I’m going to guess you simply layered a bunch of the lips inside of each other. I only didn’t do that because I was just trying to cover up the fact that my car has no front end at all. All the lips ARE the front end because of that massive hole otherwise (yay cooling?).
oh my god xD hahahahahahaha
That’s gold.
Yeah no with regards to engine, I just found that there’s no replacement for displacement, so the saying goes. Just how much does weight distribution matter when you’ve got more downforce than the Hand of God and more rigidity than a parking infringement officer? And the best thing about a giant NA engine is all the power for only a fraction of those prohibitively high cooling requirements! Thus I’ve been able to keep the styling a little more, er, discreet? Guess that’s not quite the word, but you know what I mean 
I’m not convinced that the location of wings and lips has any affect on the front/rear downforce balance. I suspect they only add to a value for the total downforce available and the balance is controlled by the two sliders. That said I haven’t tested it by putting a lip on the front, testing it, and then removing the front lip and putting one on the rear on an otherwise identical car to verify that claim.
Here’s something some may or may not have noticed. The slider labeled downforce in the aero section controls just the downforce provided by the underbody. If you don’t have the underbody downforce part equipped that slider has no affect what so ever.
I’m an avid Formula 1 fan and I’m enjoying that this development race is a lot like what happens during a F1 season. The teams all try to develop their car faster than one another but end up having done very similar things by the time the season is over because they’ve learned from watching each other and in the end there’s just what works and what doesn’t
[quote=“Stryfe”]I’m not convinced that the location of wings and lips has any affect on the front/rear downforce balance. I suspect they only add to a value for the total downforce available and the balance is controlled by the two sliders. That said I haven’t tested it by putting a lip on the front, testing it, and then removing the front lip and putting one on the rear on an otherwise identical car to verify that claim.
Here’s something some may or may not have noticed. The slider labeled downforce in the aero section controls just the downforce provided by the underbody. If you don’t have the underbody downforce part equipped that slider has no affect what so ever.[/quote]
I don’t know about this build since I cant get to the information without digging through the lua files, but I know that in previous builds the downforce did have separate effects on front and rear, depending on where you put what wings. Also, you are almost correct about the undertray. The slider has an effect on all three of the modified undertrays, but obviously the effect is most noticeable with the downforce undertray
That’s very good information, I put it to use last night. I should have a new car to submit later today 
In which case I’ll wait until the new benchmark is set before I submit my effort from today 
Today’s experiment revolved around trying to find the best balance between an engine’s output and drag. The conclusion: there’s no replacement for displacement!
A turbo engine may put out much more power for the engine bay space provided than an NA engine, but the bigger the turbo, the higher the cooling requirements get (and also potentially the greater the lag and narrower the powerband depending on how you set it up). I’ve now concluded that even though I can get up to 20% more power out of an engine by shrinking it and placing a turbo on it, since the cooling requirements and therefore drag generated by the engine itself increases by more than 120%, it’s simply not worth it. I put a 1580kw monster in a new car today, only to find that it made it about 2% slower around the track due to the heavily blunted top end speed!
Any input on the above thought is more than welcome.
I think you you guys should start a thread and put your combined knowledge to work. Push the limits of the game.
As you know I’ve been quietly considering proposing a collaboration. It may be time for that.
I would like to see what Stryfe’s independent effort returns first, as it will give me time to properly explore the limits of downforce. But after that, I would be happy to share everything I have. It also means I’d then be able to open my own car company thread instead of working in near secrecy 
I actually have a car that does a 1:07.93, but I’m not submitting it simply because I think I can drop that time still by quite a bit with more tweaking to the suspension alone. It’s powered by an 8.0L V8 FP NA, just as a note… making somewhere around 1275HP at 2330lb and 3300+lbs of downforce.
@OCAdam: I can confirm there’s plenty of room for improvement. Also, I would consider revising that aim of maximising downforce; I have also just confirmed that there is an optimum level of downforce (but it’s very very high), because interacting factors start with tyre width and camber (essentially loading and friction and how this offsets handling with acceleration and braking). I suspect the game modelling goes so far as to make the balance between front and rear downforce is important, as it will affect your suspension setup.
I’m close, if not at, the maximum speed for the current chassis I’m using, so once this round is up I’ll reveal the basics of my setup.
I’ve had no luck with turbo engines either. I think turbo lag is the biggest issue but maybe that’s because I always feel the need to go for maximum power. I may try building a turbo engine that produces peek power at lower revs (not the 8500-9500 I’ve been going) and shoot for say 10% more power than the NA engine I was using rather than going for +50% or more. I don’t have high hopes but it would be interesting to see what happens.
I’ve got a bit more work to do on my next submission tonight when I’m home from work (it’s my lunch time now). Once I submit that I’ll be up for sharing more information. I think I’m pretty near the edge of what’s possible within the bounds of the simulation so it will be diminishing returns from there on. In other words, more fun as a group effort than sitting and endlessly making changes myself.
What part of the world are you guys in? You all seem to post during what’s my morning. I’m in central Canada
I’d like to see what you come up with, because I’ve actually tried this approach but still results in at least 50% more cooling requirements, which, given our approaches, represents significant increases in drag. You’ll probably end up losing effective speed, which starts to count for more than corner speed does when getting figures like 1.7+g at 100+km/h!!!
I’m posting from Eastern Australia, but it’s way past my bedtime because my sleeping patterns got disrupted by my crashing in bed when I got back home from work today!
I’m in central US (Texas).
I’m also just increasing the downforce as to a point where I think it’s affecting the speed on the Drive-Through. Something I found that was a bit interesting is that the simulation apparently doesn’t care much about bottoming out the car, because I’ve found the old Forza 2 trick of no springs, minimum ride height works to maximize the cornering ability.
Up to a point. I was wondering about bottoming out, because while the cornering ability increases with soft springs, there is a minimum stiffness point, where given a maximal downforce tune, the time around the track will suddenly bounce upwards (and quite a bit too) despite apparently better cornering, and I’m not sure why just yet.
hot diggity, 1:04.3!? This time, I bow to the champion.
I’m openly declaring intentions to share info, though naturally it seems that I have less bargaining power at this point. Nonetheless, who’s interested?
I wonder how many of these cars are even race legal.
Don’t worry, I carefully look at all entries before I add them to the board. (PM me a question like that next time )
Haha pleb I think USDMTFW meant whether these cars would even meet any of the real life race classifications. I know mine might meet emissions requirements but other than that I strongly doubt it. Plus we take out all the safety to save weight so i suspect they’re not even legal on the track. Strictly for the moonlighting and suicidal!
Ohh, right (my stupidity once more 
) I guess I’ll delete my post haha
EDIT: Actually, I won’t cause it will confuse people