translate because the interact with the ground, the heigth is important.
I know I have things to learn, but it's clear that my cup it's more realistic than the original on tight turn and when drift, and for hillclimb it's very very important.

Ghoults and kyuubeey : thanks for the tips.

Stuff like this?

 

[Kade]

You are telling us we need at least 20 wing elements to simulate the aero correctly. I think you don't understand what numerical simulation means. This is not physically based simulation. This is not CFD. In the end there's 2 things that matter:
1. Tyres that generate forces correctly.
2. Rest of the car generates tyre loads and tyre orientation correctly.

You are discussing aero here so we are mostly talking about an effect for tyre loads. So prove to me how 20 wings is necessary to produce the correct tyre loads and maybe I'll believe you. I have a open mind.

 

[rpmmod]

Look at the downforce of GT3 RS about 0.8 the GT3 R can't have more than 3x of total cl, look at efficiency it's not possible.

 

[mclarenf1papa]

Okay for starters, I never attacked anyone, I simply stated that the aero was overly complex, to an unnecessary degree (and was called stupid in response - which the now edited review comment does not show).

And GT3 cars produce in the region of 2+ CL now.

Look at the downforce of GT3 RS about 0.8 the GT3 R can't have more than 3x of total cl, look at efficiency it's not possible.

Look at the rear wing of the GT3R, look at the diffuser, look at the splitter (front diffuser), look at the ride heights. Your assumption is baseless...

In addition to the numerous prototype cars I've worked on, I've also worked on a Viper GT3 and a Ferrari Challenge Evo.

Anyway, I'm out - I've said what I wanted to say (in trying to assist the mod to be better) and if you don't want to look at it from that perspective, alright, it's not my problem.

 

[rpmmod]

kade : You forgot the change on weight transfer.

MclarenF1papa : Ok but z4 gt3, 911 gt3 cup and R kunos ones have total cl 2x or more than mine for the same grip so there is a problem it's clear.

You think the method is not good but your rate the result, not what you think of the method. I think your method is not perfect, I don't come and do bad rating for that, you understand?

 

[rpmmod]

You're a leader don't abuse that.

 

[mclarenf1papa]

Your method mathematically is going to give the car less grip for the same total CL/CD if you're using reasonable height sensitivity. You'll be putting more load on the outside tires, which because of tire load sensitivity, means you'll have less grip. I don't know what speeds your testing at, but it's mathematically impossible for you to be having the results you're claiming unless there's something else going on in your files that's wrong. So, yes, there is a problem - it's your perception of the changes you're making and your unwillingness to explore viewpoints other than your own.

And I (and anyone on this forum) have every right to give you a review corresponding to what I think your content deserves...if you don't want that, don't upload it.

 

[rpmmod]

I do not speak about right.
I have tested on various circuits and the result is what I said.
Why my "method mathematically is going to give the car less grip for the same total CL/CD if you're using reasonable height sensitivity".

 

[rpmmod]

With your method there is a big problem with the location of the drag in addition of the change of the center of downforce.

 

[mclarenf1papa]

Not really...all that drag is going to do is make a moment about the tires and take some load from the front and put it onto the rear. So long as you include that in your calculated aeromap, it doesn't matter. It'll mess things up in yaw a bit, but you can't model yaw/roll sensitivity well in AC anyway so it doesn't particularly matter (i.e. your method has the same problem there).

And the reason you'll have less grip is that the outside of the car will be lower, producing more downforce on the outside wheels (unless it's stalling for some reason), and the inside will be higher, producing less downforce on the inside. This means the distribution is towards the outer wheels, which, because load sensitivity exists, reduces grip. There's no subjectivity in that.

edit: you can match the vanilla AC aero system to within 0-5% of a full aeromap of an LMP2 car with overall CL/CD and CoP. Yaw and roll effects can't really be done well, nor can lateral CoP migration (even with your method - which, if you understand my posts, is the same as what I recommend with the 5 wing setup).

 

[rpmmod]

You think you can calcul that?
Sure I'm also limited by the system.

 

[rpmmod]

I will think about that (less downforce on the inside).
Which car takes this into account?

 

[rpmmod]

This resource has been removed and is no longer available for download.