Home | Wiki | Discord | Dev Stream | YouTube | Archived Forums | Contact

[UE4] Spec Series Racing Build Challenge


Wow, third at my first go, thank you very much. I’ll have to look at the VoD to see the final thoughts.

Looks like I killed my chances at the top spot mostly by trying to fit to old S2000 regulations - i.e, 2000cc max and no turbo. Can only go so fast in a mostly average NA car, especially on a time budget. Perhaps should have tried the Race intake and semi slicks at the least for more simulated time and horsepower.


@flamers which car was your personal favorite?


Welp, I was expecing that - aero in BeamNG works totally different to aero in Automation - I think that the rear wing on the Eagle 707 was producing more lift than downforce in Beam…

On a side note, I wonder if those young drivers will be safe in a car that has more power than some GT4 cars…


Puma being oversteery? What you expected from car made as RWD and lightweight? Thats the reasons why you got electronic, to act as training wheels. Abs blocking? You know that braking isn’t just flooring brake pedal and hoping for best is what real racing drivers do.
Car was designed to be not powerful car being close to Cup car specs to teach young that higher classes aren’t cars like in games people often plays and forget that car isn’t a toy. If you got skill and learn with it, higher classes of cars would be just another step on staircase, but what do i know about cars. F1 or GT3 are probably very easy to drive with this approach of yours.


I mean, as @Elektrycerz just said, a few of the cars have about as much power as a gt4 car sooo…


I wonder how a real Clio Cup car would do here - with 205mm road tires, 217HP and a top speed of 161km/h…


Some of the road cars would be faster it around the track


Having driven Ariel Atoms, M4 GTP’s, Caterham 7’s as well as single seat cars I do have a degree of an idea of what I’m talking about. I’m not saying I’m an expert but I do at least have an idea what they feel like.

A Caterham, whilst it has less power also has no aids to help you and you can pretty easily get a hold of it and be pretty quick in it.

The idea of this wasn’t do build a GT3 car, which are vastly different. It was to build something that would be an initial step into racing, typically for 16-18 year olds. At that age you also have to think that the parents are the people who are funding the drivers and they want it do be safe (as possible)


The aero was defiantly a little off, the sense of lift at ~130mph was a little… Off putting?


So essentially not my car in any way shape or form, got it


Ariel atoms and caterham 7 are open wheels and even lighter cars with more power ratio and still have issue with oversteer on my car that i can hold easly. M4 Gtp, the Touring class car with more power and more weight and still you have oversteer issues. Well i have no questions anymore.

  1. power to weight is not the sole determinant of understeer or oversteer
  2. no mention has been made of the suspension or chassis setup under dynamic conditions
  3. nor that the Automation graphs only capture the behaviour in static or single variable conditions

Does anyone here really know what they’re talking about???

p.s. forgot 4. Beam has some trouble with Automation exported FR cars because the rears of front-engined Automation cars tend to be a lot lighter, and therefore the loading and traction is reduced. You’ll find the Beam vanilla FR cars behave rather differently.


For me power to weight tells that more power is available and car could get more wheelspin due to this and when not carefull it actually could make stronger oversteer or understeer due to that. TVR cerbera is a hell of
a car, but i never gonna try to fight what you said strop, i know you have waaay more experience than me. Good to see you here man :slight_smile:


To be honest, one of my bigger complaints is just that so much emphasis was put on raw speed and power. If I understood correctly, all of the drivers are going to race in the same car, so laptimes should barely matter, but they were by far the most important factor. If I was racing, I wouldn’t really care how much power my car has and how fast it is, as long as everyone in the race has a car with the same performance.

Some good cars have received a small amount of points because they were “underpowered” - for example: City E, Puma, R86. I guess my Eagle 208 would also get 7-8th place at most, because it “only” had ~230HP.

If someone was able to make a 600HP+ 2.0 engine fitting into those rules, it would have probably won. 15pts for automation time, 5pts for 0-60 time, 10 or more pts for beam time etc.


Well, to expand on that, it depends on the dynamics of the car setup i.e. how much weight is transferred and how quickly the force is transmitted through the wheel, both driven and not.

You’re not wrong in that in a rear-wheel drive car, power oversteer would be easier to provoke with more power. It’s just that this is not always the case as some cars are set up to be so understeery or neutral that even if the rear breaks traction it doesn’t kick out too much. The amount of kick and how easy it is to catch would depend on the circumstance (bumps, uneven surface) and how briskly the rear behaves compared to the front i.e. the swaybar, spring and damper setup.

I’m genuinely curious, though. I didn’t want to barge in on somebody else’s judging, but feel free to send me your model and I can find out what the issue might have been.


Oh thank you strop i will send you files to check in if it helps me make better RWD cars in future.
In general i just like driving RWD cars due to fact that they are more punishing and less forgiving.


Looks like my ‘Fake Prius’ did pretty well, at least better than expected.


I wont say that the looks will inspire a generation of racers but as I car it wasnt bad!


Happy to be the 2nd… Thank you @Flamers. I really enjoyed building the car.


Congrats @droya :smile:


thanks man. honestly though, my car is a death trap for new drivers, but eh whatever it’s fast as fuck