Home | Wiki | Live Chat | Dev Stream | YouTube | Archived Forums | Contact

Trackpaduser's mods


#41

The car looks great! Just DL’d it


#42

I couldn’t be happier that my shift ends in half an hour. I have a date with this new body coming right up! :smiley:


#43

With roughly 880hp and a mediocre tune I can get sub 80 seconds lap times around the airfield in this thing with RWD and no carbon fiber parts. This body has potential!

I am finding the height of an engine a bigger restriction then width/length I have to use a single intake to keep the engine short enough,


#44

Yeah, I don’t know if there is a way to change the height of the engine bay.


#45

sweeet


#46

Likely not, the shape of the car kind of dictates the engine bay height. It fist a 7.5 liter v8, so its still pretty ample


#47

Still, that’s a question I’ll ask to the devs when they come back from their trip.

More out of curiosity than anything else.

I mean, you can probably fit a 2000hp V8 in it with double wishbone suspension, with the width being the limitation.

I don’t even want to imagine what’s going to be possible with V10s and V12s.


#48

That is a sweet looking body, Trackpaduser.

But there must be some problem with the aero values, or something fundamentally unbalanced about this car’s geometry. Because I can’t make it very fast. Using the biggest NA I could fit, with 1250 hp, this car barely squeezes under 1:12 on the Airfield track. And even putting the 2000 hp engine from my BSLL car and AWD, it still is 20 seconds slower than the estate with that engine.

That isn’t what I was expecting, at all, from this car.


#49

Its lift coefficients are better than the 10s large mid engined supercar, but the drag coefficient is higher at .285, compared to .23 for the mid engined supercar.

It also has a slightly larger surface area.

As for where the values come from, I used this: hpwizard.com/aerodynamics.html as suggested in Daffy’s video tutorials.

I also checked the values for other cars in the game and I have to say that the values for some of the 00s to 10s cars seem to be slightly over optimistic, with a few cars having a Cd of .23 and some, like the two 00s sedans, going as low as .217.

Here are some real world examples as reference: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile … oefficient

Still, i’ll try to find the values of LMPs with no downforce, but that might be an issue.


#50

Yeah, I noticed some cars are a bit off. The Jag XF body is too high, the 00s sedan is too low. I have more “ideal” drag coefficient versions of the Corvette-like and Jag XF body for my cars.


#51

The Corvette body isn’t too bad at .29, which makes sense depending on how generous you are with the various settings in the calculator.

Same with the sedan, at .338, although it is a bit high compared to similar RL cars.


#52

That said, having applied some of the principles that were applied to the large vanilla MR body (in terms of tyre widths and downforce settings) does yield times in the low 1:09s with a fair bit of room to move, so trackpaduser’s predictions that this may be the platform for a record-tilt seems like it may come true! But I have to say, for some reason, the downforce requirements in this car are far more finnicky than the original MR body. It’s really easy to blow the tyres!


#53

Can someone tell me where to put the files, please?


#54

Yep. In your drive unit tht you had installed Automation (commonly, C unit), enter in the unit, and you need to change in the folder options, the option to unhide the hide folders (you can look in Google these step).

Go to Program Data, and enter in the Automation folder. enter in the both folders (because I can’t remember the correct name of folder), and you will see a folder called mesh (or meshes). In this folder, you can put the bodies, grilles…


#55

Are the bodies cd values not without the cooling package? if so that would explain why some bodies values seem to be rather low.


#56

You are right.

There is still a lack of uniformity. The large 10’s sedan and the 00’s sedans should have similar Cds.

Anyway, the aero will probably stay the same for the LMP, unless something changes in the way the aero values for the game are calculated. With proper cooling and max downforce the values are similar to the info I could find for high downforce setups on LMPs.

@strop

What kind of magic tricks did you use?
Best time I got is 1:10.45 and that’s after I modded the bones.lua file to fit 505s at the back.


#57

[quote=“trackpaduser”]You are right.

There is still a lack of uniformity. The large 10’s sedan and the 00’s sedans should have similar Cds.

Anyway, the aero will probably stay the same for the LMP, unless something changes in the way the aero values for the game are calculated. With proper cooling and max downforce the values are similar to the info I could find for high downforce setups on LMPs.

@strop

What kind of magic tricks did you use?
Best time I got is 1:10.45 and that’s after I modded the bones.lua file to fit 505s at the back.[/quote]

505’s?! What is that? A tractor?! :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

(You shouldn’t go any faster with wheels weighing so much they have their own gravitational field)


#58

[quote=“trackpaduser”]Small progress report:

[/quote]

Will we see a smaller/lighter/cuter version so people can make their own Radical SR3/Caterham SP300R competitors?


#59

I could try making a closed cockpit not radical out of it.

Although if I do make something like that, i’ll probably start from scratch as the cockpit is very different.

But I have other things that I want to do for now.


#60

The way I tune MRs for fast laps is to get the minimum possible downforce up front and Max possible downforce up back without breaking the game, then seeing how narrow front tyres we can get away with. The funny things about this body are: the front tyres have to be quite wide, the car does NOT tolerate lift up front at all, and the optimal suspension camber settings are quite atypical. I don’t even know if I’ve got the sweet spot. But in stark difference to all the other cars out on the leaderboard, you can put the same tune on Green Hell and it won’t just make it, it’ll destroy records.

Still, a good 0.2s off the current airfield record, so I really wonder what body Jack’s using, or what I’m missing…